Posted on 05/17/2008 2:03:48 AM PDT by MartinaMisc
It was fun while it lasted.
The guaranteed election of a non-conservative President on November 4th represents the end of the conservative movement in America. Neither Barack Obama nor John McCain stands for Reagan principles in any way, shape, manner or form—and after twenty years of non-conservative Presidents, it’s obvious that the Reagan era will never, ever return.
The conservative movement has been in the hospital for nearly two decades. Once George H. W. Bush—a good, moral man, but not a true conservative—entered the White House, conservative principles slowly but surely began to leave. Yes, he gave us a victory in the Gulf War and Clarence Thomas, but he also gave us a broken no-new-taxes promise and David Souter. Bush was more Rockefeller than Goldwater, during a time when America and the world needed more of the latter and less of the former.
Bill Clinton replaced Bush in 1993 and, during his eight years in office, stole certain conservative concepts (NAFTA, welfare reform) and destroyed others (judicial restraint, the rule of law). Clinton moved the country in a secular direction, helping to make the 1990s as culturally loose as the 1980s were culturally traditional. Clinton also seemed obsessed with, among other things, promoting the notion that the Reagan era was a fluke, and that (despite his famous 1996 claim) big government was a permanent reality.
(Excerpt) Read more at humanevents.com ...
The center of conservatism is values. Values in this nation flow from Christianity. Forget Judaism as most Jews are now JINOs. Honest healthy fine values is what turns folks towards conservative principles. A few of you got here from fiscal conservatism. Yes the Constitution is the defining document but it was written from Christian principles and ideas. Flawed as it was in its inception by compromise with the evil slavers.
Even IF you disagree with me ... toss out Christian conservatives and never win another election ever again. You have to get along with us if you want power. If power for its own sake is what you want ... the demonrats are much better at that. Power mongers have ruled the world for most of its history in all of its kingdoms and dictatorships. But a Republic can only survive by uniting factions. The big division is between values oriented folks and scumbags.
The problem the conservative movement has is that we let scumbags pretending to be values people take over leadership of the movement. The only hope of success is to patch it back together. Not rip it apart even more.
>>>>>>You didn’t respond to my posts yesterday that Newt’s goose is cooked.
Oh, that.
Let’s take the story that “Newt served divorce papers on his wife while she was in the cancer ward.” That’s a Newt-hater favorite. Yes?
You need to ask yourself some questions, starting with “In what state are spouses allowed to personally serve divorce papers on their spouses?”
Hint: none. Officers of the court serve papers. Plaintiffs and defendants do not.
Now, how much else of that story is wrong? Much of it, I’ve done the research (e.g. the “divorce papers” were a piece of yellow legal paper with some questions Newt had scribbled about their impending divorce, by the way after many months of legal separation).
The same thing is true with the other Newt tales I’ve examined.
Yet the hillbillies and Neanderthals are eager to savor them.
Whatever you do, remember to conceal the distinction between adult stem cells and embryonic stem cells while attempting to make Rush look bad.
(I would remind people that adult stem cells really work and are morally uncontroversial, while embryonic stem cell research involves creating human life and then destroying it in the name of research.)
>>>>>Now, I’ve admitted I’m a hillbilly from the Appalachians. I also went to the source document to back up my statements. Your arguments are invalid.
Good for you. You carry that mantle very well.
Your extracts are utterly unconvincing. I don’t see one word indicting Newt of anything along the lines you claim.
I know that you WANT to see something there, but it just isn’t.
Conservatism is always about principles, except for those who wish to redefine conservatism.
>>>>We probably will form our own party. Forty million voters. Deal with that fringer.
Good. You’ve just about worn out your welcome.
Fifty percent of Evangelicals vote Democrat. That’s no surprise, but it bodes ill for your “40 million”.
I think the jam is going to the guys who can find the middle seam. I don’t have any dispute with Limbaugh’s brand of coservatism. But I fear that the bellicose nature of his posturing causes as more to be turned off. I do not think that was the case a few years ago, I believe it is true today.
The last day I listened to Neil Borcht and wrote a letter to the local station informing them of my boycott of the station as long as Neil was on it he went into a rant against Christians.
Given your position I have to wonder what planet you live on. Christians who believe in their values and vote conservative solely on that basis make up the huge core of the movement. WE outnumber all the other factions combined by 100%. There is NO conservative movement without us.
PERIOD !
Um, LS, you misspoke. Check out the presidential election result maps on this interesting site: http://presidentelect.org/e1880.html
For the first couple elections after the War Between The States some Southern states voted Republican. During that period, ex-Confederates had been disenfranchised and/or in some states blacks outnumbered whites. Efforts at preventing blacks from voting started in the 1870s if not earlier. By 1880 the South voted solidly Democrat. That continued until 1948 or 1952 (depending on how you interpret Strom Thurmond's 1948 electoral votes) with the exception of some Southern states voting Republican against Al Smith in 1928.
If they are voting democrat they aren’t Christians let alone evangelicals. They may go to church. They may think they are Christian but no lover of Jesus could vote for abortion, homosexual ascendancy, taxation theft, liberal life hating judges and Teddy-sick-MFer-Kennedy!
I doubt your statistics anyway. Maybe you are talking about Rev Wright ‘christians’. HAH! If they are christians I’m a Moslem.
“If they are voting democrat they aren’t Christians let alone evangelicals. They may go to church. They may think they are Christian but no lover of Jesus could vote for abortion, homosexual ascendancy, taxation theft, liberal life hating judges and Teddy-sick-MFer-Kennedy!”
I must agree with you.
But there’s one problem with your position. The liberals are indeed Stalinists who are actively engaged in destroying the traditions and institutions which made this country great.
They denigrate our military and our troops and the Marxist press lets them get away with it. They leak secrets to the enemy and the press lets them get away with it. It goes on and on.
The behavior of the liberals is treasonous and to respond with anything less than bellicosity is unpatriotic.
You’ll note I mentioned nothing about cancer or divorce papers. I think it’s the 28% approval rating and extremely high negatives that make him a poor choice for us conservatives.
I agree with you, he’s a sharp man brimful with talent and ideas - shame that the people we need to convince in November won’t see that - they’ll switch off.
Perhaps I’m wrong - perhaps his electric oratory will win over the masses to conservatism. I’m just saying I doubt it.
Exactly my thinking for a very long time. Limbaugh is an radio jock, who just so happened that he understands the conservative movement, the fight between left and right and accordingly uses it to advance his own agenda, namely "making money".
He has no desire to promote conservative legislators, or deliberate bad laws, discuss pertaining issues none of that.He always emphasize the show is about him and his views, and accordingly the use of bombastic statements and musical parodies. It is a SHOW folks!
I never took him seriously, but sadly a whole lot of "skulls full of mush" took it at the face value and played his game.
I must give it to Rush, he is one hell of a good BS'er.
i think that is my point, it is about principles. Limbaugh is an entertainer who has great value through the power of his personality and his microphone. So, we know Limbaugh always places the importance of personality before principle.
So how’re you going to work with us conservatives who aren’t socons to stop our coalition fracturing ?
It takes two to tango - the intransigence of many socons is infuriating and is driving moderates away - you know, those people who put Reagan over the edge in ‘80, and Bush over the edge in ‘00 and ‘04.
You’re right, we need you, but we also need non-socon moderates in order to govern. How far are you willing to go to throw these people a bone ?
Conservative values are too precious to lose to a fractured coalition where one party refuses to compromise.
Exactamundo - that’s twice in 2 days from me, Spatso !!
Reason he wasn’t so polarising a few years ago is that the nation was at war and we rightly rallied around the CiC. That tide’s gone out now, and this belligerant rhetoric is revealed as the swimmer who was swimming naked.
Gotta tack to the middle this year - it’s about survival, not doctrinal purity.
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.