Posted on 03/02/2007 4:16:56 AM PST by Jim Robinson
The only reason I consider folks like you enemies is because of your constant attacks on "my house."
Never said I didn't like Viguerie. But I do think it's helpful to assess someone's track record.
It may be he's been exactly right every time. Still, there's no harm in people knowing and assessing for themselves Viguerie's approach over the years, is there?
I wouldn't read more into it than that.
For one thing, conservatives need to separate fiscal conservatism from social conservatism. The two are at the opposite ends of the political spectrum IMO. Fiscal conservatism has wide, broad intellectual appeal while social conservatism has muddied up it's waters with a confused emotion based message.
Fair enough. I read it as an attack, when in reality I shouldn't have done so. Regards...
Thanks for saying that.
I was just looking at the list of people we should reach out to and clearly some of them are law and order or national security conservatives vs. social conservatives and some of them are fiscal conservatives.
It's nice to get the whole package but I don't see that happening and so most of us are going to focus on national security and pocketbook issues.
Also, I see that the vanity suggests reaching out to certain groups including women. That's going to be difficult if it's something this forum intends to do given the recent forum decision to permit calling women desperate housewives or wish the women would get a venereal disease just because a lot of us support a fiscally conservative Republican who the social conservatives don't like.
Also, any movement by this forum to reach out to Republicans will likely be rejected by newbies when they start reading that they are treasonous liberals if they support a Republican candidate that social conservatives don't like.
It's a sad day for Conservatism when we have to attack and marginalize all for the sake of advancing the cause.
I know it. Very sad indeed.
What's really disturbing is that so many Republicans and conservatives don't realize just how MANY different kinds of conservatives there are. I don't claim that my brand of conservatism is better than any one else's, but there's a certain segment on this forum who think they are the only TRUE conservatives. It's so ignorant of the facts that it's embarrassing.
You left your house. You told many of us on FR time and time again that you're no longer a member of the GOP.
Conservative Bump!
These categories are not hard and fast, and people dip into and out of these three schools to varying degrees. The point is that conservatism is a dynamic philosophy, which has a constant churn of ideas. You'll notice that the main precepts of American liberalism / socialism have not changed for 50 years - their philosophy is intellectually bankrupt, and a failure as a result.
Regards, Ivan
************
All right. We can do it.
Very good, Ivan. I see that you know more about this country's politics than many of our own countrymen.
Oh I absolutely agree, and goes along with what I've always maintained, that conservatism itself is not monolithic, with a certain amount of give and take to allow for a certain degree of compromise.
You'll notice that the main precepts of American liberalism / socialism have not changed for 50 years - their philosophy is intellectually bankrupt, and a failure as a result.
The fact that it's "unbending" or unwilling to change (uncomprimising) with the times or the circumstances, is why it's a failure.
Bump
See, there's what I'm talking about. You have no compunction about telling bald-faced lies.
The Left has only made one concession to modernity; they decided after the collapse of the Soviet Union, that they were going to have to make some peace with business, namely that they were not going to be able to nationalise every company in the land. Instead, they are now trying to regulate them to death.
Regards, Ivan
You hit on what I see as a key point.
The reason this redefining of conservatism is taking place today has to do with a certain frustration and complacency on the rightwing. Conservatives have gotten a little bit unfocused and lazy. What Buckley and Goldwater started in the 1950`s and 1960`s to advance conservatism and what Reagan accomplished in the 1980`s, is now under a systematic attack from the internal non-conservative forces within the GOP. These "moderate" forces are slowing sucking the life-blood out of the conservative agenda and weakening the resolve of mainstream conservatism.
Today Republicans seem to be more fascinated in the liberal pop culture politics of A.Schwarzy and RudyG, then their are concerned with advancing conservatism. In addition, after 30 years in a dormant state, Rockefeller Republicanism is making a comeback and that doesn't help matters.
Over time this effort to move away from traditional conservatism and undermine its basic concepts, will only damage the Republican Party, and in the end maybe even destroy the party of Lincoln and Reagan. Its happened before. Political parties come and go. It can happen again.
How? Might I remind you that there isn't one brand of conservatism, or "My conservatism is better than your conservatism". I've never believed conservatism to be monolithic.
You believe what you want to believe, defend what you believe, persuade others to join your fight, and conservatism wins every time it's tried.
Anyone who adopts the "My conservatism is better than yours" mentality will always lose and remain pessimistic of the world around them.
If you build it, they will come.
BumP
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.