America drops in Corruption rankings

[Takeda Shingen]

I don't believe that Ducimus has any problems with honesty.

[Aramike]

Excellent points, August.

Originally Posted by Takeda Shingen

This is all true, but I feel it is a certainty that these officials will proceed to vote with the Republican block on the issues of gun control, abortion, stem cells, et al; talking like Paleoconservatives and Libertarians but voting like Neo-Cons. Of course, this is all speculation, and we'll have to see what they do in there. For me, I've seen these type of 'revolutions' before, and the past behavior is the best indicator of future behavior.

But, as you alluded to, I think it will be very interesting after the election; regarding both inter-party and intra-party conflict.

For sure, they most likely will fall into like with social-conservatism, the same way that social liberals constantly fall into line with fiscal irresponsibility.

The difference is that neo-conservatism isn't much more fiscally adept than your typical democrat whereas the Tea Party movement is based upon fiscal responsibility.

Fine, maybe Tea Partiers will adopt the social stances of neo-cons. Those weren't going away anyway. But if they can inject some fiscal responsibility into the party, that's fine by me.

Originally Posted by Takeda Shingen

I don't believe that Ducimus has any problems with honesty.

Nor do you. But Ducimus said he did. There are lies of omission aswell as comission.

[Ducimus]

Originally Posted by The Third Man

By picking the 'thoughts and beleifs' you post only serves to confirm the falacy of your posts. Because you aren't being truthfull to the membership, or, more importantly to yourself.

Truthful to membership? What membership? Poltiical party membership? Forum members? Phhht. Oh and not truthful to myself? Your attempt at psychoanalysis is laughable at best. I know myself, VERY well. You on the other hand, know nothing about me. So to say i'm not truthful to myself is really stupid on your part. Nice try at a dramatic closing sentence though.

Now, I post what i think, when i think it is pertinent, to whatever is at hand. You seem to think that one is obligated to espouse their entire core beliefs in full at every opportunity. I only say what i feel is needed at the time, and no more.

[August]

Originally Posted by Takeda Shingen

I feel it is a certainty that these officials will proceed to vote with the Republican block on the issues of gun control, abortion, stem cells, et al; talking like Paleoconservatives and Libertarians but voting like Neo-Cons.

First off stances on those issues are not the province of the Republican party alone. For example plenty of Democrats also oppose gun control. Does that make them secret "neo-cons"?

Speaking of name calling how come you use disparaging terms like "neo-con" and "paleoconservatives" when you purport to be an independent? Those terms, especially in the manner that you use them, are straight out of the DNC handbook.

Second, the Democrats have gone out of their way to make the Tea Party their enemies therefore I would not be surprised that conservatives tend to outnumber liberals in the Tea Party ranks.

[Takeda Shingen]

Originally Posted by Aramike

Excellent points, August.For sure, they most likely will fall into like with social-conservatism, the same way that social liberals constantly fall into line with fiscal irresponsibility.

The difference is that neo-conservatism isn't much more fiscally adept than your typical democrat whereas the Tea Party movement is based upon fiscal responsibility.

Fine, maybe Tea Partiers will adopt the social stances of neo-cons. Those weren't going away anyway. But if they can inject some fiscal responsibility into the party, that's fine by me.

Yes, you're right about all three points, as least as far as I, or any of us can tell before the new Congress is sworn in. How effective they will be, and their ultimate fate, has yet to be seen. They just don't give me a warm fuzzy on the outset.

[Takeda Shingen]

Originally Posted by August

First off stances on those issues are not the province of the Republican party alone. For example plenty of Democrats also oppose gun control. Does that make them secret "neo-cons"?

Speaking of name calling how come you use disparaging terms like "neo-con" and "paleoconservatives" when you purport to be an independent? Those terms, especially in the manner that you use them, are straight out of the DNC handbook.

Second, the Democrats have gone out of their way to make the Tea Party their enemies therefore I would not be surprised that conservatives tend to outnumber liberals in the Tea Party ranks.

PaleoConservatism and NeoConservatism are not pejoratives, nor do I use them as those. They are different brands of conservatism. In short, PaleoConservatism supports the type of free market, limited government capitalism that Libertarians and Tea Party members support. They also support tighter immigration laws limited involvement in foriegn affairs. Ron and Rand Paul, and also commentator Pat Buchanan are good examples of PaleoConservatives. This was the traditional brand of conservatism, hence the prefix Paleo (old). It's counterpart is PaleoLiberalism.

NeoConservatism supports a greater degree of governmental involvement in economics and business. It also boasts a more involved social agenda, a looser immigration policy and heavy involvement in foreign affairs. It is has been the favored brand of conservatism in the Republican Party since it came to forefront in 1994. Newt Gingrich, Dick Cheney and commentator Sean Hannity are good examples of Neo-Conservatives. It's counterpart is Neo-Liberalism, more commonly known as Progressivism.

These are not slanderous terms, and I have no idea why you take offense to them. I simply type 'Neo-Con' because I get tired of typing 'Neo-Conservative'. I'll be sure to use the full title from now on.

EDIT: If you need to know, I tend to identify with Paleo-Conservatism. I do not care for foreign involvement, government intervention in the free market, or loose immigration policy. I also have very little interest in social agendas. My decision to leave the Republican Party comes down to the fact that there are so few Paleo-Conservatives left. I admit to having a strong dislike of Neo-Conservatism, as I feel it has corrupted what the Republican Party, and true conservatism, had stood for. Much of my disdain for the Tea Party is also rooted in their clear willingness to play ball with the Neo-Conservatives. I believe that they will ultimately be corrupted by the Republican establishment, and as such I choose not to get on that train.