Insert photo caption or credit here
Labels, they are a huge part of our culture. From childhood to adulthood we label ourselves as one thing or another. While school age our labels might be somewhat shallow and trivial such as athlete, nerd or clown. Then the big 1-8 comes around. We enter adulthood head first and with that gain a responsibility, the 26th amendment of our Constitution ensures the right to vote. Once again a label must be chosen in the form of a political party and just by aligning yourself with one ideology over another, does not end the labeling.
In fact, you will constantly be grouped. Look at the Republican Party. There are the Reagan Republicans, Right Wing Nuts, True Conservatives, and Moderates. FoxNews pundits tell anyone who will listen that Moderates are “evil”. It has become common to say that if you are willing to pander to the left then you are a moderate, an Arlen Spector; a traitor. ‘Moderates are dooming the Republican Party’ is what echoes at every tea party across the Country.
Then, there are those who label themselves as a moderate. For these individuals they do not see themselves as traitors or panderers. In fact they wear the moderate hat because they might agree with the Party 80% of the time. These individuals are sound conservatives on every issue minus a select few. These moderate conservatives look at every issue individually. Sometimes they might agree down Party lines and other times, their gut tells them “that’s wrong”. No, they are not independents and they are definitely not the emergence of a new third party. Let’s be honest, it is impossible or implausible to agree with someone 100% of the time. Yet because there is some room for discussion and debate this should not be grounds to classify a moderate conservative as “evil” or a “traitor”. Of course, there are corrupt politicians who truly pander to special interests groups and flip flop on every issue. These individuals however should not be categorized as moderate conservatives because moderate conservatives do not flip flop. They know exactly where they stand on every issue and they know that they are not ultra conservative on each of these issues. Take social issues for example. A moderate conservative can be conservative on every issue that deals with the Governance of our nation; limited government, States rights, fiscal responsibility and a strong national defense. Yet they can take a completely different approach to social issues. Maybe they are pro-choice. Maybe they just don’t care about making same sex marriage an issue of the US Constitution.
If the social issues were taken out of the equation then there would be no moderate or ultra conservatives. In fact, the entire GOP platform should stay away from the social issues.
Before you judge this point, let’s consider.
Truly, how many people would think that lowering taxes and putting money back into your pockets is bad? How many voters would be against limited Government on the Federal level? How many people focus on the social issues of each Party when making decision on being classified as D or R? If the social issues were eliminated would the Republican Party pull more voters to their side?
For this reason and this reason alone is the premise to eliminate social issues from the GOP platform suggested. Social issues are constantly changing era from era. At one time we were looking at African American rights, than we moved into the Women’s Rights and now what? Why do we focus an entire outlook on social issues when they themselves are constantly evolving?
A lot of questions have just been posed and the solution is truly simple; States rights. Social issues should be a matter left up to the State which allows the voters to make their decision, not Congress. Alabama might vote to ban same sex marriage and yet New York and California might allow it. All social issues should be left up to the State and if the GOP were to take the social issues out of the equation more folks would be voting Republican tomorrow.
In closing, a moderate conservative will not lead to the end of our Party but rather the beginning. They will unwaver, stay true to the core conservative agenda on issues dealing with the Governance of our nation yet diverting all social issues to the States to decide. Individuals who do not strongly support the core principals of the Republican Party in terms of governance are not conservatives at all. Supporting higher taxes, larger Federal government and fiscal irresponsibility is not the Republican way; nor is it the conservative way. The division of the Republican Party must come to an end and the battle amongst moderate conservatives and ultra conservatives does not need to be waged if social issues were no longer on the agenda.
Related Articles:
- Where are the Republicans hiding?
- If you bring him (Rubio), they will come.
- CD 19 ripple effect
- Republican Minds
Comments
Sounds like a Charlie Crist supporter to me. As a (Conservative Moderate) He certainly did not waver from Conservative values when he embraced and championed the Stimulus Package...or did he? A Moderate Republican will endorse a Democrat for President (Colin Powell) and another (Dede Scozzafava) will endorse the Democratic counter-part in a congressional seat (NY-23)that was filled by the GOP for 100 years. Here in the real world, the line between social issues and political issues will never be clear; therefore, you cannot take social issues out of the equation.
A moderate is an individual that has neither the courage nor the intelligence to unabashedly proclaim that in which they believe. To use the words of one of my good 'moderate' friends, 'You can not define a moderate'.
A moderate tries to have it both ways. They try to be the snake that doesn't bite you. They make overtures to people that shouldn't be courted and turn their backs on the very people that want the best for the country.
The notion that conservatives have to prove they are not bigoted homophobes has been disproven throughout history time and again. Conservatives look out for the smallest minority - the individual. Liberals see people in groups, i.e. blacks, whites, latinos, gays, etc. If moderates aspire to rid themselves of conservative behaviors, I can not support the direction in which they head. ... Read More
Asking the question 'what is a moderate' is like asking somebody to define the dimensions of an amorphous blob, like a fog bank. From far away, it seems t
Sounds like a Charlie Crist supporter to me. As a (Conservative Moderate) He certainly did not waver from Conservative values when he embraced and championed the Stimulus Package...or did he? A Moderate Republican will endorse a Democrat for President (Colin Powell) and another (Dede Scozzafava) will endorse the Democratic counter-part in a congressional seat (NY-23)that was filled by the GOP for 100 years. Here in the real world, the line between social issues and political issues will never be clear; therefore, you cannot take social issues out of the equation.
Honestly...I did not post the same response twice...I believe something was amiss with the server...and that Timothy Street's post looks jacked up too...what's the deal?...
Dusty,
I apologize for the inconvenience. I am not exactly sure what is wrong but have reported the issues to the Examiner. Again, thanks for reading and posting your thoughts.
Sheela
Hmmmm...I agree that when it comes to social issues that we sould leave to the states.
I disagree that we should take social issues out of the Republican Party.
There are Five principles that are absolutely essential to the stability of a free society. They are Limited Government, Individual Liberties, Free Market Enterprise, Traditional Family Values & a Strong National Defense.
If any one of those principle collapse its only a matter of time that the other four cease to exist.
So by taking out Traditional Family Values your are essentially beginning to destruction of our free society...there needs to be a party that fight for social issues and that is the Republican Party.
Visit www.rmcpacfl.com to learn more about the L.I.F.T.S. Principles.
The question is do the Republicans run moderates as candidtates for office, like with McCain? Look at the statistics. 40$ of the country considers themselves conservative 20% liberal and 36% moderate. If the Republican stick with conservatives they have a 2:1 advantage over the liberals. If you reason that the moderates lean more right than left in the same 2:1 ratio, it's a landslide for the Republicans. The Republicans need to steer clear of moderate candidates, all they do is blur the line between Democrat and Republican and lose votes. They will keep the 40% conservative base and pull the moderates in with a conservative candidate.
What is a moderate? That's an interesting question, but the important point is how the far left uses that against Republicans. The liberals cast the most extreme liberal Republicans as "moderates" like Scozzafava, for a purpose. The contrast the Scozzafava types (saying she's moderate) against the plain ole ordinary conservatives to make them seem "ultra conservative" or "extreme" by comparison. They want the "Scozzafava" types to seem moderate, and ordinary conservatives to seem "extreme." They want to say the "extremists" in the Republican party are driving the "Moderates" away. In short, it's all a ploy to marginalize the liberals true nemisis, the conservative.
The liberals aren't giving this advice for Republican success, now are they? No, they are trying to steer Republicans away from what the liberals fear most, the true conservative candidate who wins out over liberalism. Why do they attack Palin so much? Because they fear her, she's a threat.
I'm a registered Republican, but it isn't part of my identity. It's just a label, nothing else. It doesn't signify who I am in any respect. I agree with some aspects of the party's platform, but disagree with MANY others. Yet there are some who define themselves according to what their political label is.
This is why we see entire cottage industries arising out of political ideology. We see blogs with like minded people discussing the day's events, magazines, think tanks, and even cable news stations that cater directly to certain political subsets. They parrot the same opinions, define the arguments through the same prisms. In my view, such a dynamic is very harmful to the public discourse. It polarizes it and focuses it away from the relevant facts.
My advice is to look for the truth and let it guide you to where it may. Break out of the two party duopoly and try to find the facts, even if it challenges your own ideological conceptions. That's what being a true moderate mean
I'm a registered Republican, but it isn't part of my identity. It's just a label, nothing else. It doesn't signify who I am in any respect. I agree with some aspects of the party's platform, but disagree with MANY others. Yet there are some who define themselves according to what their political label is.
This is why we see entire cottage industries arising out of political ideology. We see blogs with like minded people discussing the day's events, magazines, think tanks, and even cable news stations that cater directly to certain political subsets. They parrot the same opinions, define the arguments through the same prisms. In my view, such a dynamic is very harmful to the public discourse. It polarizes it and focuses it away from the relevant facts.
My advice is to look for the truth and let it guide you to where it may. Break out of the two party duopoly and try to find the facts, even if it challenges your own ideological conceptions. That's what being a true moderate mean
As far as taking the social issues out of the NATIONAL party platform, I think that would be a mistake. For example, if you look at poll referenced here, you will see that 51 percent of Americans call themselves pro-life. Additionally, 70 percent of Republicans and Republican-leaning independents call themselves pro-life.
Insofar as LOCAL candidates for office, in such places as Broward county, I'm sure the numbers would tell a different story.
This would explain the Giuliani's, Schwarzenegger's, and Tom Ridge's of the party, who are pro-choice.
If the NATIONAL Republican party were to divorce itself from all social issues, they would give a lot of "the base" a reason not to vote at all.
The Republican Party needs to remain a "big tent" where social conservatives, economic conservatives, limited government conservatives, and security-conscious conservatives all have a place.
www.gallup.com/poll/118399/More-Americans-Pro-Life-Than-Pro-Choice-First-Time.asp
Richard- Aren't you supposed to be working at 10:00am?
Got something to say?
Examiner.com is looking for writers, photographers, and videographers to join the fastest growing group of local insiders. If you are interested in growing your online rep apply to be an Examiner today!