The Future of Conservatism
LISTEN TO THE PODCAST HEREThe future of the Conservative Movement in America after the 2008 General Elections. Adam Graham joins the discussion.
Labels: Conservatism, Radio show, Republican Party
posted by Deacon David Oatney @ 1:52 AM
2 Comments:
As I listen to you and Mr Graham discuss the future of conservatism, I note that you both seem to break conservatism down to one issue - Abortion. Conservatism is not based on a single issue. And that social conservatives now seem to feel a loss of will at the top is well taken. The will was never there and Mr. Graham made note of how many Republican leaders played the idea lip service to garner support.
Be that as it may, in order for conservatism to rebound, it needs to evolve and not stagnate. The Abortion issue is just not an issue that can support a movement on it's own. Social conservatives pay attention to social issues when it is convenient and the basic issues like employment, economy, etc are tolerable. When they are comfortable. Social conservatism needs to take a back seat and not be the first thing to come out of a consevative's mouth. I actually think, listening to Mr. Graham right at this moment, he understands this.
That you are saying Republicans will once again be able to use Reagan's line "Are you better off than 4years ago", both of you can paint it anyway you want, but your obvious partisanship indicates you hope we are not better off. That kind of party hackery is one of the main reasons I dislike both parties. The wish to win and be in control overwhelms the interest in bettering the country.
I think you both, as do most conservatives, are making a serious mistake regarding Obama. That he has a liberal record in the past should not be your criteria to look for his direction in the future. He has been moving to the middle through statement and deeds slowly over the last 2 years. Do not underestimate him by labeling him a rampant liberal. He is anything but.
That the Union of Bishops even entered into the political debate, I find detestable. Sensible American religious folks generally do not respond to fire and brimstone political rhetoric from their faith leaders. Raised on the idea of seperation of church and state, Americans often resent their interference. I know several Catholics who were very angry over the Bishops sticking their nose into this election so blatantly.
I do love how Catholic hard core including the hiearchy hide their real intentions behind code words. Pro Life is Anti Abortion. Pro Family is anti Gay.
The Hiearchy while espousing inclusion and forgiveness, speaks with a forked tongue and really is a religion of exclusion and divisiveness. The Catholic Church is a World Wide political entity not a religion. It stopped being an organization based on faith years ago. Now it's main interest is in controlling the lives of it's adherents.
Sarah Palin does not deserve to be blamed for Mccain's failure. She was indeed an attempt to pander(somewhat successfully I might add). But McCain and the republican leaders own all the blame for blowing this election. That said, Sarah Palin is an empty suit. There is nothing there. If the Republican party puts her out in 2012, they will lose.
I agree with not bailing out the Auto industry. But blaming their problems soley on the unions is only looking at part of the cause. Poor management, lack of foresight, in my opinion, are their main problem. Not the unions. Unions are a tired old scapegoat that have lost over the years any real positive or negative impact through loss of memebership. Rates right up there with blaming Jimmy Carter for everything from our situation today to why it rained yesterday. You conservatives need to stop blaming the wrong people and look to the leaders who lead us to where we are. The buck stops at their desk.
Obama is starting early because Bush seems to have quit early.
BTW - I enjoyed this podcast immensely. Reasonable and I admit to some points well taken. Keep it up. I will be back.
David,
The rason the American auto industry is such sorry shape is a failure of leadership. Leadership that failed to produce a product that would sell. Instead of developing and building good, high quality, cost efficent vehicles they relied on gimmicks; tax-breaks for SUV ownership, subsidised gas (("One year of $1.99a gallon gas with every new vehicle purchase! get it now at your local dealer!"), classifying one type of vehicle as another inorder to avoid CAFE restrictions, rediculous financing arrangements and so on.
There's a reason that they have consistently lost market share to imports and it has NOTHING to do with unions.
I really want you to keep thinking the way you are. I really, really want Conservatism to drive itself out of the ditch it's in and up and over the cliff into total disrepute and inconsequentiallity.
SteveMule
Post a Comment
<< Home