Those who Divide Conservatives' Vote, provoking loss, will bear Heavy Responsibilities for ever !

[Man50D]

As I said, please provide a source for this notion

It's interesting you demand a so called "source" but fail to provide your own to buttress your claim of Conservatism by degrees.

[arderkrag]

The political compass. Most political science majors. Those are my sources. All you have to do is punch the query into a search engine. Further, as originator of the statement, and the one stating opinion as fact, the burden of proof lies with you first.

[Man50D]

The political compass. Most political science majors. Those are my sources. Those are my sources. All you have to do is punch the query into a search engine.

Then you could have easily cited details in your previous posts from those sources if they are as readily available as you claim instead of making baseless, vague and general statements.

Further, as originator of the statement, and the one stating opinion as fact, the burden of proof lies with you first.

Creating your own arbitrary rules only shows your inability to refute my statements.

[arderkrag]

They aren’t “arbitrary rules”, they’re universally recognized guidelines of a healthy debate. And your so-called “points” have been nothing but repitition of the same line that there are no varying degrees of conservatism. You are stating unsupported opinion as fact, and repeating the same baseless argument. Now, direct question, direct answer: If, as you say, you are either conservative or not, what is it that defines a conservative?

[DeaconBenjamin]

Doesn’t this article mean that McCain is responsible for the Republicans’ defeat this year?

[Harmless Teddy Bear]

to stump competitors behind the back !!!.

Excuse me?

[Man50D]

They aren’t “arbitrary rules”, they’re universally recognized guidelines of a healthy debate.

You'd better tell that to Free Republic.

You are stating unsupported opinion as fact, and repeating the same baseless argument.

The pot calling the kettle black.

Now, direct question, direct answer: If, as you say, you are either conservative or not, what is it that defines a conservative?

You demand specific answers from me while you obfuscate citing your so called all important easily researchable universal rules that you can't or won't cite with specific sources. You couldn't be more hypocritical. Nice try. LOL!!!!!

[Man50D]

Doesn’t this article mean that McCain is responsible for the Republicans’ defeat this year?

More specifically McCain's pretense of being a Conservative is further alienating Conservatives that will in turn result in a defeat for the GOP.

The GOP needs to wake up and accept the fact Conservatives will never accept McCain otherwise their chances to maintain the White House is toast.

[arderkrag]

You demand specific answers from me while you obfuscate citing your so called all important easily researchable universal rules that you can't or won't cite with specific sources. You couldn't be more hypocritical. Nice try. LOL!!!!!

This is the line you have been using over and over: there are no varying degrees of conservatism. If there is only one conservatism, please define it, or tell me where I can see the one true conservatism defined. I have given basis for my arguments - varying degrees of conservatism are universally accepted by everyone but you, apparently.

Examples:

The Political Compass, a test based on where the center lies in the worldwide political spectrum. it easily catalogs varying degrees of economic conservatism intersected by varying degrees of authoritarianism.

Wikipedia hit for Conservatism - Quote: "Conservatism as a political philosophy is difficult to define, encompassing numerous movements, and conservatives sometimes disagree about which parts of a culture are most worthy of preservation."

Conservapedia hit for Conservatism - Details common conservative beliefs, as well as cataloging Neoconservatives and UK Conservatives differently.

Newsmax article, "The Many Faces of Conservatism" - Article detailing splits among different factions of conservatives that have appeared within the Republican Party, separated by which factions hold which conservative principles in highest esteem.

Then, on top of that, there are the understood distinctions which you seem to be oblivious to - fiscal conservatism, social conservatism, authoritarian conservatism, the list goes on and on.

[arderkrag]

More specifically McCain's pretense of being a Conservative is further alienating Conservatives that will in turn result in a defeat for the GOP.

Precisely. This man will lead the party to ruin.

[Man50D]

It's amazing what you consider sources. The political compass creates its own subjective set of standards based on questions thought up by an anonymous political journalist and professor of social history and you illogiclly assume we're all supposed to consider their preordained questions the gospel.

Wikipedia is controversial at best since Wikipedia articles can be written and edited by anyone at anytime. Users can add, alter, or remove information without registering a user account, giving those who visit the site free and anonymous reign over the available information. Wikipedia wisdom.

Conservapedia for Conservatism doesn't mention at all the degrees of Conservatism you claim exist and therefore only illustrates my point either a person is Conservative or is not Conservative. Thank you for proving my point!

You completely misinterpreted the NewsMax article. The faces the writer is referring to are the different media personalities not the fallacy of degrees of Conservatism you keep falsely claims exists. In fact no where in the article does she make any such reference to different types of Conservatism! LOL!!!!

Then, on top of that, there are the understood distinctions which you seem to be oblivious to - fiscal conservatism, social conservatism, authoritarian conservatism, the list goes on and on.

These terms are self conflicting and a fallacy. Being so called fiscally Conservative implies a person can also support Social program a the same time. It is impossible to control spending as a conservative while supporting more social programs that will require in an increase in spending! Likewise a person cannot be a so called social Conservative while being fiscally liberal since it is impossible to endorse limiting the amount of government programs while supporting an increase in spending that is used to increase the number and scope of government programs.

Since you're so desperate to cite a source why not go with the one person Conservatives rely so much on these days, Ronald Reagan. Below are some of his quotes.

"We will have no more of those candidates who are pledged to the same goals as our opposition and who seek our support. Turning the Party over to the so-called moderates wouldn't make any sense at all." – Ronald Reagan, 1965

“A political party cannot be all things to all people. It must represent certain fundamental beliefs which must not be compromised to political expediency or simply to swell its numbers.” – Ronald Reagan, CPAC address, 1975

Admittedly there is a risk in any course we follow other than this [surrender], but every lesson in history tells us that the greater risk lies in appeasement, and this is the specter our well-meaning liberal friends refuse to face--that their policy of accommodation is appeasement, and it gives no choice between peace and war, only between fight and surrender.

Clearly Reagan is stating the GOP should not have candidates such as John McCain who claim to appear as a Conservative but whose actions show appeasement to the Socialist left nor can the party try to include everybody be trying to obscure the meaning of Conservatism.

[grey_whiskers]

Let's see if I can translate...

"All your base are belong to us!"

[arderkrag]

Conservapedia for Conservatism doesn't mention at all the degrees of Conservatism you claim exist and therefore only illustrates my point either a person is Conservative or is not Conservative.

By defining neoconservatives as a different group under the conservative heading, they back up what I am saying.

Being so called fiscally Conservative implies a person can also support Social program a the same time.

Well, a person can support both of those things. Sorry if you can't wrap your mind around that.

Further, you still haven't answered my question, and probably never will - If there is only one type of conservative, what defines it? At least be good enough to supply a list of what issues and stances a conservative must fall in line with to fit your definition of conservative.

[Man50D]

Further, you still haven't answered my question, and probably never will

Your poor technique of avoiding my responses based on a fallacy is getting more transparent with each post.

[arderkrag]

I’ve responded directly to everything you’ve said. You are avoiding the question.

[Zhang Fei]

(Quote)
Cost (so far) of proposed new spending:

Obama :300 Billion
Clinton : 215 Billion
Huckabee : 54 Billion
McCain : 7 Billion
(Unquote)

Do you have a web link for these numbers? I’d like to quote them, but want to provide access to the source in case I’m questioned.

[PugetSoundSoldier]

My mistake... I got the numbers wrong:

Obama: $424 BILLION to $874 BILLION
Hillary!: $249 BILLION to $889 BILLION
McCain: $7 BILLION

Note that I provide a link to the National Taxpayer's Union for each candidate, so there are links to the same organization with the same methodology, and each and every line item of spending is referenced as well.

For the extreme wing of the Republican party, who claim John McCain is a liberal Democrat, these numbers alone should convince them to cast their vote for McCain. He's a fiscal hawk, and will not grow government at the rate that President Bush has, nor anywhere near the rate at which the alternatives will.

[Zhang Fei]

Thanks. Much appreciated.