Posted on 11/06/2008 5:23:50 PM PST by rabscuttle385
I agree (I am socially conservative), but this party needs a new direction. Not necessarily pro-choice, but less culture “warriorish.” The issues like abortion may be moot in four years anyways, with a leftist controlled supreme court. We need to turn skepticism of people in their 20s and 30s from organized religion to that of government.
lol
My attitude is that it really isn’t the place of the federal government to be that much involved in social issues. Those are better off left to state and localities that can better reflect the desires of their residents.
When my son brought home this book about diverse famlies from school I was so angry I called the school and raised a stink. They clearly over stepped their bounds regarding the attitudes I want to teach my son.
And that’s basically my point, I don’t want homosexual stuff foisted on me or my kids, but on the other hand, I don’t think it’s fair to do the reverse to people who don’t look at the world the same way I do. I’d rather we just stay out of each other’s faces.
So glad you mentioned Milton Friedman and Free to Choose. I wore an Adam Smith necktie yesterday and it made me feel good. (You can still get them on line if you look hard enough). Free to Choose may be somewhat outdated as you said, but it is a classic and was more influential than any pretentious Obama oration ever will be.
A few days ago, when it became more and more apparent that this election might be lost, I pulled a book off of my shelf called The Recovery of Freedom, by the historian Paul Johnson. It is a collection of his essays and addresses from the late seventies and was published in 1980. It, too, is somewhat outdated. His brilliant pieces on terrorism, for example, mainly focus on the IRA. Yet, they are still timely and I posted excerpts here shortly after 9/11 ocurred.
So, let’s all get back to basics. Great ideas in the hands of a trusted leader with decent communication skills will win more votes than any “ground game” or campaign war chest.
A necktie might not look quite right on me. I’m the pantsuit and heels type. :)
I was extatic when I stumbled on “Free to Choose”. He did so well putting everything in laymans terms and it explained everything to me that I’ve always believed and wished for.
Just maybe with the right kind of leader we can get these things going again. To me, this is what conservatisim is really about.
"You and I have a rendezvous with destiny. We will preserve for our children this, the last best hope of man on Earth, or we will sentence them to take the last step into a thousand years of darkness."
—Ronald Reagan, A Time for Choosing, October 27, 1964
3 posted on Thursday, November 06, 2008 8:28:21 PM by rabscuttle385
Conservatives need to reflect on what worked before and why, how Reagan put together that coalition. Getting the Reagan Democrats to vote Republican again is key. One of things Reagan and the Reagan conservatives did in the '80s was to educate and inform the electorate politically. And Reagan lifted people up with a positive vision and compelling political narrative. The next conservative candidate needs to be able to speak and connect with the people.
“I’m one of the Gen-x generation. Ronald Reagan was the master of putting foot-to-ass for his country, and expected the same of his fellow countrymen. A true leader with America’s best interests at heart.”
Aye!
“What does reach out and adapt mean, exactly? Look more like democrats and basically toss conservatism under the bus?”
No! We have to define what conservatism is to the masses, instead of letting our enemies define us.
“Maybe I don’t understand this because I’m more of a Reagan conservative with a libertarian stripe, not necessarily a social conservative. In that light, Friedman is still quite relevent to today’s world.”
Actually we are not far apart.
“I’ll probably be flamed for this one, but I think that in some respects we took social conservatisim too far, and perhaps that’s why people look at ‘conservatives’ as... what you said:”
“Right now we are portrayed as white christian homo haters who’d rather molest kids at church or attack some minority than eat our red meat dinners.”
I agree. With you and your point. Instead of the “homo haters” as the left is so successfully painting us, we have to define what we are...like Chuck Heston said “I recognize homosexuality, but I dont celebrate it.”
Even Jesse Ventura(whom I dont like) had 2 great lines when a special interest group was trying to force a free college initiative past him.
“Giving away 2 years of college will turn a higher learning institute into the 13th and 14th grade”
“You dont want people to pay for this, because then you will have to pay for it for the rest of your lives....Dont ever forget,
If the government is going to do it for you
they are going to do it TO you!”
That’s just an example.
We could talk about taxes, guns, the evils of our world enemies,....
Example....socialism sounds GREAT! But here’s how it reall works(or doesn’t) and talk about Canada, and Europe.
We hear about “racial profiling” and wire tapping” but we can point to how the FBI used those tools to stop obama from getting slaughtered, not two weeks ago.
The leftys are tapping into the sincerity of our younger generations then twisting it into bad.
“Dont you want to make the world a better place?”
Sure!
“then recycle glass!” But first we need tax money to build the recycle plants and punative laws for those who done cooperate.
Whereas I’d ask “why recycle glass?” “Is the world running out of sand?”
Is that making sense?
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.