They realized what a stupid policy it was, that's what happened.

It kept corporations from living off the government handouts.

Wilford Brimley, that's what.

Those are boring topics. You can't energize people, well most people, by talking about those things.

Jeebus poisoning.

What happened was SHUT UP.

Neither party sticks to what it's alleged principles are anymore. Gotta pander.

Free-market? FREE-MARKET? That is a Worship Word! You will not speak it!

They found out that once they controlled Congress and the White House, they could force everyone to work like elves so they could play Santa Claus.

Except the people getting the present weren't good little boys and girls, but those who gave a kickback. Kind of like if the jolly old elf were a Mafia boss instead of a saint.

"Compassion" was added to "conservatism".

Dancin_In_Anson: "Compassion" was added to "conservatism".

That's the win right there.

"This way to the egress."

The marketing message does not necessarily reflect the actual product. In 50+ years of watching this in 3 major incarnations, (stop the commies, peace with honor, city on the hill) the end result of Republican administration seems to be "Lockheed gets the money". They may whore themselves to mainstreet Republicans, the silent majority and red state America but the result is more money for the military industrial complex. It was never about you, little guy. Eisenhower was right.

Those were ideas put forth by conservatives. Neo-conservatives have pretty much the opposite view of all of those. But the neocons sure can pander to Jeebus!

Dancin_In_Anson:

"Compassion" was added to "conservatism".

That implies that the abandonment of conservative principles began with W.

SherKhan: That implies that the abandonment of conservative principles began with W.

Yeah, I'd say that the deal with the devil was accepting the Evangelists as the base of the Republican party. Either that or it's a vestige of the cold war, where we fooled ourselves into thinking that Capitalism was really in a knock-down, drag-out fight with Communism, and so being pro-business was being pro-America.

So, basically, either the social conservatives ruined it for everyone, or the "Corporations are our mighty warriors" crowd did. Take your pick.

American conservatism has never really been BASED on free market and less regulation -- the core is "Let's make us rich white men even richer". In the past, that meant trashing regulation and hiding their crass greed behind the mantra of capitalism, but now they're looking to corporate welfare and government protection to allow them to screw the poor and exploit workers.

Once they got their foot in the door (controlling presidency, congress and supreme court) they realized that making the system work FOR their corruption was the better way to go.

The amazing thing are the ignorant fundies and hicks that still buy that conservative Republican crap.

Gay people.
I'm pretty sure it was gay people.

Sweet, succulent, strong, alurring, morally reprehensible gay people.

SherKhan: That implies that the abandonment of conservative principles began with W

Nothing gets past you, does it?

Yesdog: "Let's make us rich white men even richer"

Oh shiat! You're on to us!

What happened?

Rove. A magic combination of fundies, dirty politics, arrogance, and chickenshiat Democrats who surrendered on 9/11.

what HAPPENED, was that they started whoring themselves out to the religious right for votes. There's always been the two types of conservative. The small government libertarian conservatives, and the bible thumping conservatives. Both have very separate goals. But the libertarian minded ones, who were in control of the party, decided that getting their votes was more important than sticking to their principals. So they started making promises to the religious right. Then the bill came due, and they started having to actually KEEP these promises. Then more and more of the religious nutjobs got elected themselves.
And we have the ultimate example of why that was a bad idea in one George W. Bush.

You can argue he's not a conservative all you want, but fact is, Bush is exactly what the republican party has been heading towards for years. They've got no one to blame for this mess but themselves.

What happened was pandering for votes.

And the easiest way to pander for votes in ANY political party in charge is to use tax money to throw favors to their constituents.

Thus we get these damn "initiatives" and such under either the guise of "security" or "the children" or some other noble reason to pump money into a district.

Bush is an obvious symptom but he's not the cause. He's an embarrassing and telltale cold sore but choices made in the name of expediency are what infected the Republicans. Adolescent idolatry and attachment to hollow slogans without holding standard bearers accountable exacerbate it.

But by all memes, keep pulling that lever for your team. I'm sure one day one won't come in your mouth.

Fascism took it's place?

DarthBrooks: What happened was pandering for votes.

BINGO!

The collapse of the Gingrich Revolution is proof positive of this. As they cut the ever loving shiat out of the budget, they were vilified as baby killers and portrayed as hell bent on starving the poor and unwashed. Political poison to say the least. People send politicians to Washington to take care of them...not to leave them alone. You know...Ask not what you can do for your country, ask what your country can do for you.

Pity.

The Bushes and the Religious Right got control of the party, that's what happened.

Dancin_In_Anson: The collapse of the Gingrich Revolution is proof positive of this. As they cut the ever loving shiat out of the budget, they were vilified as baby killers and portrayed as hell bent on starving the poor and unwashed. Political poison to say the least. People send politicians to Washington to take care of them...not to leave them alone. You know...Ask not what you can do for your country, ask what your country can do for you.

So you don't think that any of the ridiculous union between financial conservatives and social conservatives had anything to do with the corruption of the ideals? It all had to do with those poor republicans being vilified unfairly?

That's rather lacking in personal accountability, isn't it?

I guess the majority of voters in America want the government to take care of them. What a country!

People myopically have this "vision" of which parties represent which ideals, and that they are somehow static.

Liberal was a word that only 40 years ago applied to many Reps. Democrats were largely conservative in nature before the 60's. These quantum shifts within parties happen all the time, as parties cede certain policy "territory" in an attempt to pick up on news issues that tend to resonate with the populace in the short term.

This is why ideology pisses me off. I have no prob with the tags Rep and Dem, unless they reflect dogmatic following of the "team" regardless of the shifting political sentiments. In 10 years, the values of the Dems and the Reps may look nothing like what they did 20 years ago. It's happened all throughout our history, and will happen again....if anything the 24-hour news cycle has retarded people's abilities to see long-term trends.

How many people remember that in 2000, the Dems were the party of "nation building" and the Reps utterly opposed using the military for this purpose?...talk about a quantum shift in under a decade that few seem to internally notice.

People used to go to jail for bribing politicians. Now it's all nice and legal and above board.

Obdicut: So you don't think that any of the ridiculous union between financial conservatives and social conservatives had anything to do with the corruption of the ideals?

The fundies have been around the party for a long time (Remember Ed Meese covering the same statue that Ashcroft covered?) The fiscal conservatives were by and large run off in 2000. There are a few left but not many. Sadly, it's become a matter of who is going to spend like crazy. The "social conservatives" or the "social liberals".

Dancin_In_Anson: DarthBrooks: What happened was pandering for votes.

BINGO!

The collapse of the Gingrich Revolution is proof positive of this. As they cut the ever loving shiat out of the budget, they were vilified as baby killers and portrayed as hell bent on starving the poor and unwashed. Political poison to say the least. People send politicians to Washington to take care of them...not to leave them alone. You know...Ask not what you can do for your country, ask what your country can do for you.

Don't forget about the influence of the Iron Triangle.

What happened?


it was just a catchphrase to distract people from rampant corruption. like everything else in the republican party.

flavor of the month: it was just a catchphrase to distract people from rampant corruption. like everything else in the republican party.

You are suggesting that this is unique to a single party?

Dancin_In_Anson: The fundies have been around the party for a long time (Remember Ed Meese covering the same statue that Ashcroft covered?) The fiscal conservatives were by and large run off in 2000. There are a few left but not many. Sadly, it's become a matter of who is going to spend like crazy. The "social conservatives" or the "social liberals".

Um, Ed Meese is from 1985. That's not really a long time. That's exactly the time period I'm talking about. That's when the social conservatives and the financial conservatives made an alliance in order to strengthen themselves politically. It was a choice. It didn't just happen.

I'd like to point out that one can easily be a social liberal while being a financial conservative, and that it's very ridiculous to posit that social liberals automatically spend like crazy. For example: Paul Tsongas, Olyimpia Snowe.

Obdicut: Um, Ed Meese is from 1985.

Yes. I am aware of that.

That's when the social conservatives and the financial conservatives made an alliance in order to strengthen themselves politically.

But it doesn't take into account the wild assed spending that has occurred by the social conservatives that occurred after 2000. Prior to that the fiscal conservative wing of the party still had control.

Obdicut: and that it's very ridiculous to posit that social liberals automatically spend like crazy.

Well, I would point out that the social liberals that are in control of Congress right now aren't exactly reigning in spending.

what happened to the republican party?

one aspect i haven't seen yet is democrats happened to republicans. just like any business allows itself to get sloppy and bloated in the absence of competition, the republicans haven't had any inclination to control themselves. if the other party can lose to george bush, twice, they aren't putting up any competition.

if the democratic party doesn't step up, we'll probably continue to see functional retards coming out of the GOP... why not? they can win and they don't ask questions.

They realized fiscal conservatism doesn't work, so they might as well spend liberally on the things they want rather than let the Democrats spend liberally on what they want when they take office.

As such, free markets and smaller government went straight to sh*t.

It's always about the money.

This thread is amusing, hence I shall bookmark it.

2late2baviking: "This way to the egress."

The marketing message does not necessarily reflect the actual product. In 50+ years of watching this in 3 major incarnations, (stop the commies, peace with honor, city on the hill) the end result of Republican administration seems to be "Lockheed gets the money". They may whore themselves to mainstreet Republicans, the silent majority and red state America but the result is more money for the military industrial complex. It was never about you, little guy. Eisenhower was right.

Winner!

Simple. Winners in a fixed game get stupid.

what 2late2baviking said

but... that's because that marketing stragedy was formed while republicans were in opposition. once they got into power they started doing all the same stuff as the last party in power.

That's what I'd like to know. I use to think that the Republican Party was the voice of old school common sense vs sometimes the radical innovative views of the Democrats.

Now their ideologies just seem plain ol' insensitive and wreckless. What in the world happen to that pro-life, fiscally conservative, land of the free, give us your poor and hungry, we hate all communists Republicans?

Dancin_In_Anson
Well, I would point out that the social liberals that are in control of Congress right now aren't exactly reigning in spending.

it's all MILITARY SPENDING, YOU COCK

The crusading religious zealots put their taint on it.

deeproy: 2late2baviking: "This way to the egress."

The "Egress"? Sounds exciting! Where do I line up... over here you say? Great! I can't wait! Mr. Barnum, you're the best.

Smaller government, free markets and fiscal conservatism

Oh, that crazy Ron Paul!

You can have smaller government, free markets, and fiscal conservatism, or you can have messianism. They chose messianism.

RanDomino: it's all MILITARY SPENDING

All of it eh? No other wasteful spending anywhere in the US budget.


Who knew?

YOU COCK

The hallmark of a great orator.