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 ...
I’ve reread your original post very carefully - you said “liberals” were treasonous and unpatriotic.
On that, I’m sure we can all agree. No argument there.
My big fear is that the likes of RiF, gost2, Lightbeam and yourself think everyone who doesn’t think like you is a “liberal” - and this means probably 80% of the country.
Can we agree on maybe 5-10% are truly treasonous and unpatriotic - Murtha, the entire State Dept, Episcopalians (only joking - or am I ??!!), Randy Rhodes, Pelosi, Barney Frank, Hillary & Bill of course, Michelle Obama, Al Franken, Michael Moore ?
Our problem is that if we extend our term “liberal” (ergo treasonous and unpatriotic) too much further, we start to cut into potential voters. Potential voters don’t respond favourably to such terms, in my experience.
I want power - I want it because I believe it’s in the long-term interests of conservatism. If we need trim the message a bit this year, so be it.
G’day P,
Much as I admire your taste in Japanese cinema, your post is making no sense to me.
Why do you think the GOP should be doing well in New England, New Jersey and New York. They’re full of liberals - unless you think the GOP is liberal ?
I’m confused - is it me or you ?!
“The huge debt means that our country is becoming owned by foreigners. It means that we are paying for the arming of China. Debt is not irrelevant.”
True, dat.
Conservatives who believe Americans are best-placed to run the US economy should be seriously worried about the sheer volume of sovereign wealth fund money which has entered the US economy in recent years.
The increasingly footloose nature of international capital flows allied to a historically weak dollar (caused predominantly by a massive spike in oil prices, a collossal balance of payments deficit, and an explosion in goverment debt servicing requirements), has caused an exponential growth in foreign ownership of US assets.
Can’t you hear that huge sucking sound, like a vacuum cleaner - that’s the Chinese buying US assets. Wanna restructure your US business ? Well, actually, it’s not a US business any more, we need to ask the Chinese about that - they own 30% of our stock.........
The most under-reported tragedy of the Bush years. American business should be owned by Americans - no Ifs, no Buts.
Mr P,
Serious question for you - would you prefer a moderate Republican (eg Sphincter) or a conservative Rat in power ?
Think hard, my FRiend, before you answer that one.
PS - and Neither is not an option - remember, in Mississippi - MISSISSIPPI, for crying out loud, a Republican lost.
On that, my FRiend, I concur.
Flag-burning - Nope
Bible-burning - Nope
Homosexuality - Nope
Evolution - Hmm - I think this one may be a stretch - look, I think evolutionists can be arrogant SOB’s who don’t have all the answers, but calling anyone who teaches it in schools “treasonous and unpatriotic” is simply not smart right now, when we need all the votes we can get.
I agree that anyone teaching flag and bible burning in schools is treasonous and unpatriotic however.
“KJV is the true verbal plenary inspiration as delivered by the Original Authors”.
Sorry, FRiend, I’ve studied theology, and this statement is drivel.
The original authors wrote in Hebrew and Koine Greek (with a smattering of Aramaic).
In fact, most of the Pentateuch wasn’t even originally written down - it was passed down orally.
What the heck is “true verbal plenary inpiration” ??!!
I call BS.
Megadittos again, my FRiend
“Catholic doctrine is hopelessly corrupt”.
“Of course, sabbath-keeping isn’t on the GOP platform, which is a shame and a scandal”
Wow - just wow !
Good job you’re such a good judge of what is and isn’t corrupt - I thought someone as holy as you would think that was God’s job alone ?
Have you thought about setting up your own political party to further the cause of your peculiar brand of Christianity ? I don’t think the GOP is planning your theocratic putsch any time soon.
If you're not, an ideological faction is like a plumber or an electrician, someone you call in when you have trouble, but don't necessarily want hanging around afterwards.
The bad news is that the public doesn't always need you. The good news is that they will at some point again in the future, when something else goes wrong around the house.
Roosevelt left behind quite a mess with the Communists, so the country called in the Republicans after the war. Although the modern conservative movement didn't exist then, a lot of those Republicans were very conservative.
When Eisenhower got in, the country mended some things that had gone wrong. But in time the conservative message got on people's nerves. It involved too many accusations that others were soft on Communism, too much sectional antipathy, and too little attention to problems like civil rights.
So the country let us go and tried the liberals. After enough time passed Democrats and liberals screwed up the country so badly that America welcomed the conservatives back.
It's like that in politics. If people think they need you, they'll call you. If they think you're just hanging around, you don't get invited in.
Jim,
Every time I read one of your posts, I become less certain that the conservative movement has lost it’s collective mind.
And that comment goes for the rest of you reprobates I’ve copied in !!
Well said!
Bears repeating
“See my point? The GOP is the Dem party of the 70s. In 20 years, will Republicans sound like the Daily Kos bolsheviks of today?
No thanks, include me out. I WANT SMALL GOVERNMENT.”
Well, we keep being told that the key to victory for the GOP is to dump the social conservatives and appeal to "moderate" voters by fielding candidates who are fiscally conservative, but on social issues follow a pro-abortion, pro-open borders, pro-homosexual agenda line. My point was that there are many states where the GOP long ago dumped the religious right and fielded candidates of that type. It doesn't work. Those states now vote Democrat more than they did twenty-five years ago when Reagan was president.
Furthermore, they don't even get the economic conservatism because a liberal social culture is going to have lots of "aggrieved" groups making demands. Look at California. Governor Arnold is now being held up to us as a prototype candidate who ran as a fiscal conservative but a social liberal. The result? The GOP in the state is deader than ever and the state is bleeding red with insane spending and the demand for more taxes.
I've repeatedly asked people here to name one region where the GOP was dying, but by moving to the left on social issues it revived and became competitive again. There is no such place. It just doesn't happen.
The reason is that no matter how far to the left the GOP goes, the Dems define them as being on the "far right" and the culture simply shifts to the left to match the new description. Some conservatives can't figure out why the left is so filled with hate toward Bush when he's a moderate Republican overall, and is outright liberal on some things such as amnesty. The reason is that leftists view any move to the left by the GOP as an opportunity to drive the nation even further to the left. So rather than commending Bush, they scream and yell that he's a right-wing extremist and a fascist and so forth. If Arlen Specter was president they'd say the same thing.
The practical effect is that anytime the GOP moves to the left on an issue, their position gets redefined as the extreme right position, and we're told that we must move still further to the left on that issue to reach the center. This is why the nations of the West keep culturally moving to the left, why government keeps getting bigger and bigger and bigger.
I’m confused - is it me or you ?!
We'll see! :-)
That one’s easy. I’d prefer a conservative Democrat. I’m a conservative first, a Republican second.
“Newt is. He’s the only true conservative out there.”
Yeah, that’s why he made a video with Nancy Pelosi warning about global warming.
I think we have lost track of our guiding philosophy. Some of the problem comes from failure to remember some fundamental principles, such as taking the world as it actually is, and trying to use principle and reason as guides for what to do. Some of it is failure to recognize inherrent limits in the power of even so great a country as the US to affect events on the other side of the world, or even here at home. Reasonable questions are countered with inquisition of doctrinal purity (we see a lot of that here).
Unfortunately, the desire for limits on government power, a belief which ought to underpin and unite the conservative movement, gives way to a list of exceptions, and with each falling off from the true faith, another principal is abandoned until we sound like liberals wanting to use the central state to push our ideology and suppress dissenters.
The terrorist problem has turned into a terrorist boogeyman with terrorists replacing communists hiding in our closets, under our beds and riddling our state-department. Regan demonstrated a rational strategic response to the threat of communism (we win, they lose, which turned out to be a sound strategic analysis). Terrorism and the response is likewise susceptible to rational strategic analysis, but we conservatives have abandoned rational discourse in favor of overwheening government bureaucracies that are actually incapable of doing much to address real problems. Tossing out the Taliban was the right thing to do, but Iraq has become a new Vietnam in the sense that we don't regard it as a strategic question, but a political litmus test, and if you question ends and means you are a drug crazed hippy. Global warming is an open scientific question that can be studied and addressed in a scientific manner, but we respond as it is an ideological debate on the order of Calvinism vs Catholicism.
It all returns to philosphy. Do we have one, and if not where are we going to get one, and how are we going to sell it.
What are you doing in November ? Can I vote for you ?
“My big fear is that the likes of RiF, gost2, Lightbeam and yourself think everyone who doesn’t think like you is a “liberal” - and this means probably 80% of the country.”
The error here is that the principles and values which define my conservatism—individual liberty, choosing right over wrong, the right to private property, self defense, God’s dominion over us all (the most important), the absolute value of human life—are shared by greater than 90% of Americans. The big problem is that many of them, especially democrats, are also useful idiots.
So my point is that almost all Americans think like me, but most of them are not vigilant so they don’t have occasion to be vocal. That’s where the difference lies, not on the political spectrum.
>>>>Yeah, that’s why he made a video with Nancy Pelosi warning about global warming.
You’re clearly a deep thinker and have done a lot of research on Newt’s proposals.
NOT.
Well, I killed this thread stone dead didn’t I ?
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.