A Very Apt Observation

[filkertom]

Conservatives get a lot less ideological when shit happens to them.

Comments

[shsilver.livejournal.com]

The first paragraph of the article reinforces a falsehood: They came to Washington with a near singular focus on heady national issues, like cutting spending, reducing the budget deficit and paying down the national debt.

If that has been their "singular focus," why have they been discussing social issues like gay rights, immigration, and other, shall we say, non-fiscal issues.

[filkertom.livejournal.com]

That's a point. Doesn't really affect the overarching theme, though: Whatever they came to Washington for, it turns out people are more interested in other stuff that hits closer to home.

And, some of those do fall under the aegis of "heady national issues". Certainly they're the ones that get headlines when spewed by the loudest of the loud.

[james-the-evil1.livejournal.com]

I would respond to that with the AmericaBlog Tom linked in this post: http://filkertom.livejournal.com/1367822.html

[redneckgaijin.livejournal.com]

Eh, no.

Fiscal conservatism in America, for as long as I've been alive, has always been, "Gimme! But I don't want to PAY for any of it!"

Saying that conservatives get less ideological when things happen to them gives them the benefit of the doubt- specifically, presuming that said conservatives have any integrity. They generally don't.

[filkertom.livejournal.com]

You know me. I try hard to aim at the right-wing leadership. There are a whole lotta people out there, including some very good friends, including some Very Smart And Wise People whose opinions on other matters I trust implicitly, people who have gobs of personal integrity and with whom I would trust my life and the lives of my loved ones... who have a socio-economic-political philosophy stuck in their heads despite any and all evidence that said philosophy Does Not Work And In Fact Makes Things Worse. They believe this about concepts large and small, about personalities on their side, and you can't point out problems without them doing their best to defend their idols.

Take me, for instance. I am extremely well aware of Obama's missteps, particularly regarding the perpetuation of the Bush administration's crimes at Gitmo, the authorization of torture, the non-reinstatement of habeus corpus, etc., etc., etc. I'm still pissed at him for not defending LGBT rights anywhere near as vigorously as he should, as he said he was going to. I do not trust him, in negotiations with our emotionally damaged Republican "leadership", not to fold like a map before the opening gavel; he's done it before.

That said, he's done a tremendous amount of good as well. I would much, MUCH rather have someone I can unilaterally support with a proud heart and a clear mind. But, given the alternatives we have, and given that I'm not going to run for office myself, I'm sticking with Obama... but tempering my support, and staying watchful. The devil you know, the lesser evil, and all that. It's obnoxious, it's cynicism-making, it's disheartening... but it's what we have to work with, unless and until we find someone better.

I simply can't stay outraged all the damn time for every damn thing. It's tiring.

[alverant.livejournal.com]

To play devil's advocate for a moment, do you think that's true of anyone who preaches too much ideology? Would someone who say, strongly advocates the idea of freedom of religion pull back a little bit if they encountered a religion they don't like?

I read an article about how bankrupt libertarianism is and how it can't work on alternet (I think) and someone pointed out Ayn Rynn (sp) herself when her books weren't paying enough money to pay for her medical bills went on Medicare and how she went to a public college - two things her philosophy is against.

We see this with Ron Paul and his rallying against earmarks, but when he got to DC got a few earmarks for his state. He said he did it because it's his job to serve his people. That's true, but he campaigned on a philosophy and there are times when sticking to your philosophy isn't what's best.

So personally, I'm willing to forgive someone for earlier actions if they realize the affect they have on others, but only if they learn from the experience.

[filkertom.livejournal.com]

I don't disagree. Philosophy tends to be more pure than reality. (I think we need catalana for this one.) There's a George Carlin routine (http://www.themadmusicarchive.com/song_details.aspx?SongID=21779) about kids in Catholic school trying to trip up the priests on possible exceptions to what would ordinarily be a mortal sin.

[dornbeast.livejournal.com]

I have to agree with you. I can't remember where I read it, but there was a pithy thaying that went something like:

"A liberal is a person who hasn't been mugged. A conservative is a person who's never gone broke."

[bryanp.livejournal.com]

The variation I hear most often is "A liberal is a conservative who just got arrested. A conservative is a liberal who just got robbed."

[alverant.livejournal.com]

Except I've never been arrested and I have been robbed. And I'm still liberal.

[palenoue.livejournal.com]

This is a lot like the republican rallying cries for states rights. They're all for states rights until a state does something they don't like, then suddenly they're in favor of federal control.

[filkertom.livejournal.com]

Best example recently was this week's Senate filibuster of an up-or-down vote on the nomination of Goodwin Liu (http://www.mcclatchydc.com/2011/05/19/114468/gop-filibuster-blocks-federal.html) to the appellate court, despite declaring just a few years ago that such a filibuster was unconstitutional.

[gardnerhill.livejournal.com]

Read Prayers for Bobby if you want to get disgusted by this kind of right wing Heel Face Turn (http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/HeelFaceTurn). It's about a woman's fight for gay rights - which she only started, after a lifetime of right-wing homophobic Christian fundamentalist parroting, when her own gay son committed suicide after years of his mother's rejection and religious hectoring. Only then, only after years of telling her own son he was worse than a murderer until he sentenced himself to death, did she think that maybe being gay wasn't so evil after all.

Typical blindered, privileged right-wing doodz - they don't even acknowledge that there's another POV involved until it happens personally to THEM.

A fool learns from his mistakes. A wise man learns from the mistakes of others.

[teddywolf.livejournal.com]

Nah, the last sentence isn't quite right.
A human learns from their mistakes. A wise human learns from other people's mistakes. A fool doesn't learn from mistakes.

[enjis.livejournal.com]

Good job Teddywolf! I love that last sentence!

[cathain.livejournal.com]

I only have one objection/observation to make. Many of the conservative pols in Congress are multimillionaires in their own right. They are insulated from the rabble (even those in their own states) to the extent that they can't even hear them.
I say this because I have Sam Brownback for governor, a career politician who has made a fortune from being a Rep/Senator/Governor. I'm still not exactly sure how he keeps getting elected. But then I live in the only speck of blue in the entire state and in the only county he didn't carry in the last election. Western Kansas adores him for his pork belly legislation and earmarks for agribusiness and there's no doubt at all he's on the payroll of Koch Industries. When he was in DC he was part of the C Street gang.
Thing is, this is what most red states have become; Walker, Brownback, Daniels, they're all the same. Given the experiences I've seen people go through with these politicians I don't think "freshman" conservatives are changing their tune one bit. Truth is, they lie. They got elected on a platform of creating jobs and fixing the economy and the minute they got elected they pretty much *all* started pushing social legislation (anti-gay, anti-abortion, anti-women) that had nothing to do with their campaign promises. They are wolves in sheep's clothing, masquerading as fiscal conservatives when in reality they are nothing of the sort. Given that, they have no problem at all funding their states when they get hit by floods and tornadoes.

[maiac.livejournal.com]

There's no inconsistency between preaching "fiscal restraint" (i.e. eliminating funding for things they don't need) and looking for federal disaster aid when disaster strikes their territory, if their "ideology" is "Got mine, fuck you."

[hitchkitty.livejournal.com]

By and large, I think you've got it. I heard someone summarize Rand-brand objectivism as "Okay, I'm aboard, pull up the lifeboats."

[the-s-guy.livejournal.com]

To which the correct response, of course, is to toss them over the side again.

I was watching an online immigration squabble in another forum recently, and half the "close the doors; they're taking our jobs" people readily admitted they were only second or third-generation immigrants themselves. Seem they thought it OK to lock out other people's future grandparents - after all, their own had already gotten in, so pull up the drawbridge!

[hitchkitty.livejournal.com]

Their very own "grandfather clause", n'est-ce pas?

[violinsontv.livejournal.com]

I think ol' Ben Franklin said it best:

"Experience keeps a Dear School, but Fools will learn in No Other, and Scarce in That."