"Respect for life" means he believes in the abortion plank. I do, too, but I don't think it should be a litmus test for Republicans.
I don't know what the Republican "gay plank" is besides not being for gay marriage, but since the Dem Party isn't either, that shouldn't be a big deal. I'd certainly like the Republicans to rejoin the "get government off the backs of the people" bandwagon, and that includes what consenting adults do in the privacy of their own bedrooms.
Personally, I'd like to get away from "social conservatism" and stick with economic and small-government conservatism. Plenty of room under *that* big tent, without the infighting between the "libertarian" wing and the "religious" wing.
The infighting between the libertarian and social conservative wing is precisely the problem. In fact, I assert that the term "social conservative" is an oxymoron. I don't see the GOP finding its way out the woods until the religious right returns to its apolitical positions of the early 80s and before. And I don't see that happening for a generation or more. Not much hope here when two Colorado GOP legislators are calling for laws to be written based on what the Bible determines as a sin.
Additionally, there is the problem of conservative parts of the country, calling for limited government and then becoming what Arianna Huffington called "pigs at the trough." While some may assert that conservatives need to return to their principles, the reality is that, other than people like Jeff Flake of Arizona, those principles have never truly been practiced. Newt Gingrich didn't stick to his Contract with America for longer than about six months. Clearly, the most conservative parts of the country request and receive the most government aid, paid for by the most liberal parts. While that may be a matter of demographics, voter should still acknowledge it.
The Constitution has been subverted by both social conservatives and neo-conservatives when it has been inconvenient to their agenda. That goes all the way back to the mockery of Ollie North "carrying a copy of the Constitution around in his breast pocket." That's not going to change, and the rhetoric of CPAC is evidence of this.
One of these days there will be a pragmatic conservative leader who likes limited government and believes on low taxes, but also acknowledges that the "floor" of tax rates is every bit as important as the "ceiling," and Americans like their roads and services.
There are lots of different types of conservatives. There are those who think it is conservative to make it illegal for gay people to have sex, there are those who think it is conservative to say the law should not care. How do you decide who is a real conservative?
How do *I* decide? I would make a big tent, with the foundation as *limited government* with enumerated powers. Lots of people with different views can fit under that tent, but there's a foundational view.
10 comments:
ha! loved it!
I hope he remembers that and can help to steer the conservatives away from their draconian social policy which is quickly becoming out of date.
"Respect for life" means he believes in the abortion plank. I do, too, but I don't think it should be a litmus test for Republicans.
I don't know what the Republican "gay plank" is besides not being for gay marriage, but since the Dem Party isn't either, that shouldn't be a big deal. I'd certainly like the Republicans to rejoin the "get government off the backs of the people" bandwagon, and that includes what consenting adults do in the privacy of their own bedrooms.
Personally, I'd like to get away from "social conservatism" and stick with economic and small-government conservatism. Plenty of room under *that* big tent, without the infighting between the "libertarian" wing and the "religious" wing.
Personally, I'd like to get away from "social conservatism" and stick with economic and small-government conservatism.
I couldn't agree more.
The infighting between the libertarian and social conservative wing is precisely the problem. In fact, I assert that the term "social conservative" is an oxymoron. I don't see the GOP finding its way out the woods until the religious right returns to its apolitical positions of the early 80s and before. And I don't see that happening for a generation or more. Not much hope here when two Colorado GOP legislators are calling for laws to be written based on what the Bible determines as a sin.
Additionally, there is the problem of conservative parts of the country, calling for limited government and then becoming what Arianna Huffington called "pigs at the trough." While some may assert that conservatives need to return to their principles, the reality is that, other than people like Jeff Flake of Arizona, those principles have never truly been practiced. Newt Gingrich didn't stick to his Contract with America for longer than about six months. Clearly, the most conservative parts of the country request and receive the most government aid, paid for by the most liberal parts. While that may be a matter of demographics, voter should still acknowledge it.
The Constitution has been subverted by both social conservatives and neo-conservatives when it has been inconvenient to their agenda. That goes all the way back to the mockery of Ollie North "carrying a copy of the Constitution around in his breast pocket." That's not going to change, and the rhetoric of CPAC is evidence of this.
One of these days there will be a pragmatic conservative leader who likes limited government and believes on low taxes, but also acknowledges that the "floor" of tax rates is every bit as important as the "ceiling," and Americans like their roads and services.
I'll campaign and vote for him.
There are lots of different types of conservatives. There are those who think it is conservative to make it illegal for gay people to have sex, there are those who think it is conservative to say the law should not care. How do you decide who is a real conservative?
How do *I* decide? I would make a big tent, with the foundation as *limited government* with enumerated powers. Lots of people with different views can fit under that tent, but there's a foundational view.
"Limited government" means nothing since everyone believes in it. The question is, what are the limits?
I notice you skipped the "enumerated powers" part. If only we actually followed our own Constitution....
Trust a lefty to be puzzled by the refusal to decide who is and who isn't in the club.
And right now the Left is telling us that Rush is the leader of the club that's made for you and me. ^_^
Post a Comment