Posted on 07/01/2022 5:45:05 AM PDT by DoodleBob
In overturning Roe v. Wade, the Supreme Court delivered the right’s biggest single victory ever, and it may spell the end of the conservative movement as we’ve known it.
It was Ronald Reagan who popularized the notion that the conservative movement rested on a fusionist “three-legged stool.” In theory, the three legs were free market economics, national defense and social conservatism. In practice, free market economics meant low taxes and pro-business policies. National defense meant anticommunism and, briefly, the war on terror. Social conservatism covered a lot of territory but the enduring core was opposition to Roe and abortion.
Like anticommunism, “pro-life” was a big tent all its own, including constitutionalists, religious activists, advocates of states’ rights et al. While nearly everyone invoked the “sanctity of life,” as a policy matter, many argued merely for overturning Roe either to fix a jurisprudential error or to send the issue back to the states, to let the democratic process find a social compromise on abortion.
For other abortion opponents, however, overturning Roe was a first step on the road to enshrining a “culture of life” that protected the unborn from conception onward.
Think of it this way: If the court had banned abortion outright based on the “right to life” found in the 14th Amendment, the once-united opponents of Roe would be divided. Some would cheer a huge win for life, but others would see the same sort of judicial activism they decried in Roe. Well, the fallout from Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization has opened a similar rift between opponents of Roe and opponents of abortion. And it’s a mystery where these factions will go next, ideologically or politically.
While a lot attention is on states where abortion will be banned, it’s telling that two of the GOP’s most popular governors, Ron DeSantis of Florida and Glenn Youngkin of Virginia, have stopped short of outlawing abortion, preferring a ban after 15 weeks of pregnancy. Georgia’s Republican Gov. Brian Kemp stands behind a 6-week limit, while New Hampshire’s Chris Sununu says abortion will remain legal in his state.
Meanwhile, some House Republicans have called for a federal abortion ban. “The Life at Conception Act” has 160 co-sponsors, though one wonders how many it will lose now that it has a chance, however slim, of passage.
All of this political positioning surely has a lot to do with the role the GOP base plays in congressional elections compared with statewide races, where winning the more moderate middle is necessary.
One of the arguments for repealing Roe was that it fueled polarization by removing accountability on abortion policy. Politicians could take base-pleasing absolutist positions knowing that Roe barred any meaningful changes that reflected the more nuanced views of voters. For instance, while it’s true that large numbers of Americans were against repealing Roe, support for Roe’s actual guidelines was mixed. As of April, more Americans favored a ban on abortions after 15 weeks than opposed one, though the same survey also found a majority of voters say abortion should be legal in all or most cases (obviously, it’s complicated). Republicans generally benefited from polarization on abortion both financially and electorally. But they also benefited from the unity of purpose conservatives enjoyed pre-Dobbs. In the post-Roe era that unity is gone, at least for the foreseeable future.
Which brings me back to that three-legged stool.
The end of the Cold War spelled the end of anticommunism’s role in galvanizing conservatives around a specific foreign and defense policy. Pat Buchanan, for instance, considered Cold War anticommunism the great exception to conservatism’s natural tendency to isolationism, which he returned to in the 1990s. Donald Trump’s “America First” rhetoric was a delayed victory for Buchananism.
As for economics, most on the right still reject tax hikes, but the war on “woke capitalism” is the hot new thing, and protectionism has lost its bad odor. Indeed, while traditional conservative opposition to a more generous welfare state has been eroding for some time, the Dobbs decision may hasten the process. Sen. Marco Rubio, R-Florida, hailed the court’s decision. “But,” he added, “we must not only continue to take steps to protect the unborn, we must also do more to support mothers and their babies.”
He promised to “soon introduce a bill to ensure we do everything we can to give every child the opportunity to fully access the promise of America.”
I think the Supreme Court decided Dobbs correctly. But those who insist the majority acted out of partisan loyalty to the GOP or to the broader conservative movement miss the fact that neither may benefit over the long haul. The conservative justices ruled on principle, letting the chips fall where they may. It’s going to be raining chips for quite a while.
“The social conservatism leg is not going away and there is plenty of work there to do.”
It’s more important now than ever. We just had an entire month of perverts performing in front of children and at least one instance of children performing in front of perverts. Jonah Goldberg should stick to writing about tax cuts.
So winning is actually a loss? He has it backwards.
They said we’d never overturn Roe v. Wade. Well, we did it, which means now anything is possible.
• Deporting illegal immigrants—now possible.
• Building the wall—now possible.
• Bringing manufacturing back to the US from China—now possible.
• Reigning in the federal government—now possible.
All those “impossible” things conservatives have been fighting for for decades are now possible.
Upending the three-legged stool allows 3 National Review writers to sit at the same time.
The Libertarian party has been all about Marijuana & drugs for decades.
I’m really hoping with the legalization of pot in so many states that the Libertarian party returns to its roots.
In the 1970s it was a force for small government and individual rights.
Then it was taken over by the “sex, drugs, and rock & roll” crowd that was ultra-focused on personal licentiousness. If you weren’t for legalization of drugs, they wouldn’t listen to you.
Everything about Goldberg has the smell of limp wristed homosexuality. I get really creepy vibes from that guy.
He is the type of “conservative” who wears a business suit at a big event and then simultaneously wears panty hose and woman’s underwear beneath his attire. /spit
“In overturning Roe v. Wade, the Supreme Court delivered the right’s biggest single victory ever, and it may spell the end of the conservative movement as we’ve known it.”
Th right? The Constitution is what it is. If you disagree with it and take action to undermine it, you are a radical.
To the extent that Jonah Goldberg is a member of the Republican establishment and knows his influence as a member of the conservative media is over, I agree with you.
Jonah Goldberg, Steve Hayes, George Will, Bill Krystal, and many others need to be confined to the dust bin of history.
So stool decides what conservatism is. There’s a pun in there somewhere
Assistant Democrats, whose livelihoods depend on perpetuating the hot-button issues, hate it when progress is actually made toward solving them.
The core of the conservative movement are social/moral evangelicals and traditional Catholics, yet who are adversaries regarding (unscriptural) distinctive RC teachings, but both of whom are overall foremost opposers of abortion (at least in 99% of cases), as well as absolutely opposing homosexual unions, and the most likely to contend with the opposition, on the basis of authoritative moral teaching.
I see the main division in the conservative movement as being btwn social/moral conservatives and libertarians, many of which I surmise have little use for the former, at least with its preoccupation with homosexual unions and Israel (among evangelicals) and are driven by a strong animus against authority and are the most likely to see Putin as a hero against their home adversary, as well as being the most likely to support armed warfare against anyone who opposes their degree of liberty.
The Left, as proxy servants of the devil, opposes and censors both, and seeks to take over the institutions of moral conservatives and use fringe elements to portray them as Fred Phelps types, and to provoke libertarian types to engage in armed resistance and thus portray all conservatives as domestic terrorists.
Then you have the soft conservatives, who seek nether the kingdom of God or a revolution uprising, but a restored Mayberry, and are fairly contented with RINOs, and wish they could pacify the other elements of conservatism.
Meanwhile, on the Left I see the main divisions as being btwn those who sincerely believe the liberal ethos and those who are driven by lust for power and or the overthrow of morality, liberalism being the means to that end, and the former vote for the latter, which see a division btwn the established powers who engage in methodical slow cooking of the country into Hell, and the more radical elements (as "the Quad") who seek to employ a rapid blowtorch effect and threaten the power the the established liberal Brahman.
And that the reality is that, as Scripture and history (Reformations, Great Awakenings), attests,
we wrestle not against flesh and blood, but against principalities, against powers, against the rulers of the darkness of this world, against spiritual wickedness in high places. (Ephesians 6:12)
And thus at its very base,
For though we walk in the flesh, we do not war after the flesh: (For the weapons of our warfare are not carnal, but mighty through God to the pulling down of strong holds;) Casting down imaginations, and every high thing that exalteth itself against the knowledge of God, and bringing into captivity every thought to the obedience of Christ; (2 Corinthians 10:3-5)
Whatever temporal actions this results in must be driven by the sure standard of the Scripture and faith in the author of them, and the Savior of those who repent and believe. Thanks be to God.
Grand Forks? Good Lord! Demonicrats have taken over all media. :(
For a loser, even winning is considered a loss. He fails to recognize the constitutional equilibrium this decision brings now that the court can’t nullify state laws by divining penumbras and emanations. Also the next election law cases may well re-establish a more solid state legislative authority on redistricting and election rules that are rightly owned by the state legislatures. Al of this is good for the US. Roe failing just for saving babies lives is great and putting the Feds back in the box means a lot more. Maybe resolving burdensome and unlawful tax “laws” and the private banking industry printing money. WHo knows.
LOL!
I’ll go with horrific brain injury!
I hadn’t heard of Jonah before the Clinton Scandals.
At that time he seemed a Conservative because he recognized
the evils of Clinton, and that’s what Conservatives were
talking about in the day.
This isn’t limited to Jonah either. There were a number of
people in the press that seemed to get it back then. Keith
Oberman was on board the anti-Clinton express. So was Joe Scarborough. Other well known names were as well.
Then Clinton left office, and what held those folks to
any sense of sanity, left the building.
All of a sudden they became the wing nuts they had been
all along, but had not revealed prior to that time.
Jonah and his mom were nice people. FReepers met with them
back in the late 90s. Since that time both have been a big
disappointment.
Somewhere down inside is a guy that used to get it.
You can’t reason with them because they have been trained to
prevent hearing anything you have to say. Have you noticed
they get irate if you even open your mouth. They’ll start
talking over you so as not to hear your thoughts.
They’re out there to express their thoughts, but don’t you
get the idea you have that right in their presence.
One of them explained to me once, during a semi-lucid moment.
I can’t listen to you, because anything you tell me will
just be propaganda.
That’s what they are being told on university campuses.
So winning is the new losing.
The RINO manifesto:
Without losses, what do we have to complain about? And complaints are what conservatism is all about. It’s about complaining and firing up the voting base and then doing nothing to solve the problem you are complaining about if you get elected.
Instead, it is about trying to woo white democrat voters by telling them you want to compromise. You want to “reach across the aisle, be bi-partisan.” You want to apologize for being a Republican and ask them to vote for you because you are so so very sorry. And the media?!? They are your friends and there to help you. You need to agree with them and apologize even more. Your voters? They suck and are nothing more than white nationalist, deplorables. You want to trade them in. You are more worthy of the democrat voters than the democrats.
Of course, don’t forget the complaints!! Roe is evil, secure the border, end regulation, make DC accountable!!! Yes, those complaints. But they are for election time. For now, it’s back to glad handing and apologizing.
Sincerely, the usual suspects.
When you’re a media (print, blog, or TV) celebrity or aspire to be one (Yes, I am being generous with Jonah!) you have to stay in the public eye. You do this positively or negatively with the issues of the day. Whatever it takes to keep your brand out there. Do what gets you talked about, loved hated doesn’t matter the worst thing is to be ignored. You just have to know where the boundaries are, something Oberman seems oblivious to. They have a partial PR victory on us right now by us discussing this!
Just fodder from the chattering class. Goldberg is a spectator at best and like most of his peers has long since lost touch with the real issues. I await the first interesting commentary on the real issue Justice Thomas lifted up in his concurring opinion, regarding the infusion of substantive due process into jurisprudence.
“This article is a complete waste of the pixels and bytes used to create it.”
Text is a pixel sipper. Images are pixel gobblers.
As far as public opinion is concerned, the next election will tell us that.
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.