Big tent needed for conservatives of every stripe

American Conservative Union | 06/03/03 | David Keene

[Mo1]

Good article, and I agree with the author's conclusions. If we split up because of relatively minor issues, while ignoring the 'big picture', it's certain that liberals will win.

Yep!!

[He Rides A White Horse]

Burkeman1, if I were someone who understood propaganda (laughing), and I was a Democratic spin doctor, and I had my choice of who to put forth, I would go with Lieberman if I were them.

[He Rides A White Horse]

..................bttt, bud.

[Mo1]

I may be wrong, and I don't have any problem going out on a limb............Kerry isn't going to be the problem for conservatives.............it will be Lieberman. Joe "I Voted for Iraqi Liberation" Lieberman.

IMO .. it's Hillary that will be the problem .. remember she didn't jump into the 2000 Senate election until Feb, 2000

What's the deadline for entering the 2004 elections?

[He Rides A White Horse]

...haven't heard too much from him lately, have we?............if I were his handler, the public wouldn't be hearing too much from him right now either.

No, I would be telling him, "Let's see how the situation in Iraq plays out. Joe, as your advisor, I don't want you to say anything about it right now"

Wouldn't you do the same?

[He Rides A White Horse]

IMO .. it's Hillary that will be the problem

Hillary needs to capture the swing voters; I think people are on to her. IMHO.

[rdb3]

That's why the current fight between folks who like to characterize themselves as "neo-conservatives" ...

Run-time error!

I find few, if any, who truly consider themselves to be "neo-conservatives." However, there is more than a few who love to throw that term around like confetti. Oftentimes, these are the ones who have the weakest arguments.

All in all, good piece of writing.

[He Rides A White Horse]

I think Hillary has overplayed the 'Evita' hand. I'm not crying for her............and I don't think Argentina (America) is either.

[Amelia]

Maybe some of "them" are liberal after all. Don't they walk in agreement with the far - looney - left?

I've seen increasing agreement between the far left and the far right....it's a little scary.

[He Rides A White Horse]

..............may be kind of trite..........long time, no see.

[billbears]

Well, if they don't get the votes, they aren't going to enact anything, conservative or otherwise. And if the Democrats get the votes, we know nothing conservative is going to happen.

And so real conservatives are asked to compromise again and again with our votes so Republicans can get in and push their agenda. Tell me, say the Republicans con a few on the left, gain the votes they need on promises, that as 'conservatives', you think they wouldn't keep to the new constituency. Exactly how many times will they be able to con these moderates into voting for them if they never pass moderate agenda items? One or two times before these moderates got to the Democratic side?

And what happens to real conservatives that vote year after year for these compromisers all on the promise that one day we'll see a conservative agenda? Are we just supposed to keep voting Republican as the President signs CFR (which hasn't been overturned), the Patriot Act, calls for extension on AWB (and I don't care that it may never reach his desk, he called for it and a conservative wouldn't even call for it), give $15 billion for AIDS in Africa (more than Clinton suggested), and put another industry on the government dole for $2 billion to come up with a car that no one wants? Never mind this new foreign policy brought to us by the fine folks at PNAC

Oh, but it's all strategery. I forgot....

[He Rides A White Horse]

Oh, but it's all strategery

It is about 'strategery'............but there is a such thing as a Pyhrric victory.

[Mo1]

I think Hillary has overplayed the 'Evita' hand.

I agree .. but don't under estimate that women ..

The independant voters will be the key to the 2004 elections

[He Rides A White Horse]

And we were a rambunctious lot. There were libertarians, anarchists, objectivists, social conservatives (we called them "traditionalists" in those days), Burkeans and all sorts of anti-communists.

...this author curiously leaves out those of religious persuasion..............

[Amelia]

And which are you?

Probably a combination, with emphasis on free market?

[He Rides A White Horse]

Big tent needed for conservatives of every stripe

Look at the title of this article, and look at the 'types' of conservatives the author lists; surprisingly, those of a religious flavor are left out.

Which has me wondering .

[He Rides A White Horse]

I'm getting a funny feeling as to whom this author feels (in his mind) are causing problems in the 'big tent'.........................

[He Rides A White Horse]

........care to hazard a guess?...............I will.

[sasportas]

Bravo, ohiopyle.

Reading though the posts on this string I was beginning to wonder if anybody would mention "abortion, pornography, homosexuality, fornication, adultery, blasphemy and all sorts of sexual perversions" in relation to conservatism. Thanks for your post.

I agree with you, if you support the above you are not a true conservative. By definition, you are not a conservative, a true conservative "conserves." He conserves the family values that have made this country what it is.

No matter if they call themselves Republican, if thay support the above they are helping to destroy the fabric that holds society together. They are subversives, not conservatives.

[billbears]

Yes, many more wins like this, especially on the domestic front, and the conservative movement will be lost. But the Republicans will be in charge eh?