<?xml version="1.0" encoding="ISO-8859-1"?>
<rss version="2.0">
<channel>
<title>Slog - Comments on Soul Searching</title>
<link>http://slog.thestranger.com/2006/11/soul_searching</link>
<description>Looking for a way out of the night that set on Nov 7, a senior editor of National Review, Jeffrey Hart, makes the bold claim that G. W. Bush is not a conservative. The strange syllogism that produces this strange truth: (Major premise) Conservatives are realists. (Minor premise) Bush is not a realist. (Conclusion) Bush is not a conservative. Out of all Hart has to say and stress, this is the only passage worth pointing out: Richard Cheney: Once you get to Baghdad, it&apos;s not clear what you do with it. It&apos;s not clear what kind of government you put...</description>
<copyright>Copyright 2008</copyright>
<pubDate>Tue, 28 Nov 2006 15:41:25 -0800</pubDate>
<lastBuildDate>Wed, 29 Nov 2006 14:31:51 -0800</lastBuildDate>
<generator>http://www.movabletype.org/?v=3.34</generator>
<docs>http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/tech/rss</docs> 

<item>
<title>Comment by Andrew</title>
<description><![CDATA[<p>When I think of conservatives, I think of my grandfather wearing a engineery suit, sitting at a desk with a calculator, telling me how things were possible because they were too expensive, too difficult to accomplish, or too idealistic to be done in reality.<br />
Where did those guys go? What happened to those "Eisenhower conservatives"? They ruined all the fun, but they had a necessary place in keeping things on track, just like the liberals had a place in making the world a better place.</p>]]></description>
<author>Andrew</author>
<link>http://slog.thestranger.com/2006/11/soul_searching#c504507</link>
<guid>http://slog.thestranger.com/2006/11/soul_searching#c504507</guid>
<category>Politics</category>
<pubDate>Tue, 28 Nov 2006 15:54:30 -0800</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
<title>Comment by Andrew</title>
<description><![CDATA[<p>whoops, I meant "impossible", not "possible"</p>]]></description>
<author>Andrew</author>
<link>http://slog.thestranger.com/2006/11/soul_searching#c504513</link>
<guid>http://slog.thestranger.com/2006/11/soul_searching#c504513</guid>
<category>Politics</category>
<pubDate>Tue, 28 Nov 2006 15:55:48 -0800</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
<title>Comment by Fnarf</title>
<description><![CDATA[<p>That kind of conservativism is gone. Or at least in serious remission. They sold themselves out to the religious kooks, and let the think-tank boys like Wolfowitz take over the brainwork. Result: disaster.<br /><br />
What we have now is conservatives of every description fighting like mad to stake out a plausible post-Bush position. Rats off a sinking ship, is what it is. There's a lot of finger-pointing going on: "YOUR kind of conservative is to blame here". Currently in the ascendancy (but not necessarily destined to stay there): the Goldwater/small-l libertarian conservative, at the expense of the religious "values" conservative and the neo-con "let's spread democracy" conservative.</p>]]></description>
<author>Fnarf</author>
<link>http://slog.thestranger.com/2006/11/soul_searching#c504688</link>
<guid>http://slog.thestranger.com/2006/11/soul_searching#c504688</guid>
<category>Politics</category>
<pubDate>Tue, 28 Nov 2006 16:15:44 -0800</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
<title>Comment by bing</title>
<description><![CDATA[<p>sorta like the old school communists who say "communism never failed because it's never really been tried."</p>

<p>sorry, conservabots, W is your boy.  </p>]]></description>
<author>bing</author>
<link>http://slog.thestranger.com/2006/11/soul_searching#c504714</link>
<guid>http://slog.thestranger.com/2006/11/soul_searching#c504714</guid>
<category>Politics</category>
<pubDate>Tue, 28 Nov 2006 16:19:46 -0800</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
<title>Comment by Will in Seattle</title>
<description><![CDATA[<p>The kind of conservatives they speak of fled the red commie GOP years ago.</p>

<p>They probably only exist in the Bigger Tent Dems nowadays.</p>

<p>So, what calls itself Conservatives nowadays is the ilk that W is.</p>]]></description>
<author>Will in Seattle</author>
<link>http://slog.thestranger.com/2006/11/soul_searching#c505236</link>
<guid>http://slog.thestranger.com/2006/11/soul_searching#c505236</guid>
<category>Politics</category>
<pubDate>Tue, 28 Nov 2006 16:48:05 -0800</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
<title>Comment by catalina vel-duray</title>
<description><![CDATA[<p>Most people who call themselves conservatives these days lack the mental capacity to really know what a conservative is. </p>

<p>It's the "movement" for the xenophobes, for the haters, for the suspicious. It has no intelecutal creds, no real-world validity. It's downward spiral started when they sold their soul to the devil, via that moronic "B" actor who, in turn was an amoral shill for the corportocracy. </p>]]></description>
<author>catalina vel-duray</author>
<link>http://slog.thestranger.com/2006/11/soul_searching#c505587</link>
<guid>http://slog.thestranger.com/2006/11/soul_searching#c505587</guid>
<category>Politics</category>
<pubDate>Tue, 28 Nov 2006 17:21:04 -0800</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
<title>Comment by Andrew</title>
<description><![CDATA[<p>Catalina, there are pleeeeeeeenty of xenophobe dems. Your boy Webb ran on an anti-illegal platform, as did Chris Carney and Patrick Murphy. Sherrod Brown's entire campaign was an anti-china, anti-mexico rant. These guys are anti-immigrant, anti-free trade, anti-globalization. Put together, these are are basically the international half of economic liberalism (in the Austrian sense) that Bill Clinton was so keen on. <br />
There were plenty other xenophobe dems, so you shouldn't rail on Repub xenophobes when our own party's xenophobes are what won our side control of the house and senate.</p>]]></description>
<author>Andrew</author>
<link>http://slog.thestranger.com/2006/11/soul_searching#c505672</link>
<guid>http://slog.thestranger.com/2006/11/soul_searching#c505672</guid>
<category>Politics</category>
<pubDate>Tue, 28 Nov 2006 17:47:33 -0800</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
<title>Comment by Gomez</title>
<description><![CDATA[<p>Yeah, what Bush and the neo-cons have turned the GOP into... that's not conservative politics.  That's religious fascism.</p>

<p>True conservatives have simpler values, like minimizing government spending and size, and keeping taxpayer burden low.  Religious values had nothing to do with it.</p>]]></description>
<author>Gomez</author>
<link>http://slog.thestranger.com/2006/11/soul_searching#c505725</link>
<guid>http://slog.thestranger.com/2006/11/soul_searching#c505725</guid>
<category>Politics</category>
<pubDate>Tue, 28 Nov 2006 17:50:29 -0800</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
<title>Comment by catalina vel-duray</title>
<description><![CDATA[<p>Andrew, was I talking about Democrats or Republicans? No. I was talking about conservatives - or, rather, the deluded mouth breathers who call themselves conservatives, but don't know what it means. Don't try to confuse the issue by dragging in party affiliations. </p>]]></description>
<author>catalina vel-duray</author>
<link>http://slog.thestranger.com/2006/11/soul_searching#c508659</link>
<guid>http://slog.thestranger.com/2006/11/soul_searching#c508659</guid>
<category>Politics</category>
<pubDate>Wed, 29 Nov 2006 14:31:51 -0800</pubDate>
</item>


</channel>
</rss>