A Return to Triangulation (libertarion vs social right)

National Review Online ^ | 10/25/06 | David Boaz & David Kirby

[Blackirish]

As the Republican base fragments and Christian conservatives consider a “fast” from politics, the polling data point to a mid-term Republican thumping. Less than two weeks from now, Republicans will begin their post-mortem soul searching. And as the corpses of their House and Senate majorities grow cold, so should Karl Rove’s 2006 campaign strategy.

[Beagle8U]

"It's sad when when so called conservatives view limited government and personal responsibility...the building blocks of Freedom childish."

I had to leave for a few minuets, but I think I'm the only one that used the term "Childish" in this thread.

I used that in the context of those that call for protest votes and other silly ideas to punish Republicans for not being conservative enough.

Your comment about conservatives seems rather strange when one considers that you are always pushing Rudy Julie-Annie, or is it McCain, Romney?

In the DUck room they would likely think that is conservative, but you'll have a hard time preaching that BS here as being "A true conservative".

[Fiddlstix]

My browser has a new homepage today.

What? No Opus?

[Blackirish]

I used that in the context of those that call for protest votes and other silly ideas to punish Republicans for not being conservative enough.

---

I agree with that. Sitting out an election pouting and letting a dim win is childish.

However I believe a libertarian streak is a healthy streak of true conservatism. If I'm not mistaken your on the social right and you believe your the true conservative. So I guess were two guys that vote Repub but don't think the other is a real conservative....

but throwing out the DU card is lazy.

[Beagle8U]

"but throwing out the DU card is lazy."

I didn't throw out your DU card, I said you can push Rudy Julie-Annie in the DUck room and be the king conservative there.

Nobody but left wing Libertarians would buy a Rudy ticket.

[Coyoteman]

Luddites abound ===> Placemarker <===

[Jim Robinson]

If there is a disconnect, it's on your end. Here's how I describe FR in a statememt I made and linked to from our home page:

"As a conservative site, Free Republic is pro-God, pro-life, pro-family, pro-Constitution, pro-Bill of Rights, pro-gun, pro-limited government, pro-private property rights, pro-limited taxes, pro-capitalism, pro-national defense, pro-freedom, and-pro America. We oppose all forms of liberalism, socialism, fascism, pacifism, totalitarianism, anarchism, government enforced atheism, abortionism, feminism, homosexualism, racism, wacko environmentalism, judicial activism, etc. We also oppose the United Nations or any other world government body that may attempt to impose its will or rule over our sovereign nation and sovereign people. We believe in defending our borders, our constitution and our national sovereignty."

"Free Republic is private property. It is not a government project, nor is it funded by government or taxpayer money. We are not a publicly owned entity nor are we an IRS tax-free non-profit organization. We pay all applicable taxes on our income. We are not connected to or funded by any political party, news agency, or any other entity. We sell no merchandise, product or service, and we offer no subscriptions or paid memberships. We accept no paid advertising or promotions. We are funded solely by donations (non tax deductible gifts) from our readers and participants."

"We aggressively defend our God-given and first amendment guaranteed rights to free speech, free press, free religion, and freedom of association, as well as our constitutional right to control the use and content of our own personal private property. Despite the wailing of the liberal trolls and other doom & gloom naysayers, we feel no compelling need to allow them a platform to promote their repugnant and obnoxious propaganda from our forum. Free Republic is not a liberal debating society. We are conservative activists dedicated to defending our rights, defending our constitution, defending our republic and defending our traditional American way of life."

"Our God-given liberty and freedoms are not negotiable."

If you're trying to make it into something else, that's your problem not mine.

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1103363/posts

[metmom]

If you don't like it, leave. It's not your site and JR is free to run HIS site as HE sees fit.

[denydenydeny]

The f-word ("fundie") is always a favorite insult of leftists, and it always makes me bristle when someone on (in the broadest sesne) "our" side uses it. To use the phrase at all is always a red flag for me.

I'm more of a a small-l libertarian than a social conservative, but I do not get at all this concept that the two points of view are somehow inimical.

How does being a social conservative mean that you favor a "nanny state"? I don't know of ANYONE that I would consider a social conservative--other than the numerically insiginificant "crunchy cons"--who isn't also a small-government advocate.

It's the social conservatives, for example, who are in the forefront of homeschooling and the revolution against the education bureaucracy.

And any libertarian who supports the grotesque expansion of judicial fiat power that is Roe v. Wade is a HYPOCRITE, whatever his views on abortion are. Roe v. Wade is an abomination on the law, and it should be a natural point of agreement between libertarians and social conservatives.

There are many more examples. In short, anyone who thinks that libertarianism and social conservatives are in direct oppostion to each other is either naive or is deliberately trying to sabotage things.

[whattajoke]

And some of you [scientists]are absolutely worthless to the cause of conservatism.

Jim, you've lost me here. Totally and completely lost me. Yes, I inserted the word "scientists" but that's exactly what you are saying - if this post remains longer than 2 minutes then I invite casual readers to back track.

You own the site, you've done a great thing here with it, and I give you all the respect in the world. FR is yours, do with it as you see fit. And, it goes without saying, do with me as you see fit.

I've been 'round these parts for several years now, just lurking for the last two or so. I try to read most of the science threads and as one with two science degrees who works with some fairly high-level math modeling and population dynamics in a real-world job, you've had some VERY impressive people get banned or leave in disgust over the ridiculous anti-science turn FR has taken recently. And that's just sad.

Being a scientist or being interested in science has nothing to do with being liberal or "god-hating" or really anything to do with any religion at all. The DEFINITION of science sticks to the natural world whereas religion is purely supernatural. Scientists don't "hate" God or religion anymore than they may hate purple unicorn fairies. It simply doesn't matter to the science at hand. By the way, the vast majority of scientists are religious people.

Free Republic is a great website. We enjoy it via the internet on computers. These things were created by scientists, many of which, I'm sure, push for smaller gov't, lower taxes, national security, and no illegal immigration. What's so hard to understand about that?

Something tells me, Jim, that when you were diagnosed with MS you not only prayed a lot, you also sought out the best medical care you could find. And you'd have been a fool not to. And you're not a fool, Jim.

Think about that. Take care and keep up the great work.

[grey_whiskers]

Yes, I often get criticized for valuing knowledge over ignorance. My point exactly.

The problem is that by starting from such a tack, you give the impression that anyone who disagrees with you is ignorant, and willfully so. Regardless of the *grounds* of the disagreement. Although I agree, that some of the pro-cre posters are much more strident than others; as indeed, some of the pro-evos are much bigger jerks than others.

And it can be taken (in a certain light) as hinting at the perjorative meaning of "ignorant". NOTE: I don't take it that way, since I think it *holds out hope* for the one who is ignorant.

I think most of the detractors (including Dominic_Harr) are objecting to that last point...

Cheers!

[RunningWolf]

I think Ann's latest book had a much greater impact and influence than any evo will ever credit her for.

Wolf

[whattajoke]

Don't forget homosexuality and global warming. I'm sure the theory of evolution is a great boon to those Marxist theories as well.

Well, I guess we now know where the Mods have been getting their ultimate direction these past few months. I can't for the life of me figure out how ANYONE could confuse the Theory of Evolution with promoting homosexuality. Call me crazy but I would think they are diametrically opposed in the long run.

While my intent in posting to Jim is not to get the boot of martyr myself (hell, I've barely posted for the last 2 yrs), I did want to point out that every liberal troll reading this thread now has a lovely screen shot of FR's owner and founder thoroughly embarrassing himself and conservatism in general. Thanks.

[whattajoke]

I think Ann's latest book had a much greater impact and influence than any evo will ever credit her for.

If by "impact" you mean "deleterious effect upon the conservative cause," then yeah, you're probably right. Goodnight mordo.

[Jim Robinson]

What part of "I have no problem with science" did you not understand? I do, however, have a great problem with the Godless Marxist ACLU influenced big government forcing evolution theory, homosexuality, feminism, whacko environmentalism, earth worship, paganism, even Islamic fascism on our children in public schools while simultaneously trying to remove all mention of God and Christianity from their daily lives. And that is not a theory. That is real life government intrusion, subversion, suppression and denial of freedom and constitutional rights. I think it's a shame that some people on FR are so willing to join forces with the liberals and Marxist ACLU in their efforts to destroy our traditional American way of life.

[Jim Robinson]

By the way, I do not have MS.

[Jim Robinson]

The liberal trolls can bite me. Who cares what they think of me or conservatism?

[grey_whiskers]

I can't for the life of me figure out how ANYONE could confuse the Theory of Evolution with promoting homosexuality.

There are elements of BOTH which consider Christianity as their prime enemy...

And for that matter, you can always take this thread as linking various assaults on conservative culture.

Please, think and read before shooting off your mouth.

Cheers!

[whattajoke]

1. I apologize for the horrible misdiagnosis and I"m glad to hear that.

2. Evolution has nothing in the world to do with homosexuality, feminism, whacko enviromentalism, earth worship, paganism, or Islamic fascism (who are creationists, btw).

And therein lies the problem. Promoting good science (ie, evolution) is simply that, nothing more. To pretend otherwise and invent correlations to real problems in America is disingenuous and serves no purpose.

3. Liberals are too stupid to understand most real science. I don't worry with them too much (in this realm).

[Tench_Coxe]

"The problem is that by starting from such a tack, you give the impression that anyone who disagrees with you is ignorant, and willfully so. Regardless of the *grounds* of the disagreement. Although I agree, that some of the pro-cre posters are much more strident than others; as indeed, some of the pro-evos are much bigger jerks than others."

You have identified the crux of the issue, as far as one group is conerned. Trust me, I've seen certain creo folks posting thing to pick a fight.

There is another aspect here I think is being missed--some of the folks who do have a legimate interest in discussing science, I think IMHO, have been manipulated by a few who get their kicks out of doing so.

[Tench_Coxe]

thing==things (ack)