Posted on 10/16/2006 8:38:07 AM PDT by IrishMike
Excellent post, shield, and I thank you for it!
I don't think Burns is toast. We'll have to wait and see what happens. There might be a tilt toward Burns from the undecideds who are slowly coming out of the woodworks.
No, it will not work. It only makes us more determined. Liberals win the polls and we continue to win the elections.
Oh, I get it. What you haven't 'gotten' is that I wasn't taking a gratuitous swipe at Christians (although you seem to have misconstrued my intent).
But while we're at it, why don't we recognize what many Social Conservatives have failed to grasp forever; you will not change society by exercise of political power, except at the margins. Morality, it's been said, cannot be legislated.
Which is part of the problem here when it comes to republican politics; provided someone can convince the social conserrvatives that they are "on their side", they can get elected without having to actually do anything about the issues social conservatives care about (and can always point to the other side or the Supreme Court or a myriad of social/political strictures upon ttheir quest for the Social conservative Holy Grail). In the meantime, good-government conservatives have to sit on the sidelines simply because while they might stand for limited government, upholding of personal rights, fiscal restraint, etc. (honest-to-God REPUBLICAN virtues), they can't get even into the game without paying at least lip-service to things they really can't change in any case! We either elect political opportunists or charlatans in this manner. So why should we be surprised at the program of abuse of power that has been wrought?
And stop with the "Rockefeller republican"/RINO nonsense already! In case you missed that class, Republicans ARE liberals, in the classical sense of the word. What is commonly referred to as "liberal" these days is nothing of the sort, unless you consider someone who wishes to use the coercive power of government to legislate and control every aspect of American's daily lives to be liberal?
Anyways, the problem is that republicans are more and more being forced to act in most un-republican ways, and because they got there by gaining the imprimitur of the social conservatives, they are almost impossible to remove in order to make room for new blood. So, when someone who is labelled "Our kind of conservative" can parlay that into 20 years in Congress and putting his fingers into every pie he/she can, a REAL conservative (in the classical sense) can't even get on a ballot unless he says something completely inane like "Jesus is my favortie political philosopher" (remember that laughable statement, delievred with a straight face?)
There is still a place for the social conservatives in the Republican party, but the influence they wield is far in excess of their power as a voting bloc (however, their financial power is a different matter), and it's getting to the point where that influence has kept people in power who should have been shown the door quite some time ago.
No your problem Wombat101 is that you can't see that Social Conservatives are Reagan Small Government Conservative Like me, so don't even try telling me to stop that RINO crap, frankly I don't care, beside you R being hypocritical by attacking social conservatives. (While at the same time you mis charecterize what a social conservative is..) .
My friend, I would like to point out that most/many social conservatives do NOT want to "legislate morality" as you point out, they merely do not want the government dictating that abortion (NOT found in the Constitution, homo marriage- also NOT in the Constitution upheld as federal law, as well as the FIRST Ammendment rights to free exercize of religion are restored to their rightful place in society). (I know, as do many other intellignet people that you can-not legislative behavior-what you call morality because people have free will. Do not harp on me, and social conservatives, when IT is You who are attacking us, not the other way AROUND, now get it?
No, most Social Conservatives are theocrats in all but name. The only rights they actually want upheld are their own (as they choose to define them, by the way) and to hell with the rest of us.
I don't disagree with you on the matters of abortion, homosexual marriage and the rest of the boilerplate. I do disagree with you in the notion that politics must have a morality totally dependant upon religious views. We demand our "conservatives" (that's two lies for the price of one, btw) must kow-tow to religious sensibilities. It's wrong and it's killing our party because we keep winding up with the same non-entities, produced by the same, stale recipe.
You wanna tell me where I can find a low tax, small-government, pro-national defense, pro-property-rights, the Constitution-says-what-it-means candidate with an R next to his name that doesn't have to pass religious right muster? You can't --- because, unfortunately for them, being a true republican apparently is no longer enough anymore.
And no need to get nasty, friend, since I believe that I have been more than civil with you.
Perhaps if more people actually stayed awake during poly-sci class (or even took any) they would realize that 99% of the people in these debates are talking out of their backsides, since they can't adequately define either "liberal" or "republican" but post as if they do.
look we both know that conservatism is really a marriage of two ideologies (and in a normal world)-one with out socialist wackos/radical social agenda freaks. The Republican party would be 2 sensible parties:
One based on the Biblical Christian wing of the Republican party, and one based on the Classical liberal wing of the republican party.
Its true that they don't ALWAYS see eye to eye, but most of thse so called "rockefeller republicans" aren't even Small government conservatives, they are plain and simple LIBERALS, (albeit of the lesser degree than the majority of the Democratic population..), and usually focused in cities and ne.
It is not inconsistent to be a social conservative, and still believe in the Constitution and its protections, true we can't make people behave like we want, and I believe that Government is NEVER neutral, its not that it follow or dictate a MORALITY, it is WHAT MORALITY? That is is advocating, better a Biblical morality (even if it is only a guideline for someone that doesn';t believe) than the GODLESS ATHIESM/ANTI-CHRIST/PC/LIBERAL/SOCIALIST/COMMUNIST CRAP that we have today.
So for now, we shall be allies, but one day, we may, but it would probably take my lifetime we will opponents (not enemies mind you because I never want you to be my enemy), butmerely political opponents (After we have defeated liberalism..).
"After we have defeated liberalism..."
If you ever succeed in doing that, you will have defeated constitutional, consensual government, Dude. What you really mean to say, I would assume, is that "when we have defeated LIBERTINE-ISM", which is something totally different.
The continuing experiment which is the United States was founded by men advancing liberal ideas and agendas in a creative and constructive way. Just remember this: as a "Conservative" what you seek to conserve are, at heart, LIBERAL ideas.
And if we ever become opponents, neither one of us will survive in a poliical sense, so don't even go there, please. There's room for compromise, so let's make some.
Liberalism (as in the sense of the word today0-progressivism-communism/socialism/radical social agenda, it's all the same.
I think that we can get along too, beside as I stated it is not inconsistent to be both a Biblical Christian and a Classically Liberal leaning Conservative. In fact they both mostly believe the same things (especially as far as our govt is concerned).
I am saying that WHEN we defeat PROGRESSIVISM (you are right to chastise me on letting the left controll the word 'liberal') we should not let them do that (even in our-my own language..).
There will probably be two sensible major parties with their primary philosphies: classical liberalsim (including libertartian leanings), and Biblical Christian philosophy.
(That may not happen for a loooooooong while)..
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.