Conservative Soup - food for thought

C'mon Will. Your being way to hard on Hill. The funny thing is that I was going to go a real hard-ass diatribe here on her virtues... or lack thereof. But then I had an epiphony. Hillary is exactly what Mother America needs to awaken from its less-than-50% voting participation slumber. Actually I am rooting to see those tree-trunk ankles kickin' it around the white house and Bill as "first husband". Think of it,... 4 years (or 8 if we can really take it) of pure left-wing agenda, Health care programs to mimic our fine northern neighbors (ok ok... the maple leaf heads can come out now...), a slashing of our military by 25%, providing free daycare, free education, free after-school care, free condoms, free drugs, free retirement benefits by age 55 and all for the stellar price of a whopping 67% flat tax rate across the board. Finland, eat your heart out.
Seriously Will, having her win one, ONE election may be just what the doctor ordered. A swift kick in the ass to the country, an awakening of the masses that roam in apathy because they are doing "ok" and thus dont care how the actions of government affects them. Would I cringe..? yeah.. a little. But hell, I made through 4 years of Jimmy "malaise" Carter, I can handle this Bimbo. Jimmy Carter scared the crap our of the country and ushered in the era of Regan. Who is to say 4 years of Hillary wont usher in an era of a Santorum, a Brownback or heaven forbid (and my favorite) a libertarian like Badnarik. Hell, she may even pick up your homebody Evan Bayh as her running partner and really put fly-over country on the map! Ok, we can all wake up now.
 

I've often had the same thought about "teaching the ignorant a lesson". Bill was fortunate to inherit the Reagan economy - that was the only factor that caused his continued popularity.

My point is just the continual hypocracy of the American Left - pretty much been the theme of all my post!

Will
 

Well put. In the words of my mother... "If at age 20 you're not a liberal, you don't have a heart. If at age 40 you're not a conservative, you don't have a brain" (Im sure she plagiarized that from somebody but what the heck...). Something just crossed my mind, Will. You guys' specialty is economics, long the main crux of discord between the left and the right. The way the principles of economics and fiscal policy works and grows is used by both wings to further their agenda. Maybe you can give a couple of links of basic enonomic realities to us un-enlighted folks. I'm serious. I know that for as much as I read I have yet to find anything that is objective enough in content to trust fully since the majority of economic lingo is as much conjecture as anything else. Dr. Walter Williams has a basic primer on the subject at townhall.com that is just terrific but maybe conservative soup can make this blog a place to both vent AND nourish the frontal lobe. As always, your blog is terrific.
 

By the way, I know at least 10 of my buddies out here on the left coast that take a peek at your blog often (at my behest of course),... even though the bone-heads at too timid to write to you. Keep it coming, we like it!
 

I don't think Hilary even qualifies as "left" and I agree she seems more an expedient politician than a person of any convictions.

I had to laugh when I saw that some democrats think Hilary/Obama would be a Prez/VP "dream team". Are they kidding? An ardent feminist and a black man? Do they never want to win an election again?
 

I have to agree with Angry man here. Hill is what I consider a political "Yatch". She will tach wichever way the winds are strongest. Having said that, I think she is a bona-fide card carrying leftie. Did you get a load of the Health Care initiative she came up with under Bill's first term? Pretty socialist in the ways of the best Canadian/French tradition if you ask me. As to Hillary/Obama in 08?... that dynamic duo doesn't scare me. But somebody like a Mark Warner/Barrack Obama ticket? THAT has electoral legs.
 

Angry-Man...you may be correct in that Hillary may not be left by virtue of her apparent lack of any substantive values. But, the Left sure like her!

Will
 

Dardin,

You're right. I need to put in a post or two about economic theory, etc. But, after a day of banking and then teaching a night class, I like to think of other things. I will do that however as I really do enjoy the topic.

Thank you for your spreading the word about Conservative Soup! I do try to present this stuff in a useful manner. Hey, thanks again for your very kind words!

Will
 

Answer to Will's question: No.

That's why we over here on the Left side of the room - the real leftists, not the ones you all seem to think are in love with Mrs. Clinton - won't be supporting her, and won't be voting for her.

And yes, some of us do believe that Sen. Obama may be a good candidate someday.
 

The picture is great, by the way. But busting on Hill's ankles is a cheap shot. Almost as bad as picking on Laura's "Joker"-style make-up.
 

That wasn't a cheap shot Dave. My time is valuable and it took me a whole 5 minutes to type up that blurb. Add to that the mental anguish of imagining those ankles prancing in the oval office,... well, as you can see it was a pretty daunting task. A shot? yes... cheap?.. not if you count the therapy i've been in just thinking about that imagery.
Ok, I'm really jokin' Qhuakerdave. All in good fun and with zero malice. I'm not a Bush fan at all and I rip into his ears and Polio-English all day. In the best tradition of American satire. By the way, thanks for the Laura bit. I kept wondering who her lips reminded me of.... ah humor,... the cure of all the ills....
 

Dave, You do have virtues. But, why is it so many on the left DO love Hillary? I think she draws the those venom spewers that hate anyone that disagrees with them - not centered on anything other than hatred and contempt for the right.

That ankle thing is hillarious!

Will
 

If you read Leftish blogs and left-wing publications - by real Leftists, not the folks you guys think of as Leftists, the ones being portrayed as such in the Corporate Media - you will see that the real Left likes her no more than they liked her husband, who by the way was about as liberal as I am conservative. She does not really believe in a social democrat-type of agenda.

For one example, for all the hyperbolic ranting about the "Hillary Health Care Plan," you might remember that the very FIRST THING she took off the table was Canadian-style single-payer health care. It was never discussed. The Clinton "health care plan" benefited insurance companies and drug companies more than anyone else. That's not very "left-wing."

What's been her idea on "winning" the war in Iraq? Send in 100,000 more troops. That's "Left"?

Abortion? Not "Left" at all. Not even liberal.

But, it benefits the Right to call her Left. Because, for all her faults, if she runs against a human shrub like George Allen, she might win.
 

The fact that the "left of center" finds her a very attractive candidate is the base she depends upon. You are correct that her health care plan was screwed-up. But, the fact that she has accepted the idea behind a need for a national program in this regard shows her leftist mentality. And, her doing so is catching the eye of those that feel "we need to do something".

You might be missing the point of my post - but, you help me make the point: she has no convictions i.e. she is a political opportunist.

Unfortunately, it is the Left and those that do not care to delve into the details that give her the support she needs to survive.

Will
 

I don't mind helping you make THIS point! Hillary is a cancer. There's a reason we over here like the word "progressive." And she's not one.

But she will get support from the "Left" if she's the nominee, just as the Right will support whomever, because she's not "them." That's what happens in our system. You usually end up having to hold your nose when you enter the booth. Too bad, really.
 

Yeah, or that wicked 3rd party appears. "Ya just gotta fix-it!".

Will
 

Hey, what's with the "wicked 3rd party" blast? Ross Perot does not reflect a true 3rd party alternative like the Libertarian Pary does. I am a conservative man who thinks Republicans give only token attention to limited government and fiscal discipline. GWB has increased the size of Uncle Sam even more than Clinton did! Presciption Drug benefits? Please. Border control? A joke!, Yet ANOTHER government cabinet (homeland sucurity)? Just a knee jerk reaction to satisfy the voters to seem like they are doing something after 911. A re-shifting of the chairs on the Titanic Will, nothing more. I will blast the left on going on about this need for national health care all day long, but the Republican Party has not had a swingin' pair enough to cut Government spending since Reagan, and he too was shafted by Concress after Tip O'neill assured him he would reign in spending. A third party is EXACTLY what we need. As much as I am a non-socialist I give the Dems credit for keeping their "tax and spend" credo up their flag post, at least they dont run on something and do something else once they sit their ass in the oval office. Compasionate Conservatism? Read NIXON! It means Foreign policy Hawk and fiscal Liberal!Republicans spend even more than the Dems. Lets not kid ourselves WIll, pork does not stop in the Blue State's borders. Tell me one, ONE substantive cut in the 07' Fiscal Budget made by the Bush Junta. Don't worry, i wont be hurt if you can't come up with one.
Lastly, don't think I'm on your side QuakerDave. With all due respect to your agenda I don't subscribe to any socialist program in any way, shape or form. But I do admire your ability to make your arguments in a salient, logical and introspective way. I prefer that than some of the so-called conservatives these days.
 

Excellent points as always, Dardin. But, the wicked third party comment was a joke. If only one would appear that could gain some political purchase!

If I had to define myself by party, I would most likely define myself more Libertarian than Republican. Because, the idea of the Libertarian is based upon ideals - Republican / Democrats are political parties first, ideals second. A collegue and friend of mine, whom happens to be a full Professor of Econ, is red-blooded Libertarian - and I respect him a great deal. As we have often said, the Libertarians would not, by definition, change stripes for political advancement as the Repubs have if they were to gain a majority in Congress.

Nah, we are on the same page. Now if we could get around the drug legalization and abortion issue, I would be full-bore!

Will
 

Noted and appreciate the clarification. Yeah, the abortion and drug legalization issues is a sticky thorn in our other-wise sweet platform. But alas, nothing is perfect. Besides, we already let poeople drink themselves to a pulp (alcohol) die from fast foods (fatty foods), get addicted to cigarretes (BIG tabacco), all of which -we the tax payer- get it in the shorts at the end of the day in health care costs. Did I forget coffee and sodas? (caffeine and the sugar industry). Why are we cherry picking our vices Will? Eliminate the stupid war on drugs and it just gives the idiots (who are going to get stoned anyway) a way to do it legally. We tax it just like booze and tabacco and start paying off the national debt. In one giant swoop we end all drug-related crimes and profiteering in America. Inmoral? maybe. But I'm not the one being hypocritical by allowing the arsenic of cigarettes to be inhaled by kids and then complain about the "drug" problem in America. You either eliminate it all, or allow it all. Say what you will about the nordic countries but when was the last time you heard anybody in Denmark get killed in a drive-by shooting because of a drug turf war? Never. I dont like their Governments, but in the drug thing they got it right. We on the other hand are still subject to the religious wing of conservatism to allow any of that. Moral relativity. Too bad.
Abortion? Thats the one thing we are brothers in arms as I am totally against it. But you can't pick your battles all at once. That battle is for another day.