Former Prime Minister John Howard is a Conservative. So is current Prime Minister Tony Abbott. Matty pridefully declares himself a Conservative from an improbably early age. I was a Conservative, but grew out of it.

So who are these Conservatives? Why don't they all grow out of it?

Political divides begin in the brain
10 April 2012 by Chris Mooney

JOHN HIBBING used to be a traditional political scientist. He studied elections, ran opinion polls and researched why some politicians opt to retire rather than wait around to be defeated by challengers. "About as traditional as it gets," he says.

Roughly a decade ago, though, Hibbing shifted to a new approach that is starting to revolutionise how we think about politics. He began to explore whether political preferences might be partly based in biology. The idea initially met with great scepticism from his peers. But Hibbing and his collaborators at the Political Physiology Lab at the University of Nebraska-Lincoln now have a stack of scientific publications backing the idea.

For example, when they measure the physical reactions of liberals and conservatives to aversive stimuli, they find major differences. Tough-on-crime, pro-military conservatives have a more pronounced startle reflex after hearing a sudden loud noise. They also show stronger skin responses when shown threatening images and look at them more rapidly and for longer.

It is conventional to think about political ideology as a set of ideas people consciously hold about the way society should be ordered. A tacit assumption is that we come to these beliefs rationally, by reading and thinking about the issues. If we differ, it is because we reason to different conclusions.

Hibbing's results suggest otherwise. "One of the things we're trying to get people to realise is that those who disagree with them politically really do experience the world in a different fashion," he says.

Many other seemingly apolitical differences between liberals and conservatives have also been discovered. For example, they tend to organise their living spaces differently, with conservatives favouring tidiness and conventionality, and liberals more tolerant of clutter. They also seem to have different art preferences and even senses of humour.

Most recently, and controversially, focus has shifted to differences in brain structures and functions. In one experiment, conservatives on average had a larger right amygdala, a region of the brain that processes responses to fear and threat. Liberals, in contrast, had more grey matter in the anterior cingulate cortex, an error-detecting region that is thought to be involved in causing us to stop repeated patterns of behaviour and change course.

Results like these need to be treated with caution. They involve relatively small samples and it is far from clear whether your brain causes you to have a particular political outlook or vice versa - or some combination of both. Moreover, in these studies liberalism and conservatism are largely based on self-description, which introduces a fair amount of variability - especially as politically left and right are perhaps better thought of as a continuum than a binary choice.

Nevertheless, the amygdala finding dovetails nicely with Hibbing's work on startle reflexes. Conservatives on average really do seem to respond to fear and threat differently, and to focus on what Hibbing calls the "aversive" in life, rather than the "appetitive".

These experiments are themselves an extension of an older and long-standing body of research on personality differences between liberals and conservatives. Across a range of studies, liberals consistently rate higher on a trait called openness to experience. They are both ideologically liberal - comfortable with policy innovation and social and political change - and also personally liberal.

Conservatives, in contrast, tend to be less open and also consistently rate higher on conscientiousness, which means that they tend to prize orderliness and structure. Conscientious people are driven, competent, organised - and, on average, politically conservative.

Finally, there are a substantial number of genetic studies. Again and again, these show that identical twins (who share all of their DNA) tend to be far more politically similar to one another than fraternal twins (who share half of it). The studies suggest that 40 per cent or more of the variance in ideological views may ultimately be rooted in genes.

If all of this is true, it may reflect something we've always sort of known, but never really been willing to admit: liberals and conservatives are different sorts of people. Rational thinking about politics is not irrelevant, but seems to be less important than we thought. And this raises some important questions about how the new science of politics could be received and used.

[continued ...]

[... continued]

Hibbing is devoted to the idea that his work ought to be used to promote greater political tolerance. "The notion that our opponents are not simply obstinate or uninformed but have this way of experiencing the world that we don't understand could be useful," he says.

As far as toleration goes, the research certainly suggests that liberals and conservatives alike have strengths and weaknesses, and ought to fare better in some situations than others. Liberals are better at handling nuance, uncertainty and flexibility, while conservatives do better with leadership, duty and loyalty. There are good things about both ideologies.

The problem with the tolerance approach, though, is that it requires the acceptance of contentious new science on both sides. How do we know that's going to occur? What's to say conservatives won't reject the growing body of science on our political differences - as is their wont - and defensively assume that this is all just a way of putting them down and calling them inferior even though it isn't? In that case, the research could prove divisive, not helpful.

Frankly, in light of the polarisation of everything else in the US, it's hard not to fear that outcome.

Not a bad article. I agree that politics, like morality (is there much difference?), can be reduced to physiology or brain structures. But reductionism doesn't actually refute the ideas each group espouses. It merely describes the state of the body or mind at the time of making a moral/political decision. While "progressives" seem to think fear is not the way to think, often it is a very natural instinctive reaction to phenomena. And, to say "progressives" are free of fear is myth. Just look at how they fear Christians, confident white males, successful businessmen and the like.

The article is welcome, in my opinion, because the trend in the social sciences in the past 50 years has been to reduce politics to just "ideas"; free-floating ideas where the body and mind play little part. Foucault and other post-structuralist clowns see the body as a passive unit that merely absorbs ideas and acts them out like an automaton. Physiology and biology really, really needs to come back in and fill in the blanks.

And he got PAID for this?

smack ME!

Postmodern Trendoid III wrote on Dec 26^th, 2013 at 6:44pm:

... to say "progressives" are free of fear ...

Does the article say that? Does it instead say that, in progressives, fear reactions are generally less uncontrolled (if you'll forgive the double negative)?

Kat wrote on Dec 26^th, 2013 at 8:29pm:

And he got PAID for this? smack ME!

# wrote on Dec 26^th, 2013 at 3:31pm:

... What's to say conservatives won't reject the growing body of science on our political differences ...

I don't care if people and our government are conservative or progressive. What I do care about is that both people and governments of whatever hue advance Australia. That may mean changing anything that needs changing or retaining something that is working and nothing better is on offer.

my gut instinct is that a lot of young ones start out to the left and then get married, have kids, have a mortgage, run a business, see the destructive nature of leftist trendy ideas and drift to the right.  that would seem to be the opposite of what you see happening but it has been my experience.

eventually, you realise that the policies of whitlam and bob brown , as intellectually appealing as they may be  ;) ;), are almost certain to fail and dont help pay the school fees.  in the end
"its the economy stupid" and people instinctively come to realise , the right side of politics is the natural homeland of economic management.  one need only check out whitlam, kirner, bligh and gillard swan to recognise this.  as we have discussed before, keating was a good economic manager but he was a true blue blood liberal ;)

# wrote on Dec 26^th, 2013 at 3:30pm:

Former Prime Minister John Howard is a Conservative. So is current Prime Minister Tony Abbott.

You say this like it is somehow a bad thing?  ;D

Postmodern Trendoid III wrote on Dec 26^th, 2013 at 6:44pm:

to say "progressives" are free of fear is myth. Just look at how they fear Christians, confident white males, successful businessmen and the like. .

Yet many progressives are white male successful businessman and the like. As for fearing Christians, many progressives are Christians, there are stupid people on all sides of politics.

If you grew out of Conservatism Skippy instead of into it you'd have to be a Regressive.

Variations on a theme...

"If you're not a socialist at the age of 20, then you have no heart. If you're not a conservative at the age of 40, then you have no brain."

“If you are not a socialist at the age of 20 you have no heart, if you are still a socialist at the age of 40 you have no brain.”

“If you are not a leftist at 20 you have no heart, but if you are still a leftist at 40 you have no brains.”

“Anyone who isn't a socialist at the age of 20 hasn't got a heart and anyone who isn't a capitalist at the age of 50 hasn't got a head. "

"It is normal for people to be Progressives in their youth, but foolish for them to still be so in maturity."

Grendel wrote on Dec 27^th, 2013 at 11:37am:

If you grew out of Conservatism Skippy instead of into it you'd have to be a Regressive. Variations on a theme... "If you're not a socialist at the age of 20, then you have no heart. If you're not a conservative at the age of 40, then you have no brain." “If you are not a socialist at the age of 20 you have no heart, if you are still a socialist at the age of 40 you have no brain.” “If you are not a leftist at 20 you have no heart, but if you are still a leftist at 40 you have no brains.” “Anyone who isn't a socialist at the age of 20 hasn't got a heart and anyone who isn't a capitalist at the age of 50 hasn't got a head. " "It is normal for people to be Progressives in their youth, but foolish for them to still be so in maturity."

Yes I've read your little ditty before, written by a loony fringe like yourself of course.

Postmodern Trendoid III wrote on Dec 26^th, 2013 at 6:44pm:

And, to say "progressives" are free of fear is myth. Just look at how they fear Christians, confident white males, successful businessmen and the like.

More crap from MM.
Tim Costello, baptist minister and current CEO of World Vision is certainly more progressive than his brother Peter.

The_Barnacle wrote on Dec 27^th, 2013 at 11:51am:

Postmodern Trendoid III wrote on Dec 26th, 2013 at 6:44pm: And, to say "progressives" are free of fear is myth. Just look at how they fear Christians, confident white males, successful businessmen and the like. More crap from MM. Tim Costello, baptist minister and current CEO of World Vision is certainly more progressive than his brother Peter.

This is a problem with the thinking of "progressives" more than anything. "Progressivism" is usually anti-religious (well, anti-Christian; they seem to like Muslims for some weird reason). Get rid of religion they say and we can be closer to the socialist paradise on earth. Yet, many charity organisations have a Christian base. An interesting contradiction there in "progressive" thinking. Perhaps there needs to be some journal articles written on this phenomenon.

Postmodern Trendoid III wrote on Dec 27^th, 2013 at 12:03pm:

The_Barnacle wrote on Dec 27th, 2013 at 11:51am: Postmodern Trendoid III wrote on Dec 26th, 2013 at 6:44pm: And, to say "progressives" are free of fear is myth. Just look at how they fear Christians, confident white males, successful businessmen and the like. More crap from MM. Tim Costello, baptist minister and current CEO of World Vision is certainly more progressive than his brother Peter. This is a problem with the thinking of "progressives" more than anything. "Progressivism" is usually anti-religious (well, anti-Christian; they seem to like Muslims for some weird reason). Get rid of religion they say and we can be closer to the socialist paradise on earth. Yet, many charity organisations have a Christian base. An interesting contradiction there in "progressive" thinking. Perhaps there needs to be some journal articles written on this phenomenon.

Yes by your thinking Tim Costello hates Christians, the stupidity of the loony fringe is never ending. ::)

skippy. wrote on Dec 27^th, 2013 at 12:15pm:

Postmodern Trendoid III wrote on Dec 27th, 2013 at 12:03pm: The_Barnacle wrote on Dec 27th, 2013 at 11:51am: Postmodern Trendoid III wrote on Dec 26th, 2013 at 6:44pm: And, to say "progressives" are free of fear is myth. Just look at how they fear Christians, confident white males, successful businessmen and the like. More crap from MM. Tim Costello, baptist minister and current CEO of World Vision is certainly more progressive than his brother Peter. This is a problem with the thinking of "progressives" more than anything. "Progressivism" is usually anti-religious (well, anti-Christian; they seem to like Muslims for some weird reason). Get rid of religion they say and we can be closer to the socialist paradise on earth. Yet, many charity organisations have a Christian base. An interesting contradiction there in "progressive" thinking. Perhaps there needs to be some journal articles written on this phenomenon. Yes by your thinking Tim Costello hates Christians, the stupidity of the loony fringe is never ending. ::)

It's not my thinking, it's the thinking of "progressivism".

Postmodern Trendoid III wrote on Dec 27^th, 2013 at 12:17pm:

skippy. wrote on Dec 27th, 2013 at 12:15pm: Postmodern Trendoid III wrote on Dec 27th, 2013 at 12:03pm: The_Barnacle wrote on Dec 27th, 2013 at 11:51am: Postmodern Trendoid III wrote on Dec 26th, 2013 at 6:44pm: And, to say "progressives" are free of fear is myth. Just look at how they fear Christians, confident white males, successful businessmen and the like. More crap from MM. Tim Costello, baptist minister and current CEO of World Vision is certainly more progressive than his brother Peter. This is a problem with the thinking of "progressives" more than anything. "Progressivism" is usually anti-religious (well, anti-Christian; they seem to like Muslims for some weird reason). Get rid of religion they say and we can be closer to the socialist paradise on earth. Yet, many charity organisations have a Christian base. An interesting contradiction there in "progressive" thinking. Perhaps there needs to be some journal articles written on this phenomenon. Yes by your thinking Tim Costello hates Christians, the stupidity of the loony fringe is never ending. ::) It's not my thinking, it's the thinking of "progressivism".

Oh good, by your thinking Tim Costello hates himself, glad you cleared that up. ::)

Poor Skippy, he can't follow a simple line of reasoning.  :(

skippy. wrote on Dec 27^th, 2013 at 12:18pm:

Postmodern Trendoid III wrote on Dec 27th, 2013 at 12:17pm: skippy. wrote on Dec 27th, 2013 at 12:15pm: Postmodern Trendoid III wrote on Dec 27th, 2013 at 12:03pm: The_Barnacle wrote on Dec 27th, 2013 at 11:51am: Postmodern Trendoid III wrote on Dec 26th, 2013 at 6:44pm: And, to say "progressives" are free of fear is myth. Just look at how they fear Christians, confident white males, successful businessmen and the like. More crap from MM. Tim Costello, baptist minister and current CEO of World Vision is certainly more progressive than his brother Peter. This is a problem with the thinking of "progressives" more than anything. "Progressivism" is usually anti-religious (well, anti-Christian; they seem to like Muslims for some weird reason). Get rid of religion they say and we can be closer to the socialist paradise on earth. Yet, many charity organisations have a Christian base. An interesting contradiction there in "progressive" thinking. Perhaps there needs to be some journal articles written on this phenomenon. Yes by your thinking Tim Costello hates Christians, the stupidity of the loony fringe is never ending. ::) It's not my thinking, it's the thinking of "progressivism". Oh good, by your thinking Tim Costello hates himself, glad you cleared that up. ::)

I would too if I was him.

Postmodern Trendoid III wrote on Dec 27^th, 2013 at 12:23pm:

Poor Skippy, he can't follow a simple line of reasoning.  :(

It's your reasons dear, you claim progressives hate Christians, yet when it's pointed out the likes Tim Costello or Father Bob are progressives you carry on like the child you are, no wonder you're considered loony fringe.

skippy. wrote on Dec 27^th, 2013 at 12:25pm:

Postmodern Trendoid III wrote on Dec 27th, 2013 at 12:23pm: Poor Skippy, he can't follow a simple line of reasoning.  :( It's your reasons dear, you claim progressives hate Christians, yet when it's pointed out the likes Tim Costello or Father Bob are progressives you carry on like the child you are, no wonder you're considered loony fringe.

So how do "progressives" reconcile their desired secular earthly paradise with a few religious people in their ranks?

I have never understood that about people changing ideology as they age, from left to right (be we heard of the reverse). Nor do I see how it is weird for me to be a conservative from a young age, as referenced in the op. Again, nor do I see how one can be a conservative so young and have no heart. I have been a staunch conservative righty forever, and always will be. How does a thing like that change over time?

matty wrote on Dec 27^th, 2013 at 12:36pm:

I have never understood that about people changing ideology as they age, from left to right (be we heard of the reverse). Nor do I see how it is weird for me to be a conservative from a young age, as referenced in the op. Again, nor do I see how one can be a conservative so young and have no heart. I have been a staunch conservative righty forever, and always will be. How does a thing like that change over time?

"forever"   ;D

How old are you, 23 or something?

"How does it change over time?" - with maturity comes wisdom, matty.

;)

greggerypeccary wrote on Dec 27^th, 2013 at 12:42pm:

matty wrote on Dec 27th, 2013 at 12:36pm: I have never understood that about people changing ideology as they age, from left to right (be we heard of the reverse). Nor do I see how it is weird for me to be a conservative from a young age, as referenced in the op. Again, nor do I see how one can be a conservative so young and have no heart. I have been a staunch conservative righty forever, and always will be. How does a thing like that change over time? "forever"   ;D How old are you, 23 or something? "How does it change over time?" - with maturity comes wisdom, matty. ;)

Yes, 23, and have been politically aware since about 8.

So you think that when people become more mature, they become more conservative? I guess that it's hard to disagree with that.

Postmodern Trendoid III wrote on Dec 27^th, 2013 at 12:03pm:

The_Barnacle wrote on Dec 27th, 2013 at 11:51am: Postmodern Trendoid III wrote on Dec 26th, 2013 at 6:44pm: And, to say "progressives" are free of fear is myth. Just look at how they fear Christians, confident white males, successful businessmen and the like. More crap from MM. Tim Costello, baptist minister and current CEO of World Vision is certainly more progressive than his brother Peter. This is a problem with the thinking of "progressives" more than anything. "Progressivism" is usually anti-religious (well, anti-Christian; they seem to like Muslims for some weird reason). Get rid of religion they say and we can be closer to the socialist paradise on earth. Yet, many charity organisations have a Christian base. An interesting contradiction there in "progressive" thinking. Perhaps there needs to be some journal articles written on this phenomenon.

"Progressives" simply want to progress us out of the dark ages.  Some organisations, like religion, are still in the dark ages.  Dont take offense at it, "progressives" simply want everything to be accountable.
The fact that you cant sue the catholic church should be setting off alarm bells in anybody who believes in accountability.

Doctor Jolly wrote on Dec 27^th, 2013 at 1:21pm:

"Progressives" simply want to progress us out of the dark ages

Well 'progressives' can progress themselves till the cows come home for all I care as long as they keep their yuppy noses out of everyone else's business.... :D

Swagman wrote on Dec 27^th, 2013 at 1:30pm:

Doctor Jolly wrote on Dec 27th, 2013 at 1:21pm: "Progressives" simply want to progress us out of the dark ages Well 'progressives' can progress themselves till the cows come home for all I care as long as they keep their yuppy noses out of everyone else's business....

Yes, there are many like you who are perfectly happy to stagnate and regress.

Good luck to you, as long as you keep your redneck noses out of everyone else's business.

aquascoot wrote on Dec 27^th, 2013 at 8:01am:

my gut instinct is that a lot of young ones start out to the left and then get married, have kids, have a mortgage, run a business, see the destructive nature of leftist trendy ideas and drift to the right.  that would seem to be the opposite of what you see happening but it has been my experience. eventually, you realise that the policies of whitlam and bob brown , as intellectually appealing as they may be  ;) ;), are almost certain to fail and dont help pay the school fees.  in the end "its the economy stupid" and people instinctively come to realise , the right side of politics is the natural homeland of economic management.  one need only check out whitlam, kirner, bligh and gillard swan to recognise this.  as we have discussed before, keating was a good economic manager but he was a true blue blood liberal ;)

“the right side of politics is the natural homeland of economic management.” Really?

Doubt that, Fraser/Howard left the economy in a mess, was up to Hawke/Keating to clean that up and to modernise and open up the economy, something neglected by Menzies/Holt/Gorton/McMahon/Frazer.

Now idiots here will say “But all those surpluses, paid Labors $100Bn debt” etc. Pretty easy taking over as a recession is ending, like in1996. Then fuel a credit–fed boom, feeding back the surpluses as tax cuts pork and middleclass welfare. WTF didn’t Howard make the Pacific Highway a real highway, boost education, why didn’t he build the NBN? We are still suffering from the damage he did to the economy.

If we look at the US we see neoconservatism, started by Reagan and his idiotic “trickle down” and the brain damaged moron Dubya have turned the US from a superpower into a practically mendicant state $17Trn in debt!

If we look at Europe—Greece, Spain, Portugal, Ireland etc rightwing governments had fanned debt–driven booms in their economy, like the idiots Howard & Costello did here. Came the GFC and all these booms collapsed. We were fortunate that our bank regulations were much tighter than in the EZ economies—that is the measure of the danger Howard & Costello placed our economy in.

Bah! rightards in govt just give lots of money to those who already have plenty.

As usual, one picture is worth a thousand words!

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/BccnjBOCEAAXvPA.jpg

Notice the fear and cowering? OP spot on!

;D

aquascoot wrote on Dec 27^th, 2013 at 8:01am:

my gut instinct is that a lot of young ones start out to the left and then get married, have kids, have a mortgage, run a business, see the destructive nature of leftist trendy ideas and drift to the right.  that would seem to be the opposite of what you see happening but it has been my experience.

I have to admit that my own politics have drifted to the right as I've got older. But that is mostly because I have become more selfish, grumpy and less tolerant as i have reached middle age.

Doctor Jolly wrote on Dec 27^th, 2013 at 1:21pm:

Postmodern Trendoid III wrote on Dec 27th, 2013 at 12:03pm: The_Barnacle wrote on Dec 27th, 2013 at 11:51am: Postmodern Trendoid III wrote on Dec 26th, 2013 at 6:44pm: And, to say "progressives" are free of fear is myth. Just look at how they fear Christians, confident white males, successful businessmen and the like. More crap from MM. Tim Costello, baptist minister and current CEO of World Vision is certainly more progressive than his brother Peter. This is a problem with the thinking of "progressives" more than anything. "Progressivism" is usually anti-religious (well, anti-Christian; they seem to like Muslims for some weird reason). Get rid of religion they say and we can be closer to the socialist paradise on earth. Yet, many charity organisations have a Christian base. An interesting contradiction there in "progressive" thinking. Perhaps there needs to be some journal articles written on this phenomenon. "Progressives" simply want to progress us out of the dark ages.  Some organisations, like religion, are still in the dark ages.  Dont take offense at it, "progressives" simply want everything to be accountable. The fact that you cant sue the catholic church should be setting off alarm bells in anybody who believes in accountability.

Skippy won't like that.

matty wrote on Dec 27^th, 2013 at 12:36pm:

I have never understood that about people changing ideology as they age, from left to right (be we heard of the reverse). Nor do I see how it is weird for me to be a conservative from a young age, as referenced in the op. Again, nor do I see how one can be a conservative so young and have no heart. I have been a staunch conservative righty forever, and always will be. How does a thing like that change over time?

How sad.

Change is healthy. Change is necessary. Stagnation is death.

Yes, progressives often become less "alternative" as they age. We recognise the need to conform to some degree, but the zest for life remains. That is what conservatives miss out on, I reckon.

Conservatives' fears, particularly of uncertainty and change, make for lives barely worth living IMHO.

The_Barnacle wrote on Dec 27^th, 2013 at 3:09pm:

I have to admit that my own politics have drifted to the right as I've got older. But that is mostly because I have become more selfish, grumpy and less tolerant as i have reached middle age.

Haha so you have realised that the occupy movement unemployed protesting scum isn't going to look after you like the capitalist worker can   ;D
Socialism is wonderful in theory but it sucks f#ckin dogs balls when its implemented.  ;D

Innocent bystander wrote on Dec 27^th, 2013 at 7:55pm:

... Socialism is wonderful in theory ...

Extremes inevitably fail.

Extreme socialism is no more sustainable than extreme capitalism.

# wrote on Dec 27^th, 2013 at 8:09pm:

Innocent bystander wrote on Dec 27th, 2013 at 7:55pm: ... Socialism is wonderful in theory ... Extremes inevitably fail. Extreme socialism is no more sustainable than extreme capitalism.

I think anyone with a sense of realism sees that a mixture is good,  but I want my leaders with ideologies on either side.  It's the only way to get that mixture and not get what we have had which is stagnated short term thinkers too afraid to do anything and leading by popular decisions only.

Postmodern Trendoid III wrote on Dec 27^th, 2013 at 4:12pm:

Doctor Jolly wrote on Dec 27th, 2013 at 1:21pm: Postmodern Trendoid III wrote on Dec 27th, 2013 at 12:03pm: The_Barnacle wrote on Dec 27th, 2013 at 11:51am: Postmodern Trendoid III wrote on Dec 26th, 2013 at 6:44pm: And, to say "progressives" are free of fear is myth. Just look at how they fear Christians, confident white males, successful businessmen and the like. More crap from MM. Tim Costello, baptist minister and current CEO of World Vision is certainly more progressive than his brother Peter. This is a problem with the thinking of "progressives" more than anything. "Progressivism" is usually anti-religious (well, anti-Christian; they seem to like Muslims for some weird reason). Get rid of religion they say and we can be closer to the socialist paradise on earth. Yet, many charity organisations have a Christian base. An interesting contradiction there in "progressive" thinking. Perhaps there needs to be some journal articles written on this phenomenon. "Progressives" simply want to progress us out of the dark ages.  Some organisations, like religion, are still in the dark ages.  Dont take offense at it, "progressives" simply want everything to be accountable. The fact that you cant sue the catholic church should be setting off alarm bells in anybody who believes in accountability. Skippy won't like that.

Why not? He hasn't said anything I have disputed. I must say its  funny watching you backtrack after being found to be so wrong. ;D ;D ;D

skippy. wrote on Dec 27^th, 2013 at 8:40pm:

Postmodern Trendoid III wrote on Dec 27th, 2013 at 4:12pm: Doctor Jolly wrote on Dec 27th, 2013 at 1:21pm: Postmodern Trendoid III wrote on Dec 27th, 2013 at 12:03pm: The_Barnacle wrote on Dec 27th, 2013 at 11:51am: Postmodern Trendoid III wrote on Dec 26th, 2013 at 6:44pm: And, to say "progressives" are free of fear is myth. Just look at how they fear Christians, confident white males, successful businessmen and the like. More crap from MM. Tim Costello, baptist minister and current CEO of World Vision is certainly more progressive than his brother Peter. This is a problem with the thinking of "progressives" more than anything. "Progressivism" is usually anti-religious (well, anti-Christian; they seem to like Muslims for some weird reason). Get rid of religion they say and we can be closer to the socialist paradise on earth. Yet, many charity organisations have a Christian base. An interesting contradiction there in "progressive" thinking. Perhaps there needs to be some journal articles written on this phenomenon. "Progressives" simply want to progress us out of the dark ages.  Some organisations, like religion, are still in the dark ages.  Dont take offense at it, "progressives" simply want everything to be accountable. The fact that you cant sue the catholic church should be setting off alarm bells in anybody who believes in accountability. Skippy won't like that. Why not? He hasn't said anything I have disputed. I must say its  funny watching you backtrack after being found to be so wrong. ;D ;D ;D

Misty won't like that... 8-)

skippy. wrote on Dec 27^th, 2013 at 8:40pm:

Postmodern Trendoid III wrote on Dec 27th, 2013 at 4:12pm: Doctor Jolly wrote on Dec 27th, 2013 at 1:21pm: Postmodern Trendoid III wrote on Dec 27th, 2013 at 12:03pm: The_Barnacle wrote on Dec 27th, 2013 at 11:51am: Postmodern Trendoid III wrote on Dec 26th, 2013 at 6:44pm: And, to say "progressives" are free of fear is myth. Just look at how they fear Christians, confident white males, successful businessmen and the like. More crap from MM. Tim Costello, baptist minister and current CEO of World Vision is certainly more progressive than his brother Peter. This is a problem with the thinking of "progressives" more than anything. "Progressivism" is usually anti-religious (well, anti-Christian; they seem to like Muslims for some weird reason). Get rid of religion they say and we can be closer to the socialist paradise on earth. Yet, many charity organisations have a Christian base. An interesting contradiction there in "progressive" thinking. Perhaps there needs to be some journal articles written on this phenomenon. "Progressives" simply want to progress us out of the dark ages.  Some organisations, like religion, are still in the dark ages.  Dont take offense at it, "progressives" simply want everything to be accountable. The fact that you cant sue the catholic church should be setting off alarm bells in anybody who believes in accountability. Skippy won't like that. Why not? He hasn't said anything I have disputed. I must say its  funny watching you backtrack after being found to be so wrong. ;D ;D ;D

You're not being clear, Skippy. Does "progressivism" want Christians in its ranks or does it desire a complete secular utopia?

Doctor Jolly wrote on Dec 27^th, 2013 at 1:21pm:

Postmodern Trendoid III wrote on Dec 27th, 2013 at 12:03pm: The_Barnacle wrote on Dec 27th, 2013 at 11:51am: Postmodern Trendoid III wrote on Dec 26th, 2013 at 6:44pm: And, to say "progressives" are free of fear is myth. Just look at how they fear Christians, confident white males, successful businessmen and the like. More crap from MM. Tim Costello, baptist minister and current CEO of World Vision is certainly more progressive than his brother Peter. This is a problem with the thinking of "progressives" more than anything. "Progressivism" is usually anti-religious (well, anti-Christian; they seem to like Muslims for some weird reason). Get rid of religion they say and we can be closer to the socialist paradise on earth. Yet, many charity organisations have a Christian base. An interesting contradiction there in "progressive" thinking. Perhaps there needs to be some journal articles written on this phenomenon. "Progressives" simply want to progress us out of the dark ages.  Some organisations, like religion, are still in the dark ages.  Dont take offense at it, "progressives" simply want everything to be accountable except themselves. The fact that you cant sue the catholic church should be setting off alarm bells in anybody who believes in accountability.

Progressives also make vague references to nebulous concepts like "the dark ages" yet never explain what makes them dark, nor how they should be enlightened.

Also, I can't say I've ever seen a "progressive" be accountable for the consequences of their own half-baked ideological schemes, so I've made a slight correction to your statement.

Postmodern Trendoid III wrote on Dec 28^th, 2013 at 9:32am:

skippy. wrote on Dec 27th, 2013 at 8:40pm: Postmodern Trendoid III wrote on Dec 27th, 2013 at 4:12pm: Doctor Jolly wrote on Dec 27th, 2013 at 1:21pm: Postmodern Trendoid III wrote on Dec 27th, 2013 at 12:03pm: The_Barnacle wrote on Dec 27th, 2013 at 11:51am: Postmodern Trendoid III wrote on Dec 26th, 2013 at 6:44pm: And, to say "progressives" are free of fear is myth. Just look at how they fear Christians, confident white males, successful businessmen and the like. More crap from MM. Tim Costello, baptist minister and current CEO of World Vision is certainly more progressive than his brother Peter. This is a problem with the thinking of "progressives" more than anything. "Progressivism" is usually anti-religious (well, anti-Christian; they seem to like Muslims for some weird reason). Get rid of religion they say and we can be closer to the socialist paradise on earth. Yet, many charity organisations have a Christian base. An interesting contradiction there in "progressive" thinking. Perhaps there needs to be some journal articles written on this phenomenon. "Progressives" simply want to progress us out of the dark ages.  Some organisations, like religion, are still in the dark ages.  Dont take offense at it, "progressives" simply want everything to be accountable. The fact that you cant sue the catholic church should be setting off alarm bells in anybody who believes in accountability. Skippy won't like that. Why not? He hasn't said anything I have disputed. I must say its  funny watching you backtrack after being found to be so wrong. ;D ;D ;D You're not being clear, Skippy. Does "progressivism" want Christians in its ranks or does it desire a complete secular utopia?

So it's an either/or black/white? Why are conservatives so simple? I work in an all Christian environment and guess what! Some of them are very progressive. Being progressive is not anti-christian unless you are stuck in the dark ages. You label it like it's someone, some block of people, a conspiracy. It's not. It's wanting a better society and anyone is welcome to the party, want to come? You just need to look forward, not back.

Setanta wrote on Dec 28^th, 2013 at 9:41am:

So it's an either/or black/white? Why are conservatives so simple? I work in an all Christian environment and guess what! Some of them are very progressive. Being progressive is not anti-christian unless you are stuck in the dark ages. You label it like it's someone, some block of people, a conspiracy. It's not. It's wanting a better society and anyone is welcome to the party, want to come? You just need to look forward, not back.

It usually is black and white. Part of the "progressive" movement for the last 50 years (100 years if we include the socialist revolution in the Soviet Union) has been to remove religion from public and private life. Skippy is just being argumentative. He's on record here bashing the Church. But he's had a change of heart in this thread. But, given the way of Skippy, he'll be back to bashing the Church in a week or so. He's not smart enough to be disciplined and hold consistent views.

Postmodern Trendoid III wrote on Dec 28^th, 2013 at 9:51am:

Setanta wrote on Dec 28th, 2013 at 9:41am: So it's an either/or black/white? Why are conservatives so simple? I work in an all Christian environment and guess what! Some of them are very progressive. Being progressive is not anti-christian unless you are stuck in the dark ages. You label it like it's someone, some block of people, a conspiracy. It's not. It's wanting a better society and anyone is welcome to the party, want to come? You just need to look forward, not back. It usually is black and white. Part of the "progressive" movement for the last 50 years (100 years if we include the socialist revolution in the Soviet Union) has been to remove religion from public and private life. Skippy is just being argumentative. He's on record here bashing the Church. But he's had a change of heart in this thread. But, given the way of Skippy, he'll be back to bashing the Church in a week or so. He's not smart enough to be disciplined and hold consistent views.

So you are just wrong and shooting off at people you disagree with? Progressive has nothing to do with religion, find another dead horse. I'm not a fan of religion, but the absence of it is not a requirement to be progressive. Think more broadly or you're boxing yourself in.

Setanta wrote on Dec 28^th, 2013 at 9:56am:

I'm not a fan of religion, but the absence of it is not a requirement to be progressive.

yeah, it pretty much is.  I know there's no shortage of people calling themselves christians/jews/muslims/whatever and getting on board with the latest fad, but it's always better to look at their actions rather than listen to their words.  In doing so, you'll see they're religious in name only.  These wishy washy breeze-flappers don't have the strength of character to truly believe in anything but the god of mainstream acceptance.

... wrote on Dec 28^th, 2013 at 9:58am:

Setanta wrote on Dec 28th, 2013 at 9:56am: I'm not a fan of religion, but the absence of it is not a requirement to be progressive. yeah, it pretty much is.  I know there's no shortage of people calling themselves christians/jews/muslims/whatever and getting on board with the latest fad, but it's always better to look at their actions rather than listen to their words.  In doing so, you'll see they're religious in name only.  These wishy washy breeze-flappers don't have the strength of character to truly believe in anything but the god of mainstream acceptance.

Hmm, not really.. I work at a Christian Community School, they're a pretty devout bunch, but it seems you would discount many of them because they don't fit your mould. That is what is commonly known as a dogmatist or bigot.

# wrote on Dec 26^th, 2013 at 3:30pm:

So who are these Conservatives? Why don't they all grow out of it?

‘Contrarianism is what Conservatism does. It hasn’t got an ideology. We are people who instinctively know the right thing to do. We don’t look it up in a book. A bit of it is pure contrarianism, too — the pure pleasure and enjoyment of annoying people. Surely we all have a bit of that?’

Soren wrote on Dec 28^th, 2013 at 11:06am:

# wrote on Dec 26th, 2013 at 3:30pm: So who are these Conservatives? Why don't they all grow out of it? ‘Contrarianism is what Conservatism does. It hasn’t got an ideology. We are people who instinctively know the right thing to do. We don’t look it up in a book. A bit of it is pure contrarianism, too — the pure pleasure and enjoyment of annoying people. Surely we all have a bit of that?’

Conservatives you mean?

Yes. Conservatives do not go along with ideology - the stuff of PC, whether left or right.

The quote is from the end of an interview, 'The pure pleasure of annoying people' - Peregrine Worsthorne at 90'. He doesn't think Thatcher was a true conservative. There may be something in that.

Roger Scruton writes well on what true conservatism really is. For example:
http://www.prospectmagazine.co.uk/magazine/conservatism-tories-roger-scruton/#.Ur4t8NIW18E

Postmodern Trendoid III wrote on Dec 27^th, 2013 at 12:03pm:

... This is a problem with the thinking of "progressives" more than anything. "Progressivism" is usually anti-religious (well, anti-Christian; they seem to like Muslims for some weird reason). Get rid of religion they say and we can be closer to the socialist paradise on earth. Yet, many charity organisations have a Christian base. ...

I can see how your perspective might lead you to that perception.  You're missing something, as the OP implies a conservative might.

Progressives tend to rebel against whatever they were born to. In our society, that's usually Christianity.

In my experience, most take to Buddhism. Wicca and other forms of Paganism have fair followings, as do Agnosticism and Atheism. Those born Buddhist rarely rebel against it; if they do, they usually return after a while. I know of none who have taken to Islam. Maybe it's the more authoritarian and repressive religions that fare worst.

Your belief that a progressive is necessarily a socialist is false. Progressives seek balance. Conservatives see the world in black and white. They can't abide anything but the extreme.

That's a deliberate over-generalisation. I'm sure that there's a continuum, rather than just two extremes. I reckon the distribution is probably normal, as well.

Soren wrote on Dec 28^th, 2013 at 11:06am:

... ‘Contrarianism is what Conservatism does. It hasn’t got an ideology. We are people who instinctively know the right thing to do. We don’t look it up in a book. A bit of it is pure contrarianism, too — the pure pleasure and enjoyment of annoying people. Surely we all have a bit of that?’

So you reckon Conservatives are trolls?

# wrote on Dec 28^th, 2013 at 11:52am:

Soren wrote on Dec 28th, 2013 at 11:06am: ... ‘Contrarianism is what Conservatism does. It hasn’t got an ideology. We are people who instinctively know the right thing to do. We don’t look it up in a book. A bit of it is pure contrarianism, too — the pure pleasure and enjoyment of annoying people. Surely we all have a bit of that?’ So you reckon Conservatives are trolls?

Good spot. That is what I was questioning. Too often conservatives "project" what they would do onto the other. I don't mind having a dig and I can get a bit of fun/pleasure out of it but it's not something that I go out of my way to look for, I don't generally take pleasure in others discomfort. Then again, on this forum, I don't mind a bit of fire, and after all I am arguing/discussing with adults... That's a good thing because they are in charge now and will keep it all civil and save us from ourselves..

Edit: If it's Cods, Matty or LWE then it's out of the generally area and into the twilight zone. That's pure entertainment, loved that show as a kid.

# wrote on Dec 28^th, 2013 at 11:50am:

Progressives tend to rebel against whatever they were born to. In our society, that's usually Christianity.

Yes, that is correct. It is a highly reactive, and thus childish, worldview.


Quote:

Progressives seek balance.

Umm ... you just stated they rebel against whatever they were born into. There's no balance there.


Quote:

Conservatives see the world in black and white. They can't abide anything but the extreme.

Conservatism is only conceived as extreme because "progressives" are as left as Stalin. 

Setanta wrote on Dec 28^th, 2013 at 9:56am:

Postmodern Trendoid III wrote on Dec 28th, 2013 at 9:51am: Setanta wrote on Dec 28th, 2013 at 9:41am: So it's an either/or black/white? Why are conservatives so simple? I work in an all Christian environment and guess what! Some of them are very progressive. Being progressive is not anti-christian unless you are stuck in the dark ages. You label it like it's someone, some block of people, a conspiracy. It's not. It's wanting a better society and anyone is welcome to the party, want to come? You just need to look forward, not back. It usually is black and white. Part of the "progressive" movement for the last 50 years (100 years if we include the socialist revolution in the Soviet Union) has been to remove religion from public and private life. Skippy is just being argumentative. He's on record here bashing the Church. But he's had a change of heart in this thread. But, given the way of Skippy, he'll be back to bashing the Church in a week or so. He's not smart enough to be disciplined and hold consistent views. So you are just wrong and shooting off at people you disagree with? Progressive has nothing to do with religion, find another dead horse. I'm not a fan of religion, but the absence of it is not a requirement to be progressive. Think more broadly or you're boxing yourself in.

Nothing you say there has any connection to what I wrote. Did you quote the right post?

Postmodern Trendoid III wrote on Dec 28^th, 2013 at 12:22pm:

Setanta wrote on Dec 28th, 2013 at 9:56am: Postmodern Trendoid III wrote on Dec 28th, 2013 at 9:51am: Setanta wrote on Dec 28th, 2013 at 9:41am: So it's an either/or black/white? Why are conservatives so simple? I work in an all Christian environment and guess what! Some of them are very progressive. Being progressive is not anti-christian unless you are stuck in the dark ages. You label it like it's someone, some block of people, a conspiracy. It's not. It's wanting a better society and anyone is welcome to the party, want to come? You just need to look forward, not back. It usually is black and white. Part of the "progressive" movement for the last 50 years (100 years if we include the socialist revolution in the Soviet Union) has been to remove religion from public and private life. Skippy is just being argumentative. He's on record here bashing the Church. But he's had a change of heart in this thread. But, given the way of Skippy, he'll be back to bashing the Church in a week or so. He's not smart enough to be disciplined and hold consistent views. So you are just wrong and shooting off at people you disagree with? Progressive has nothing to do with religion, find another dead horse. I'm not a fan of religion, but the absence of it is not a requirement to be progressive. Think more broadly or you're boxing yourself in. Nothing you say there has any connection to what I wrote. Did you quote the right post?

I love the conservative lack of comprehension. Is it wilful?

This is old, and therefor bad.

This is new, and therefor bad.

Some old things (copper CAN, monarchy) are bad but others good and provide continuity

Some new things are bad, some, like the NBN are good. The Abbott shambles is new but very bad.

This is how progressive v conservative can be stated. Note no left v right is involved, that tends to come in when the ‘new’ might mean some get a bit less money  ;D

Still not seeing what's wrong with being a young conservative.  :-?

matty wrote on Dec 28^th, 2013 at 12:46pm:

Still not seeing what's wrong with being a young conservative.  :-?

What makes you think anyone's saying there's something "wrong" with it?

matty wrote on Dec 28^th, 2013 at 12:46pm:

Still not seeing what's wrong with being a young conservative.  :-?

Constantly seeking approval is a "progressive" trait. Give it up.

Postmodern Trendoid III wrote on Dec 28^th, 2013 at 12:19pm:

... Umm ... you just stated they rebel against whatever they were born into. There's no balance there.

Isn't there?


Postmodern Trendoid III wrote on Dec 28^th, 2013 at 12:19pm:

... Quote: Conservatives see the world in black and white. They can't abide anything but the extreme. Conservatism is only conceived as extreme because "progressives" are as left as Stalin.

You really haven't a clue.  ::)

... wrote on Dec 28^th, 2013 at 1:54pm:

matty wrote on Dec 28th, 2013 at 12:46pm: Still not seeing what's wrong with being a young conservative.  :-? Constantly seeking approval is a "progressive" trait. Give it up.

He's too frightened he made the wrong decision. That's a conservative trait.

sir prince duke alevine wrote on Dec 28^th, 2013 at 1:54pm:

... wrote on Dec 28th, 2013 at 1:54pm: matty wrote on Dec 28th, 2013 at 12:46pm: Still not seeing what's wrong with being a young conservative.  :-? Constantly seeking approval is a "progressive" trait. Give it up. He's too frightened he made the wrong decision. That's a conservative trait.

Conservatives don't really make decisions. 

... wrote on Dec 28^th, 2013 at 2:02pm:

sir prince duke alevine wrote on Dec 28th, 2013 at 1:54pm: ... wrote on Dec 28th, 2013 at 1:54pm: matty wrote on Dec 28th, 2013 at 12:46pm: Still not seeing what's wrong with being a young conservative.  :-? Constantly seeking approval is a "progressive" trait. Give it up. He's too frightened he made the wrong decision. That's a conservative trait. Conservatives don't really make decisions.

then how can they be good leaders?

skippy. wrote on Dec 27^th, 2013 at 11:42am:

Grendel wrote on Dec 27th, 2013 at 11:37am: If you grew out of Conservatism Skippy instead of into it you'd have to be a Regressive. Variations on a theme... "If you're not a socialist at the age of 20, then you have no heart. If you're not a conservative at the age of 40, then you have no brain." “If you are not a socialist at the age of 20 you have no heart, if you are still a socialist at the age of 40 you have no brain.” “If you are not a leftist at 20 you have no heart, but if you are still a leftist at 40 you have no brains.” “Anyone who isn't a socialist at the age of 20 hasn't got a heart and anyone who isn't a capitalist at the age of 50 hasn't got a head. " "It is normal for people to be Progressives in their youth, but foolish for them to still be so in maturity." Yes I've read your little ditty before, written by a loony fringe like yourself of course.

I know how the truth upsets you Squippy...  and how dissent is something Progressives cannot accept or tolerate.  :D

# wrote on Dec 28^th, 2013 at 1:52pm:

matty wrote on Dec 28th, 2013 at 12:46pm: Still not seeing what's wrong with being a young conservative.  :-? What makes you think anyone's saying there's something "wrong" with it?

Your previous comments.

... wrote on Dec 28^th, 2013 at 1:54pm:

matty wrote on Dec 28th, 2013 at 12:46pm: Still not seeing what's wrong with being a young conservative.  :-? Constantly seeking approval is a "progressive" trait. Give it up.

I don't seek anyobe's approval, except the Lord's.

sir prince duke alevine wrote on Dec 28^th, 2013 at 1:54pm:

... wrote on Dec 28th, 2013 at 1:54pm: matty wrote on Dec 28th, 2013 at 12:46pm: Still not seeing what's wrong with being a young conservative.  :-? Constantly seeking approval is a "progressive" trait. Give it up. He's too frightened he made the wrong decision. That's a conservative trait.

No I'm not.

matty wrote on Dec 28^th, 2013 at 3:25pm:

... wrote on Dec 28th, 2013 at 1:54pm: matty wrote on Dec 28th, 2013 at 12:46pm: Still not seeing what's wrong with being a young conservative.  :-? Constantly seeking approval is a "progressive" trait. Give it up. I don't seek anyobe's approval, except the Lord's.

How often does he send you reports?  Daily, weekly.....what?  How's it going.  Getting good marks?

Aussie wrote on Dec 28^th, 2013 at 3:28pm:

matty wrote on Dec 28th, 2013 at 3:25pm: ... wrote on Dec 28th, 2013 at 1:54pm: matty wrote on Dec 28th, 2013 at 12:46pm: Still not seeing what's wrong with being a young conservative.  :-? Constantly seeking approval is a "progressive" trait. Give it up. I don't seek anyobe's approval, except the Lord's. How often does he send you reports?  Daily, weekly.....what?  How's it going.  Getting good marks?

Lords approval is very easy. Just say a few hail mary's and all is forgiven :)

sir prince duke alevine wrote on Dec 28^th, 2013 at 3:32pm:

Aussie wrote on Dec 28th, 2013 at 3:28pm: matty wrote on Dec 28th, 2013 at 3:25pm: ... wrote on Dec 28th, 2013 at 1:54pm: matty wrote on Dec 28th, 2013 at 12:46pm: Still not seeing what's wrong with being a young conservative.  :-? Constantly seeking approval is a "progressive" trait. Give it up. I don't seek anyobe's approval, except the Lord's. How often does he send you reports?  Daily, weekly.....what?  How's it going.  Getting good marks? Lords approval is very easy. Just say a few hail mary's and all is forgiven :)

At least with Santa Claus, you actually get something if you have been a good boy.  The Tooth Fairy doesn't even care about that.  Lose a tooth, ya get cash.  Same with the Easter Bunny.  Not too sure about those fairies in the bottom of the garden.  I get bugger all from them.  Bit like the 'Lord' they are.

sir prince duke alevine wrote on Dec 28^th, 2013 at 2:03pm:

... wrote on Dec 28th, 2013 at 2:02pm: sir prince duke alevine wrote on Dec 28th, 2013 at 1:54pm: ... wrote on Dec 28th, 2013 at 1:54pm: matty wrote on Dec 28th, 2013 at 12:46pm: Still not seeing what's wrong with being a young conservative.  :-? Constantly seeking approval is a "progressive" trait. Give it up. He's too frightened he made the wrong decision. That's a conservative trait. Conservatives don't really make decisions.  then how can they be good leaders?

How good a leader does one need to be to say "leave everything as is"?

Setanta wrote on Dec 28^th, 2013 at 12:24pm:

Postmodern Trendoid III wrote on Dec 28th, 2013 at 12:22pm: Setanta wrote on Dec 28th, 2013 at 9:56am: Postmodern Trendoid III wrote on Dec 28th, 2013 at 9:51am: Setanta wrote on Dec 28th, 2013 at 9:41am: So it's an either/or black/white? Why are conservatives so simple? I work in an all Christian environment and guess what! Some of them are very progressive. Being progressive is not anti-christian unless you are stuck in the dark ages. You label it like it's someone, some block of people, a conspiracy. It's not. It's wanting a better society and anyone is welcome to the party, want to come? You just need to look forward, not back. It usually is black and white. Part of the "progressive" movement for the last 50 years (100 years if we include the socialist revolution in the Soviet Union) has been to remove religion from public and private life. Skippy is just being argumentative. He's on record here bashing the Church. But he's had a change of heart in this thread. But, given the way of Skippy, he'll be back to bashing the Church in a week or so. He's not smart enough to be disciplined and hold consistent views. So you are just wrong and shooting off at people you disagree with? Progressive has nothing to do with religion, find another dead horse. I'm not a fan of religion, but the absence of it is not a requirement to be progressive. Think more broadly or you're boxing yourself in. Nothing you say there has any connection to what I wrote. Did you quote the right post? I love the conservative lack of comprehension. Is it wilful?

Perhaps you'd like to continue this conversation here:

http://www.ozpolitic.com/forum/YaBB.pl?num=1383724020

# wrote on Dec 28^th, 2013 at 1:54pm:

Postmodern Trendoid III wrote on Dec 28th, 2013 at 12:19pm: ... Umm ... you just stated they rebel against whatever they were born into. There's no balance there. Isn't there? Postmodern Trendoid III wrote on Dec 28th, 2013 at 12:19pm: ... Quote: Conservatives see the world in black and white. They can't abide anything but the extreme. Conservatism is only conceived as extreme because "progressives" are as left as Stalin.  You really haven't a clue.  ::)

Don't I?

Perhaps you'd also like to continue this conversation here:

http://www.ozpolitic.com/forum/YaBB.pl?num=1383724020

... wrote on Dec 28^th, 2013 at 4:07pm:

sir prince duke alevine wrote on Dec 28th, 2013 at 2:03pm: ... wrote on Dec 28th, 2013 at 2:02pm: sir prince duke alevine wrote on Dec 28th, 2013 at 1:54pm: ... wrote on Dec 28th, 2013 at 1:54pm: matty wrote on Dec 28th, 2013 at 12:46pm: Still not seeing what's wrong with being a young conservative.  :-? Constantly seeking approval is a "progressive" trait. Give it up. He's too frightened he made the wrong decision. That's a conservative trait. Conservatives don't really make decisions.  then how can they be good leaders? How good a leader does one need to be to say "leave everything as is"?

a very poor one.

Theres a raging fire! "Leave everything as is."
We have found a cure for cancer! "Leave everything as is"
No one is buying our coal anymore! "Leave everything as is"

Plus, it seems your great conservative leaders don't leave EVERYTHING as is. Somehow they don't think the environment is an important thing to leave as is...  strange that.

My great conservative leaders?

Who dey?

Who brought in the GST?
Something Hawke refused to do and Keating failed to do?
Who was going to bring it in under Fightback?

Ooops... ;D

Grendel wrote on Dec 28^th, 2013 at 5:28pm:

Who brought in the GST? Something Hawke refused to do and Keating failed to do? Who was going to bring it in under Fightback? Ooops... ;D

One "achievement".  Well done?

sir prince duke alevine wrote on Dec 28^th, 2013 at 5:28pm:

Grendel wrote on Dec 28th, 2013 at 5:28pm: Who brought in the GST? Something Hawke refused to do and Keating failed to do? Who was going to bring it in under Fightback? Ooops... ;D One "achievement".  Well done?

in 12 yrs  ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D

how many labor in half that time?

John Smith wrote on Dec 28^th, 2013 at 5:40pm:

sir prince duke alevine wrote on Dec 28th, 2013 at 5:28pm: Grendel wrote on Dec 28th, 2013 at 5:28pm: Who brought in the GST? Something Hawke refused to do and Keating failed to do? Who was going to bring it in under Fightback? Ooops... ;D One "achievement".  Well done? in 12 yrs  ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D how many labor in half that time?

We conservatives like less government interferrnce in our lives. Small, but effective government.

Btw, what did the Rudd/Gillard/Rudd government/s achieve?

matty wrote on Dec 28^th, 2013 at 6:04pm:

We conservatives like less government interferrnce in our lives

then why bring in the GST? Why interfere with asylum seekers? Why direct action?

you conservatives like to show your stupidity thats all.....

John Smith wrote on Dec 28^th, 2013 at 6:12pm:

matty wrote on Dec 28th, 2013 at 6:04pm: We conservatives like less government interferrnce in our lives then why bring in the GST? Why interfere with asylum seekers? Why direct action? you conservatives like to show your stupidity thats all.....

Paiiiidddd pareenttallll leave.

It goes to show we don't have a true conservative party. There hasn't been since WWII.

Postmodern Trendoid III wrote on Dec 28^th, 2013 at 6:38pm:

It goes to show we don't have a true conservative party. There hasn't been since WWII.

sshhh, you'll make Matty cry!

Postmodern Trendoid III wrote on Dec 28^th, 2013 at 6:38pm:

It goes to show we don't have a true conservative party. There hasn't been since WWII.

Maybe a god does exist?

matty wrote on Dec 28^th, 2013 at 12:46pm:

Still not seeing what's wrong with being a young conservative.  :-?

matty wrote on Dec 28^th, 2013 at 3:24pm:

# wrote on Dec 28th, 2013 at 1:52pm: ... What makes you think anyone's saying there's something "wrong" with it? Your previous comments.

matty wrote on Dec 28^th, 2013 at 3:25pm:

... wrote on Dec 28th, 2013 at 1:54pm: ... Constantly seeking approval is a "progressive" trait. Give it up. I don't seek anyobe's approval, except the Lord's.

matty wrote on Dec 28^th, 2013 at 3:26pm:

sir prince duke alevine wrote on Dec 28th, 2013 at 1:54pm: ... He's too frightened he made the wrong decision. That's a conservative trait. No I'm not.

It looks like matty has revealed that he's the secret identity of the world-renowned Snivelling Conservative.  :D

John Smith wrote on Dec 28^th, 2013 at 5:40pm:

sir prince duke alevine wrote on Dec 28th, 2013 at 5:28pm: Grendel wrote on Dec 28th, 2013 at 5:28pm: Who brought in the GST? Something Hawke refused to do and Keating failed to do? Who was going to bring it in under Fightback? Ooops... ;D One "achievement".  Well done? in 12 yrs  ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D how many labor in half that time?

You are ignorant aren't you  ::) ::) ::)

sir prince duke alevine wrote on Dec 28^th, 2013 at 6:34pm:

John Smith wrote on Dec 28th, 2013 at 6:12pm: matty wrote on Dec 28th, 2013 at 6:04pm: We conservatives like less government interferrnce in our lives then why bring in the GST? Why interfere with asylum seekers? Why direct action? you conservatives like to show your stupidity thats all..... Paiiiidddd pareenttallll leave.

You mean the one where the so-called Arch Conservative is more generous than the bleeding heart LW PC progressives?  that one?

http://www.liberal.org.au/achievements-government

Grendel wrote on Dec 28^th, 2013 at 8:53pm:

sir prince duke alevine wrote on Dec 28th, 2013 at 6:34pm: John Smith wrote on Dec 28th, 2013 at 6:12pm: matty wrote on Dec 28th, 2013 at 6:04pm: We conservatives like less government interferrnce in our lives then why bring in the GST? Why interfere with asylum seekers? Why direct action? you conservatives like to show your stupidity thats all..... Paiiiidddd pareenttallll leave. You mean the one where the so-called Arch Conservative is more generous than the bleeding heart LW PC progressives?  that one?

You obviously didn't get it. 

sir prince duke alevine wrote on Dec 28^th, 2013 at 9:25pm:

Grendel wrote on Dec 28th, 2013 at 8:53pm: sir prince duke alevine wrote on Dec 28th, 2013 at 6:34pm: John Smith wrote on Dec 28th, 2013 at 6:12pm: matty wrote on Dec 28th, 2013 at 6:04pm: We conservatives like less government interferrnce in our lives then why bring in the GST? Why interfere with asylum seekers? Why direct action? you conservatives like to show your stupidity thats all..... Paiiiidddd pareenttallll leave. You mean the one where the so-called Arch Conservative is more generous than the bleeding heart LW PC progressives?  that one? You obviously didn't get it.

No...  I obviously deal in reality.

http://cdn2.spectator.co.uk/wp-content/blogs.dir/11/files/2013/09/176750474.jpg

The remains of the Amir Tadros Coptic Church in Minya, southern Egypt. (VIRGINIE NGUYEN HOANG/AFP/Getty Images)


Bishop Angaelos, leader of the UK Copts, also expressed disappointment at the response from other religious leaders, saying that if Christians burned down 10 synagogues or mosques, let alone 50, they’d be going over to show their sympathy and shame.

The most outspoken British religious leader has been Rabbi Jonathan Sacks, and the debate brought to mind something Rabbi Sacks recently said about Middle Eastern Christians, comparing their fate with those of the Jews in Europe, and quoting Martin Luther King: ‘In the End, we will remember not the words of our enemies, but the silence of our friends.’


The Muslim apologist don't have a leg to stand on, nor do the Western politicians  who cower in silence lest they offend - Muslims. Muslims who are savagely persecuting Christians and Jews.
And politicians are worried about offending the perpetrators by mentioning such attrocities. Twisted.

Islam deserves no special treatment and no respect as long as such attrocities are committed in its name. Muslims should not be spared any opprobrium unless they actively fight against such oppression.

Gandalf, Stavros, Tits, Brain - what have you done to protect non-Muslims in Egypt, Lybia, Syria, Iraq, Pakistan?

Nothing.

matty wrote on Dec 28^th, 2013 at 6:04pm:

John Smith wrote on Dec 28th, 2013 at 5:40pm: sir prince duke alevine wrote on Dec 28th, 2013 at 5:28pm: Grendel wrote on Dec 28th, 2013 at 5:28pm: Who brought in the GST? Something Hawke refused to do and Keating failed to do? Who was going to bring it in under Fightback? Ooops... ;D One "achievement".  Well done? in 12 yrs  ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D how many labor in half that time? We conservatives like less government interferrnce in our lives. Small, but effective government.

That’s right, Matty. That’s why we love Mr Abbott. He’s reliable, predictable, sane, measured, responsible and yes, effective. He’ll return the budget to surplus (he’s done it before and he’ll do it again. He’ll deliver on his commitments (say what you do and do what you say). He’ll stop the boats (they are stopping, they are stopping, and they will be stopped). He’ll do what it takes (winning government from opposition is like climbing Mt Everest).

Yes, Matty, effective. Mr Abbott will govern for all Australians - except the leftards. He even cares about religious minorities in Egypt - like the old boy.

Thank heavens the old boys are back in charge.

They’re effective.

More side splitting comedy son.

Soren wrote on Dec 28^th, 2013 at 9:58pm:

... The remains of the Amir Tadros Coptic Church in Minya, southern Egypt. (VIRGINIE NGUYEN HOANG/AFP/Getty Images) ...

Distraction Alert!

The Conservatives have nothing, so they're dragging in non-sequiturs.

John Smith wrote on Dec 28^th, 2013 at 6:12pm:

matty wrote on Dec 28th, 2013 at 6:04pm: We conservatives like less government interferrnce in our lives then why bring in the GST? Why interfere with asylum seekers? Why direct action? you conservatives like to show your stupidity thats all.....

I said small, not nonexistent. Again, I ask, what are the achievements of the Rudd/Gillard/Rudd government?

sir prince duke alevine wrote on Dec 28^th, 2013 at 6:34pm:

John Smith wrote on Dec 28th, 2013 at 6:12pm: matty wrote on Dec 28th, 2013 at 6:04pm: We conservatives like less government interferrnce in our lives then why bring in the GST? Why interfere with asylum seekers? Why direct action? you conservatives like to show your stupidity thats all..... Paiiiidddd pareenttallll leave.

A stupid policy, I concede.

matty wrote on Dec 29^th, 2013 at 12:12pm:

sir prince duke alevine wrote on Dec 28th, 2013 at 6:34pm: John Smith wrote on Dec 28th, 2013 at 6:12pm: matty wrote on Dec 28th, 2013 at 6:04pm: We conservatives like less government interferrnce in our lives then why bring in the GST? Why interfere with asylum seekers? Why direct action? you conservatives like to show your stupidity thats all..... Paiiiidddd pareenttallll leave. A stupid policy, I concede.

Why direct action?  Why gst?  Private health rebate? Private school funding? Fhog? What's with all this interference?  Let the market be!

Postmodern Trendoid III wrote on Dec 28^th, 2013 at 6:38pm:

It goes to show we don't have a true conservative party. There hasn't been since WWII.

I wouldn't say that, but unfortunately the Coalition is not as right wing-conservative as I would like.

matty wrote on Dec 29^th, 2013 at 12:14pm:

Postmodern Trendoid III wrote on Dec 28th, 2013 at 6:38pm: It goes to show we don't have a true conservative party. There hasn't been since WWII. I wouldn't say that, but unfortunately the Coalition is not as right wing-conservative as I would like.

They are socialists

sir prince duke alevine wrote on Dec 29^th, 2013 at 12:16pm:

matty wrote on Dec 29th, 2013 at 12:14pm: Postmodern Trendoid III wrote on Dec 28th, 2013 at 6:38pm: It goes to show we don't have a true conservative party. There hasn't been since WWII. I wouldn't say that, but unfortunately the Coalition is not as right wing-conservative as I would like. They are socialists

Then again, for mine, Labor is too Conservative.

matty wrote on Dec 29^th, 2013 at 12:14pm:

Postmodern Trendoid III wrote on Dec 28th, 2013 at 6:38pm: It goes to show we don't have a true conservative party. There hasn't been since WWII. I wouldn't say that, but unfortunately the Coalition is not as right wing-conservative as I would like.

I suppose it depends if we are talking conservatism or liberalism. Liberalism is about minimal government, but I don't think conservatives have any beef with using the government to get their way.

matty wrote on Dec 29^th, 2013 at 12:11pm:

... Again, I ask, what are the achievements of the Rudd/Gillard/Rudd government?

Focusing on Gillard; didn't she manage to get almost 600 pieces of legislation through a hostile parliament? Bearing in mind that Abbott couldn't even manage to form a government.

Progressives have no idea where the want to progress to. It's all ideology and fantasy. That's why they are so PC and full of bluster and ideological righteousness.

At least conservatives have a concrete idea of what they want to conserve. They respect yesterday because today was made of it.

# wrote on Dec 29^th, 2013 at 1:18pm:

matty wrote on Dec 29th, 2013 at 12:11pm: ... Again, I ask, what are the achievements of the Rudd/Gillard/Rudd government? Focusing on Gillard; didn't she manage to get almost 600 pieces of legislation through a hostile parliament? Bearing in mind that Abbott couldn't even manage to form a government.

And again you're told.

And again you do not learn.

Do you have some kind of specific learning disability?

Many can be treated nowadays, you know.... :P

Kat wrote on Dec 30^th, 2013 at 10:47pm:

# wrote on Dec 29th, 2013 at 1:18pm: matty wrote on Dec 29th, 2013 at 12:11pm: ... Again, I ask, what are the achievements of the Rudd/Gillard/Rudd government? Focusing on Gillard; didn't she manage to get almost 600 pieces of legislation through a hostile parliament? Bearing in mind that Abbott couldn't even manage to form a government. [b][i]And again you're told. And again you do not learn. Do you have some kind of specific learning disability?

Absolutely not. Matty is a 21 year old student who gave up his dream of becoming a specialist to avoid the carbon tax in Dunedin.

Matty has learned all he needs to learn, thank you very much. He’s like Alex Keaton in Family Ties. Or his younger sister, I forget which.

Matty’s parents are leftards and Mr Abbott is his Prime Minister.

Thank heavens the grown-ups are back in charge.

Soren wrote on Dec 30^th, 2013 at 10:08pm:

Progressives have no idea where the want to progress to. It's all ideology and fantasy. That's why they are so PC and full of bluster and ideological righteousness.

I say, old boy, haven’t you read the memo?

It’s "progressives".

Soren wrote on Dec 30^th, 2013 at 10:08pm:

At least conservatives have a concrete idea of what they want to conserve. They respect yesterday because today was made of it.

Ah. Like carbon dioxide, subsidies to foreign miners, and rich working mothers.

Yes, old boy, I believe in yesterday.

Mattyfisk wrote on Dec 31^st, 2013 at 12:18am:

... Matty has learned all he needs to learn, thank you very much. ...

I guess that's what creeps me out the most. The fact that he says he came to that conclusion at the age of eight doesn't make it any better.

Sounds an awful lot like Norman Bates to me.
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/c/c0/Norman-bates.png/225px-Norman-bates.png
Norman
Matty

Soren wrote on Dec 30^th, 2013 at 10:08pm:

Progressives have no idea where the want to progress to. It's all ideology and fantasy. That's why they are so PC and full of bluster and ideological righteousness. At least conservatives have a concrete idea of what they want to conserve. They respect yesterday because today was made of it.

There's some truth in that, albeit expressed from a psychotic perspective. None of us really knows where we're going.

We're on a juggernaut. It's moving inexorably forward. We can't stop it. We can't steer it. We can't slow it. We can't speed it up. We can't get off. All we can do is try to see where the juggernaut is going and choose the best spot on it.

At the front are Progressives, looking forward with varying degrees of anticipation and apprehension. Hanging off the back, looking backward and dragging their feet, trying in vain to slow the juggernaut, are Conservatives.

# wrote on Dec 31^st, 2013 at 11:16am:

We're on a juggernaut. It's moving inexorably forward. We can't stop it. We can't steer it. We can't slow it. We can't speed it up. We can't get off. All we can do is try to see where the juggernaut is going and choose the best spot on it. At the front are Progressives, looking forward with varying degrees of anticipation and apprehension. Hanging off the back, looking backward and dragging their feet, trying in vain to slow the juggernaut, are Conservatives.

This is mere sloganeering. It's just cute words on a page without any actual specific examples. Perhaps you'd like to outline in detail what is progress here: http://www.ozpolitic.com/forum/YaBB.pl?num=1383724020/0#0

Postmodern Trendoid III wrote on Dec 31^st, 2013 at 11:32am:

... This is mere sloganeering. ...

As intended, in response to similar.

Just not getting it, are you?

# wrote on Dec 31^st, 2013 at 12:25pm:

Postmodern Trendoid III wrote on Dec 31st, 2013 at 11:32am: ... This is mere sloganeering. ... As intended, in response to similar. Just not getting it, are you?

Getting what?

Postmodern Trendoid III wrote on Dec 31^st, 2013 at 12:27pm:

# wrote on Dec 31st, 2013 at 12:25pm: Postmodern Trendoid III wrote on Dec 31st, 2013 at 11:32am: ... This is mere sloganeering. ... As intended, in response to similar. Just not getting it, are you? Getting what?

See?

# wrote on Dec 31^st, 2013 at 12:35pm:

Postmodern Trendoid III wrote on Dec 31st, 2013 at 12:27pm: # wrote on Dec 31st, 2013 at 12:25pm: Postmodern Trendoid III wrote on Dec 31st, 2013 at 11:32am: ... This is mere sloganeering. ... As intended, in response to similar. Just not getting it, are you? Getting what? See?

I hypothesize you cannot articulate what progress means.

Postmodern Trendoid III wrote on Dec 31^st, 2013 at 12:42pm:

# wrote on Dec 31st, 2013 at 12:35pm: Postmodern Trendoid III wrote on Dec 31st, 2013 at 12:27pm: # wrote on Dec 31st, 2013 at 12:25pm: Postmodern Trendoid III wrote on Dec 31st, 2013 at 11:32am: ... This is mere sloganeering. ... As intended, in response to similar. Just not getting it, are you? Getting what? See? I hypothesize you cannot articulate what progress means.

I already have.

# wrote on Dec 31^st, 2013 at 12:45pm:

Postmodern Trendoid III wrote on Dec 31st, 2013 at 12:42pm: # wrote on Dec 31st, 2013 at 12:35pm: Postmodern Trendoid III wrote on Dec 31st, 2013 at 12:27pm: # wrote on Dec 31st, 2013 at 12:25pm: Postmodern Trendoid III wrote on Dec 31st, 2013 at 11:32am: ... This is mere sloganeering. ... As intended, in response to similar. Just not getting it, are you? Getting what? See? I hypothesize you cannot articulate what progress means. I already have.

I see. So it's about about baseless sloganeering.
Yep, already knew that.

Postmodern Trendoid III wrote on Dec 31^st, 2013 at 1:45pm:

# wrote on Dec 31st, 2013 at 12:45pm: Postmodern Trendoid III wrote on Dec 31st, 2013 at 12:42pm: # wrote on Dec 31st, 2013 at 12:35pm: Postmodern Trendoid III wrote on Dec 31st, 2013 at 12:27pm: # wrote on Dec 31st, 2013 at 12:25pm: Postmodern Trendoid III wrote on Dec 31st, 2013 at 11:32am: ... This is mere sloganeering. ... As intended, in response to similar. Just not getting it, are you? Getting what? See? I hypothesize you cannot articulate what progress means. I already have. I see. So it's about about baseless sloganeering. Yep, already knew that.

There's none so blind as he who will not see.

# wrote on Dec 31^st, 2013 at 11:16am:

Soren wrote on Dec 30th, 2013 at 10:08pm: Progressives have no idea where the want to progress to. It's all ideology and fantasy. That's why they are so PC and full of bluster and ideological righteousness. At least conservatives have a concrete idea of what they want to conserve. They respect yesterday because today was made of it. There's some truth in that, albeit expressed from a psychotic perspective. None of us really knows where we're going. We're on a juggernaut. It's moving inexorably forward. We can't stop it. We can't steer it. We can't slow it. We can't speed it up. We can't get off. All we can do is try to see where the juggernaut is going and choose the best spot on it.

You could say that if every society everywhere was roughly at the same level regardless of what its members do. But evidently human action makes a massive difference.

So this uncontrollable juggernaut idea is nonsense.

sir prince duke alevine wrote on Dec 29^th, 2013 at 12:16pm:

matty wrote on Dec 29th, 2013 at 12:14pm: Postmodern Trendoid III wrote on Dec 28th, 2013 at 6:38pm: It goes to show we don't have a true conservative party. There hasn't been since WWII. I wouldn't say that, but unfortunately the Coalition is not as right wing-conservative as I would like. They are socialists

The other month weren't you saying that they were far-right? Make up your mind.

matty wrote on Jan 1^st, 2014 at 9:51am:

sir prince duke alevine wrote on Dec 29th, 2013 at 12:16pm: matty wrote on Dec 29th, 2013 at 12:14pm: Postmodern Trendoid III wrote on Dec 28th, 2013 at 6:38pm: It goes to show we don't have a true conservative party. There hasn't been since WWII. I wouldn't say that, but unfortunately the Coalition is not as right wing-conservative as I would like. They are socialists The other month weren't you saying that they were far-right? Make up your mind.

Hey Matty...are you still trying to solicit speedo pics from fellow forum users  :D

adelcrow wrote on Jan 1^st, 2014 at 9:53am:

matty wrote on Jan 1st, 2014 at 9:51am: sir prince duke alevine wrote on Dec 29th, 2013 at 12:16pm: matty wrote on Dec 29th, 2013 at 12:14pm: Postmodern Trendoid III wrote on Dec 28th, 2013 at 6:38pm: It goes to show we don't have a true conservative party. There hasn't been since WWII. I wouldn't say that, but unfortunately the Coalition is not as right wing-conservative as I would like. They are socialists The other month weren't you saying that they were far-right? Make up your mind. Hey Matty...are you still trying to solicit speedo pics from fellow forum users  :D

Only those middle-aged closeted lefties who continually mock and criticise Abbott for wearing budgie smugglers, yet don't have the guts to show how they look wearing them.

matty wrote on Jan 1^st, 2014 at 9:57am:

adelcrow wrote on Jan 1st, 2014 at 9:53am: matty wrote on Jan 1st, 2014 at 9:51am: sir prince duke alevine wrote on Dec 29th, 2013 at 12:16pm: matty wrote on Dec 29th, 2013 at 12:14pm: Postmodern Trendoid III wrote on Dec 28th, 2013 at 6:38pm: It goes to show we don't have a true conservative party. There hasn't been since WWII. I wouldn't say that, but unfortunately the Coalition is not as right wing-conservative as I would like. They are socialists The other month weren't you saying that they were far-right? Make up your mind. Hey Matty...are you still trying to solicit speedo pics from fellow forum users  :D Only those middle-aged closeted lefties who continually mock and criticise Abbott for wearing budgie smugglers, yet don't have the guts to show how they look wearing them.

You may want to download the Grinder app on your iphone if thats what your into...political forums are not the place to look for man eye candy  ;D

adelcrow wrote on Jan 1^st, 2014 at 10:01am:

matty wrote on Jan 1st, 2014 at 9:57am: adelcrow wrote on Jan 1st, 2014 at 9:53am: matty wrote on Jan 1st, 2014 at 9:51am: sir prince duke alevine wrote on Dec 29th, 2013 at 12:16pm: matty wrote on Dec 29th, 2013 at 12:14pm: Postmodern Trendoid III wrote on Dec 28th, 2013 at 6:38pm: It goes to show we don't have a true conservative party. There hasn't been since WWII. I wouldn't say that, but unfortunately the Coalition is not as right wing-conservative as I would like. They are socialists The other month weren't you saying that they were far-right? Make up your mind. Hey Matty...are you still trying to solicit speedo pics from fellow forum users  :D Only those middle-aged closeted lefties who continually mock and criticise Abbott for wearing budgie smugglers, yet don't have the guts to show how they look wearing them. You may want to download the Grinder app on your iphone if thats what your into...political forums are not the place to look for man eye candy  ;D

Trust your gay perverted mind to come up with such nonsense, adel.

matty wrote on Jan 1^st, 2014 at 10:10am:

adelcrow wrote on Jan 1st, 2014 at 10:01am: matty wrote on Jan 1st, 2014 at 9:57am: adelcrow wrote on Jan 1st, 2014 at 9:53am: matty wrote on Jan 1st, 2014 at 9:51am: sir prince duke alevine wrote on Dec 29th, 2013 at 12:16pm: matty wrote on Dec 29th, 2013 at 12:14pm: Postmodern Trendoid III wrote on Dec 28th, 2013 at 6:38pm: It goes to show we don't have a true conservative party. There hasn't been since WWII. I wouldn't say that, but unfortunately the Coalition is not as right wing-conservative as I would like. They are socialists The other month weren't you saying that they were far-right? Make up your mind. Hey Matty...are you still trying to solicit speedo pics from fellow forum users  :D Only those middle-aged closeted lefties who continually mock and criticise Abbott for wearing budgie smugglers, yet don't have the guts to show how they look wearing them. You may want to download the Grinder app on your iphone if thats what your into...political forums are not the place to look for man eye candy  ;D Trust your gay perverted mind to come up with such nonsense, adel.

I think you'll find that if you download this app that you'll have no trouble getting the sort of selfies you are seeking

http://grindr.com/

Soren wrote on Jan 1^st, 2014 at 9:05am:

# wrote on Dec 31st, 2013 at 11:16am: ... We're on a juggernaut. It's moving inexorably forward. We can't stop it. We can't steer it. We can't slow it. We can't speed it up. We can't get off. All we can do is try to see where the juggernaut is going and choose the best spot on it. You could say that if every society everywhere was roughly at the same level regardless of what its members do. But evidently human action makes a massive difference.

What we do influences only our positions, relative to each other. We're all headed the same way at the same speed. We will all reach the same destination at the same time.


Soren wrote on Jan 1^st, 2014 at 9:05am:

So this uncontrollable juggernaut idea is nonsense.

To the Conservative mindset, I don't doubt that it's deeply unsettling. From what I've seen, Conservatives need to believe that individuals have more control than we actually do.

Let me know how you go with that download Matty..Im concerned that you are soliciting pics from strangers so maybe when you find someone "special" on grindr you can both swap pics until you've satisfied your cravings in a safe way  :D

# wrote on Jan 1^st, 2014 at 10:25am:

Soren wrote on Jan 1st, 2014 at 9:05am: # wrote on Dec 31st, 2013 at 11:16am: ... We're on a juggernaut. It's moving inexorably forward. We can't stop it. We can't steer it. We can't slow it. We can't speed it up. We can't get off. All we can do is try to see where the juggernaut is going and choose the best spot on it. You could say that if every society everywhere was roughly at the same level regardless of what its members do. But evidently human action makes a massive difference. What we do influences only our positions, relative to each other. We're all headed the same way at the same speed. We will all reach the same destination at the same time.

Any idea what this 'final destination' might be?

... wrote on Jan 1^st, 2014 at 10:31am:

# wrote on Jan 1st, 2014 at 10:25am: Soren wrote on Jan 1st, 2014 at 9:05am: # wrote on Dec 31st, 2013 at 11:16am: ... We're on a juggernaut. It's moving inexorably forward. We can't stop it. We can't steer it. We can't slow it. We can't speed it up. We can't get off. All we can do is try to see where the juggernaut is going and choose the best spot on it. You could say that if every society everywhere was roughly at the same level regardless of what its members do. But evidently human action makes a massive difference. What we do influences only our positions, relative to each other. We're all headed the same way at the same speed. We will all reach the same destination at the same time. Any idea what this 'final destination' might be?

Now there's a question. Trying to answer could fill several web sites.

With varying degrees of anticipation and trepidation, Progressives pay attention to where we're going. Conservatives are obsessed with where we've been. Or so it seems to me.

The longer we travel, the clearer our destination grows. To be honest, my trepidation grows with it. Perhaps, in not looking that way, the Conservatives have a good idea. Then again, if memory serves, Aristotle's* apocryphal ostrich died.

* Or whoever it was.

adelcrow wrote on Jan 1^st, 2014 at 10:27am:

Let me know how you go with that download Matty..Im concerned that you are soliciting pics from strangers so maybe when you find someone "special" on grindr you can both swap pics until you've satisfied your cravings in a safe way  :D

Funny how you seem to know so much about it.

matty wrote on Jan 1^st, 2014 at 1:17pm:

adelcrow wrote on Jan 1st, 2014 at 10:27am: Let me know how you go with that download Matty..Im concerned that you are soliciting pics from strangers so maybe when you find someone "special" on grindr you can both swap pics until you've satisfied your cravings in a safe way  :D Funny how you seem to know so much about it.

Why is it funny?..Hey you might even get me on Grindr and then we can swap speedo pics in secret
The secret word is...Flambe  :D

adelcrow wrote on Jan 1^st, 2014 at 1:20pm:

matty wrote on Jan 1st, 2014 at 1:17pm: adelcrow wrote on Jan 1st, 2014 at 10:27am: Let me know how you go with that download Matty..Im concerned that you are soliciting pics from strangers so maybe when you find someone "special" on grindr you can both swap pics until you've satisfied your cravings in a safe way  :D Funny how you seem to know so much about it. Why is it funny?..Hey you might even get me on Grindr and then we can swap speedo pics in secret The secret word is...Flambe  :D

Does your wife know about your love and sexual obsession for other men?

matty wrote on Jan 1^st, 2014 at 1:24pm:

adelcrow wrote on Jan 1st, 2014 at 1:20pm: matty wrote on Jan 1st, 2014 at 1:17pm: adelcrow wrote on Jan 1st, 2014 at 10:27am: Let me know how you go with that download Matty..Im concerned that you are soliciting pics from strangers so maybe when you find someone "special" on grindr you can both swap pics until you've satisfied your cravings in a safe way  :D Funny how you seem to know so much about it. Why is it funny?..Hey you might even get me on Grindr and then we can swap speedo pics in secret The secret word is...Flambe  :D Does your wife know about your love and sezual obsession for other men?

You are using the plural when you should be using the singular.

adelcrow wrote on Jan 1^st, 2014 at 1:26pm:

matty wrote on Jan 1st, 2014 at 1:24pm: adelcrow wrote on Jan 1st, 2014 at 1:20pm: matty wrote on Jan 1st, 2014 at 1:17pm: adelcrow wrote on Jan 1st, 2014 at 10:27am: Let me know how you go with that download Matty..Im concerned that you are soliciting pics from strangers so maybe when you find someone "special" on grindr you can both swap pics until you've satisfied your cravings in a safe way  :D Funny how you seem to know so much about it. Why is it funny?..Hey you might even get me on Grindr and then we can swap speedo pics in secret The secret word is...Flambe  :D Does your wife know about your love and sezual obsession for other men? You are using the plural when you should be using the singular.

So just one man then? Only Tony?

matty wrote on Jan 1^st, 2014 at 1:28pm:

adelcrow wrote on Jan 1st, 2014 at 1:26pm: matty wrote on Jan 1st, 2014 at 1:24pm: adelcrow wrote on Jan 1st, 2014 at 1:20pm: matty wrote on Jan 1st, 2014 at 1:17pm: adelcrow wrote on Jan 1st, 2014 at 10:27am: Let me know how you go with that download Matty..Im concerned that you are soliciting pics from strangers so maybe when you find someone "special" on grindr you can both swap pics until you've satisfied your cravings in a safe way  :D Funny how you seem to know so much about it. Why is it funny?..Hey you might even get me on Grindr and then we can swap speedo pics in secret The secret word is...Flambe  :D Does your wife know about your love and sezual obsession for other men? You are using the plural when you should be using the singular. So just one man then? Only Tony?

Yep..cant get enough of a bloke in his 50's who ponces about on public beaches in red pedo panties :D

Matty..what are your thoughts on Tonys red pedo panties and his fondness for being photographed wearing them on public beaches?
Its an interesting topic of discussion ..Im sure you'll agree

adelcrow wrote on Jan 1^st, 2014 at 2:29pm:

Matty..what are your thoughts on Tonys red pedo panties and his fondness for being photographed wearing them on public beaches? Its an interesting topic of discussion ..Im sure you'll agree

As I have said, what is wrong with it? He is very fit and looks great for a man of his age.

matty wrote on Jan 2^nd, 2014 at 12:57am:

adelcrow wrote on Jan 1st, 2014 at 2:29pm: Matty..what are your thoughts on Tonys red pedo panties and his fondness for being photographed wearing them on public beaches? Its an interesting topic of discussion ..Im sure you'll agree As I have said, what is wrong with it? He is very fit and looks great for a man of his age.

A bloke who's proved to be intellectually lazy? Who'd much rather prance around in Lycra or budgie-smugglers than engage his brain on the job for which he's paid?

With all that exercise, of course he's physically fit. Intellectually, though, is he fit for office?

Abbott is a narcissist.

Want to find some real conservatives? http://prospect.org/article/homeschool-apostates and see the damage conservatism does to people!

Why don't you use the hyperlink symbol (above the B) so that one can click on the URL and not have to cut and paste it into the browser?  ::)

Conservatism does not harm people you idiot Geoooorge.

Quote:

Our Platform…                            Clear thinking, straight talking, and a “fair go” for all Australians.      The Conservative Labour Party of Australia defines its CONSERVATISM as: a political philosophy advocating the preservation of the best of the established order in society and opposing radical change, or simply change for its own sake.  The Party recognises the majority “conservative” nature of Australians and as such sees Conservatism as the core tenet of the party.      The Conservative Labour Party of Australia will govern for all Australians and will do so by putting Australia and Australians first, in all their deliberations.  It is time that ordinary Australians had a voice to represent them and their values, in Government.       The Conservative Labour Party of Australia will oversee a return to Australian values and a return to common-sense thinking and straight talking in and from Government.            The Conservative Labour Party of Australia recognises the value of “Labour” in all its forms and seeks to ensure that their voice carries the same weight in decision making to that of other voices in the Australian community.  The party will strive to provide a “fair go” for all Australians, at all times.

At dinner, a guest made an interesting observation; differences between Conservatives and Progressives can be seen in their reactions to risk. Progressives try to manage risk, while Conservatives try to deny it.

Certainly explains the Global Warming "debate".

# wrote on Jan 19^th, 2014 at 7:00pm:

At dinner, a guest made an interesting observation; differences between Conservatives and Progressives can be seen in their reactions to risk. Progressives try to manage risk, while Conservatives try to deny it. Certainly explains the Global Warming "debate".

Well that's just Progressive Bullshit isn't it...  one of their problems is their inability to accept dissent and mix with others outside their little group.

Neferti wrote on Jan 2^nd, 2014 at 8:06am:

Why don't you use the hyperlink symbol (above the B) so that one can click on the URL and not have to cut and paste it into the browser?  ::)

Poor poor poor little Naffy, has to actually drag—copy—paste. The sheer HARDSHIP of it!

I'm happy with my own values being Conservative in nature.

I believe in low taxation, strong will to succeed and pro business minded, strong private sector in health and schools where user pays system provides best delivery.
I am anti nationalised companies because I think Governments are wasteful.

My view is you will spend your money much better than any Government will.
You want something, you should pay for it so lower taxes and give people more.

I never needed Governments to tell me what to do or provide me anything.
I think people should get out there and help themselves.
Conservatives encourage that. Others always want to help bloody low life's!!!

Andrei.Hicks wrote on Jan 19^th, 2014 at 9:19pm:

I'm happy with my own values being Conservative in nature. I believe in low taxation, strong will to succeed and pro business minded, strong private sector in health and schools where user pays system provides best delivery. I am anti nationalised companies because I think Governments are wasteful. My view is you will spend your money much better than any Government will. You want something, you should pay for it so lower taxes and give people more. I never needed Governments to tell me what to do or provide me anything. I think people should get out there and help themselves. Conservatives encourage that. Others always want to help bloody low life's!!!

Just curious as to where I might find some of these conservative types as you describe.

Those are my personal views which fit into the Conservative mantra.

I grew up in Mrs Thatcher's Britain - where conservative values brought the country back from being the sick old man of Europe to a bustling, wealthy place with people doing well.

As Reagan put it "The trouble with Socialism is that sooner or later, you run out of other people's money"

Andrei.Hicks wrote on Jan 19^th, 2014 at 9:19pm:

I'm happy with my own values being Conservative in nature. I believe in low taxation, strong will to succeed and pro business minded, strong private sector in health and schools where user pays system provides best delivery. I am anti nationalised companies because I think Governments are wasteful. My view is you will spend your money much better than any Government will. You want something, you should pay for it so lower taxes and give people more. I never needed Governments to tell me what to do or provide me anything. I think people should get out there and help themselves. Conservatives encourage that. Others always want to help bloody low life's!!!

I agree, but your description sounds more like Australian liberalism to conservatism.

CONSERVATISM is...


Quote:

Our Platform…                            Clear thinking, straight talking, and a “fair go” for all Australians.      The Conservative Labour Party of Australia defines its CONSERVATISM as: a political philosophy advocating the preservation of the best of the established order in society and opposing radical change, or simply change for its own sake.  The Party recognises the majority “conservative” nature of Australians and as such sees Conservatism as the core tenet of the party.      The Conservative Labour Party of Australia will govern for all Australians and will do so by putting Australia and Australians first, in all their deliberations.  It is time that ordinary Australians had a voice to represent them and their values, in Government.       The Conservative Labour Party of Australia will oversee a return to Australian values and a return to common-sense thinking and straight talking in and from Government.            The Conservative Labour Party of Australia recognises the value of “Labour” in all its forms and seeks to ensure that their voice carries the same weight in decision making to that of other voices in the Australian community.  The party will strive to provide a “fair go” for all Australians, at all times.

Andrei.Hicks wrote on Jan 19^th, 2014 at 9:19pm:

I'm happy with my own values being Conservative in nature. I believe in low taxation, strong will to succeed and pro business minded, strong private sector in health and schools where user pays system provides best delivery. I am anti nationalised companies because I think Governments are wasteful. My view is you will spend your money much better than any Government will. You want something, you should pay for it so lower taxes and give people more. I never needed Governments to tell me what to do or provide me anything. I think people should get out there and help themselves. Conservatives encourage that. Others always want to help bloody low life's!!!

I'm happy with my own values being Socialist in nature.

I believe in fair taxation and not dishonestly seeking to avoid paying tax at every turn, and that a co-operative minded community is far stronger and more prosperous then one that is fractured by the incessant conflicts inevitably brought on by the greedy few always insisting that they deserve more and that the rest deserve less. I believe in a strong well funded public universal health and education scheme where we all pay (user pays in the real sense of that expression) to deliver the best health and education outcomes for all instead of just for the privileged few. 

I am anti privatisation and pro govt enterprise because I believe that in comparison private enterprise is less innovative, less efficient, produces shoddy goods and services, conducts itself far more destructively, is incredibly wasteful and unaccountable and often is highly dependent on govt welfare in the form of govt  handouts, lower tax rates and copious tax lurks.

My view is that although you personally will spend your money much better than any Government will, businesses, especially since they're unaccountable to the rest of us, will always spend their money more wastefully then govts, only of course they can hide it better.  We want something, we have to work for it and then make sure that we get the benefit of the work we do instead of the cream and lions share of our work going to someone else. That way the profits go back to us instead of a few so that we pay less tax and give the people more.
We don't need these corporate Nannies to dictate our lives and tell us what to do. We can do it ourselves.
Socialists encourage that. Conservatives always want to help bloody low life's!!!

Swagman wrote on Jan 20^th, 2014 at 8:45am:

Andrei.Hicks wrote on Jan 19th, 2014 at 9:19pm: I'm happy with my own values being Conservative in nature. I believe in low taxation, strong will to succeed and pro business minded, strong private sector in health and schools where user pays system provides best delivery. I am anti nationalised companies because I think Governments are wasteful. My view is you will spend your money much better than any Government will. You want something, you should pay for it so lower taxes and give people more. I never needed Governments to tell me what to do or provide me anything. I think people should get out there and help themselves. Conservatives encourage that. Others always want to help bloody low life's!!! I agree, but your description sounds more like Australian liberalism to conservatism.

Yes, he's thinking of liberalism.
The conservatives and liberals have been bed fellows since 1945. So often the two get conflated.

Grendel wrote on Jan 20^th, 2014 at 9:02am:

CONSERVATISM is... [quote]      The Conservative Labour Party of Australia defines its CONSERVATISM as: a political philosophy advocating the preservation of the best of the established order in society and opposing radical change, or simply change for its own sake.  The Party recognises the majority “conservative” nature of Australians and as such sees Conservatism as the core tenet of the party.

In a nutshell, that is it.
If a tradition has been in place for hundreds, even thousands, of years, then obviously it has some value. This is even more the case if it doesn't take much convincing for people to follow a tradition. If they do it naturally or instinctively, then human beings obviously value the tradition in question.

There can be, and is, still change, but not change for the sake of change or revolution. The current "progressive" mindset appears to want to create "year zero". For them, all the past is evil and the cause of all the problems in the world. They believe if they can overturn the entire previously established order then the secular utopia can be created.

Moreover, because "progressives" dislike tradition, they rarely argue from principle. Having no fixed point to argue from ends up seeing them making the most hypocritical and contradictory statements. This is why they are anti-racist one minute, then making racial slurs the next. The same with gays. One minute they are pro-gay, then next they are badgering someone for being gay. It's a highly reactionary way to view the world. 

Postmodern Trendoid III wrote on Jan 20^th, 2014 at 10:28am:

If a tradition has been in place for hundreds, even thousands, of years, then obviously it has some value.

OK, this is completely dumb.  Especially while writing and reading, which for thousands of years was only the tradition of the elite.

Especially when writing on a computer too, over the internet, which would definitely not have happened if you has stuck to the thousands year old tradition of writing on paper/vellum/ not a computer.

I agree with the quote on what a conservative is, and myself actually agree with it.  Change for change's sake is pointless.

Stratos wrote on Jan 20^th, 2014 at 10:33am:

Postmodern Trendoid III wrote on Jan 20th, 2014 at 10:28am: If a tradition has been in place for hundreds, even thousands, of years, then obviously it has some value. OK, this is completely dumb.  Especially while writing and reading, which for thousands of years was only the tradition of the elite.

Arh, the trendy Marxist critique: hold up some fanciful ideal of how we're all equal and then lambaste the unequal nature of the past. Yawn.

Stratos wrote on Jan 20^th, 2014 at 10:33am:

Postmodern Trendoid III wrote on Jan 20th, 2014 at 10:28am: If a tradition has been in place for hundreds, even thousands, of years, then obviously it has some value. OK, this is completely dumb.  Especially while writing and reading, which for thousands of years was only the tradition of the elite. Especially when writing on a computer too, over the internet, which would definitely not have happened if you has stuck to the thousands year old tradition of writing on paper/vellum/ not a computer. I agree with the quote on what a conservative is, and myself actually agree with it.  Change for change's sake is pointless.

Motherhood is a good thing too

Postmodern Trendoid III wrote on Jan 20^th, 2014 at 10:36am:

Stratos wrote on Jan 20th, 2014 at 10:33am: Postmodern Trendoid III wrote on Jan 20th, 2014 at 10:28am: If a tradition has been in place for hundreds, even thousands, of years, then obviously it has some value. OK, this is completely dumb.  Especially while writing and reading, which for thousands of years was only the tradition of the elite. Arh, the trendy Marxist critique: hold up some fanciful ideal of how we're all equal and then lambaste the unequal nature of the past. Yawn.

Postmodern Trendoid III wrote on Jan 20^th, 2014 at 10:36am:

Arh, the trendy Marxist critique: hold up some fanciful ideal of how we're all equal and then lambaste the unequal nature of the past. Yawn.

Are you seriously arguing that you don't like the fact that most people can read and write nowadays?

Stand up for the real meaning of freedom
We need conservatism now more than ever

Roger Scruton 4 January 2014

...

Conservatives believe that our identities and values are formed through our relations with other people, and not through our relation with the state. The state is not an end but a means. Civil society is the end, and the state is the means to protect it. The social world emerges through free association, rooted in friendship and community life. And the customs and institutions that we cherish have grown from below, by the ‘invisible hand’ of co-operation. They have rarely been imposed from above by the work of politics, the role of which, for a conservative, is to reconcile our many aims, and not to dictate or control them.

Only in English-speaking countries do political parties describe themselves as ‘conservative’. Why is this? It is surely because English-speakers are heirs to a political system that has been built from below, by the free association of individuals and the workings of the common law. Hence we envisage politics as a means to conserve society rather than a means to impose or create it. From the French revolution to the European Union, continental government has conceived itself in ‘top-down’ terms, as an association of wise, powerful or expert figures, who are in the business of creating social order through regulation and dictated law. The common law does not impose order but grows from it. If government is necessary, in the conservative view, it is in order to resolve the conflicts that arise when things are, for whatever reason, unsettled.
....

http://www.spectator.co.uk/features/9106192/the-right-way/

That's the gist of it.
The difference is illustrated by, among other things, common law (in the English speaking world and Denmark) versus statute law of most other countries.

Postmodern Trendoid III wrote on Jan 20^th, 2014 at 10:17am:

Yes, he's thinking of liberalism. The conservatives and liberals have been bed fellows since 1945. So often the two get conflated.

Allied yes, but not the same.


ImSpartacus2 wrote on Jan 20^th, 2014 at 9:06am:

I am anti privatisation and pro govt enterprise because I believe that in comparison private enterprise is less innovative, less efficient, produces shoddy goods and services, conducts itself far more destructively, is incredibly wasteful and unaccountable and often is highly dependent on govt welfare in the form of govt  handouts, lower tax rates and copious tax lurks.

You believe wrongly then.  ;D

Innovation, efficiency, quality of product & service are all born from competition.  If a business falls down on any one of these factors it will suffer financiallly.

Govt organisations don't (normally) have competition to worry about so they are naturally inefficient.  The exception would be war time when competition is replaced by necessity by the survival of the fittest.  The laziest of socialists may even chip in if their arse is on the line.


Quote:

is incredibly wasteful and unaccountable and often is highly dependent on govt welfare in the form of govt  handouts, lower tax rates and copious tax lurks

That's ridiculous, no business that is innovative, efficient and has quality products & services will require any govt assistance.


ImSpartacus2 wrote on Jan 20^th, 2014 at 9:06am:

My view is that although you personally will spend your money much better than any Government will, businesses, especially since they're unaccountable to the rest of us, will always spend their money more wastefully then govts, only of course they can hide it better.

Business is accountable to its shareholders.  If it wastes money the shareholders pull out and the business fails.  A business will therefore be much more mindful of costs than any Govt organisation.


Quote:

I believe that in comparison private enterprise........conducts itself far more destructively,

Yes I'll give you that one.  Business won't really give a rat's what damage it does unless of course it effects its bottom line.


ImSpartacus2 wrote on Jan 20^th, 2014 at 9:06am:

We want something, we have to work for it

Not socialists.  Somebody else works for it .

Swagman wrote on Jan 20^th, 2014 at 12:22pm:

Postmodern Trendoid III wrote on Jan 20th, 2014 at 10:17am: Yes, he's thinking of liberalism. The conservatives and liberals have been bed fellows since 1945. So often the two get conflated. Allied yes, but not the same. ImSpartacus2 wrote on Jan 20th, 2014 at 9:06am: I am anti privatisation and pro govt enterprise because I believe that in comparison private enterprise is less innovative, less efficient, produces shoddy goods and services, conducts itself far more destructively, is incredibly wasteful and unaccountable and often is highly dependent on govt welfare in the form of govt  handouts, lower tax rates and copious tax lurks. You believe wrongly then.  Innovation, efficiency, quality of product & service are all born from competition.  If a business falls down on any one of these factors it will suffer financiallly.Oh here we go.  You read that BS on the barn wall and so it must be right. "Four legs good, two legs baaahhhhhdd". Competition is incredibly wasteful and counter-productive. Why do you think the first thing they tell you when you join any business organisation is that "There is no I in team".  Because they know that co-operation and teamwork is what has made the human race so successful.  Govt organisations don't (normally) have competition to worry about so they are naturally inefficient.  The exception would be war time and space travel, sending people to the moon, inventing the internet, GPS, wifi, running schools, hospitals, building roads, dams for centuries. We could go on for ever when competition is replaced by necessity by the survival of the fittest.  The laziest of socialists may even chip in if their arse is on the line. Quote: is incredibly wasteful and unaccountable and often is highly dependent on govt welfare in the form of govt  handouts, lower tax rates and copious tax lurks That's ridiculous, no business that is innovative, efficient and has quality products & services will require any govt assistance.Ohh that's crap. Business (big and small) is constantly on the take in this country. Ask your average PAYE tax payer what deductions he can claim each year compared to business (its scandalous) and that's not counting lower tax rates and the way they fiddle the GST, and fudging on their employee's pay and conditions ImSpartacus2 wrote on Jan 20th, 2014 at 9:06am: My view is that although you personally will spend your money much better than any Government will, businesses, especially since they're unaccountable to the rest of us, will always spend their money more wastefully then govts, only of course they can hide it better. Business is accountable to its shareholders.  Oh this is the biggest furffy of them all.  As the sharholders association what they think of the BS claim.  Sharholders have very little power to pull their companies into line and its a constant source of complaint because the waste, the exorbitant executive salaries and the fraud goes on constantly and the shareholders can do little more then complain about it.  If it wastes money the shareholders pull out and the business fails.  A business will therefore be much more mindful of costs than any Govt organisation. [quote]I believe that in comparison private enterprise........conducts itself far more destructively,

Yes I'll give you that one.  Business won't really give a rat's what damage it does unless of course it effects its bottom line.


ImSpartacus2 wrote on Jan 20^th, 2014 at 9:06am:

We want something, we have to work for it

Im gakld we can agree on something


Not socialists.  Somebody else works for it .
[/quote]

ImSpartacus2 wrote on Jan 20^th, 2014 at 3:41pm:

Swagman wrote on Jan 20th, 2014 at 12:22pm: [quote author=Time link=1388035852/147#147 date=1390177067] Business is accountable to its shareholders.  Oh this is the biggest furffy of them all.  As the sharholders association what they think of the BS claim.  Sharholders have very little power to pull their companies into line and its a constant source of complaint because the waste, the exorbitant executive salaries and the fraud goes on constantly and the shareholders can do little more then complain about it.  If it wastes money the shareholders pull out and the business fails.  A business will therefore be much more mindful of costs than any Govt organisation.

I am curious as to why you addressed the opening sentence of that paragraph but not the explanation of it - which I have now highlighted for you to make it easier for you to address.

...

.

Soren wrote on Jan 20^th, 2014 at 5:15pm:

ImSpartacus2 wrote on Jan 20th, 2014 at 3:41pm: Swagman wrote on Jan 20th, 2014 at 12:22pm: [quote author=Time link=1388035852/147#147 date=1390177067] Business is accountable to its shareholders.  Oh this is the biggest furffy of them all.  As the sharholders association what they think of the BS claim.  Sharholders have very little power to pull their companies into line and its a constant source of complaint because the waste, the exorbitant executive salaries and the fraud goes on constantly and the shareholders can do little more then complain about it.  If it wastes money the shareholders pull out and the business fails.  A business will therefore be much more mindful of costs than any Govt organisation. I am curious as to why you addressed the opening sentence of that paragraph but not the explanation of it - which I have now highlighted for you to make it easier for you to address.

Because the explanation didn't add anything since shareholders have no real power to do anything about it. Its like saying why don't you leave Australia if you're power to vote doesn't influence what Aust Inc does.  All companies are the same and so you don't have anywhere to go.  Besides you can't just drop your shares and go. To get out of the company you have to sell your shares to someone else, so leaving just passes the powerlessness on to someone else equally powerless and so it goes on.  And companies are adept at hiding waste and fraud and justifying extortionist executive salaries. You see, what you may not appreciate is that public companies are as much in the business of selling shares (in which case they will use spin and hide inefficiencies and waste and fraud) as they are in the business of their declared enterprise.   

St George of the Garden wrote on Jan 2^nd, 2014 at 8:01am:

Abbott is a narcissist. Want to find some real conservatives? http://prospect.org/article/homeschool-apostates and see the damage conservatism does to people!

No he's not and his past actions have shown that...  you biased moronic hater.

ImSpartacus2 wrote on Jan 20^th, 2014 at 5:40pm:

Soren wrote on Jan 20th, 2014 at 5:15pm: ImSpartacus2 wrote on Jan 20th, 2014 at 3:41pm: Swagman wrote on Jan 20th, 2014 at 12:22pm: [quote author=Time link=1388035852/147#147 date=1390177067] Business is accountable to its shareholders.  Oh this is the biggest furffy of them all.  As the sharholders association what they think of the BS claim.  Sharholders have very little power to pull their companies into line and its a constant source of complaint because the waste, the exorbitant executive salaries and the fraud goes on constantly and the shareholders can do little more then complain about it.  If it wastes money the shareholders pull out and the business fails.  A business will therefore be much more mindful of costs than any Govt organisation. I am curious as to why you addressed the opening sentence of that paragraph but not the explanation of it - which I have now highlighted for you to make it easier for you to address. Because the explanation didn't add anything since shareholders have no real power to do anything about it. Its like saying why don't you leave Australia if you're power to vote doesn't influence what Aust Inc does.  All companies are the same and so you don't have anywhere to go.  Besides you can't just drop your shares and go. To get out of the company you have to sell your shares to someone else, so leaving just passes the powerlessness on to someone else equally powerless and so it goes on.  And companies are adept at hiding waste and fraud and justifying extortionist executive salaries. You see, what you may not appreciate is that public companies are as much in the business of selling shares (in which case they will use spin and hide inefficiencies and waste and fraud) as they are in the business of their declared enterprise.

You can do all the song and dance an 'hide the decline' you like but if the return on investment is not there, it's not there. You can cut your losses.

Not so with public sector companies. You, as taxpayer (ie shareholder) , cannot cut your losses or invest your taxes elsewhere.