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 ...
Your right Limbaugh naked is not a pretty image.
Do you know how offensive you and your kind are with this HS and how many otherwise supportive individuals you send scurrying to the democratic party because of this. There are many threads of conservatism, and your kinds is tolerated and defended by the fiscal conservatives and liberatarians, so long as you keep scripture to your home and your church. We will defend your right to worshop how you choose, but draw the line at your notions of what religious beliefs are supposed to be for the rest of us. Remember, your kind of so-called conservative christianity even has hard time putting up with Catholics and Orthodox Christians.
Your kind are a direct threat to those of us who want to put government in a box, because your kind views the government as a toolkit to enforce your kind of values, in just exactly the same ways that liberals do. You just worship different orthodoxies.
I recognize that some parts of my criticism is unfair. Limbaugh is clear in letting it be known he is primarily a radio personality. It is his listeners who have made him the great interpreter of conservative orthodoxy. It is like democrats suddenly proclaiming John Stewart as their leading spokesperson for party policy.
Limbaugh now presumes to argue that the problem today is that conservative ideology has been diminished. As I said before, I got off the LImbaugh bus in 2006 when he started accusing the Congressional pages as causing the Foley scandal. For weeks it was all people talked about until he went on to pick a fight with Michael J Fox. I don’t have any doubt that this year he will do the same thing regardless of the consequences for Republicans. It is always about Limbaugh.
Well, you have now painted yourself in the box of ignorant uncharitable, unchristian bigots, and I don't know how you get yourself back out of that one. WE are not going to stand in that corner with you and I suggest you spend some time before a mirror or before your god reflecting on the black hatred in your own soul before you go lecturing anyone else here about Christian values.
Newt is not running for anything. Why do folks equate reading Newt's ideas and examining them for merit with a Newt for President move. The real problem with conservatism is that it has become a doctrinaire movement, with no intellectual spark, and no ability to generate and debate ideas for how to solve the country's problems. Orthodoxy was the mark of liberalism and that is how Regan took them down. Our own orthodoxy has sucked the oxygen out of the conservative tent and we are now all brain dead.
It is sad.
Well, there goes the greatness of the US. 2/3 of conservatives don't believe in the orthodoxy of the social conservatives.
well, then you are still ignorant about Ron Paul. Why don't you read his book or visit the vonmises.org website which espouses the economic theories that he espouses.
I would suggest that Ron Paul is not selling his books to skinheads and neo-nazis, none of whom now, or in any past incarnation (Hitler youth, brown shirts, fascists, etc.) have been marked by special literary inclinations.
Oh please. I’m married to a Jew. I’ve spent months in Israel. I don’t hate irreligious Jews or ‘christians’. I just get a bit ticked off when they, standing in THEIR little far corner of so called conservatism pretend that THEY are the main stream. Mainstream of the river flowing straight to hell maybe.
True Christian conservatives are the vast center of the movement. That’s what IS. Enjoy your fantasy.
I know how offensive you libertines find Christ. He irks you to death. I can’t do anything about that. It is you who have splintered the movement. We stand right where we have stood for five hundred years in THIS land. WE formed this government. WE died for it. WE are its only hope. Join us or die (politically).
You just pull those numbers right out of your butt don’t you?
Ooops, too many fingers. 4 hundred years.
You know, every so often we have elections, which are very helpful in figuring out who stands where.
Prior to the 2008 GOP primary elections, members of your "vast center of the movement", who "outnumber all the other factions combined by 100%" were fatmouthing all the time about nominating and then electing Duncan Hunter, or Tom Tancredo, and at last (desperately) Fred Thompson.
Guess what?
On election day, (almost) NOBODY SHOWED UP.
Now, your huge core, vast majority, vast outnumbering center is exposed as 15%, or less, OF THE PARTY OF THE RIGHT. They are ZERO percent of the Democrats.
Yes, it's probably true that the Republicans can't win without you.
But it is a delusion, and one of major proportions, that you can elect a dogcatcher, much less a President, on your own.
>>>>>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 bring that story up (and deconstruct it) because it is one of several that are widely cited even here on FR as reasons to despise Newt and hence his ideas (those also having been reduced to one-line sound bites digestible by the low-IQ Newt haters).
Yet it’s completely false.
As I said, to see Newt work an audience such as that at the Kerry “global warming” debate is a thing to behold. I don’t doubt that Newt began the debate with “high negatives”. At the end he had Kerry eating from his hand, and I’m guessing (from the sound of the audience response) 50 to 70 percent approval down on the floor. Hesitant approval, but approval nonetheless.
I and I think many other conservatives would be willing to give our all for Newt. Is that enough to overcome the impoverished grunting from the Neanderthals and hillbillies? I actually do think so. Also many of them will have abandoned us for a more fundamentalist movement by 2012, perhaps one that indulges their torment and fury over the immoral Newt and his obscene three marriages.
>>>>>But it is a delusion, and one of major proportions, that you can elect a dogcatcher, much less a President, on your own.
On target as always Jim. Great points all, written with precision and insight.
OK you’ve convinced me - sign me up. It’s not like the conservative movement is spoilt for choice right now - the easiest way to to have changed my mind more quickly would have been to ask - ok not Newt, then who ? I’d have had (and have) no answer !!(LOL)
We always knew we’d end up a despised minority. Either we all hang together or we’ll all hang separately.
Your right. I meant for Republican Reconstruction. Sorry.
But he’s not. Stewart is an entertainer who’s using satire and comedy to make serious political points. He’s a Democrat, make no bones about it - he just can’t say so publically.
Rush is a political commentator who happens to be entertaining - that doesn’t make him primarily an entertainer. He’s a powerful conservative voice - no doubt.
>>>>ok not Newt, then who ? I’d have had (and have) no answer !!(LOL)
Chuckle.
Yep. That’s his biggest advantage. He’s the last conservative politician alive.
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.