I recently heard on the radio a tirade against Republicans by Michael Savage. It was unofficially titled “Republicans versus Conservatives”. Like Savage, I am vehemently opposed to the Republican party. But the alternative he provides is really not that much better in my eyes. In some cases, what conservatives think, or what he says conservatives think is worse. Here is the comparison:
I of course am not asking anyone to agree with anything he says. What I am asking is if we can throw in what a libertarian would do, or would feel on a particular topic. For example, Republicans are for …, Conservatives are for … , Libertarians are for …
Libertarians are for anyone who wants to give aid to others to be able to do so provided they aren’t coerced into doing so, nor they coerce others into it.
Libertarians are for letting the free market decide that $5 gas is ok. Republicans and Conservatives (of Savage’s type) are for bullying anyone who doesn’t give them free gas.
Wow, Michael Savage is an ignorant idiot. I knew he was a dummy, but I didn’t know it was that bad.
What it seems he actually wants is just a big government doing the things he likes by force. The only difference with the current government is the “things he likes” part. But this is a typical partisan Republicrat position. Government intervention and legal theft–but only when it helps you out.
Perhaps it’s a little worse, but it seems to be just taking current Repub political views and turning them up a notch.
He has one thing right–the word conservative. As in, no significant changes at all.
But this one really shocked me - this is basically saying we should use the military to take what we need if we have to. This shows that he has about as much understanding of how the economy and the price system works as Obama: i.e. none at all. But it’s even more dumb–how much stolen taxpayer loot would have to be expended to pay for this use of force? Couldn’t we have just cut the size of the military and given everyone a tax cut to pay for their gas? [^o)]
It’s distressing that such ignorance is being broadcast every day.
The libertarian position there is basically the supposed “Republican” position, let the market and private industry re-adjust when the time comes.
This imbecile has written a piece on libertarianism too, very poorly argued and laden with strawmen.
Notice this:
So per “conservatism” violations of the market are not anti-market? “Masquerading as free marketers”? I think if anyone is masquerading as such, it’d be Savage, if he thinks this rubbish passes as advocacy of the free market, his own delusions to the contrary notwithstanding.
Measures such as these only ever erode responsibility and create people whose lives depend of the states welfare programmes, not only this, but forced “charity” on behalf of the state crowds out private providers of charity: namely churches and families.
The rest just repeats his pseudo conservative views, the fact of the matter is that any true conservative will realise that the market works best to bring about a society that favours the Church, the family and traditional lifestyles.
Since when do conservatives believe in letting gas suppliers sort out prices, dislike the FDA, and all that other jazz. Being a cured conservative, I can say that the “Golfer” and Michael Savage are both for bigger and much more violent government. This is why the Republican Party looks like it is desintegrating. Of the two Savage is much worse as he is for government control over out lives domestically and government control of the lives of people outside the US.
Control of the lives of people outside the US, yes. It sounds like he’s basically demanding price controls and/or forced subsidies, but only for Americans. As if Americans have any more claim to resources on the open market than anyone else does–it’s extreme arrogance and shortsightedness. His solution is the same kind of fix a 10 year old could have come up with. He’s either genuinely really stupid, or he hasn’t spent more than 30 seconds thinking about it.
Which is good because Savage is a Nazi, as in a National Socialist. He’s a fascist at his ideological core.
As Giles indicated, it is a shamockery that he claims to be a conservative, when his positions are authoritarian and socialist.
The only upside to this, is that it continues to fragment the fascist right further. People think there needs to be a 3rd American party. They are wrong. There needs to be only one party, so everyone can protest it.
Well we already have the Republicrat party = one party, most people just don’t realize it yet. Perhaps we need a book about how our “two party system” is really just a one party system.
Simple. A visually appealing candidate claiming to be a “conservative” will come along in 2016, he’ll say all the right things about “freedom from government” and “free-market prosperity” and of course “tax cuts for the poor exploited common man” instead of “Hope” and “Change” and “a Government that looks out the poor, not the rich.”
The Republican sheeple will unite and fall all over themselves to vote for the guy. He’ll win by a large margin, and just like Reagan, he’ll abuse power, legislate morality, and tax and spend us into oblivion.
Savage is right to point out that genuine conservatives are a different breed from mainstream Republicans.
However, that’s about the only thing he is right about. I am more and more convinced that contemporary political labels have little, if anything, to do with the original terms. What is conservative to Savage? Why, whatever he likes. Whatever he dislikes is obviously something else. The fact that he has such a large following is terrible.
I find it ironic that this bully with no respect for rights, reason or law, is now protesting the very same sort of bullying he does, but applied to himself.