Skip to comments.The Conservative Movements of 2008
Posted on 02/12/2007 11:39:59 AM PST by Keyes2000mt
In my last column, "The Men Who Would Destroy Conservatism" I explained why Rudy Giuliani, John McCain, and Mitt Romney posed a great threat to the future of conservatism. Having explained why these men should not be president, I believe it's incumbent that they not be given the nomination.
Conservatives can stop this process. With the establishment fairly well split between these three men, the challenge is that many conservatives are supporting these candidates.
Of course, we often make the flawed assumption that Conservatism is a monolith, when it's quite complex movement. There are certain people who self-identify as conservatives who can't be counted on to back a strongly conservative candidate for various reasons. Then there are groups that are critical to a Fall success.
The Conservative Conservatives
Many people view conservatism as a systematic set of beliefs regarding protecting the family, innocent human life, reforming taxes and social security, etc. Yet, the traditional definition of a Conservative is to preserve existing conditions. As such, these "conservatives" prefer to stick with what we have now. Utterly revamping Social Security, changing the tax code, or providing school vouchers is too disturbing to an order that's working just fine. They're the type of people who oppose same sex marriage now, but are cautious in how they advocate against it. Don't ask for their help if you want to abolish it after it gets passed as they quickly accept the status quo.
The Conservatives of War
There are people who are socially and economically conservative, but with 9-11, their whole focus shifted to the War on Terror. All that matters is winning the war. They assume everyone else has that focus and if they don't, something is deadly wrong with them. We have to win in 2008, no matter how far left the nominee is. They mock those who will be concerned about other issues, forgetting that the Cold War was not won until a coalition of social, economic, and foreign policy conservatives came together around a candidate that they could all support in good conscience. However, as arguing with them is like arguing with a brick wall, let's move on.
These people are Conservative to a varying degree, but pride themselves on being realists. They will only back candidates who they think can realistically win the general. These type of pragmatically-obsessed folks are of the same type of people who were dispatched by Liddy Dole's National Republican Senatorial Campaign Committee to save Lincoln Chafee's (RI.) campaign from defeat at the hands of conservative Mayor Steve Laffey. There is no principle higher than victory.
These people generally suffer from a lack of confidence in the Conservative message and believe that if a Conservative message is presented to the American people, they will overwhelmingly reject it. They believe in political analysts who define who they will and will not support, and who can in the end be successful. Defeat and struggle must be avoided at all costs in order to win. They want to take the path of least resistance that leads to victory.
These people may (like Giuliani Blogger Patrick Ruffini) hope for a position in the next administration and so support someone who is utterly detestable on any number of issues in order to further their own careers.
They back whoever party establishment and politicos tell them to. Baaahhhhhh!
It's a Coalition
Basically, what we have left is a core of ideologically committed folks. They're in politics for ideas. They believe in Fighting the War on Terror, but don't believe that's the be-all and end-all of conservative issues.
Among that group, you've got quite a few sub-groups. There are economic conservatives, who are tired of "big government conservatism," want taxes reformed, and social security fixed. The religious conservatives are concerned about life, the sanctity of the family, and the protection of religious liberty. Border hawks are tired of our nation's border laws being violated with impunity and the balkanization of our nation. And of course, unlike the left, nearly everyone understands the importance of fighting the War on Terror.
The challenge of a Conservative presidential candidate is to unite these groups under one banner. Failure to do so will mean defeat for Conservatism in the 2008 primary and dire consequences afterwards.
Renew America is Alan Keye's blog, isn't it?
And how conservative is it that he endorses reparations?
Good luck, you'll need it.
---"Renew America is Alan Keye's blog, isn't it?"---
Reparations are not Conservative, just as Rudy Giuliani is not Conservative.
I guess the big question is: Is Rudy Liberal enough for you, or should we look even further left for the GOP nominee? I'm hard-pressed to find anybody there, but I was just wondering.
Some people are unappeaseble, after all. You just can't be Liberal enough for everybody, sometimes.
When you can't attack the idea, you attack the man. Take it as an admission.
Nice job spreading disunity, Adam. By the way, did you participate in the 1992 election?
It's February, the year before the election. The party is not supposed to be united, or has some crowned a king and not told me.
Hey now,, if the dems can anoint Obama, "we" can anoint Rudy..
They are also called "normal people".
Does anybody know what...
"I'm a Unite'er not a Divide'er".... means?...
Been working on that for 6 years.. and can't figure it out..
You mean if the dems can anoint a liberal with no military or foreign policy background during wartime well, the Reps can anoint a liberal with no military or foreign policy background during wartime.
Sorry, I missed the rules. I agree, primaries are good. The "Coalition" described is not even cohesive enough to be called a coallition. They are indeed "ideologically committed" but they don't necessarily agree on what the priorities of the ideologoy should be (social, economic, balance of powers, etc.).
I agree with you 100%.
Good post and food for thought.
I do for sure. It's the same nonsense that Americans hunger for every 8 years. Obama is preaching that same message now. People who don't love politics get sick and tired of the life-blood of politics (scandal, nasty bickering, etc.). So any politician who goes out and preaches "uniter not a divider" gets their ear. It's just another way people fool themselves. Any politician who ignores that need in the people is also known as a loser.
You think that someone with the screenname Peach is a sir? ROFL
And since this is Alan Keyes' blog, I'll post whatever I think is pertinent about him and his blog.
As to reparations, he suggested that African Americans be exempt from certain taxes. That's a form of reparations:
I could go on, but you get the idea.
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.