Sick of the Conservative B.S.


In the November 12th edition of The American Thinker Magazine, a hard-line Conservative publication, the very first line in the article titled It Is Not Too Early for Conservatives… reads:

“The Republican Party lost the 2012 election while conservatives watched from the sidelines.”

Essentially, that is a clear admission that Conservatives in the Republican party made the choice to give the country four more years of the socialist-leaning Liberal, Barack Obama, rather than vote for a candidate that they felt was not “Conservative enough”. Like spoiled grade schoolers, they took their “ball” and went home rather than allow their team to win.

Although Conservatives are now suggesting that the Republican Party is not really “their team” they should perhaps take their heads out of the sand and get a firm grip on the fact that a moderate Republican President would have been a whole lot better for America than the Liberal Democratic President is — or will be for the next four years. Now, however, it may be too late for Conservatives to start thinking about America’s future, rather than their own.

That’s it!

That’s all there is to say: You should blame the hard-line Conservatives, and especially the “Social Conservatives” (which is just a politically correct way of saying “Christian Conservatives”) for what is about to happen to you and all of us in 2013 and beyond! With a moderate Republican in the presidency it would still have been a “hard knock life” for sure but there would still have been a ray of hope for a bright future.

7 thoughts on “Sick of the Conservative B.S.

  1. Sorry….Not buying the blame. Conservatives were either ignored or taken for granted by the Republican (Moderate) Party. Republican Leadership demanded a Moderate candidate, got their way, lost another election, and now want to blame their arrogant foolishness on Conservatives.

    In theor abandonment of Conservative Values, Republicans have now definitively exposed themselves as a political party based on nothing more than Political Opportunism, Political Expedience, and Political Convenience.

    Thomas Jefferson described this situation perfectly: “In matter of style, swim with the currents….In matters of Principle, stand like a rock.’ Republicans are swimming. Conservatives are standing.

    Those who say that a Moderate Republican would be far better than a Liberal Democrat as President are….Republicans.

    Conservatives want a limited federal government, pursuing a US Constitutionally-charted course, not a politically-charted one. We will have the States making decisions concerning social policy, not a disconnected gang of opportunists spending our children’s, and our grand children’s money.

    Jon-David Wells; The Wells Report

    • Apparently you are saying that those ‘rock-steady’ Conservatives actually prefer Obama for another four years. I listened to you for a while yesterday and that’s what I thought you said. (That’s why I sent you my opinion piece.)

      I don’t understand that ‘don’t compromise your principles but go ahead and compromise the country attitude’. It reeks of childishness and is childishly selfish — it reminds me of something Ayn Rand would approve of

      • “Rock-Steady Conservatives” believe that President Obama elections represents the first steps in the destruction of the Republic.

        When you discuss Conservatives compromising the country by actually standing up for our principles, you are apparently forwarding the notion that your level of calculated compromise is somehow more mature, and noble than the incidental compromise of our refusal to vote against our beliefs.

        “Childishness”? “Childishly selfish”? What do you call compromising the very founding principles of the nation for the sake of mature collaboration and your rationalized settleing for half of an evil loaf?

        I call it….Republicanism.


      • Sorry J.D I just don’t understand how you can say “Rock-Steady Conservatives believe that President Obama’s election represents the first steps in the destruction of the Republic.” and then continue to defend the fact that Conservatives facilitated those “first steps.”

        I know! How dare me suggest that a set of political principles can be compromised but try to forget for a moment about discussions of principles and just ask yourself the two questions I am asking myself:

        1) Would the ‘Republic’ be in greater danger under a Romney presidency than it is under this Obama presidency? and

        2) Since when are Conservative principles more important than the ‘destruction of the republic’?

        I appreciate your responses to my emails. To me this is a very important issue and while I consider myself mostly Conservative I can find NO rational justification for a Conservative withholding his or her vote when the known ‘stakes’ were so large.

      • Harvey….Conservatives had no part in facilitating the re-election of President Obama. Republicans did that.

        1) We can only assume that it would not be in as great a danger. However, I remember the atrocious conduct Bill Frist, and Dennis
        Hastert brought to the Federal Government between 2004 & 2006 when Social Security Reform, and Tax Reform were on the
        table. I voted for President Bush’s agenda on those issues twice, and again, when they had nothing stopping them, Republicans
        dropped the ball. Had they acted, this would be a far different country, and the Presidency of Barack Obama would likely be either
        a unrealized muse, or would exist only in an alternate dimension of space/time.

        2) When the principles you stand for are (mostly) based on the Declaration of Independence, the US Constitution, and Federalist
        Papers, they are American principles, not “Conservative” ones. Remember, Republicans were also on Capitol Hill when all this
        spending; now adding up to a 16.4 Trillion Dollar national debt, was taking place. While the Ryan plan at least put a series of debt
        reduction mechanisms in place, the actual reduction curve over 10 years was nearly identical to one discussed by the President.

        Again, Conservatives were as plain as day regarding their ideology leading up to the 2012 election. The Republican Party chose to pursue Independent Voters instead of Conservative ones. Why? Because according to the Republican “Brain” Trust, Independent Voters more represented the Moderate (read: Opportunistic, Expedient, and Convenient absent known principles) political ideology currently espoused by them. Nice going.

        Harvey, this is a Republican/Moderate failure, not a Conservative one. In a nearly 4-Decade review of Republican political strategy, I have come to the conclusion that the Party is not up to the work necessary to back up their rhetoric.


      • John David,

        You make some important and valid points — but on this Conservative issue (and especially on the issue of Social Conservatism) our social/political views may never merge.

        Let me say again, however, that I respect you and your positions as I hope you respect mine.

        I don’t have a radio show JD but I do have a very opinionated blog ( http://webcentrist, — if you like I will always welcome your thoughts.

        BTW, I listen to AM 660 all the time but work odd hours so I don’t always get to hear your commentary — but I do agree with many of your other positions.

        Regards, Harvey Grund Dallas, TX

      • Of course I appreciate and respect your opinions. I’m glad you’re in the game. The only practical/real-world thing I would suggest to you is that you can’t win a tug of war standing in the middle… 🙂

        From its inception, the government of the United States of America is about limitations, not capabilities. It’s about maintenance, not reformation. Conservatism isn’t government about telling people how to live. It’s about government getting out of the way.

        The credo of this political ideology is: “Congress shall make no law….Unless it’s absolutely necessary.”

        Republicans and Democrats talk about creating law that dictates morality, or medical care….Conservatives want to determine when life begins.

        The major political parties want to reach out to minorities, Conservatives want to stop government from classifying people by race, creed, color, national origin, gender, sexual practices, religion….We want to classify people by the contents of their character….Nothing more.

        Republicans and Democrats want to control our transportation…our energy use…how our children are educated…what medical care we can have…

        Conservatives want to pave here, pave now. We want energy companies to profitably compete within a framework of laws that benefit everyone. Public Education should be about facts, and any public money should follow the child, not the political connections of Public Education Unions. The US Goverment, State Government, County Government, City Government, and HOA’s should never have anything to do with anyone’s medical care. An individual’s healthcare is his or her responsibility. Period.

        Speaking of those levels of government, Conservatives believe all of them should be compliant to the Constitution of the United States, the respective Constitutions of States, and the laws of due process.

        There’s more….Someday….


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s