Saturday, March 20, 2010

Cave To The So-Cons? Get Riehl.

I generally enjoy Riehl World View. Dan can be brash, but that's what I like about him. Today, however, I read something there that I completely disagree with. More, I think he's advocating the opposite of what we should do:

But as so many libertarians and moderate Republicans have had their say about social cons over the years, you might want to consider that, they could be the only thing standing between you and Obama Care just now.

This is the exact opposite of the opinion I gave after asshat Ryan Sorba decided CPAC was a tent revival instead of a political strategy event:

You're going to have to reach deep inside you, and come up with some good old fashioned compassion and tolerance for your fellow man - and never mind if he's wearing mascara. If he's supporting the candidate that will defend the Constitution, he's one of you.

I'm not advocating purging anyone. It's not my Party to begin with... BUT, I can not accept that libertarian conservatives should be forced to accept candidates who pay lip service to smaller government principles, while fully backing the intrusion of the federal government into our private lives - which is the case with many social conservatives.

I want candidates who will serve their constituents while adhering to the Constitution. Period.


Matt said...

I see your point on much of this. I have some libertarian tendencies, but they are of a pragmatic nature. I look at politics as cyclical, I think we can all agree with that. So, if Conservatives give government power to enforce something that they want, that same power can also be abused by the left when the pendulum swings to their side. Small government protects us all, right and left, gay and straight, Christian and atheist.

As for purges, I would reserve that for RINOs. They are to the left what Libertarians are to Conservatives, they all agree on most of the big issues, and the differences consist of scope and methodology.

ScratcherMMBI said...

"Small government protects us all, right and left, gay and straight, Christian and atheist."

Thank you, Matt, for posting that. You just stated exactly what I'm trying to say here, shorter and sweeter than I managed.

theCL said...

The way I see it, is it's the so-cons who have helped grow the leviathan.

Look. I have socially conservative views, but that doesn't mean I support getting the government involved. Laws are not a reflection of your values, but the express use of force. So-cons will put up with any amount of government growth for mere lip-serve on social issues.

It's no secret that I like Ron Paul. He has the strongest, most consistent anti-abortion stance in Washington, coupled with a detailed plan to overturn Roe v. Wade. But so-cons don't like him. They prefer Establishment lackeys who pay lip-service to their issues instead.