re: #843 LudwigVanQuixote
So many straw men, so little time.

Given that many “conservatives” AGW aside, see nothing wrong with pollution if it is good for business,

I’ve never heard anyone say there’s nothing wrong with pollution if it is good for business. I would argue the need to weigh all the benefits of cutting pollution against all the costs.

Given that education is one of the first things that many “conservatives” go to cut, by that standard I am a liberal.

Given the waste in most state education budgets, it’s an easy target. Fund teachers and programs that work. Don’t fund more administrators. Could the Democrats ever actually stand up to the Teachers Unions?

Given that many “conservatives” see science as something subordinate to either the needs of big business or to the military

Would you rather have science funding based solely on the whims of pork barrel spending, seniority, and lobbyists, or have some basis in actual (or even perceived) needs? Funding for pure science is the easiest cut to make for any politican, Democrat, Republican, liberal or conservative. Imagine I’m a congressman: show me what your research will do for me. If it doesn’t create jobs in my district it better do something really special.

I like the idea of having smart people as my representatives. Policies aside, the GOP has quite the track record of running people who can’t string together a coherent sentence

Like Joe “I bet my iQ is higher than yours” Biden? Or Rangel or Conyers?

and who would have gotten C’s or worse in the classes I teach.

As I recall, W had better college grades than Al Gore.

there is much that “conservatives” have become that have nothing to do with classical conservatism

. Agreed. And the labels liberal and conservative have been close to useless for at least twenty years.