You're not a conservative son. You are describing right wign kooks. It
is something that you are.
Goldwater would have started WWIII. It was good that he was soundly
defeated.
Furthermore, the repuks -- whom you call conservative -- have controlled
the federal government for 20 of the last 28 years. The only man to lead
us to paying down the debt -- which has been run up by the right wigners
-- was Clinton.
In <4874b097$0$5953$9a6e19ea@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>, on 07/09/2008
at 08:35 AM, "Vito" <vito@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> said:
><truthteller@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote.
>>
>> You clearly have no idea of what the word "conservative" means.
>>
>On the contrary. 'Conservative' has one basic meaning (one who wishes to
> conserve) but any number of derived meanings depending on when and where
>it is used. An American conservative is different from a British or
>Canadian conservative and they from each other. Rebels fight against
>conservatives but once they win and establish the government they like,
>they seek to conserve it - to wit they become the conservatives.
>Barry Goldwater led a 'conservative' movement in the USA in the early
>1960s. Their goal was to scrap a number of ineffective federal programs
>and thus reduce taxes after paying down the national debt. A failed
>actor named RR was a charismatic speaker for them. Goldwater lost when
>LBJ swore not to send "your sons" to die in Vietnam. RR got into bed
>with religious fasciests and others with axes to grind and took over the
>movement. They kept the name 'conservative' to hide their real goals,
>aided by the liberal press. So now "conservative" means something far
>different than it's root (to conserve) would imply, especially to those
>with little grasp of language or history.
