Posted on 06/19/2005 9:27:36 AM PDT by Willie Green
A brief and steamy walk on the streets of Pittsburgh with the chairman of the Republican National Committee succinctly affirmed what affliction has stricken many of today's conservatives:
They don't know what conservatism is.
It was on the evening of June 9 that a behind-schedule but very gracious Ken Mehlman and I took a brisk stroll from one political fundraiser to another. "What's the future of conservatism?" I asked.
(Excerpt) Read more at pittsburghlive.com ...
I know there are naysayers here:
think how bleak the future looked in Nov 1992.
Can somebody post the salient points of this possibly interesting or useful article if we can't post the article in its entirety?
With all due respect to Ken Mehlman, conservatism in its current form is a pale imitation of what it once was, if conservatism at all. And if today's Republicans truly want to make their mark in service to our founding precepts, they'll reject liberalism-lite and return to the Goldwater standard.
This paper isn't on the excerpt only list insofar as I can tell.
What happened is that the liberals redefined the term conservative and the usual statist RINO republicans happily bought into it. The liberals moved "conservative" from the right to the middle so that anybody who would fit the term conservative in 1970 is now a an "extremist." Suckaaahs....
Ah, Goldwater. A very personable man, not at all as portrayed by his opponents. The political pendulum had reached its maximum leftward velocity when he ran for President. His debates on the Senate floor with Dirksen were classic, and classy.
Yes it is.
Conservatism is "a vision of the nation and the world as it should be, not a compromise with the world as it is."
I agree with this point, but would say it differently. I think conservatism, today, should be a vision of the Nation as it was , and through hard work, God willing, will be again.
"My opinion:Author is hoping the conservatives get as rabid as the liberals are now so the libs will stop looking like such drooling morons."
You're probably right about that. But it wouldn't hurt for conservatives to get back to our small government roots. If people lose faith in conservatives to have a better performance on the economy we'll be in trouble... we can't win ONLY on social issues.
Perhaps I'm blind.
"And if today's Republicans truly want to make their mark in service to our founding precepts, they'll reject liberalism-lite and return to the Goldwater standard."
I think he's missing a major point here. Conservatism today isn't necessarily more "liberal" than Goldwater conservatism. Goldwater conservatism had a somewhat more libertarian bent, whereas today social conservatism plays a bigger role in the movement. What really scares me is that we seem to have lost all concept of "shrinking government". We have a Republican House, Senate, and Presidency for the first time in over 50 years and govt. spending is still rising. If we can't cut down govt. now, I don't know when we'll have a chance.
Good post. There are many newbie conservatives, apparently unfamiliar with the guiding principals of the philosophy in the Freep and elsewhere.
That CAFTA thread disheartened me the other night.
There was a 'golden' time. Maybe more than once. My grandparents told me that 1895 was one such 'golden age.' Maybe there was another in 1953. But, you know, and there is no doubt, that the 'golden' periods were not golden to all. It might be that right now is another 'golden' time. 1776 was 'golden', but by 1787 that was coming apart. It takes work to make this idea real, apparently constant work, it is the kind of work that just won't stay done.
It's listed as tribune-review.com, easy to miss if you're looking for Pittsburgh.
An excellent read. Thank you for sharing.
Yet the excerpted link was to Pittsburglive.com
I know the pay is not good, but it would be helpful to those who want to comply with forum rules if the mods would take some time to rearrange the do not post list. Part of it is geographical, and part is alphabetical.
Those two features should be combined.
Make me a mod, and I'll do it.
Exactly, I wasn't necessarily harkening back to any particular era, just the idea of what America used to be. Then the 1960s happened and young people decided they didn't want to work as hard as their parents and grand-parents did. Now we have the America of today.
It's a fight that doesnt end, just when you think you've won it, apathy creeps in and cracks start to appear.
as Heritage Foundation President Edwin J. Feulner put it in a recently updated foreword to "The Conscience of a Conservative," the classic 1960 treatise of Barry Goldwater (ghostwritten by L. Brent Bozell):
Conservatism is "a vision of the nation and the world as it should be, not a compromise with the world as it" is.
Yet, and save for defense, that's exactly what conservatism largely has become in the early 21st century. Conservatives haven't led, they've acquiesced. Witness the deal-cutting on filibusters. Witness how they lost control of John Bolton's nomination to become U.S. ambassador to the United Nations. Social Security reform? Oh, there's been lots of talk. But there won't be a vote this year. One has to wonder if conservatives ever can bring it to a vote. Chances are if they do, in this climate, it will be an expensive joke. Conservatives haven't enforced the rule of law to crack down on illegal aliens, they've aided and abetted illegals by proposing amnesty. Conservatives haven't defended free speech, they've restricted it through campaign finance "reform." The Internet appears to be next on the hit-list. Conservatives haven't shrunk the size of the federal government and spending, they've enlarged it and increased it.
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.