http://www.lp.org

Conservatives w/out conscience will create a world where “Islamo-fascism” thrives, and then
condemn Progressives for “clamoring to appease them,” without offering a single example proving
their point, and not acknowledging and not accepting responsibility that the world is a much more
dangerous place since the conservatives w/out conscience have been in control of our government.

Even using the term “Islamo-fascism” is not without a specific intent to be able to act without
conscience. As Joseph Sobran, syndicated columnist said: “Islamofascism is nothing but an empty
propaganda term. And wartime propaganda is usually, if not always, crafted to produce hysteria,
the destruction of any sense of proportion. Such words, undefined and unmeasured, are used by
people more interested in making us lose our heads than in keeping their own.”

Dean is correct, this is not the conservative party of Goldwater, nor is it the conservative party
of:
• Eisenhower: emphasizing a balanced budget and control of the military industrial complex,
• Nixon: ending American fighting in the un-winnable war in Viet Nam and improving relations
with the U.S.S.R., and China., and a installing a broad environmental program,
• Reagan: negotiated bilateral arms reductions with the Soviets,
• George H. W. Bush: had the foresight to know when choosing not to invade Iraq: “”Whose
life would be on my hands as the commander-in-chief because I, unilaterally, went beyond
the international law, went beyond the stated mission, and said we’re going to show our
macho? We’re going into Baghdad. We’re going to be an occupying power — America in an
Arab land — with no allies at our side. It would have been disastrous.”[18]
• William Buckley: – in an interview on CBS “”I think Mr. Bush faces a singular problem best
defined, I think, as the absence of effective conservative ideology — with the result that
he ended up being very extravagant in domestic spending, extremely tolerant of excesses
by Congress,” Buckley says. “And in respect of foreign policy, incapable of bringing
together such forces as apparently were necessary to conclude the Iraq challenge.” Asked
what President Bush’s foreign policy legacy will be to his successor, Buckley says “There
will be no legacy for Mr. Bush.”

The conservative ship has steered off course. The occasional voice in the wilderness has tried to
bring it back, but any attempt at course correction is often dismissed with attacks on the
messenger.

Yeah, I keep hearing about Fiasco…guess I have to add it to my list, although I’m in the middle of Michelle Goldberg’s Kingdom Coming right now, which is also good. So many books, so little time…

I found this book to be absolutely riveting. He has done the world an enormous favor by explaining, in a popular, easily digestable manner, a large of amount to academic research into the political behavior of conservatives about which the geberal public would have likely oteherwise remained unaware.

Now the next book you need to review is Fiasco;)
Regards,

PT

“Jacke, if you want to argue against Dean’s book, then you should read it first, or at least acquaint yourself with his arguments.”

Fair enough. Since I haven’t read the book and have no intention of adding to the wealth of John Dean, runs against my “conservative principles,” don’t you know? Here’s a review from someone who has:

http://www.powells.com/biblio/18-0670037745-0

Review:
“In his seventh book, Dean, the former Nixon legal counsel whom the FBI has called the ‘master manipulator’ of the Watergate coverup, weighs in with a rebuke to Christian fundamentalists and other right-wing hard-liners. A self-described Goldwater conservative (indeed, Goldwater had planned to collaborate on this book before his death), he rails against the influence of social conservatives and neoconservatives within his party. Suffused with bitterness stemming from the controversies in which he has been embroiled, Dean’s book paints a thin social science veneer over a litany of mostly ad hominem complaints. Purporting to show that social conservatives and neoconservatives are, on the whole, demonstrably authoritarian, bigoted, irrational and amoral, Conservatives Without Conscience offers helpful hints such as ‘Conservatives without conscience do not have horns and tails,’ and evinces a telling fascination with politicians’ shady book deals. Though there is clearly much to condemn in the policies and tactics Dean deplores, assailing everyone from French political theorist Joseph de Maistre to Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist to the chairman of Yale University’s conservative association as ‘Double High’ social- dominance-oriented authoritarians undermines his journalistic credibility. Dean’s lurid accusations may be entertaining, but they add little to the reasoned debate that Washington so sorely lacks today. (July 11)” Publishers Weekly (Copyright Reed Business Information, Inc.)

Jacke, if you want to argue against Dean’s book, then you should read it first, or at least acquaint yourself with his arguments. Take a look: http://www.google.com/search?q=dean+%22conservatives+without+conscience%22&start=0&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8&client=firefox-a&rls=org.mozilla:en-US:official

If you won’t make the effort to understand his arguments, then we’re just wasting our time here.

“As you might expect, conservative Christians tend to score highly on this scale.”