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.
The Analysts
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.
The Sheep
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.
LOLOL
The streets of NYC used to be a war zone, doesn't that count?
Sorry, Reagan wasn't all that conservative and had the fortune to run against Jimmy Carter in a horrible economy.
It was George Bush's main sound bite in 2000/4, you remember..
I agree Bush has pretty much fractured the republican party..
Only a matter of time before he supports Giuliani.. unless he supports the one he DON'T want to succeed..
Hey Adam.....
at least you can spell.
That's about all I can say positive about your simplistic point of view.
> The New Deal.
> The Vietnam-era sprit of protest.
> The dysfunctional public school system.
> Laws favoring labor unions at the expense of individual entrepreneurs.
> The US tax code.
> The free flow of money into the US Treasury and back out to particular groups whose votes need to stay bought.
> Congressional earmarks on legislation.
> Their own tenure in office.
But finding someone interested in conserving the radical spirit of liberty exemplified by the Founding Fathers, well, that's a tricky one. And it's hard to "conserve" something that hasn't really been a part of American life for a century and half.
So I'd say we need a lot fewer "conservatives" and a lot more radicals. ;)
I don't see my brand of conservative in that description above.
Where are the pro-freedom conservatives, those who believe in freedom because it's the right thing to do as opposed to those who like freedom because it works most of the time?
These conservatives hate big government because it restricts our freedom, not because it "doesn't work."
These conservatives want lower taxes because it cuts down the size of government (or, at least it should).
These conservatives believe that the Bill of Rights is immutable, and don;t think it should be suspended because of a conflict either here or abroad.
These conservatives are heirs to the Barry Goldwater school of conservatism, not Richard Nixon's. In economics they favor Friedman and Hayak and Mises over Galbreath and Keynes.
These conservatives would never go along with efforts to increase entitlements, grow the Department of Education, or raise tariffs.
Wish these conservatives had a place in our GOP.
I'm enthralled with these people who are obsessed with "defining" others to pump themselves up as the "real, true" conservatives.
Reminds me of a girl who lived in our town who was very rich and kind of looked down her nose at the rest of us because we were just "normal" people; she had a friend in town and brought her to a big party; someone overheard her telling her friend that "most of these people are from the wrong side of the tracks."
We finally figured it out: she built the tracks around HER house; not hard to find people to look down on then, is it?
Somebody needs to remind me again just who it is who is trying to "divide" this party.
Excellent points and something I've wondered. When a major paper like the LA Times is up for sale, why wasn't there any serious conservatives bidding on it?
The same people who espouse Reaganism have forgotten he wasn't a conservative governor in California, he had to govern according to the state, which was already leaning liberal. Once he was President he governed according to the country as a whole and was more conservative.
That's a very good way of explaining things. It's an interesting dilemma that both Rudy and Mitt faced. The question is do we demand purity in those blue state and just give up or do we accept a bit of the RINO to try to break down blue state stereotypes about Republicans? I hate the thought of giving up. I confess that I celebrated when Rudy won NY and also rejoiced when Mitt won Massachusetts.
This is the shallowest analysis of the conservative movement I've seen this side of DU.
Because newspapers don't make money any more. However, it would be nice if a wealthy conservative could subsidize the darn thing so we could try and effect the dinosaurs who still believe it's true if it's on newsprint.
Same as with the other end of the spectrum.
Every 8-12 years, social conservatives throw a tantrum and DEMAND that a candidate take a "strong" position and say out loud the magic words: "I think abortion should be illegal everywhere."
No matter that no pro-life candidate has done a damn thing to overturn Roe/Wade....it doesn't matter. They just want someone to say the magic words, and then they will vote against Hillary.
I'm not sure what this analysis was intended to do here. First I thought it was just another disunity stink bomb to get us all a-sqwabblin'. Any writing that tries to label groups can always smell bad. Then as I watched the discussion board here I agreed that the "conservative movement" as you called it, is moved forward by different groups with not exactly the same ordered priorities. When we reject this, we lose. When we accept this, we win and winning by losing is what the party of the "communal movement" wants us to do.
What I don't get is their "trick God" plan.
They're concerned that the country's morality is withering on the vine in God's eyes, and if they can only elect a pro-life prez, and pass a Federal or Constitutional Law.....then...well, God will think our morality is restored.
Never mind that the deteriorating individual morality of the people isn't changed one bit....nope, they need to wait till 2008 to improve morality by force of government.
Well I don't know too much about everyone's individual morality. But I sure as heck wouldn't want to know about every screaming monkey on every hairy back. Thank you very much but it just isn't my job. :-)
For one, Renew America is less of a blog that Free Republic. Second, the article has nothing to do with Alan Keyes who is almost certainly not running in 2008.
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.