Conservatism Without "Cliques"

[Whitehorse (Robin Ray)]

We need to be conservative Republicans, not segregating ourselves into little High-School type cliques. We have the winning strategy for elections & governance:

Strong National Defense
Fiscal Responsibility
Limited Government
Conservative Social Values

Standing alone, these are winning issues. Together, they are almost invincible. We have the watershed victories of 1980 & 1994 as evidence of what happens when Republicans run as total conservatives, expousing all conservative principles in bold, unafraid colors. We also have the negative watershed elections of 2006 & 2008 which show that Republicans lose when the party does not hold fast to all planks in the conservative Republican platform. Far too many of our elected leaders abandoned fiscal responsibility - they spent money & acted exactly as the Democrats they replaced. They grew government outside of what was needed for national security. Because of that they lost control of congress & the White House.

IMHO, absolutely nothing in the conservative Republican platform needs to be watered down. This country is not Puritanical, however it's not left of center by any stretch. Economic & national security issues must be in the forefront, especially given they are the major concerns of the day. Conservative social values undergird everything else. We cannot legislate morality, however we can stand for what is right. Voters usually like those who stand for what is right.

Concluding, we must communicate respectfully, politely, but also firmly with our elected leaders the critical need to reclaim fiscal responsibility & limited government conservatism without watering down or fading the colors of any other part of the conservative Republican platform. We win as a party of all bold colors.

[Julie Oubre Fell]

Good points Ben. I also think that the United States needs to be less concerned with what the rest of the world thinks and we also need to stop allowing ourselves to be influenced by other nations. It disgusts me that a presidential candidate traveled overseas to campaign in Europe for an election that is here. Other countries' candidates do not campaign here...and why??? Because it is no business of ours.We have allowed ourselves to be sucked into this vacuum of world approval for what we do in our own country.

I am also so sick of both parties spending so much time on the people in the center! I know that there are people out there that want more parties so that the Dems and Pubs aren't our only choices, but it is what it is people. We need to stop catering to the folks that sit on the fence and pay more attention to the people that have been loyal conservatives and republicans all along. I was on my side of the fence for the entire election. McCain was not my first choice, but he was part of the team so I backed him (among the other 500 reasons I voted for him).

I felt neglected because it seemed that the party was so focused on the people in the middle, that they ignored the frustrated people that have been standing on the right side of the fence. I think that there were a lot of republicans that voted for Obama because they felt that they were tossed aside and forgotten. We were already in the bag, so why waste time.

By the way, Happy New Year to all!

[Ronald Olson]

The problem with the center is that most don't vote at all. The land in the middle is well populated with intellectually lazy people. Social chameleons, who when they do vote, have their minds made up for them by vocal supporters either left or right at the last minute.

Trying campaign to the middle means losing the ardent support of those who walk the precincts or command the coffee shop rhetoric.

I actually know some people that only vote for the projected winner.

[Ben Brown]

There are those that contend that we need to return back to our core conservatism. On the flip side, there are those that believe we need a candidate who holds a moderate view to win. Well we had one of the most moderate candidates we had to offer and look where that ended. Those who value tradition and those who want change will neither one change the other. It is simply the make-up of our party. I,myself, favor a more traditional role in our party, but I just turned sixty, getting old sucks, so maybe I am out of sync with a majority here, I dunno. I will tell you that I am looking for a candidate not to just win, but to represent what this country was built on; that so many died for. Their death was not to gain the respect of the world, although they deserved that and their death was not so that the gays can be legally married nor was their death to protect those illegally in our country. So my candidate would be what the republican party once stood for. I was eager and proud to vote back then. The values of the world does not concern me, but the values of this country does.

[Whitehorse (Robin Ray)]

The other side tends towards statism - centralizing power & federalizing as much as possible. We have to fight this not only in keeping things from being federalized but also not allowing (like abortion) being federalized in a very bad way.

[Jimmy Clendennen]

"Leave the social issues to the states."

Like California, Massachusetts, Connecticut, New Jersey, etc. where the laws are made by the state supreme courts? Is that the model for good government for America?

[Whitehorse (Robin Ray)]

Thanks for your comment Tamara. I thnk most social issues are state-level issues, however we cannot sit idly by while the other side nationalizes them further than they are. Again, abortion & same sex marriage are not the only social issues out there. 2nd amendment & 1st amendment issues are constitutional as well as state. Illegal "immigration" has a big rule of law social component. I do think we need to lead with economic & defense issues, however we should not shy away from the social ones when needed. Getting abortion back to the states will be a huge undertaking. SSM is already mostly a state issue, losing 30 out of 30 elections. Keeping marriage from being federalized will be a huge undertaking also, & that means keeping the other side from federalizing it like abortion was - through the courts.

[Whitehorse (Robin Ray)]

Jason, rant away. I think that your friends & perhaps you have bought into the misconceptions regarding social conservative values & those who hold them. I know many who do, & none are big-government typer. Maybe it's because we're in Fred's state, however we believe issues such as marriage & abortion shouldn't be federalized by any side in the debate. Not being federal, these should be left up to the states. Some of the DOMA supporters I've heard are pushing for a federal amendment because the other side is federalizing that issue, as happened with abortion.

There is a great misconception regarding sex ed in the schools. Most parents don't want teachers teaching kids how to use condoms & the plethora of contraceptives & sex aids. Sex education should be the parent's responsibility, & I know that many parents abrogate their responsibility. I can give you my case - I have a 20 year old son. I didn't want the teachers teaching him about sex, so I did. Believe me, he knew what to do, what to not do, & what he should do if he did what he shouldn't do. You bring up Gov. Palin; I have not asked her however I believe that her daughter had a comprehensive sex ed course from home - that is how most of us teach our kids. Kids will be kids as people will be people, & Bristol became pregnant. I have a 14 month grandson. It's not because the kids don't have the knowledge - sometimes they don't put it into practice. The schools shouldn't raise our kids to their values.

Obama won because McCain was an extraordinarlly weak candidate. He was not passionate about the things that mattered most, which at the time was (& still is) the economy. If he had been against the bailout passionately, we would likely be talking about President-Elect McCain.

[Jason Stewart]

You cannot have a unified party if certain factions are actively working on undermining the rest.

CAUTION: RANT FOLLOWS

Specifically, I'm speaking of certain social conservatives who's actions clearly show that they reject other party values. They typically sound something like this:

"Screw small government! We need to amend the constitution of the U.S. to outlaw gay marriage! It's an abomination!"

"What do you mean that we're picking and choosing what things to enforce in the constitution? What? Of course a married woman who is raped shouldn't be stoned to death for being an adulterer! Who in their right mind would say something like that?"

"What? God?
No he didn't. I'll prove it! Hold on..."

--- Flips through Old Testament ---

"Oh. Hmm... Well, I guess I was wrong. But it's still an abomination."

The thing that many social conservatives need to get through their head is that it is never ok to use big government to your advantage. You are causing your own undoing. Because when the power-shift happens, I guarantee that liberals will not only reverse what you did, but make whatever you banned mandatory. And when you try to say that the law is unconstitutional in order to get it abolished, it will be thrown out of court because the same lame-ass excuse that you justified the original law with was used against you.

Don't say I didn't warn you.

Seriously, this is a big problem. Everyone needs to realize that while big government may seem nice while you're in control, it will come back to bite you in the ass just as hard - if not harder - than you bit the liberals.

Jesus' golden rule is a good idea for multiple reasons, but one that applies here is that violation of it results in karmic payback. For example: A holy war (Crusades) seemed like a good idea to Christians a long time ago. Now Christians are being Holy War'd (Jihad) by the descendants of the same people they killed. And this Holy War could involve biological or nuclear weapons. Great going, you ignorant medieval jackasses. You might have caused the Apocalypse. (Karmic Payback)

As godless as our country may seem to some, it does not persecute the religious. But with both parties swinging further to extremes and pushing to expand government power with no end in sight, there may indeed come a time soon when the official religion of the government is established. To that generation, it might not seem unreasonable that the government should have the power to make the official religion the only legal one. With our country facing increasing political polarization, I would say the Democratic Party would be officially the Communist Party (think Stalin) by then. What happens when they gain power? Do they use the power granted to the GOP (God's Official Party) to make Atheism the official religion and send the religious to prison camps? Government power is a double edged sword, and it WILL be used against you in time.

Some of the people who have realized this are put off by the prospect of a government that shoves its leaders' religious beliefs down their constituents' throats (as well they should be.) I know some of these people. They volunteered to help out with McCain's campaign. Until he picked Palin. Then every single one of them quit. Guess who they voted for? Mostly Obama.

Them (and people like them) lived in a relatively conservative part of NOVA (a.k.a. "Fake Virginia")

Sarah Palin may have energized the base, but she turned off many moderates that I know in Virginia. I personally reject the notion that social conservatives are a large enough group to decide an election alone. Especially when the rest of the country is really pissed off and vague campaign promises such as hope or change start sounding more appealing than actual positions on issues.

Do you know how vague phrases are able to sound so appealing? I'll tell you. For each opinion that a candidate has, they will make additional voters feel excluded.

Take a fiscally conservative but socially liberal voter. He might rally around a candidate because he wants smaller government. But as soon as that candidate starts talking about abstinence-only education (when has telling a teenage boy not to do something EVER worked?), the guy realizes that he'll have to tell his kid about the "birds and the bees" so his kid won't have unprotected sex and die. (Ironically, this is the best way to encourage abstinence. Have a father show his son how to put a condom on a banana. He'll never think a dirty thought again.)

He flips out. His unwillingness to have this very awkward conversation with his son convinces him that liberalism is the answer, at least until he can find a Republican who will support Sex Ed that actually works. He has yet to find one.

One issue can make a difference. So here is my advice: form some opinions. But not any more than necessary. The more opinions you have, the less votes you get. This is why Obama won. Because who can disagree with Hope and Change?

[Whitehorse (Robin Ray)]

Jude, I think we should be confident in what we believe - however we should work hard & smart. I think there's about 15% - 20% of the electorate that can be swayed. They want passion in their candidates & a differentiation on the major issues. With McCain, there wasn't enough differentiation on economic issues. I go back to the bailout - McCain has admitted this is where he lost the election. He became a major face for the bailout, & allowed Obama to sit in the background & cast the same yes vote as McCain. The vast majority of people were against it, & are against the auto bailout & any other bailouts to come. If McCain had stood on fiscal responsibility & limited government conservatism, he would have been forcefully against it & we would likely be talking about President-Elect McCain.

[Jude O'Connor]

The USA is just about 50/50 so I think we as a party are okay. With calmness and our integrity I really don't see a problem in our future. The after shock of this election will see our the other side tipping to the majority on our side because common sense will prevail and the current president in waiting is already getting a taste of the office and it's not comfortable. The left will always ignore the facts. Be comfortable my conservative friends.