|
September 27, 2010
Who Comes First?
In the war between social and fiscal conservatives the question on everyone's mind is: who (or what) comes first? Lawrence Reed may have an answer. "If you politically win on all the economic issues, you could lose on all the social ones and still have an avenue as a social conservative to advance what's important to you," Reed said. "When there's a smaller government, families, individuals, private, voluntary organizations and churches have a bigger role. It's on the strength of those institutions, not mandates from the government, that allow for a healthy culture to blossom."Ah. But the social conservatives have an issue with that. Social conservative Bob Patterson of the Howard Center for Family, Religion and Society thinks Americans must focus on social issues first, and that's the main difference between social and fiscal conservatives. He said economic conservatives have traditionally been a lot better than social conservatives at furthering their interests, though.I think Mr. Patterson has given us a clue. Unwittingly. Fiscal conservatism without the social conservative trappings is the bigger tent. i.e. more likely to win elections. But I'm willing to run the experiment again. Let the social conservatives start passing laws or continuing government caused disasters (putting the distribution of some drugs solely in the hands of criminals) and we shall see if they can keep winning elections. I mean what the heck? Two, or four, or six, or eight years of communists in power would be worth it to find the outcome of the experiment. How bad could it hurt? We did run the experiment in Illinois a while back. The year was 2004. Given the choice between a flaming socon who disowned his lesbian daughter and a communist in 2004 I voted for the communist. And the name of the communist? You might have heard of him. Obama. Other than that race I voted straight R. BTW I wasn't the only one: But if socons want to try that on a national level I say go for it. Maybe they will learn something. The hard way. Cross Posted at Power and Control posted by Simon on 09.27.10 at 01:51 AM
Comments
Simon Bad choice back in 2004. No matter how bad we find Keyes, he could never do the damage that Obama has done. Period. The little "communist experiments" you blithely embrace leads to irreversible ratchets like social security, Medicare, and now obamacare. These are dependencies which can only ever be uprooted with great pain, and then only by the motivation of huge fiscal crises. Bad choice. Robert Arvanitis · September 27, 2010 08:10 AM SoCon belief (see what I did there?) that legislating morality is the most-pressing issue currently facing the USSA is completely mystifying. dr kill · September 27, 2010 08:21 AM Robert, I'm not talking right or wrong - where socons always go with the question. I'm talking about winning elections. Mike, I like having socon allies. Really, I do. What I'm talking about is winning elections. If half a loaf is good enough (reign in spending) socons are not bad. Mostly. But they have the wrong litmus test - "He is OK on social issues so who cares if he is spending us into the poor house." Dr. Kill, Another deadly observation. I have a name for it. Socialism. Cultural Socialism. And yes it is just as "naive as that I see in the Progs." M. Simon · September 27, 2010 10:07 AM Robert, Keyes and the people who put him on the ballot (my State Senator Dave Syverson was the Chief Instigator) are just as responsible for the Obama phenomenon as any Communist in the D Party. Had he not had a blow out in Illinois in 2004 his momentum might have been reduced. Wake the fuck up. You want to change the culture? Fine. Do it in the private sector. Socons need to get away from the addiction to government guns. It is just as ugly to me as the Economic Socialists. If you judge by the Illinois results a lot of my fellow Americans agree with me. Enough to affect elections. And seriously - was Jesus a big government guy or a change their hearts guy? As an outside observer I must say that a very large faction of socons are not even understanding the message of Jesus. Pretty funny coming from a Jew hunh? The short version: Jesus was not a statist. Why are you? M. Simon · September 27, 2010 10:21 AM Power is more addictive than heroin. We could live with 2% of the population addicted to heroin - the number we had before the instigation of heroin prohibition and the number we have had in the nearly 100 years since. We can't live with 80% addicted to government power. It is killing us. Between the Economic Socialists and the Cultural Socialist we are being drowned. Because Cultural Socialism validates government power. And that is the heart and soul of the matter. M. Simon · September 27, 2010 10:31 AM Forget the Jesus message. It could just as well be the Mohammed message, or the Lenin message, or the Hitler message. It's all the same. They get a glint in their eyes, and enter the rapture of the true believer. Nothing will stop them. Because they so truly believe they are right and just, we must follow. How can we not see? The truth is before us, and if we can't see it, they will make us. If we refuse and instead follow a path of sin and abomination, they will scorn us, re-educate us, imprison us, march us into the jungle, stone us, castrate us, and hang us. Or mark us with a number and incinerate us. Frank · September 28, 2010 01:51 AM Assolutamente d'accordo con lei. L'idea di un bene, sono d'accordo con lei. bet365 · September 28, 2010 02:51 AM I think someone has made an ass out of o and lutamente! Eric Scheie · September 28, 2010 12:04 PM I have to admit that even knowing what I know now, had I been there then, I too would have voted for Obama. Kathy K · September 28, 2010 12:49 PM It occurs to me that when one encounters someone who emphasizes social issues, one should point out that politics involves ... political issues. When social cons can point to a specific spot in the constitution, and tell me that's their justification for social engineering, I may listen to them. Otherwise I think Simon has the right of it, in that they would find far more leverage employing local community groups or services which are independent of the federal leviathan. Casey · September 29, 2010 01:13 AM Post a comment
You may use basic HTML for formatting.
|
|
September 2010
WORLD-WIDE CALENDAR
Search the Site
E-mail
Classics To Go
Archives
September 2010
August 2010 July 2010 June 2010 May 2010 April 2010 March 2010 February 2010 January 2010 December 2009 November 2009 October 2009 September 2009 August 2009 July 2009 June 2009 May 2009 April 2009 March 2009 February 2009 January 2009 December 2008 November 2008 October 2008 September 2008 August 2008 July 2008 June 2008 May 2008 April 2008 March 2008 February 2008 January 2008 December 2007 November 2007 October 2007 September 2007 August 2007 July 2007 June 2007 May 2007 April 2007 March 2007 February 2007 January 2007 December 2006 November 2006 October 2006 September 2006 August 2006 July 2006 June 2006 May 2006 April 2006 March 2006 February 2006 January 2006 December 2005 November 2005 October 2005 September 2005 August 2005 July 2005 June 2005 May 2005 April 2005 March 2005 February 2005 January 2005 December 2004 November 2004 October 2004 September 2004 August 2004 July 2004 June 2004 May 2004 April 2004 March 2004 February 2004 January 2004 December 2003 November 2003 October 2003 September 2003 August 2003 July 2003 June 2003 May 2003 May 2002 AB 1634 MBAPBSAAGOP Skepticism See more archives here Old (Blogspot) archives
Recent Entries
I write to friends about creeping totalitarianism, and for my efforts my ISP accuses me of "spamming"
The Drug Culture Takes A Hit Cultural Socialism Anti-colonial is bad! Colonial is good! Validation Good mourning to you! Who Comes First? Doing It By Hand Let the losers be as cocky they want Loony
Links
Site Credits
|
|
socons should be kicked out of the party