Originally Posted by logtroll
Originally Posted by NW Ponderer
I realized that some of my phraseology in the preceding post is confusing. When I say conservative versus "conservative" what I mean is, those who are really conservative in thought versus those who use the label "conservative." I opine that the majority of actions/activities by modern "conservatives" is not conservative at all.

There are some areas that are claimed by conservatism, generally, but aren't really conservative at all - such as small government, and tax cuts. There is nothing inherently conservative in a small government, except perhaps preservation of capital. But is not conservatism interested in efficient and effective government? The same with tax cuts. If the tax cut furthers a conservative goal, perhaps, but tax cuts are not, per se conservative, and may, indeed, create inefficiencies that undermine conservative principles. For example, reducing the police force, undercutting national security, etc.
I recall asking a simple question recently of how people define "conservatism", and specifically invited the good Senator to describe his version in his own words. It is one of the simple questions that he did not answer.
I did not answer because I was either embroiled in a discussion with Mr. High Horse (NW Ponderer) or didn't see it. While it is a simple question there isn't a simple answer. After the fall of the USSR in Russia a conservative was someone who wanted the Communist government back. Here in the US a person who could be considered a conservative is someone who wants to preserve the New Deal programs. No one is 100% "conservative" and no one is 100% a "liberal." There are things I want to conserve and there somethings I want to change. What I want to conserve someone else wants to change.

The state can never straighten the crooked timber of humanity.
I'm a conservative because I question authority.
Conservative Revolutionary