And that's what's wrong with a lot of the self-proclaimed Tea Party movement.
Let's face it - if you're only for half of conservatism, then you're not for conservatism. Conservatism is a self-contained, all-encompassing worldview, rather than just a "made for the ballot" laundry list of policy positions. Conservatism stands for the rule of law (constitutionalism), fiscal responsibility, strong national defence, AND traditional values because all of these things are interrelated. To only have one or two of them is to merely have a cannibalised shadow of conservatism - and the depth of understanding of the reasoning for why conservatism is what is is simply will not be there. This is ultimately why libertarianism fails as a coherent worldview. They want the freedom, but not, ultimately, the responsibility and moral grounding that must come with it. Our Founders understood that these must go together, though many modern libertarians who claim the Founders as their ideological forebearers do not.
Interrelated yes, but not mutually causative. I'm a conservative because I want to conserve the fundamental natural or negative rights structure of the Constitution - that's it. I believe the Founders well knew of the dangers of going beyond that in specificity, which is why at first they didn't even bother with a Bill of Rights. Fiscal irresponsibility, weak national defense, and the sabotage of traditional values - and more - ALL depend on first defeating natural rights, in order to wield the government as a weapon against the sane expression of these things. Without that fundamental weapon, what doesn't work in life dies out soon, small and naturally, instead of becoming a bloated nightmare run by vicious, violent, lying, hypocritical and ultimately murderous maniacs.
Amen!