Posted on 01/21/2013 9:48:38 PM PST by ReformationFan
For some years now, we have been told about a major division within American conservatism: fiscal conservatives vs. social conservatives.
This division is hurting conservatism and hurting America -- because the survival of American values depends on both fiscal and social conservatism. Furthermore, the division is logically and morally untenable. A conservative conserves all American values, not just economic ones.
By "social conservatism," I am referring to the second and third components of what I call the American Trinity -- liberty, "In God We Trust" and "E Pluribus Unum."
It is worth noting that a similar bifurcation does not exist on the left. One never hears the term "fiscal liberals." Why not? Because those who consider themselves liberals are liberal across the board -- fiscally and socially.
The left understands that values are a package. Apparently, many conservatives -- libertarians, for example -- do not. They think that we can sustain liberty while ignoring God and religion and ignoring American nationalism and exceptionalism.
It is true that small government and liberty are at the heart of the American experiment. But they are dependent on two other values: a God-based religious vigor in the society and the melting pot ideal.
Or, to put it another way, small government and fiscal conservatism will not survive the victory of social leftism.
The Founding Fathers made clear that liberty is dependent upon not only small government but also society's affirming God-based values. Not having imbibed the Enlightenment foolishness that people are basically good, the founders understood that in order for a society to prosper without big government, its citizens have to hold themselves accountable to something other than -- higher than -- the brute force of the state. That something is God and the Judeo-Christian religions that are its vehicle.
(Excerpt) Read more at jewishworldreview.com ...
That was put very well. It took me far more words. Thanks.
Your liberal rants and war against conservatism grows tiresome.
Economic conservative voters are the social conservatives, massively, and overwhelmingly.
You social liberals are massively and overwhelmingly economically liberal voters and democrats.
You need to be trying to move social liberals to the right, not trying to move the conservatives to the left.
Romney headed the ticket. He was the public face of the Republican Party. Some of us predicted that running a liberal — and face it, we ALL knew he was a liberal — would lead to a ticket with no coattails. And we were right.
Too, the GOP continuing to stack the primary process with states who either don’t vote Republican for President (Iowa) and states generally but not always inclined to moderation (New Hampshire) doesn’t help either.
The goal should be more conservative candidates at all levels, but the top of the ticket is most important.
Well, maybe we’re not that far apart. Given the state of our culture, I don’t expect the electorate to vote for smaller government anytime soon. And if they did, the politicians and bureaucrats would see to it that the the government would continue to grow. Even Reagan could only slow it. Then they would make sure that the next generation was dumbed down even further.
Then I'm a socon of that latter kind. You may be right that the former kind are in the minority - but they sure do seem to make the most noise.
right-left, these are crackpots or at least they present themselves as when it was critical. You cant win elections or even issues saying stupid stuff on TV.
I posted similar when Mitt did it.
What good is electing lib Dems ?? How many unborn will they save?
He was more than liberal. This is just not the right time for super rich Republicans saying ‘elect me because a tax cut for me is good for you too’, especially when the party wants to cut spending. There was no reason to believe that line would go over well outside of some bright red states. That is the irony.
Romney had multiple problems, life isnt as simple as its portrayed on talk radio.
And Romney didnt cause Akin’s probs, he did that to himself.
Rove said he was 100% sure that Romney would beat O.
So I briefly turned on Hannity’s radio program yesterday and he introduces Rove as ‘the architect’ LOL
Man that Hannity is dumb!
If you read what I wrote in it’s entirety, instead of whatever you did do, the answers that you are looking for are there.
Pretty sure none of your projections are in there. Pretty sure.
Also had the problem that in 2011 there were all these other candidates who spent all their time beating up on each other until there were only 2+Romney left.
And you couldn't even get agreement here on who to pick, none of them stood out.
And there were also make believe candidates who had no intention of running. Right there that was a early sign of coming disaster.
Libertarianism is anti-conservative, so that is hardly something that conservatism would embrace.
You’ve raised some good points for discussion but I’m viewing the position as overreaching in the government’s role.
The problem could be that the founding fathers did not imagine society would get to the point it has. What would they say about it if they came back today to survey the situation?
Seriously, You need to be trying to move social liberals to the right, not trying to move the conservatives to the left.
If you support us conservatives on our economic issues then you need to go out there and try and persuade your fellow social liberals to start voting republican, like we do.
How are libertarians "anti-God"?
Let me finish for you:
“I like Palin, but..
no way in hell is she really running”
The make believe run was fun though, sure fooled many suckers.
“Libertarianism is anti-conservative”
That’s your opinion.
What’s FACT is that most Libertarians embrace small government principles.
Looking at the last two elections, it would make sense to form coalitions where they can be formed; the goal of a small, limited government is a building block to unite anti-RAT factions is a great one to focus on.
IOW, it’s called “strategy”.
If you are a religious person, can you link me to some threads showing that?
It isn’t my opinion, it is a stone cold fact, that is why they don’t just call themselves conservatives.
What sense does it make to ‘win’ and abandon what we stand for?
Enjoy being part of a political party that will be extinct. Please go argue with someone else.
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.