Quote:
Originally Posted by CrackerBarrel
Social conservatives aren't necessarily dumb, but they are the part of the party who's views don't align with mine. If they are also fiscal conservatives I am fine with them, because social things really aren't "voting issues" for me. People who vote only because of "ohmygod the gays!"? Yeah, they're dumb. The only reason you vote is over concern about an issue that in all likelihood you can't do anything about and that doesn't affect you anyways? Not entirely rational.
And I don't know that libertarians have been driven out, but if it goes to people like Huck and Palin, conservatives are going to be driven out. Conservatism had nothing to do with putting god in everything and stifling science, or with having a government big enough to tell people what they can't do. We're at an inflection point where we can either go back to being a party of small government conservatives who don't like big government and big rapid changes, or go ahead and fully make the switch to being a party of anti-intellectual idealogues.
And I think it's clear which direction I hope that inflection point goes.  |
Why are you saying that Palin isn't a fiscal conservative? And what evidence do you have of her advancing a particularly socially conservative agenda in office? Huckabee, I'm with you.
We know that she's opposed to abortion. We know that she's personally religious. But she vetoed some kind of anti-gay legislation because if conflicted with the Alaska constitution and she's made no efforts to promote creationism or suppress sex ed.
So although she appeals to a socially conservative base, are you really sure that you are categorizing her correctly? Palin and Huckabee? I think the evidence is that she is small government and maybe more libertarian than you think.