Personally I wouldn’t count Hamilton among the founding fathers.

modifiedcontent on May 25, 2009 at 8:39 AM

Then you are an idiot…hamilton was the FIRST delegate chose for the Constitutional Convention and only Madison and Mason had more input on the Constitution than Hamilton.
Get thee back to Junior High for an education.

Moderates are simply those who cannot, have not, will not, or don’t have the balls to take a position on difficult issues.

You cannot compromise on values. Compromised values are s**t, who needs them, and who needs people with compromised values? That’s the dimmies.

The only real solution for conservatives is to stay conservative, and work to convince whomever we can that we are right. If the strategy for “saving” the GOP is to become like the Left, really: Who needs it. Let ‘em have it. Why would conservatives want to enable the goals of the Left?

The way back for the Republican party is not please “the conservative base” or to move towards a lite version of socialist “liberal”, but reclaim classic liberalism and become agressively pro-capitalist, pro-individualist and pro-Constitution.

modifiedcontent on May 24, 2009 at 9:55 AM

this is something that megan (mooo) mccain, or powell would say…

it worked REAL WELL in the last election didn’t??? mccain sure didn’t please the conservative base…get a clue…God you’re stupid.

now can you defend what you wrote, or can you just call people names like some typical left-wing stooge.

right4life, who the fuck are you?! You’re not calling me on anything. You are the one repeating talking points. Your post went into things I hadn’t even mentioned. You were just assuming stuff, clueless moron…

modifiedcontent on May 25, 2009 at 12:16 AM

someone who is a lot smarter than you…you clueless piece of shit.

here’s what you said jackass

The Republican Party was captured by “conservatives”.

that is such a laughable lie you must be some left wing moron…duhhhhhh

and you cannot back up what you say…all you can do is parrot talking points like the left-wing POS you are.

you’re just upset that I called you on your blatant lies and stupidity

bet you’re fat as you are stupid.

I like red…new blood, the democrats…old blood.

But the colors don’t necessarily divide…as they are united under the flag.

I note that you seemed to have missed Samuel Adams and the Great George Washington…do they not get counted in the founding fathers too?

Alexander Hamilton (January 11, 1755 or 1757 – July 12, 1804) was the first United States Secretary of the Treasury, a Founding Father, economist, and political philosopher. He led calls for the Philadelphia Convention, was one of America’s first Constitutional lawyers, and cowrote the Federalist Papers, a primary source for Constitutional interpretation.

I also note that you mentioned a few people not considered founding fathers…great thinkers sure, but not founding fathers.

Do not confuse the central bank with todays Fed. The founding fathers first tried the Articles of Confederation…but that was too loose. The founding fathers, who all disdained tyranny like the plague that it is, realized that they needed more…so created the federal government with principles of a republic and balance of power. Hence my statement, I understand the necessary evil, the federal government.

This further divides the country and gives the impression that those on the Right are Commies (red) while the Demoncrates are Blue the color of the sea and sky.

Hamilton and Samuel Adams are founding fathers yes? Did they not start the Federalist Party, which promoted central banking, railroads etc? In fact “although George Washington was broadly sympathetic to the Federalist program, he remained an independent his entire term.” Hamilton was part of George Washington’s cabinet.

Classical liberalism is very much conservatism, that part is true…and while some social conservatives maybe clueless on economics and the philosophical underpinnings of the constitution, in many regards they understand it better…because they understand government should protect our freedom to live…especially the innocent and the persons who can’t defend themselves…unless through due process of law government should protect life, liberty and property…oops that was too hard to swallow, because of the slavery issue…so up, the pursuit of happiness…
But just because they are pro-life, or against gay marriage doesn’t make a person a conservative.

I don’t have a problem with centralize banking, as long as its very very limited in its power….and banks can exist off the matrix. I also don’t have a problem with railroads, anymore than I am against inner state highways. As long as the people can own the majority of the property, than it doesn’t matter. I do have a problem with the federal government being in charge with 30+% of the gdp, this should not be more than 10%.

Classical liberalism understands limited federal power…the founding fathers recognized that some federal power, not a lot, but some was a necessary evil…

Federal power as a necessary evil is NOT classic liberalism; classic liberalism includes the idea of limited government. The Founding Fathers were classic liberals.

I am against centralized banking, railroads, etc. There’s no need for that at all. The market really can sort itself out if contracts between free people are respected.

What is called liberalism in the US now has absolutely nothing to do with classic liberalism; it’s almost the exact opposite of classic liberalism.

What you call conservatism is almost entirely classic liberalism, but conservatism puts the emphasis on social issues and many conservatives are utterly clueless about economics and the philosophical underpinnings of the Constitution.

I really dislike this Avlon character. He’s kind of a twerp and his spin on the numbers is pretty contrived. If Beck is going to be bringing idiots like Avlon onto his show he’s going to lose me (and those like me) as viewers. I like to hear the other side, and these self-anointed “moderates” are the other side, but not from mental midgets. I can talk to a 12 year old to get the Avlon view of the world.

progressoverpeace on May 23, 2009 at 5:40 PM

Avlon is quite possibly the most annoying “pundit” on television, etc., today. His whole “I am the voice of centrist independents, MY voice speaks for all of them” schtick is competely annoying; he’s got to be the most pretentious person I’ve ever seen with his self-appointed “Voice of the Moderates” crap.

I’ve never seen any conservative or leftist “pundit” claim to speak for all of their compatriots, yet this Avlon clown lterally claims to speak for all “Centrists”, the most amorphous group of all. Ridiculous.

Oh and I love the way he’s always trotting out numbers, when he obviously has no facility with them, nor any kind of empirical background. I know he worked for Giuliani’s presidential campaign, and was an editor at the New York Sun. I like Giuliani and liked the Sun, but with this guy involved it’s no wonder both tanked.

Then again, I’m not crazy about Beck either, so maybe they make a good pair.

I am not a big fan of Jackson mainly because of how he treated the Cherokees…but good for him to tell the court to stick it.

Reagan was for smaller government….there are a number of Republicans who are for smaller government…esp when you compare the Republicans against Democrats. However, since President Bush I no longer consider myself Republican….a Glennican?

modifiedcontent on May 24, 2009 at 2:41 PM

you throw out talking points, then you get upset when you get called on it…poor baby..wimp

go F yourself.

Where I agree with the Whigs…they were strong states rights, …especially when it came to Jacksons power grabs.Again…states rights and keep the power grabs of the President in check. Where I disagree with the Whigs is tariffs….the central banking…railroad projects and infra-structure…are all good, to a point..

Conservative Voice on May 24, 2009 at 2:28 PM

but Jackson got rid of the central bank…which given the performance of the fed would be a good thing…and he also told the supreme court to stick it, and let em enforce their own rules…so I like Jackson.

my point was the whigs divided over social issues…just as the republicans are doing…they obviously don’t want social conservatives…they are embarressed by us…so why should we vote for them?

if the republicans want to be a ‘small government party’ I would first wonder SINCE WHEN??? you’re right, both parties have embraced the progressive movement, Glenn Beck is right about that.

right now the only real conservative party out there is the constitution party…

Do you seriously think the dems are going to continue TARP and stimulus spending levels into the future? I think not. Yes the dems want more government, but all the deficit spending of the last 15 years has been on the GOP watch.

trailboss on May 23, 2009 at 6:45 PM

Huh? I’m no math major or nothin’ but 2009-15 = 1994. And who was president 1994-2001? Oh yea a Democrat. And who has been in charge of Congress since 2007? Oh right the Dems. And who controlled the Senate from 2001 (after Jeffords) to 2003? Why by golly it’s the Dems again.

There’s no denying the GOP did plenty of stupid spending. But to say it was on the GOP’s “watch” is beyond ridiculous.

It’s from the Economist, I assume a reputable source.
Cindy Munford on May 23, 2009 at 8:55 PM

Has to be… I heard palin reads it. *uproarious laughter*

modifiedcontent on May 24, 2009 at 2:41 PM

well said, and sorry for coming to same conclusion that you were against social conservatives when I read…
The way back for the Republican party is not please “the conservative base” or to move towards a lite version of socialist “liberal”, but reclaim classic liberalism and become agressively pro-capitalist, pro-individualist and pro-Constitution.

modifiedcontent on May 24, 2009 at 9:55 AM

I also consider myself to be a classical liberal…I understand the necessary evil of having federal power, centralize banking, railroads, interstate highways etc…but its way over-bloated and powerful. I don’t care if I have to pick up farming again to support my family…I want my freedoms again!

I hadn’t even mentioned those issues. You have no idea what my position on those issues is, so FU.

If the Constitution is followed and government restored to its proper very limited role, it will be up to the people to decide on these social issues and work itself out.

And on the Fed, I agree that the Whigs largely come from the Federalists party…strong central banking….and the Fed is too strong…
My main point is the Republicans ( and Democrats ) have lost their roots…they are both socialists progressives who seem to have forgotten basic principles in smaller less central government ( The Republicans and Democrats were at one time one party…looks like history has come full circle, as they are again one party, only now there isn’t a viable opposing party…in the beginning it was the Federalists against the Democratic-Republican Party…now its just the Federalists.