Don’t conflate conservatism with Republicanism
The politics of entitlement reform may be debatable, but the math is not. The aging of the population and rising health care costs are together triggering explosive growth in Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid. If left unchecked, these programs will place a crushing burden on federal taxpayers, cripple states and stifle economic growth.
It isn’t moral to impose these problems on future generations. It isn’t right to cede ground to liberals and allow ever higher taxes to chase ever higher spending, while government takes on an increasingly intrusive role in people’s lives.
Conservatives cannot live in a bubble. We’re never going to realize a federal government with powers truly limited to those narrowly enumerated in the U.S. Constitution. But even if a reaffirmation of principles doesn’t entail advocating utopian political positions — such as scrapping the entire welfare state — conservatives shouldn’t allow their core beliefs be dictated by what may or may not improve the short-term prospects for Republicans. Conservatism is not a political strategy.
Blowback
Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.
Trackbacks/Pings
Trackback URL
Comments
I like this snippet but the whole cut above is beautiful and realistic.
CW on November 22, 2012 at 3:33 PM
The so-called Conservatives are the best thing to happen to the Democrats since Watergate. I don’t think there has been a movement that has elected so many Democrats in my lifetime. They either get candidates elected in the primary that lose spectacularly (with a few notable exceptions) or they decide to not vote, again getting the Democrat elected. I can rattle off more than a handful of cases where some “conservative” candidate wins the primary against the “establishment” candidate and ends up handing the seat to the Democrat.
crosspatch on November 22, 2012 at 3:51 PM
I should think that conservatives are just fine with republicanism, and even better with federalism so that there are counter-weights to the National level government at levels below the National.
Now if only Republicans could support these ideals… unfortunately the Republican elites seem to have forgotten what republicanism is.
ajacksonian on November 22, 2012 at 4:06 PM
But principals are more important to many conservatives than simply beating the democrats with a “democrat lite” candidate with an R after their name. I think many conservatives feel that there is no real point in electing a liberal from their side. Even if Republicans control both houses of congress and control the agenda, it will not be a conservative one that will make a difference but rather a more liberal one that will send us in the same direction that the democrats will take us, except maybe at a slower pace. They think that it is better to let the democrats own it themselves.
Dollayo on November 22, 2012 at 4:17 PM
Damned skippy.
astonerii on November 22, 2012 at 4:27 PM
Which is fine when you have a degenerate like Clinton in office, but when you are dealing with an out and out marxist who leaves people to die in Syria and pledges flexibility to Putin sometimes you look at the bigger picture.
But now we get to see exactly what an unencumbered Obama will do both here and in the ME. Should be fun, huh?
Wonder what the end of the cliff will look like. More socialism? Maybe a cratered Israel. An emboldened Muslim Brotherhood? We’re going to find out!
But hey, why compromise your principles to play the long game, right?
kim roy on November 22, 2012 at 4:56 PM
Right. And “principals” don’t vote. But having a majority STOPS the crossing over and the “democrat-lite” behavior. We can cull after we get the majority. Doing it now just makes the problem worse.
You can have a group of very principled losers for a very long time taking that approach. It is called cutting off your nose to spite your face. It is in the political vernacular, “stupid”.
crosspatch on November 22, 2012 at 5:01 PM
You are a progressive. Like any of us should take anything you say seriously. Enjoy living under president Romney! Oh, yeah, my bad, my views are progressive lost didn’t he… Move along folks, nothing to see here.
astonerii on November 22, 2012 at 5:03 PM
Bingo! You hit the nail right on it’s head.
ButterflyDragon on November 22, 2012 at 5:25 PM
Long game is letting Obama and the Democrats own their failure instead of having a socialist lite come in and make things marginally better but not enough to stop the failure and allow the brand name to go under and be of no use for decades to come.
astonerii on November 22, 2012 at 5:43 PM
It was the one argument that Romney ever made that ever gave me pause to think maybe he did get it. But when I read it outside of the moment, it was caged to mean what ever he wanted it to mean later.
As close as i remember it…”it is not moral to keep spending significantly more than we take in.” “Spending a trillion more than we have is just not moral”
So basically, 999 billion would fit within his future needs. When in fact any spending that is outside our revenues that is not for existential items like defending the nation is not moral, as the following generation does not benefit from it.
astonerii on November 22, 2012 at 6:10 PM
And this, folks, is what is known as a mental patient.
xblade on November 22, 2012 at 6:26 PM
Hey, I voted for Romney. I’m the first person to say that Obama needs to go. I was referring more toward members of congress than the Presidency. I’m just saying that this is what I observe. The truth is, when you elect liberals, you get liberal ideas you get liberal legislation, you get liberalism, no matter if it comes with an R or a D.
I don’t think a majority “stops” crossing over much at all. Did it stop medicare part D or E or F or whatever it’s called? What about No Child Left Behind, written by the liberal Ted Kennedy with a Republican majority and a Republican President? And what about Obamacare, probably the most destructive legislation to emerge in my lifetime? We should remember that liberals wanted a single payer system and if not for moderate democrats like Ben Nelson “crossing over” we would have had single payer today. But does it really matter who has the majority? Some would say that Oylmpia Snowe passed Obamacare by abandoning republicans and crossing over when dems had the majority. Senator Olympia Snowe was Obama’s key ‘Republican’ (RINO) candidate helping to get Obamacare out of committee and into the lives of the American people. She seems ready to cross over no matter who is in the majority.
Dollayo on November 22, 2012 at 6:39 PM