There was a little sarcasm, but it seems that’s the going definition in this house. Conservatism is a useful philosophy. As a philosophy is can only guide toward a general principle. True conservatives can not legislate, however, for legislation requires the persuasion of a thin majority of equally dogmatic fellows. Quite a task. The first to assent can no longer wear the mantle of “true conservative”. (The 100% rule.)
Well stated, and I completely agree with your points.
A conservative is someone who agrees with me 100% of the time. There is no room for any equivocation. Not 90%, not 98%, but 100% always, all the time, forever. If not, they are not a conservative.
This is precisely the reason the dogmatic left and right wings of the political spectrum tend to lose far more elections than they win. It's also why the broad spectrum between the two wings often seem to be "Republicrats," or "Demicans," or "RINOs," or "DINOs," etc., depending on the perspective of the person throwing around such useless labels.