Posted on 11/20/2012 8:42:54 AM PST by Scooter100
I am wondering about the structure of a third "Constitutional" party. Would it be better to form a party exclusively on a fiscal issues basis? What would be the pros and cons of taking social issues completely off the table? I mean, are there really enough "social issues" in the text of the Constitution itself to warrant making them a permanent policy of a new party and subsequently risking vicious debate and division? I guess I am thinking of the inevitability of Conservatives locking antlers with the "socially" left wing of the Libertarians", who are otherwise fiscally right wing. Shouldn't social issues be contained closer to the people, i.e., at the state/local levels?
Exodus 18:21 Moreover thou shalt provide out of all the people able men, such as fear God, men of truth, hating covetousness; and place such over them, to be rulers of thousands, and rulers of hundreds, rulers of fifties, and rulers of tens:
I can't trust any man that is blind to the duty to protect the life an unborn person to give the slightest damn about protecting my liberty or pursuit of happiness.
There's that claim of ownership, and the attempt to arbitrate what is and is not conservative.
The premise of the article is a question of whether there needs to be a party dedicated to fiscal conservativism or whether there would be room for consideration of social conservative issues along with it.
You have effectively answered that you if you give them room at the table, they will claim all of it.
Multiple conversations with self-described social conservatives about the federal drug war and the abuse of the Commerce Clause they claim as authority to prosecute it say otherwise.
Hard? Try impossible. By all means run someone who fears God next time.
You can whine, but you are doing what they left has been doing for 60 years, trying to break America from it’s conservatism, and degrade the culture, and the nation and replace our traditional social conservatism with European style liberalism.
Your social issues positions, dove tail with the left’s, and that ain’t right.
I don’t want a non-secular public school. I want people be given the choice of not having to pay to support secular schools.
I actually want government out of the education business altogether.
It is not possible to be fiscally conservative without being socially conservative.
Social liberals have to break the bank to fund all of the liberal entitlement programs, freebies and give-aways that coincide with their bleeding-heart liberal views.
The fact is that there is no such thing as a person who is truly fiscally conservative and socially liberal.
If I started a political party, they would all be social conservatives. Social conservatives = fiscal conservatives.
Social conservatives because they believe in limited government, independence, self-sufficiency, free enterprise, property rights, hard-work, paying your fair share and pulling your weight. If a party is full of nothing but true social conservatives, you will have a party full of fiscal conservatives as well.
And I'm sure you're aware that the coalition was built up within the context of the Republican Party. Reagan understood the futility of third parties, and took over the Republican party.
Everything I stated (and could have added more), are what the socialist/marxist/democRATs (pardon the redundancy), are doing/proposing. Their policies are detrimental to the nation. It's our job to educate, and market to the middle how conservative policies will insure the nation's survival. Sans our last two presidential candidates (who were liberal/progressive), academia and the media must be negated to give a real conservative candidate a chance to win.
The margin of 0bama's victory was less than 2% of the electorate. Disregarding voting irregularities and electioneering, that's a very close election. Imho, social issues were not the determining factor, Baraq O'Clause was.
Have a Happy Thanksgiving.
5.56mm
Put up, or shut up.
I believe in all those things too. At the same time, I have been an atheist for all my sixty years. Can I be a social conservative??
Allow me to ask you for a third time: how does your strategy promise success within the Republican Party where 2008 and 2012 failed?
Yes, Reagan succeeded. He was a Conservative who gained control of the party apparatus. I do not see such success possible in today’s Republican Party.
You evidently do. So, how do you do it?
You don't know what my "social issue positions" are. All I've said about them is that there is no enumerated power in the Constitution for the federal government to tell me what they must be.
Ever hear the old saying about why one should not mud wrestle with a pig??
That’s false on it’s face that religion determines when life is formed. With new technology were saving premmies at an earlier rate. Also advances in sonograms make it clear that this is a human life waaaay before birth. The point is moot however this is a pro-life website period. If you want to discuss the morality of abortion your not welcome here.
Not being able to have as structured discussion might be the objective.
I also have a strong steak of libertarianism....I have a aversion to authority whether it comes from so-cons moralizing to me or the lefts nanny statism.
For one thing Im a single guy and really don’t want to get married and enjoy single females there companionship and sleeping with them and if some soc-con wants to come at me with finger wagging I’d just as soon break it. Now that said I’ve never voted for a Democrat. At least the so-cons are fair. They will reason an argument and put it to a vote. Unlike the left which operates in the shadows writing rules and regulations by faceless burocrats
We are in favor of: guns, drugs, fast cars, free love (if our wives don't find out), a sound dollar, and a strong military with spiffy uniforms. There are thousands of people in America who feel this way, especially after three or four drinks. If all of us would unite and work together, we could give this country. . . well, a real bad hangover."
Ha. I’m a PJ fan. “Holidays in Hell” is a fun read. ..and his work with the National Lampoon was classic. I’ve been wondering what’s happened to the left lately. How they used to be non -conformists with a strong libertarion streak. Live and let live and all that and now have become moralistic little fiends who want you to pay for there condoms, what car you drive,what you can eat or smoke, what type of healthcare you get it just goes on
I'm not saying my strategy promises success.
I'm saying your strategy guarantees failure, for the reasons I've listed in prior posts.
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.