Apparently, conservatives come in all shapes and sizes.

Sometimes Conniff's views come off as conservative, while he considers himself a liberal. People who know me through my letters to the editor confuse me for a liberal, when I consider myself a conservative. It's becoming increasingly harder to judge a book by its cover.

A neoconservative however is an entirely different animal, a dangerous animal, a freakish hybrid, an invasive species…ok you get the point.

As Michael noted; neocons cannot be reasoned with or brought to the middle, unlike most conservatives I know. From the sound of it THX you are a perfectly normal conservative, of the sort this country was founded by. I’ll bet they even smoked a little weed now and then.

Cheers,

Today Mayor Ireland called Michael a "shock jock."

This is almost as much of a reach as writing, "Give me an example of a humble yet successful radio talk show host, and I'll concede the point."

Don't worry. The day you concede a point, I won't be the one who made it.

Cheers,

You do not agree with me? How unusual.

Please give me an example of a humble yet successful radio talk show host, and I'll concede the point.

mgman,

Good observations. You seem to be both a realist and an optimist, but I can only join you on the first. I don’t think we’re going to pull out of this tailspin before we crash.

The bi-partisan failures of the past 30 to 40 years amount to nothing next to the purposeful dismantling of democracy in America by the neocons during the same period. I liken the neocon movement to the farmer in the fable; The Goose that Layed the Golden Egg. The American taxpayer/treasury is the goose. They think they’re setting themselves up for extreme wealth and world domination, but all they’re really doing is destroying the system that gives them their power. Eventually their own actions will bite them in the ass, but not before we’re all made to suffer the consequences.

OK, ‘nuff pessimism. Please enjoy your day.

No, that is how electrons are won.

[As has been pointed out by one of our mutual friends...]

I really miss Rat's comments and posts.

[humility will get you nowhere.]

I see what you mean by that. I do not agree.

Cheers,

Take a current issue, energy, and you see that the neocon solution is one-sided-my-way-or-the-highway-dogma. The Bush administration had about as much power as one party can get in our political system and they completely dropped the ball on energy because of this neoconservative simplistic canon.

Obama had his first major blunder in political maneuvering when John McCain announced his idea for a 300 million dollar competition for a ‘mega-battery’ that would take electric cars to the next level, and fast. A political maneuver, yes. But that is how elections are won. While not original, it’s a good idea that involves throwing a small chunk of the money we dish to the government at something seemingly worthwhile. Obama should have beaten McCain to the idea table and not just have to respond to it. Most great technologies developed from government funded research (unfortunately, most in military applications but let’s not go there). In the 1920’s, aviation was seen as a novelty that would never go anywhere. But prizes for aviation accomplishments changed all that: see Lindberg. Notably, these were mostly wealthy, private sector competitions in an economic environment vastly different that the one we've been in for the last 30 to 40 years.

Sticking with the subject, the neocon response to this is, “If the market were ready for a mega-battery, there would be one there”………Horse excreta!! In the U.S., the auto is a unique and fundamental piece of the way we live, good or bad. The ratio of how much we spend on moving the car around to the value from it has to remain in a certain balance for this to work. We’re not talking about dvd players or blenders here. This ‘crisis’ is good for us because it’s been a bi-partisan failure for decades and while blame is hurled at the two parties, the transition will come from a melding of government and private money and our ingenuity.

I admire Michael's willingness to expose his human foibles, both on radio and in print. We're all selfish, egotistical, attention seeking animals. So what's wrong with admitting that and using the experience of it as a springboard for discussion?

I think he made a very good point about the fact that those who want to go on believing they are right (regardless of political leanings, but most notably evident in neocons), have a tendency to shun those who challenge their beliefs.

This is why Con Games and Aspen Post are so remarkable. Both offer a place for people of all opinions to respectfully disagree and to challenge each other's perspectives. Michael is rarely in the position of preaching to the choir. He welcomes criticism of his views as a converation starter, and seeks out dialog with those on the opposite side of the political spectrum.

As has been pointed out by one of our mutual friends, Michael's approach is anything but humble. And as I have often replied; in a field where self-promotion is imperative to success, humility will get you nowhere.

Michael's suggestion that an inability to listen to opinion is a trait unique to neocons is patently erroneous. It is far too common in the realm of politics.

Perhaps I was a bit harsh about Michael's obvious bitterness over his absence on that guest list. Remember when his picture appeared on the front page of an Aspen newspaper with other local notables? He spent several radio segments pointing out that the paper's caption writer failed to acknowledge his prominence in the photo. I realize Michael's wired differently when it comes to things social, but I don't think it's beneficial to him to advertise this kind of disappointment.

Cheers,

Which all of us regardless of liberal or conservative leanings, are being sucked down. Great dissertation on neocons Michael, I couldn't have said it better myself!

The secret to being a liberal in a neocon world is that you just have to enjoy the argument for argument's sake. You can't expect to convert them. If they're at all offended by your insinuations, they'll take their marbles and go play with their own kind. But if they like to argue and don't feel too threatened by your tone, they'll keep talking and reveal some interesting stuff.

Just look at it from an anthropological point of view, which is how I take Con Games and Aspen Post in general; hearing what others believe and how they justify those beliefs is just a fascinating way to pass the time.

For that I thank you and advise you to ignore Mitch's sour comment. He must've had a bad day.