Conservatism Includes Social Conservatives

Damocles said:
Rubbish. I can point out shared experience. Such as elections where legislation was concurrently run in order to get out the Praymores to the ballot boxes in order to elect a solely social conservative....
Click to expand...
I see a strawman building here. What mainstream candidate has ever campaigned on social conservatism without fiscal conservatism?
 
Southern Man said:
I require proof that Regan "did nothing" as you falsely accuse.
Click to expand...
Prove the legislation he promoted or signed that dealt with those issues. Saying he spoke about it but didn't work towards laws dealing with it is exactly what people are saying. We agree, you just believe that talking about stuff you have no plans is apparently the same as working to pass legislation and making that legislation a priority.
 
Southern Man said:
I see a strawman building here. What mainstream candidate has ever campaigned on social conservatism without fiscal conservatism?
Click to expand...
The last President prioritized social conservatism above fiscal conservative issues, and I point to his record deficit spending, the pill bill, etc. as portions of our shared experience that will show how I built that opinion. The man led the party in a direction that clearly wasn't one of fiscal conservative principals.

Again, we already know what happens when the priorities are askew. We are living it right now.
 
Damocles said:
Prove the legislation he promoted or signed that dealt with those issues. Saying he spoke about it but didn't work towards laws dealing with it is exactly what people are saying. We agree, you just believe that talking about stuff you have no plans of making laws about isn't really using government to do something....
Click to expand...
Soli, er, Winterborn, made the accusation, therefore it is his duty to provide evidence. Its not my responsibility to defend a baseless accusation.
 
Southern Man said:
I don't recall it being a mainstream issue back then.
Click to expand...
Yeah, that's why people passed the Defense of Marriage Act just a couple years later, because it wasn't an issue. Your memory is "flawed" at the least.

(What I should have done is "demanded" links to this memory of yours, like you demanded to my opinion.)

It wasn't addressed because the issue existed, was on the radar, but was not a priority. Nowadays you can barely read any Republican publication without reading about how these issues drive them.

They shouldn't drive them. When I need a driver I'll go with personal freedoms over religious stricture any day. Religious stricture drives my personal life, it does not prioritize government for me.
 
Southern Man said:
Soli, er, Winterborn, made the accusation, therefore it is his duty to provide evidence. Its not my responsibility to defend a baseless accusation.
Click to expand...

Delusions still bothering you?

I made the post that said Reagan paid lip-service to social conservatism. You said he talked about it, and then defended his not doing anything.

If Reagan was such a great social conservative point to what he did.
 
Damocles said:
The last President prioritized social conservatism above fiscal conservative issues, and I point to his record deficit spending, the pill bill, etc. as portions of our shared experience that will show how I built that opinion. The man led the party in a direction that clearly wasn't one of fiscal conservative principals.

Again, we already know what happens when the priorities are askew. We are living it right now.
Click to expand...
I can see your point, and have never heard GWB described that way. I would argue, however, that social conservatism is the belief that the individual take responsibility for his own actions, and is thus the basis for fiscal conservatism. I would also argue that GWB, although I believe him to be a moral man, failed to understand this.
 
Damocles said:
It wasn't addressed because the issue existed, was on the radar, but was not a priority. Nowadays you can barely read any Republican publication without reading about how these issues drive them.

They shouldn't drive them. When I need a driver I'll go with personal freedoms over religious stricture any day. Religious stricture drives my personal life, it does not prioritize government for me.
Click to expand...

I agree with that.
 
Southern Man said:
Soli, er, Winterborn, made the accusation, therefore it is his duty to provide evidence. Its not my responsibility to defend a baseless accusation.
Click to expand...
You seek "proof" of a negative.

Prove to me that the sky is not "yellow", for instance. We've already seen a picture of it just that color....

:rolleyes:
 
Southern Man said:
I can see your point, and have never heard GWB described that way. I would argue, however, that social conservatism is the belief that the individual take responsibility for his own actions, and is thus the basis for fiscal conservatism. I would also argue that GWB, although I believe him to be a moral man, failed to understand this.
Click to expand...
Which is my point. And the R party rode right along in that Posse, and now argue that we should continue to canter along following that same map. It frustrates me. I don't say to reject such ideas, only to remember what gained us a majority to begin with, it wasn't these things, they were there, but they were not the driving force behind those victories.
 
WinterBorn said:
Delusions still bothering you?

I made the post that said Reagan paid lip-service to social conservatism. You said he talked about it, and then defended his not doing anything.

If Reagan was such a great social conservative point to what he did.
Click to expand...
Again it is you who claim that he did nothing; I have countered that he led. Now you wish for me to provide evidence in defense of my position while it was you who made the baseless accusation in the first place.
 
Damocles said:
Which is my point. And the R party rode right along in that Posse, and now argue that we should continue to canter along following that same map.
Click to expand...
...which supports my argument that fiscal conservatism cannot work without social conservatism.
 
Southern Man said:
...which supports my argument that fiscal conservatism cannot work without social conservatism.
Click to expand...
Which I agreed with and suggested that we simply prioritize differently.

Then you proceeded to make it mean we should "reject" the ideas in some way. Then Dixie, as I said he would, said I was wrong then wrote a well thought opinion on why I was wrong. I disagree with him, how we prioritize and how we educate people on our priorities is what we are missing, we should not allow our opponents to define us, that is a recipe for fail.

We need to effectively communicate to and regain the trust of people who are also driven by personal freedoms and responsibility. We need to express the idea that the closer to home the government is, the more effective it is. We need to reconstruct the same message that showed that something you should fear is the words, "I am from the government, and I am here to help."
 
Damocles said:
You seek "proof" of a negative.

...
Click to expand...
No I seek proof from an accuser who claims that a man did nothing. Reagan was a popular president for 8 years and his works are well documented, and he had many detractors in the press. Surely one of these pundits has documented what Winterborn claims.
 
Damocles said:
Which I agreed with and suggested that we simply prioritize differently.

Then you proceeded to make it mean we should "reject" the ideas in some way. Then Dixie, as I said he would, said I was wrong then wrote a well thought opinion on why I was wrong. I disagree with him, how we prioritize and how we educate people on our priorities is what we are missing, we should not allow our opponents to define us, that is a recipe for fail.

We need to effectively communicate to and regain the trust of people who are also driven by personal freedoms and responsibility.
Click to expand...
No I simply asked for a prioritized list from a mainstream candidate that reflected your "opinion" that your list was the same as theirs. *shrug*
 
Southern Man said:
No I seek proof from an accuser who claims that a man did nothing. Reagan was a popular president for 8 years and his works are well documented, and he had many detractors in the press. Surely one of these pundits has documented what Winterborn claims.
Click to expand...

I have not claimed that Reagan did nothing. He did plenty.

I have claimed that he paid lip service to social conservatism. He led based on his beliefs as a fiscal conservative. He talked about social conservatism but did nothing to press their agenda.
 
WinterBorn said:
I have not claimed that Reagan did nothing. He did plenty.

I have claimed that he paid lip service to social conservatism. He led based on his beliefs as a fiscal conservative. He talked about social conservatism but did nothing to press their agenda.
Click to expand...
Forgive me for not spelling it out with precise legal language. Prove that he did nothing with respect to social conservatism.
 
Damocles said:
Which I agreed with and suggested that we simply prioritize differently.

Then you proceeded to make it mean we should "reject" the ideas in some way. Then Dixie, as I said he would, said I was wrong then wrote a well thought opinion on why I was wrong. I disagree with him, how we prioritize and how we educate people on our priorities is what we are missing, we should not allow our opponents to define us, that is a recipe for fail.

We need to effectively communicate to and regain the trust of people who are also driven by personal freedoms and responsibility. We need to express the idea that the closer to home the government is, the more effective it is. We need to reconstruct the same message that showed that something you should fear is the words, "I am from the government, and I am here to help."
Click to expand...


Damo, I don't disagree that the Republicans must find a new way to articulate the ideals of conservatism, that is sort of my point too. I think the mistake has been, shying away from conservative social issues, instead of articulating a strong message to support them. You SAY prioritize, but what you really mean is, shove the religious stuff in the closet and don't bring it up. Yeah, we can have these social conservative views, but just don't mention them... focus on the other stuff... fiscal responsibility, national security, etc. I get what you are saying, but I think that is what Republicans tried to do with McCain, and have been trying to do for the past 7-8 years, and it's not working.

Moderating conservative views to play down social conservatism, is a terrible strategic mistake. It may appeal to you personally, as I said, I can see what you are saying, I somewhat agree, but I really do think this is what is missing, the connective argument... why social conservative issues are important in a conservative movement. I think Conservatism has to be presented in a complete package to work like it did with Reagan. That is what has been missing. Reagan never made you feel as if he were pounding you over the head with his Bible, however, he had very strong religious convictions, and didn't mind expressing them. Virtually every fiscal conservative aspect to Reagan, from economic policy to the ideas on reforming welfare, were rooted in a foundational Christian belief system. Much of Reagan's "vision" is summed up in his famous "Shining City on the Hill" speech, which is pretty much a direct reference to his religious beliefs.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top