Approval Rate: 62%

62%Approval ratio

Reviews 48

Sort by:
  • by


    Sun Nov 07 2010

    Why Conservatism sucks: Conservatives are, by and large, materialistic, intolerant, unsympathetic pricks. They have a terrible tendency to be racist, anti-poor, xenophobic, pro-gun warmongers who only care about what they own and what kind of car they drive. They are also usually quite religious, and believe in religious freedom as long as they are free to push their religion on you. There are some who are intelligent, but rarely intellectual.

  • by


    Tue May 26 2009

    It's time for conservatives to leave The Republican Party and start a new 3rd Party. The GOP is too far to the left now.

  • by


    Sun Apr 06 2008

    There is nothing wrong with keeping what is good, but I think you should always challenge your own assumptions about what is good to make sure that they have a firm foundation.Keeping an open mind to change is the only way to progress as a society and an individual. The great advances of civil rights were achieved painfully, but their long term success was that they changed what was perceived to be right by the general people, changed the composition of the bedrock of societal norms.

  • by


    Sat Apr 05 2008

    Stability is wrong and boring. Let's blow up everything and have fun while doing it. And down we go...

  • by


    Sun Mar 25 2007

    TODAY ONLY! Free MP3s for Conservatives: Here's an Honest Christian and a Bible Message.

  • by


    Fri Mar 16 2007

    Conservative all the way. I think liberals are liberals because they fear being called heartless. Conservatives are conservatives because they fear being called brainless. Do the math.

  • by


    Fri Mar 16 2007

    DrEntropy....fantastic post! I am glad that someone out there understands that Bush and this current crop of Republicans are NOT conservatives."The government that governs least governs best"...Conservatives believe that people, not government, can do it better, and an aherence to the US Constitution. This is not to be confused with the so-called religious right; should not be confused with neocons.

  • by


    Sat Mar 10 2007

    Ah yes conservatism, something our country needs more of especially these days when liberals want control of everything.  We need another Ronald Reagan!

  • by


    Sun Feb 11 2007

    Liberals yell at us because we "dont want change" yet they contradict themselves when they yell at us for taking certain civil liberities away because we are in a time of war.

  • by


    Sat Jan 13 2007

    Who did New York City have to get to clean the intolerable crime situation when the city was so messed up from years of liberalism? They had to settle at least for Giuliani a social liberal who was conservative and tough on crime to get things back to some kind of sanity again. Businesses where fleeing in record numbers out of California to escape the killer liberal taxes, who did California have to get to clean up the corruption ,waste, taxes,spending and economic ruins? They had to fire a sitting Governor for (only the second time in US history) and had to settle at least for Schwarzenegger a social liberal who was at least semi conservative on taxes and spending.When liberals get the country in trouble Americans have to bring in someone who at least holds some form of a watered down conservative policy into get those intolerable problems under control.

  • by


    Thu Jan 11 2007

    The above description of conservatism is a good one, and worth quoting in full: "A disposition in politics to preserve what is established, the political philosophy based on tradition and social stability, stressing established institutions, and preferring gradual development to abrupt change, and the tendency to prefer an existing or traditional situation to change." This is truly a 5-star ideology. What is odd is how few people who call themselves Conservatives even come close to following these values. Modern Conservatism-and the supposedly Conservatism Republican party-is characterized by support for pre-emptive warfare (i.e. unprovoked invasion), the removal of all constitutional restraints on presidential power, encouraging mass immigration, replacing progressive taxation with regressive ones, addiction to destructive deficit spending, and-most of all-an endless stream of mindless anti-liberal, anti-tax, anti-government rhetoric. Except on social issues, there is very littl... Read more

  • by


    Sat Sep 23 2006

    Right is right.

  • by


    Fri Sep 15 2006

    times change, so should ideas conservatism for me mean the rich getting richer and the poor getting poorer. all i am saying is there's a reason a wealthefare states have been instituted.

  • by


    Fri Aug 11 2006

    I got a problem with "the mans" view on America. My pops tells me to stop listening to "junk" and listen to Barry freaking Manilow and Randy Travis. Are you joking?? I aint down with those lyrics. This is America, I should be able to look, say, talk any way I want to want fear of penalty or ridicule. The peeps in my hood dont want to hear the truth. Anyway, Im gonna do what I do, love what is true, do what it do mayne. Freedom of speech is in effect, I repeat freedom of speech is in effect.

  • by


    Mon Jul 24 2006

    I have many liberal friends, yet I would never stoop so low as to insult them just because we disagree on political philosophies. Instead, we choose to agree to disagree, and leave it at that. Given that, only a complete, uneducated fool (like lollapalloo) would actually believe that conservatism are for those without education. But in looking at conservatism as an political/economic ideology, those who choose to practice it do so because they believe in social stability, tradition, and/or at least gradual/careful change based on past experiences; as opposed to liberalism which, at its roots, believe in a more progressive approach to issues (and a commendable belief in the goodness of human nature). I feel that both philosophies possess good qualities worthy of those who are passionate about the issues. But there are a few who give these philosophies a bad name/reputation; and stupid, shrill comments like the few here only reflect individuals' ignorance and/or immaturity. If anything, ... Read more

  • by


    Mon Jul 24 2006

    The conservative economic philosophy has much to admire and study. . .politically, it is allergic to inevitable social change. . .social and philosophical conservatives have made the argument against freeing the slaves (1) during the Revolutionary War and leading up to the Civil War, (2) conservatives trumpeted patience or belligerence when it came to issues of voting rights for women and Civil Rights for minorities. . .financially, conservatism has much to admire. . .politically and socially, it usually winds up on the wrong side of issues when the unkind glare of history points at it. . .remember, the conservative argument during the Revolutionary War would have been 'wait and see/respect traditional values' with dealings with King George. . .which gets you nowhere, nada, zilch. . .

  • by


    Tue Mar 28 2006

    For those without any education.

  • by


    Mon Feb 20 2006

    the only way america can survive is through true consevatism. Borders (Mexico and Canada), our national language of english, and our culture (american culture). I borrowed this statement from Michael Savage, I don't like sounding liberal and copying some ones elses ideas, but it is a good idea. I sure wish Bush would take note. America was brought up on conservative values and will last and eternity if it keeps them. America is the envy of the world and I hope it will always be. Chat with a legal immagrent and you will see that most are successful ,vote conservative, and on average do better than most american citizens because they know where the land of oppurtunity (not free liberal hand outs) can take them.

  • by


    Thu Jan 05 2006

    I hate to be the bearer of bad tidings, but in no stretch of the imagination is conservatism an ECONOMIC ideology!

  • by


    Thu Jan 05 2006

    Conservatives differ from liberals in this way... they want to give people the opportunity for aomeone to make money but liberals want to just throw money at the problem...which does not help anything You give a man a fish he will eat for a day...give a man a fishing pole he will it for life

  • by


    Thu Jan 05 2006

    Just another word for fascism. Christian, heterosexist, consumer addicted, family addicted, war addicted, fascism. It bases it's lies on this concept. You give a man a fish he will eat for a day...give a man a fishing pole he will it for life. But in reality, a small group of extrememly rich and powerful people own the fish, the pole and the mortgage on the man. The man has to stand in line to get to the stream because the population of the planet has exploded. He is then charged a fee for using the pole and the stream and a tax on the fish caught, which goes directly to officials who give it to those same few wealthy and powerful people. The water is polluted from corporate sludge and the fish have three eyes. But the wealthy few use their media to spin that tired old tale about the man and the pole and the fish. They tell the man with the pole to only believe Fox News or else he might think something that could get him into trouble. And trouble means going into the largest... Read more

  • by


    Thu Dec 29 2005

    MATHEW'S TOP TEN REASONS WHY CONSERVATISM (And conservatives in general) FAIL: These are a few examples, there are simply wayyyy too many to list--due to space limitations)... 1. Weapons (supposedly) in Iraq. Weapons in North Korea. Crazy dictator in Iraq. Crazy dictator in North Korea. Dictator in Iraq has done interviews with News Anchors in Iraq. Dictator in North Korea threatens the US and begins testing Nuclear Missles. Conservatives are good on going after Iraq, but are for "diplomacy" with North Korea No weapons found in Iraq. More water reacators (nuclear facilities) being built in North Korea (ummm .. for WHAT purpose? Peace Talks??) Conservatives view terrorism a threat, but North Korea amassing the largest amount of nukes known to mankind is 'okay'... We invade Iraq because it's a threat to the US. Um, Where's the logic here??!?!?!?! 2. Democrats support Afghanistan invasion. Democrats are against Iraq invasion. Conservatives say Democrats are "pacifists" and are "unpa... Read more

  • by


    Wed Dec 21 2005

    ORIGINAL COMMENT 7/21/04: I find funny the tendency by lefties and far lefties (and others)to rate an ideology like this negatively and rationalize their judgement by their own caricature of the ideology. Some descriptions of conservatism are so ridiculous and far out, you wonder who they know who could possibly live up (or down) to such a silly list of attributes. As a conservative, I believe in thoughtful progressiveness, not the absence of progress but some thought to the ramifications of the change being implemented. That is the strain I look for in judging the merits of governmental policies. Here's my advice to all: strive to achieve a firm, logical and unemotional grasp on the subtle realities of each situation. It isn't conservative to oppose gun control, for instance, or abortion or to support the war effort, in each case. But applying the thought process to the proposed legislation, most conservatives come away with the same opinion on its merits. Take the personal at... Read more

  • by


    Tue Dec 13 2005

    AS time goes on, humans are being less and less Conservative. 100 years ago if you thought blacks should have the same rights as whites, you were a liberal. Face it, change is good. If everyone was still a conservative, no one would have any rights but white males with property.

  • by


    Fri Dec 09 2005

    The greatest problem people have with defining conservatism is they cannot define liberalism. People are so uneducated and lazy they take only the time to consume a patina of knowledge and regurgitate cliches to make themselves feel good. Thats what life is all about apparently making yourself feel good right? Classical liberalism as defined predominantly by the likes of Locke and Mill contains an inherent fault that when progressed forward naturally by contemporary liberals like Rawls it becomes evidently clear that the philosophy is untenable. Rawls undercuts first priority rights for second priority rights providing the proof that liberals are really despots cloaked in sweet linguistic slight of hand. Locke actually contradicts himself in Concerning Human Understanding from his Second Treatise particularly on property and family obligations tripping on his own empiricist path. The ideals of classic liberalism however were widely accepted by the Christian masses because they were... Read more

  • by


    Sun Dec 04 2005

    "What is Conservatism? Is it not adherence to the old and tried, against the new and untried?" ~~~Abe Lincoln

  • by


    Sat Dec 03 2005

    I am not a conservative, but to each his own. There are many people I know who are conservatives, and they are fine people. I don't like Bush's brand of conservatism, but I had no serious problem with Reagan, and from what I hear, Eisenhower was a decent president. UPDATE: What was I smoking when I penned this review?! While I do know some Conservatives in my personal life who are fine people, Conservatism as it is practiced now is a pox on this country, based on an altogether repugnant combination of fear, intolerance, and rampaging militaristic imperialism. (OK El Rightoes, get out your Webster's Dictionaries to look up all the big words I used in this post!)

  • by


    Fri Dec 02 2005

    Closed minded sometimes...I don't always agree with them...but I'd pick them over liberals any day of the week

  • by


    Sun Nov 13 2005

    Conservatism these days has a problem: it has been hijacked by extremists who have nothing to offer than their own prejudice. I might have actually been inclined to give conservatism another star or two if it weren't for the fact that I am sick of what passes as discourse in this country. I am also disgusted by famous conservatives like Sean Hannity, Ann Coulter, and the like. I don't know what their problem is, but they seem to have serious issues about liberals. The only thing these people seem to contribute to political discourse is how immoral and stupid liberal are. Do you know how sick and tired I am of hearing "you liberals" this and "you liberals" that? Ann Coulter, Sean Hannity, Rush Limbaugh, and many others like them - they seem to make big money spewing as much hate and vitriol against liberals that they can. They write books about how stupid and immoral liberals are - lumping them together as though all liberals think alike - and conservatives who read garbage like tha... Read more

  • by


    Fri Nov 11 2005

    This was a MUCH more conservative nation when I was younger and there was much less crime, social and family breakdown and general ugliness in our society then!

  • by


    Mon Oct 31 2005

    Well, ya know, back in the good-ole days.....

  • by


    Thu Oct 06 2005

    good on values and family

  • by


    Wed Oct 05 2005

    In my view, "conservative" and "liberal" are two terms that have become essentially meaningless in contemporary discourse. Just read through the many comments on this list and you'll see why. Whether you take a conservative or a liberal approach depends on the context (social, political, moral, environmental, fiscal, etc.) and the issues involved. Many so-called liberals often appear stronger on energy conservation. Some so-called conservatives favor the liberalization of laws against marijuana use. One can claim to be a fiscal conservative and a liberal on moral and social issues, while, according to someone else's definition, acting in defiance of both! Many wish to identify "conservatism" with theocratic, biblical interpretations of moral issues; others see conservatism as having purely secular roots in the Rational Enlightenment. A self-styled liberal journalist claims the mainstream media is dominated by "the Conservative Right," only to be contradicted by colleagues who be... Read more

  • by


    Sun Oct 02 2005

    Consider the words of the philosopher and scholar F.A. Hayek about conservatism as a political system of thought. "It all depends upon WHAT you want to conserve." Broadly, I like conservatism, particularly its emphasis on the natural law tradition. There are certain moral constants that need to be preserved in order to maintain a semblance of civil society throughout all periods. However, change many times is the only constant that we can rely upon. Standards for behavior change; for instance, about 250 years ago, slavery was generally considered moral in the West. Today most societies, even non-Western ones, have moved away from such a conception; especially since the dawn of the Enlightenment with its emphasis on individual rights. I consider myself a conservative with reservations. Sometimes certain practices can become arcane, old alliances shift, new technologies arise, and paradigms, or ways of thinking, shift. Hayek's words under these circumstances have more poignancy. Conserva... Read more

  • by


    Sat Aug 06 2005

    Safe. Stagnant. You have to agree that the ideal that is trying to be conserved, matches your ideal, to be a conservative. All the other atypical people, the minorities, are better suited as liberals. Myself included.

  • by


    Sat Jul 30 2005

    I can tolerate conservatism (the ideology, but not it's current or previous applications). The concept of self-initiative and responsibility I can identify with, but it's not progessive enough for me. I don't like morality being a commodity in the political domain, and as of late (some) conservatives have frustrated me with the rhetoric that morality and ethics can only be found in the religious heart. That notion is false, and creates a greater chasm in the conservative/liberal divide. Anyway, there's a glut of ideology nowadays, do we need so many -ISM's?

  • by


    Sat Jul 30 2005

    The disgusting social policies overshadow any respect that I would have considering giving.

  • by


    Wed Jul 13 2005

    I would only rank conservatism a star above liberalism based on its constituents. Liberalism in this country is insane. I believe most of America is moderate/conservative in nature. However, the problem is, many of these people are either not very smart, misguided by religion or greedy business owners. Conservative ideals in this country are not actually that bad, if practiced properly. However, in America, many conservatives give the smart ones a bad name with their attitudes. That's why being conservative has equaled being unintelligent now. I prefer to call myself a moderate, any rational person should be. Going one way or the other is insane. But I prefer to deal with conservatives, I cannot stand liberals, they are the strangest birds I have ever met, and I'm a pretty open, nice guy.

  • by


    Thu Jul 07 2005

    real conservatives, which are very few in number now, are nice people. But the vast majority of people in america now , are Faux conservatives. True conservatives, much like true Liberals, are people who don't hate on the ways exhibited here.

  • by


    Mon Jun 13 2005

    Five years ago, if you had asked me about my political ideology, I would have certaintly responded with liberal. However, now, I have found that conservatism fits much more with what I believe in--and I'm actually secular (a secular humanist to be precise)! ^_^ I'm very much against the disturbing practice of moral relativism--because I believe that there absolute rights and wrongs in the universe, and that quite a few grey areas are created by the wrong people in a futile effort to confuse the right people. As for as politics specfically go, I find myself conservative on many levels. One major social issue to me involves television. I am for stricter control on television and support the efforts of the underrated TV watchdog group, the Parents Television Council. I am also against the legalization of marijana, which is a drug that is more deadlier than most people claim! I am also a supporter of gun control and stricter laws on the consumption of alcohol and tabacoo. I believe that pe... Read more

  • by


    Fri Jun 10 2005

    As I have observed, in Australia, politics isn't as polarized as the U.S. I consider myself a moderate liberal (as in I vote Labour). My criticism of conservatism as applicable to Australia is it's fixture to the British Monarchy, attention to Upper-Class financial gain and the disenfranchising of the working classes. It was Conservative Australia that set forth the ill-fated White Australia policy many years ago. I take offense at LanceRoxas sweeping generalisations about liberals. Quoting ideological rhetoric, is almost indulgent. I am rating conservatism as to it's applications to reality. Neither Liberalism or Conservatism are to be given 5 stars. Both have limitations

  • by


    Mon Apr 04 2005

    Depends. I think most associate this with christians. The problem with this idea is that the change is so slow and I feel most who subscribe to the idea are not willing to entertain other views because they are clouded by the belief of a fairy tale.

  • by


    Fri Apr 01 2005

    why would you want to conserve the past? Mankind has not advanced by conserving anything. We need to be progressive, pressing forward, try new things. Wishing for some mythological better past time will result only in the stagnation and ultimate demise of humankind.

  • by


    Mon Jan 24 2005

    There is inherant value in conservatism, as there is in libralism. There are also inherant problems with both ideologies. Choosing a side and assuming that the other side are either idiots or evil, is one of the worst habits of North American politics, and that habit is well represented here. There are good things in conservatism, and there are also serious flaws. Keep your minds open. With a crowbar if necessary.

  • by


    Sun Jan 23 2005

    Conservatism is effective only as a counter-balance. In today's world, with new information and new ideas constantly being fed to the masses, a good amount of conservatism can keep things stable. Essentially, conservatism is a political, social, and cultural anchor. It can keep you from going forward, but it can also keep you from losing your way.

  • by


    Mon Jan 10 2005

    I find it odd that my liberal friends, as demonstrated by some reviews here, are supposed to be the most tolerant and open minded, yet they have fallen prey to stereotypical fallacies about Conservatives. I doubt that they have taken the time to look into the heart of Conservative principles. (of course many will tell you that they have, but I have my doubts. Please keep in mind that at one time I was a liberal so I have been on both sides of the fence) Instead of true tolerance and honest inquiry, I see them repeating all of the tripe and nonsense that has been fed to them by pundits who have their own agenda to promote. Although Conservatism takes some of its principles from a belief in God, atheists, agnostics and others who have no religion in their life can still be conservative for we are agreeing on principles, not deities. I don't know of any atheist or agnostic who promotes murder and stealing, yet these are two of the 10 Commandments. So one does not need to be religious to h... Read more

  • by


    Fri Jan 07 2005

    Conservatism is in many ways a two-edged sword. Whilst it is a wise thing to examine the costs of progress, overexamination can lead to stagnation. And whilst it is occasionally a good idea to go back a bit when society seems to be heading on the wrong course, there is a powerful risk of idealizing a past that never existed. In addition, whilst liberalism, or as I'd much rather call it progressive philosophy technically allows, at least in theory, everyone to decide what they wish to do with their own life, within reason. Conservatives, even though conservatism as a philosophy does not dictate this, would often wish to push their values onto those who do not agree 'for the good of all.' In addition conservatism in the US has grown increasingly more towards the undesirable radical right. And whereas a sensible conservatism may have earned three or four stars from me, the current brand of semi-religious moralizing, with its creepy theocratic overtones, simply can't hold my personal appro... Read more

  • by


    Mon Dec 06 2004

    Ok, I have a question. If it is true that conservatists are usually pro-life and then how is it that they can also be for the death penalty?

This topic is on the following list(s)

Add to new list