ME: Well, actually, the fascists and the Nazi's were conservative movements MAV: You mean they were strict followers of the US Constitution?

We need to agree on definitions. I think I have a rather different view of conservatives than you. For me the term conservative doesn't apply to a party in the USA but to a way of thinking. I believe conservatives are more focused on the status quo, not rocking the boat, a strict and restrictive interpretation of the rule of law. If we keep our argument strictly within the borders of this country then I would be willing to label parties this way but the topic at the time was political movements overseas. Thus the Nazi's and the fascists were, at the start, conservative movements. Once past their liberal pro labor beginnings and established in power the "communists" became the model for conservative thinking.

ME: Except when it comes to telling women what they can and cannot do with their own bodies MAV: All I'm saying is it should be an individual state decision. Abortion is not mentioned in the Constitution and R v.Wade should be reversed.

Well, here we are once again at cross purposes. I am not talking about what MAV has said. I am talking about the parties. Abortion is a hot button topic and seems to drive to some extent at times, the Republican agenda. We have two completely different views of the topic. For conservatives in the USA abortion is the killing of a person. For the liberals it is a matter of freedom of choice. The two sides will never be reconciled because they are arguing apples and oranges.

MAV: Nixon resigned and we helped him pack. He did nothing compared to the hatchet job cLINTON did. At least he had the dignity to resign. What did Reagan do to violate the Constitution?

Reagan, or maybe it was Bush Sr., authorized the Iran-Contra trade in order to side step the constitutional checks placed on the Presidency. Oliver North, in direct conflict with his oath to protect the Constitution, carried out their orders. I will always believe that Reagan knew what was going on and lied about it when deposed.

I am unaware of anything that Clinton did that violated the Constitutional limits of his office. There is no law against having sex in the White House. Lying about it was poor judgment and showed a decided lack of character but it wasn't against the law. He may have violated the civil rights of the other women but nothing has been proven yet and the law of the land is that he is innocent until proven guilty. His actions have offended a large number of people in this country but not enough to give GB Jr. a sweeping mandate to do what he wants with the office to clean up the actions of his predecessor.

ME: Democrats, on the other hand believe in the freedoms granted to the people of this country, upholding the spirit and the letter of the basis of all law in this land MAV: Yeah they do, except for one thing.... FREEDOM ISN'T GRANTED TO THE PEOPLE

Well, I would argue that one. I have worked as an immigration officer and I know that the Constitution grants certain rights to each person in the United States. That is the way it is worded. There are no words in the Constitution about those freedoms belonging to citizens. If a person can set foot on this land s/he is instantly accorded full protection under the Constitution. With that comes all the rights we take for granted.

As far as "People give permission to the state to regulate them." I didn't vote for ratification of the Constitution. I didn't have anything to do with the creation of this State. I was born here and at my birth I was granted certain unalienable rights. Eisenhower didn't give me those and I didn't go looking for them (though I have defended them). But Thomas Jefferson through the Constitution granted me those rights.

Look to foreign lands where the people are oppressed. Have those people given their permission to their governments to torture them in prison cells and shoot them at midnight? No! And if they manage to throw off the yoke of oppression and settle the mantle of democracy about their shoulders they will have granted freedom to their descendants through their actions.

"Democrats believe that government is the answer to every problem. They want you be dependent on them for your every need and to have you shirk responsibility for your own needs and actions."

I work for the Government and I KNOW it isn't the answer. But we already tried working without the Government regulating things and it was a dismal failure. Look at the lives of the common folk through the end of the 19th and the beginning of the 20th Centuries. Look at how people suffered during the Great Depression and the Dust Bowl Years. There was nobody to support them.

"They don't give a damn about law and order and love protecting a criminal's rights over yours."

I sometimes have a problem with this too when I see a criminal walking free while his victim's family still suffers. But that is the price for our system of Government. If he has served the sentence for his crime then he has paid the price and the score has been settled. It may not seem so to the victim or that family but that is the case.

Now it is possible you are talking about the restrictions placed on police in their investigations. Please remember that we are, each of us, assumed innocent until proven guilty. Thus the full protection of the Constitution hangs over us and must be enforced. Nothing should be done to the suspect that is a violation of the Constitution. As you have already stated that would be abhorrent to conservatives. So what is the problem?

MAV: Your own Maine speaker of the House said "I don't give a damn what it says in the Constitution".

Yeah, we all have our crosses to bear.

Me: "the Republican party seems to be made up of people who march, in lock step, to the drums beaten by their leaders"

I'm gonna have to stand by that statement based on my experience with the conservatives I have worked with (a lot of them) and the actions in Congress.

There is a reason why the Republican party is so popular with the military. It is because it is a party that knows the meaning of leadership and loyalty (paraphrasing various politicians during various campaigns). It is because the military members don't have to worry about who is truly in charge and because the conservatives brook no nonsense. No questions are allowed. Every man is expected to do his duty.

And in Congress, where you can pretty much expect votes to fall out along party lines, crossing over to vote against the party line is generally not seen in the Republican party, But it happens all the time for the Democrats. "Question Authority" is a Democrat's slogan but could never be used by a Republican.

My other big problem with conservatives in general but not specific or focused on them alone is that they seem to be creating another aristocracy in this country. We fought a protracted and bloody revolution to get rid of one set of aristocrats and now we have more. Generally I have noticed that it is the conservatives that are impressed with high office and money. We seem to have lost the idea that the president is just the human being we have hired to do a job. He is not a god. He is not a king. We do not have to kow-tow to him because he is in the room.

But that is my own rant and not one I am necessarily blaming your side on. People in general (liberals and conservatives) seem to need to depend on a leader. Ugh!

MAV: I've heard you are a very nice guy.

Hmmm, who's been talking behind my back? Have you heard of the stamp collector who met a beautiful girl. He looked her up and down and said, "You are more beautiful than any stamp in my collection." She replied, "Philately will get you nowhere." *BG*