Capitol Hill Blue Forums Political Issues Politics In General Where have all the conservatives gone?

Since there isn't a "Conservative" party (in the United States), only one that claims to be so, it is a bit difficult to find any consistent platform that defines conservatism. However, as Senator Hatrack previously opined, a central tenet would appear to be "conservation" - maintenance of the "status quo ante". This is where I generally part ways with conservatism, per se, and further why I don't believe that the Republican party, or friend Hatrack, really represents conservatism in the traditional sense.

The modern incarnation of the Republican party follows a path blazed by the TEA party, of destruction and (in my view) detriment. It is heartless, mean-spirited, and selfish. That is the path of the reactionary and revanchist. That is not conservatism. Conservatives, in my experience, don't "tear down". They may resist change, but they accept it when it happens, and work to improve "the system" in ways that comport with their views. At least in theory they care about institutions and the people who build (and run) them. When people claim Donald Trump isn't a conservative, they are right. He is an opportunist and a parasite. He claimed to be a Democrat when it suited his purpose, and has gone along with the Republican agenda, largely, because it was expedient. Those are not, in my view, "conservative values." He hasn't displayed any values whatever beyond "taking care of number one", and I don't mean the United States.

When I started this thread, I talked about what I considered conservatism from my personal experience. I never was a candidate, but I campaigned for them. I was an advocate. I described them as "'real' conservatives who take positions on principle, and have rational (if, I will add, misguided) bases for their views," and "don't... lump everyone left of Genghis Khan into the "progressive/socialist/communist" camp because they can't discern a difference, and complain that anyone with an ounce of compassion is weak and un-American." I gave examples of some recent politicians who seemed to hew to traditional conservative values, and "didn't assume anyone who didn't was the devil incarnate worthy of excommunication or worse. Those that think before they speak, and use measured tones." We, generally, have left that farm a long time ago (both here and nationally). Is the farm even there anymore? Was it always a mirage?

Some of the change is deliberate, I think, and some of it is the result of changes in the structure of elections and the electorate (exacerbated by a partisan Supreme Court - to whom these same observations also apply): gerrymandering and a flood of money; structural defects in the systems - some put there deliberately - like the Electoral College; voter apathy, and its sibling, vote suppression; and archaic voting methods. But it has certainly been manipulated and amplified by actors who have agendas completely separate from concern for the country, civil liberties, or humanity generally [I'm looking at you, Mitch McConnell].

I have personally or professionally known several legislators and other pols (I once worked in a Lieutenant Governor's office as an ombudsman, and was an Assistant Attorney General for 13 years). They were of various stripes, but had one thing in common - they were patriotic and wanted to do a good job for their constituents. I just don't see that in today's "conservative" politics and that distresses me.

This is a good description of The Administrative State: "a term used to describe the phenomenon of executive branch administrative agencies exercising the power to create, adjudicate, and enforce their own rules. Five pillars are key to understanding the main areas of debate about the nature and scope of administrative agency action: nondelegation, judicial deference, executive control of agencies, procedural rights, and agency dynamics." (Ballotpedia).

Bureaucracies are born of needs. Agencies are created to administer programs deemed necessary or valuable for the citizenry. They are, by and large, efficient tools for their purposes. Defense, disease control, public health, public works, public safety, etc. In short the "public good" or "general welfare." Every federal, State or local agency was created to address some public good or danger. So, it is a valid question to ask whether they are addressing a current need and whether they are pursuing the public interest and doing so efficiently and effectively. That, of course, is what government oversight is all about.

I looked it up, too. I have had some experience with rules promulgated by government agencies as a result of needing to implement various laws. For the national government I believe most of those rules are published in the Code of Federal Regulations. Those regulations are not created at the whim of government employees, they have to go through a comprehensive process that includes public input and legal review (some of which I have participated in). For the most part I have been impressed far more often by how well CFR's (as we call them) are written than by finding any gross problems related to their proper implementation of the laws that spawned them.

I have had a few issues with how some bureaucrats have "interpreted" and applied some regulations, but that's a different issue.

Frankly, I don't see how it would be possible for lawmakers to generate the regulations for the laws they pass. They don't have the time, the knowledge, or the setting for doing a job like that.

My spidey sense is telling me that Hatrack is parroting a talking point from ignorant non-conservative radicals and doesn't actually know why he thinks the the "administrative state" is a bad thing, or how it could be "torn down" without completely destroying the government - or what system would be used to implement government in its place.

I don’t know why regressive conservatives are so askairt of Logtroll’s simple direct questions.

Why the hell should I waste my time making a comment when before it has even been made it is being condemned as wrong? When the close minded liberals here on the Rant automatically think that everything a conservative says, or might say, is wrong it is a waste of time for any conservative to be here. There is no debate here just a bunch of liberals agreeing on how all conservatives are wrong.

Prejudice = pre-judge

Your pre-judgement is a common escape route for them who is askairt of real discussion.

You love to waste your time fighting with NWP, yet you won't engage in a discussion with me because it's a trap, right? What does Trump call it? Oh yeah, a "perjury trap", meaning that if he answers any questions he will either, a) have to lie; b) expose a previous lie.

I understand...

You pre-judged my comment before I even saw your comment. Since you did that it a waste of my time to even make one. Then you state that anything I say will be lie. You have no idea what I would have said but before I said anything you decided it was either a) wrong or b) a lie. Thanks for proving that there isn't any debate here, just a bunch of liberals agree how all conservatives are either a) wrong or b) liars.

Wouldn't it be much easier (and potentially productive) to answer my simple questions and engage in an honest discussion?

If you just want to kill something, you win - I'll fake a grisly death and you can brag to your many liberal friends about your bigly success.

Because that's what we do here?

We are all proud partisans who believe strongly in our own political theories. You cannot be right, Hatrack, because that would make ME wrong. To admit that you are even half right makes me half wrong.

But I respect your position. I even understand it to a certain extent. It(conservatism) has held us in good stead for a long time.

I feel that we are facing some pretty serious issues right now. You seem to deny their existence. You blow my solutions off as "socialist" yet provide none of your own. You cling to your narrow reading of the Constitution and disavow any other interpretation as wrong. You speak as though you know the minds of the hallowed Four Fathers.

Ya don't, okay.

That bus has left the station and three centuries hence we are dealing with sh*t they never could have imagined.

And we find ourselves again faced with a tyrant...

In an honest discussion people wait for the people they are in the discussion with to something before they condemn.