Posted on 01/06/2008 9:51:23 AM PST by Kaslin
“Balderdash. Hunter and Thompson are pro-life.”
I don’t know enough about Hunter to comment. However, I will respectfully say this about Fred Thompson. Because of his federalist approach and beliefs, Thompson is essentially “pro-choice.” He thinks that states should decide the question. Which from a purely pragmatic point of view is the only way right now to eliminate most of abortions by letting states decide. But Thompson is consistent in his federalism. HE TRULY THINKS IT IS A STATES DECISION. This ultimately has the effect of making him pro-choice, because he would do nothing to end abortion in states that “chose” to keep it. That is NOT PRO-LIFE. Organizations like NRTL have sold out in that regard by supporting Fred. Fred is against ammending the constitution to end abortion in all 50 states.
The same is true concerning the homosexual agenda. I heard Thompson say with his own mouth that if a state wants to have homosexual marriage it is their business and not his; even if he disagrees.
That is the drawback of Federalism. While on many, many issues I agree that the states or lower is the best place to address the issue. However, when we talk about matters of fundamental significance to the general being of a nation - like the right to life, the sanctitity of hetereosexual marriage...it really needs to be decided at a national level.
I only embrace federalism as a stop-gap measure to limit abortion, but it is not the best solution.
Exactly. Except we'll all pay the price.
Since most of the corporate "conservatives" have been sending their contributions to the Democrats since way before the primary season actually kicked into gear, and have steadfastly refused to give the time of day to any conservative, what do you suppose that portends for the future of the Republican party and who do you think is actually "paying the price?"
Reading all the excellent comments here I’m thinking that of all the Republicans I think the only who will stand up to the democrats is Thompson. How many times have we wanted Bush to just put his foot down, talk to the American people and be honest about what the democrats were/are doing?
Huckabee will be similar to Bush and strive to work with them, “can’t we all just get along” behavior.
We know McCain will have one foot in their camp.
Mitt will try to compromise with them also, try to gain consensus.
I’m not sure what Hunter would do.
I’m dismissing Ron Paul altogether.
I believe Fred Thompson will call a spade a spade as he has shown in interviews. I would love to see him at the press conferences with the yahoo msm.
I too am a member of both groups and I resent the suggestion that they are mutually exclusive or that following Madisonian principles is somehow conflicts with Christianity. ON the contrary, they are complimentary.
Love your table. I wonder if you meant SC=5, NC=5, FC=1, rather?
I love you clasifications and as you say "..there is more..." it would really be nice to come up with a comprehensive questionaire in order to find out "what kind of a conservative" one is :) Especially now, that labels are being thrown around all over the place
I tend to agree with your analysis. For some reason many "experts" believe that being a strong free-market capitalist and being a good Christian is mutually exclusive. It's not. No true conservative Republican paints a picture of a depression-era nation. Huckabee is basically dismissing the great economy of the past six years. Reagan would have rejected that image and Huckabee too. I don't like Huckabee because is more of a populist than a conservative Republican. A populist is just the flip side of a demagogue.
This whole piece while fine, does’t mention at all the job that G. Bush, McCain, Guilani and Romney ARE doing to ‘redefine’ and destry the Conservative Coalition!! Very Unbecoming of the author.
Yes, that’s about right. Other than Duncan Hunter, Fred is the only one who is conservative across the board.
Hopefully, Will is wrong about a new “tearing” of the conservative fusion. Conservatism in America has, since the Reagan years, always been a coalition of several factions, and these factions have always been somewhat uneasy with one another.
Which is too bad. Because it IS perfectly possible to be conservative across the board, as Fred is. And (if I may say so) as I am.
I’m a compassionate conservative. I think the poor and oppressed need help. But the worst possible way to do it is through government welfare. Government welfare PRETENDS to help the poor, but it’s only real purpose is to increase the size of the bureaucracy and to put the designated poor on the welfare rolls where they will vote for you. That is not helping the poor. Rather, it is turning them into a permanent underclass.
Fiscal conservatives and social conservatives certainly need to work together—or hang separately. And the big money country clubbers need to get on board as well, because if they want to be part of the power structure, then they need our votes.
One reason why Huckabee is doing so well is that the Republicans kicked the social conservative base and the fiscal conservative base in the teeth over the past 7 years, with out of control pork and contempt for social conservatives running for congress. So, everyone wants to pick up his marbles and go home, and the blame rests chiefly on the party, not the voters. It’s the party that drove them away. And they thought they could do it again, but supporting Romney and Giuliani. No, they can’t. If they don’t watch out, they’ll get Huckabee instead, mainly because everyone is so damned mad they aren’t thinking straight.
Fred is the only possible coalition candidate who can work with all the factions involved.
There are few candiadtes for the “fiscal conservatives” and the “pro-individual liberty people like me who want self-government limited and devolved back as close to local people as possible. This allows for cultural, community and regional differences and maximizes individual freedoms and responsibility. Romney, Huckabee, Rudy are all for big federal Nanny state programs to solve our problems. They want to pull power to Washington DC. Fred is a federalist and embraces the limited government devolved to the local level.
Yes, being in the House is a handicap. But Obama is now the leading Demonrat candidate, and his whole career is: 1) backbencher in IL legislature and 2) a completely undistinguished 1/2 term in the Senate. A single speech before the last Demon convention put him on the map. Most people wouldn’t know Fred Thompson either, except for his acting career. Hardly anyone outside AR knew who Huckabee was. Jimmah Carter and Bill Clinton were obscure Southern governors, also.
Edwards grew up in SC not North Carolina. He just stayed here after college, but we’d love to give him back.
Like Job after losing his camels and acquiring boils, the conservative movement is in distress. Mike Huckabee shreds the compact that has held the movement's two tendencies in sometimes uneasy equipoise. Social conservatives, many of whom share Huckabee's desire to "take back this nation for Christ," have collaborated with limited-government, market-oriented, capitalism-defending conservatives who want to take back the nation for James Madison. Under the doctrine that conservatives call "fusion," each faction has respected the other's agenda. Huckabee aggressively repudiates the Madisonians.
Wrong. It's not Huckabee but all the GOP candidates. None of them are conservatives. They are PARTIAL conservatives. When the conservative voters are faced with a slate of candidates, each of whom is a schizophrenic conservative they are forced to select the one that matches their personal set of priorities within conservatism.
A major part of the problem is ignorance within the movement. Many of us are unable to discern conservative principles when they are couched in new issues. So they fail to recognize the LIBERAL aspects of their favored candidate. And every one of these candidates in the GOP is a LIBERAL to one extent or another.
The problem comes down to determining which candidate is conservative on the issues that are most urgent and most important to us. The WOT is obviously an urgent issue. Abortion is important, but no more urgent than it has been since the 70's. Protecting our borders is important and urgent, in light of the WOT. Protecting marriage shouldn't even be a Federal issue, but the reciprocity clause and the actions of activist judges is forcing it out. Protecting the recent gains in tax policy is urgent because of the expiring legislation.
Lacking a true conservative in the mix, how do we choose?
That is what is fracturing the movement and the party. The fact that we don't have a conservative option on the ticket.
“We must unite behind a candidate that is at least acceptable to all the major factions, and who also has a reasonable chance to run an effective, winning campaign in the general election.”
Sounds like Fred Thompson to me.
A House Divided Will Not Stand
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1949161/posts
Fred gets my check next to his name. When a person starts assigning to government the directives of their religion, then the line of separation has been crossed. Social justice is a religious burden, not one for the government.
Anyway, Thompson deserves great respect for his reverence for the Constitution and federalism. That's something completely lacking in all the Demonrats, and many of the Republicans (Bush, for example, has trashed federalism with things like the No Child Left Behind), and something we desperately need in this country.
Whatever you think of Thompson's position, you can be sure it is the result of serious thought and personal conviction. It is not some kind of wimpy "compromise" position.
And a wholesale Federal ban overriding any input from the states is constitutional in your eyes? Im sorry, I am as prolife as you can get - but that idea SUCKS just as hard as the Roe v Wade decision. Just because you get a consortium of 9 judges to side with the ProLife movement doesn’t make it right or constitutional. Apparently the branch of Christianity you practice doesnt include the idea of Free Will.
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.