Townhall.com, Where Your Opinion Counts
Talk Radio:   Bill Bennett   Mike Gallagher   Dennis Prager   Michael Medved   Hugh Hewitt   
BREAKING NEWS  LeftArrow - Townhall.com : Conservative, Political, Republican   RightArrow - Townhall.com : Conservative, Political, Republican  
Columns, funnies & more in your inbox!
  • Check the boxes and send us your email address to receveive your free newsletter
  • Your daily must-read of conservative columns, cartoons and news. Coulter, Sowell, Krauthammer and more.
  • Townhall.com’s weekly inside scoop on what’s happening behind the scenes in the world of politics. When news breaks, we report.
  • Signup to receive the latest daily Townhall cartoons
Friday, July 20, 2007
Katie Favazza :: Townhall.com Columnist
Wholeheartedly Embracing Conservatism
by Katie Favazza
Vote on It:
Average Vote:
[+] Text [-]
 
Poll
Will the Dems' health care Christmas Present to America be an improvement or detriment to our health care system?


The Townhall.com community—including nationally-recognized radio hosts, columnists, and bloggers, readers who maintain their own blogs, and our conservative partner groups—regularly examines the need for strengthened conservative principles, and this week was no exception.

Brian, who first started his reader blog in July 2006, posted his analysis of conservatism in California (“Does(R) Mean Anything Anymore?”) on Monday. After mentioning the universal health care concerns plaguing his state, he wrote:

This is the sad state of affairs that’s reached when conservative principles—once proudly enshrined in the self-definition of the Republican Party—are no longer even given lip service.

Townhall.com featured this post for most of the week and it caused quite a stir with our readers, who posted nearly 200 comments.

Another California reader posed a question to the Townhall.com community earlier this week, a question which many conservatives have asked time and time again: do we really need so much government? Mick wrote that “more and more of our freedoms are being taken away,” citing a new California law that bans the use of handheld phones while driving as an example. His comparison of the recommended hands-free earpieces to outlawed music headphones highlights the double standards of the government’s misplaced effort to regulate consumerism.

Last fall, Democrats tried to capitalize on the allure of conservative truths in their campaigns and, in some cases, succeeded. Dave recently cautioned his Townhall.com audience against accepting the Democrats’ continuing copy-cat rhetoric:

Don't get lulled into a sense of security that there are a growing number of ‘conservatives’ in the Democratic party. They are wolves in sheep's clothing….The conservative movement is growing, but in the electorate, not [in] the Progressive Democrats.

Dave is not alone in thinking that the Left is trying to hijack some conservative principles. Mike noted on his new reader blog that even so-called “green living” can be a conservative practice. “Conservatism at its core is life with less dependency,” he wrote.

It’s true that the environmental movement is engulfed with hypocrisy. Energy independence, however, liberates us from our reliance on foreign oil, most of which is controlled by radical ideologues or dictators,and presents another front on which we can defeat terrorism. This is not an issue best left to the emotional Left.

It’s no wonder politicians are vying to exhibit conservative ideals, according to another Townhall.com reader. In a post called “Conservative or Republican,” Jay wrote:

I have found that when you present the ideas of conservatism to people, apart from the labels, they embrace them wholeheartedly.  Politicians know this.  Look at the last election cycle and it is clearly visible.  Look at where candidates are aligning themselves for the upcoming Presidential election, and it becomes clearly visible.

Jay started his blog, Conservatively Speaking, just last week to explain why he is a conservative and is already getting attention. He concluded in this particular post that conservative principles are less complicated than some would have you believe. For him, the beliefs seem to speak for themselves—and are the only way to refocus the GOP for big and small victories in 2008:

Either you believe that government should be small or you don't.  Either you believe that taxes are bad, or you don't.  Either you believe that the family is the ultimate institution, requiring the greatest protection, or you don't.  It is precisely this that got the Republican Party in trouble in the last election,and it will get them in trouble in the next if they do not right the ship and return to their foundation.

Things within the Republican Party are not perfect. They never have been and they never will be. In our current defeatist culture,however, it is more important than ever to support those Republicans fighting for conservatives around the country, including President Bush. In a recent column titled “Conservatives Shouldn’t Abandon Bush,” popular radio host Mike Gallagher said that “liberals are emboldened by Republican-fueled criticism” and reminded readers that the Left has enough “hatred and contempt” without the assistance of frustrated conservatives.

Despite the Democrats' and the mainstream media’s best efforts to convince us otherwise, conservatism is thriving within the hearts and minds of the American people—and it will be the source of 2008 Republican successes.

Be sure to visit the Townhall.com Blogatorium at http://townhall.com/youropinion for the latest reader observations or to start your own blog. Your opinion counts at Townhall.com—and you may find your own thoughts featured here in the future.

Share:
Vote on It:
Average Vote:
 
About The Author
Katie Favazza is Assistant Editor of Townhall.com. She blogs at http://katiefavazza.townhall.com

Be the first to read Katie Favazza's column. Sign up today and receive Townhall.com delivered each morning to your inbox.

The Evil Republican
Now fess up arn't you rally Ron Paul in wolves clothing?

Really, Jay?
"I have found that when you present the ideas of conservatism to people, apart from the labels, they embrace them wholeheartedly."

Ha!

Which part? The antequated self-righteous religious dogma, or the heartless greed-driven economic policy?

Evil R
"for a President who has declared himself our de facto monarch."

Uh. He hasn't.

"We are now exhorted that loyalty to our Reichchancellor trumps all,"

No. We're not.




TurnLeft
"Which part? The antequated self-righteous religious dogma, or the heartless greed-driven economic policy?"

Both parts, actually.

Bush is no conservative
... and it's beyond ridiculous for the author to imply that he is.

Hhmmm.... I've been a conservative all my life and this has always been my understanding of what that meant:

- limited constitutional government
- personal privacy
- personal responsibility
- strong national defense
- fiscally responsible government
- individual liberty
- national sovereignty
- traditional foreign policy of avoiding foreign entanglements

Tell me, if we rate those in government, and elsewhere, going around calling themselves conservative today, on these ideals, how do you think they do? Not very well at all, I would think.

What happened to the conservative movement that Barry Goldwater started so very long ago. We were co-opted, that's what. By a bunch of big government, Trotsky-loving, ex-think tank dwelling, self-proclaimed neoconservatives. They share very little at all with traditional conservative principles. But somewhere along the way, we have allowed everything that we once believed to be replaced with their tenets.

Remember back to what you personally always held close as to what conservative meant. Can you see the changes?

Here is a book on the subject, if you're interested.

CONSERVATIVES BETRAYED
"How George W. Bush and other Big Government Republicans HIJACKED the Conservative Cause"

by Richard Viguerie

It's time to.....
. TAKE BACK OUR MOVEMENT!
... TAKE BACK OUR GOVERNMENT!
...... TAKE BACK OUR COUNTRY!

http://www.conservativesbetrayed.com/

Remember our Founding Fathers and everything for which this country has stood. Don't let the greatest experiment in the history of mankind, be stolen from us and our progeny.

R E I N S T A T E . T H E . C O N S T I T U T I O N

TurnLeft
When people are asked if they would prefer less taxes or more, they always prefer less. When asked who should be responsible for raising their children, they respond that they themselves should be.

True conservative ideas are those of less government, stronger families, more personal responsibility. The liberal, socialist, ideas are the antiquated ideas. Remember the Berlin Wall and the Iron Curtain?

Hmm...
You had me until the very end, when the last paragraph basically calls Bush a conservative and says we should all shut up, drink the Kool-Aid and follow the Decider.

"Which part? The antequated self-righteous religious dogma, or the heartless greed-driven economic policy?"

As opposed to the self-righteous progressive religion that encourages us to use government guns to force us all to be charitable? Or the self-righteous progressive religion that wants us to buy carbon credits to save Gaia from the impending apocalypse brought on by sinful man?

Or the happy feel-good economic progressive policies that have saddled our government with liabilities in the neighborhood of 49 trillion dollars and will likely bring about more poverty and inflataion in the near future?

Sorry, you lost me..
at the mention of Bush fighting for conservatives.
He's been fighting against conservatives more than for us in this term.

soonhomo, this is for you:

"They who would give up an essential liberty for temporary security, deserve neither liberty or security"....Benjamin Franklin

Moral_majority
You say that Republicans need to embrace Bush's positions. You follow that by indicating the need to be strongly against immigration (illegal?), as one of the means to get the Southern vote. Surely you realize there's a contradiction here.


The difference
between parties is this: Republicans spend too much, refuse to protect the borders, and believe Islamofascism is a threat to this country.

The Dimocrats spend too much, refuse to protect the borders, and believe Islamofascism can be defeated by negotiations and pleas.

Liberty
I have to agree with that Liberty said. I, too, am a conservative my whole life.

To the Evil Republican, the party didn't leave you, Pres. Bush and the big governmnent RINOs left you. We (conservatives) are still here.

In 1978 (I think) Robert Ringer wrote Restoring The American Dream. I still have the book, and intend to re-read it. Ringer was a Libertarian, when nobody knew what that meant. A man ahead of his time. He noted even then that there was no difference between a Republican and a Democrat. He coined the word Demopublican to describe them. He was right. I am a registered Republican, mostly so I can vote in the primaries. When I describe myself, I am a Conservative, the same way Libery describes it above.

Well, Katie, thanks for mentioning
my blog. I truly appreciate it.

I do find it odd, however, that it's mentioned in the context of a column that has as its basic premise the support of Bush, as he's one of the people I find most problematic, and is exactly the type of politician I'm most concerned about, as expressed in my essay "Does (R) Mean Anything Anymore?"


AZPhil
You need to start your own Townhall blog... You paint a clear picture of whats wrong.

~ Josue
http://josue.townhall.com


BrianR:
My basic premise is not to just blindly support Bush. My premise is that across the board, conservatives recognize that conservatives need to refocus on core principles. Bush has frustrated many of his supporters, but at the end of the day, we have to pick our battles and he is not the biggest, or even one of the biggest, obstacles for the American people. And that, I think, is consistent with your very well-written post.

define conservatism
Liberty wrote at 11:21:

Hhmmm.... I've been a conservative all my life and this has always been my understanding of what that meant:

- limited constitutional government
- personal privacy
- personal responsibility
- strong national defense
- fiscally responsible government
- individual liberty
- national sovereignty
- traditional foreign policy of avoiding foreign entanglements

This is not conservatism as much as it is libertarianism. By definition "conservatism" must mean the desire to conserve something. In the broadest sense "conservatism" for us would mean the desire to conserve Western civilization. Some of Liberty's point's (e.g., personal responsibility, national defense) are part of the long Western tradition; others are not, (e.g., avoiding foreign entanglements).

But the essential element of true conservatism is the attempt to maintain the central core of Western culture, which is the Judeo-Christian faith-based moral code. If one does not support that, one is supporting the overthrow of the culture we grew up in, and that can hardly be called conservative -- by the very definition of the word.

Barry Goldwater called himself a conservative, but he was not. He was pro-abortion, and thus set radically against the Judeo-Christian culture of the West. He was a libertarian, but not a conservative.

Both conservatives and libertarians generally oppose big-government liberals, so they are often on the same side of political issues; and many people have a bit of both in them (think Rush Limbaugh, for example). But libertarians and conservatives are not the same thing.

R and D, one and the same
R means exactly what it’s supposed to mean, Republican. R does not mean conservative, as demonstrated by our current President and the Republicans in Congress.

If R is supposed to mean conservative, then R might as well mean Rush, since he is conservative and he is “running the country”.

I don’t think the Republicans have learned a lesson from the 06 thrashing. Most of them feel that it was a one-time tantrum on the part of conservatives and that these same voters will come crawling back to them in fear of a Hillary presidency with a Dem Congress. They better think again. Conservatives are not like most black voters who go back to the Dems, even after being taken for granted over and over again.

Moral_majority
The contradiction is this: Bush is one of the biggest amnesty proponents in the US. If Republicans embrace El Presidente's positions on every issue, they cannot run on an anti-illegal immigration platform.

tgwWhale

Both Barry Goldwater and Ronald Reagan referred to themselves as libertarian-conservatives. Perhaps that is where you are misunderstanding. The belief in individual liberty and the Constitution are at the very crux of traditional conservatism.


“…man is not free unless government is limited. There's a clear cause and effect here that is as neat and predictable as a law of physics: As government expands, liberty contracts.”
~ Ronald Reagan

Conservatism
Conservatism is a movement split 5 ways:

Neoconservatives: interventionist foreign policy in favor of spreading democracy

Social Conservatives: want domestic policy to focus on upholding moral values and justice (abortion, death penalty, porn/smut)

Fiscal Conservative: care about taxes, a balanced budget, a sound monetary system, and returns on their investments

Libertarians: care about individual freedom and liberty, want government effectively out of anything and everything save for a few activities, essentially exist in fundamental conflict with much of the neocons and social cons.

RINOs: effectively agree with nothing of the Conservative movement, no one has any idea why these people are associated with the Republican party or don the title 'conservative' (see: Arlen Specter)

The Neoconservative sect's policies have crippled the Republican party in the public sphere. Meanwhile, the Social/Libertarian divide is the greatest thing plaguing the Conservative movement currently.

This used to be easily remedied because the freedoms libertarians wanted (generally economic) were not in conflict with the controls social conservatives wanted (i.e. use of the FCC for obscene television, prohibition of abortion as murder). However, as the libertarians have moved to becoming also more socially liberal and in agreement with the left, the divide has grown by leaps and bounds. Add in the RINOs, and things get even uglier.

What I find encouraging is
that more and more younger people are adopting more conservative stances (if they are truly educated on the issues and not just falling for whatever their educators tell them!) This is refreshing and for me gives hope to the future that conservative values will continue with the younger generations. I have seen this with my own children and their friends, so there is hope indeed.

Reenie Is Right
Five years ago Tom Tancredo was the only Congressman who had the guts to come out and talk about illegal immigration.
That tells me that he believes in what he says.
He is a man of conviction. He wasn't wetting his finger and holding it up to find out which way the political winds were blowing. As President he would be COMMITTED to stopping illegal immigration.
We conservatives WANT a true conservative as President. If we would all shake this fear that our vote would be wasted and go ahead and VOTE for a true conservative instead of compromising, why, it just might turn out that there are enough of us to carry the day.
Know this, fellow conservatives; Reenie and I will definitely be voting for Tom Tancredo next November.

Don't believe educators...the media...
Or scientists...or doctors, either...

Intellectuals...dangerous...

Writers, unless they have a talk show, are also liars...

Journalists...they don't know anything...

Bloggers, hah! Bloggers write stuff on the internet anonymously...

Soldiers who come back from Iraq, they only turn coward if they speak out...so only believe the ones that agree with you...

Katie Favazza! That's who we'll all listen to and believe! Yesiree! A regular William Penn...
Erh...William Buckley...er....Okay...Bill Kristol?
Katie, Katie, she's our man, townhall.com is for the most intelligent minds of our (conservative) culture....Except no stupid teachers, journalists, scientists, intellectuals, war heroes, anti-war "veterans" or the like....

Grade "A" Prime, Chickenspits ya'll are...

Even if this counterproductive Police Action was mostly non-violent...

You'd still be whining about taxes and mexicans instead of teaching, studying, or learning....
Fire Out.

BrotherFire:
I'm a girl.

Katie
Thanks for the kind mention. I'd have to agree with BrianR though. Bush may not be a fight we need to pick, but he is a problem we have to get around. To want open borders and amnesty is no small thing indeed. And the Establishment GOP is definitely on very thin ice. I can see the Dems taking it all as a result of the GOP refusing to listen to conservatives.

The Evil Republican
You say that Tom Tancredo is "riding the illegal immigration wave to stroke his insatiable ego".

But it is my recollection that he was out there talking about illegal immigration long before it was popular. There was no "wave" 5 years ago.

Also, having heard him interviewed many times, he never came across to me as anything other than a humble man with a genuine interest in curtailing illegal immigration for all the right reasons.

Can you fill me in on how I could be so mistaken?

Why not Ron Paul?
Ask yourself, how can there even be an article like this without mention of the popular online (and real world) Conservative Candidate Ron Paul?

If we truly want to go back to the original principles of Conservatism. I don't know how you can't endorce Ron Paul for President in 2008.

http://www.RonPaul2008.com for more info

Mr. A.

Ron Paul doesn't just give "lip service"
And by the way, Ron Paul doesn't just give "lip service" to conservative constitutional ideals.

He lives them. As the scripture goes, "you shall know them by their fruits (works)"

Brief Overview of Congressman Paul’s Record:

He has never voted to raise taxes.
He has never voted for an unbalanced budget.
He has never voted for a federal restriction on gun ownership.
He has never voted to raise congressional pay.
He has never taken a government-paid junket.
He has never voted to increase the power of the executive branch.

He voted against the Patriot Act.
He voted against regulating the Internet.
He voted against the Iraq war.

He does not participate in the lucrative congressional pension program.
He returns a portion of his annual congressional office budget to the U.S. treasury every year.

Congressman Paul introduces numerous pieces of substantive legislation each year, probably more than any single member of Congress.


Thanks Katie
I'm always glad to hear good news about conservatism being "cool" to the next generation.
Any uplifting news in politics is welcomed but rarely seen these days.

As I write my own version of history I compare W with Bill Clinton and I note that Bill was going to be a "new" democrat. Sometimes reaching across the aisle and sometimes not. He governed by polls and manipulation.

W thought that reaching accross the aisle was successful for Bill so he thought he would continue to do that as POTUS just as he did as governor of Tx. He governed by the will of the people when it came to 9/11. Then he began to govern by his own moral code.

I am going to admire at least this one thing about W - in his moral code, winning against terrorism is not subject to polls or manipulation. Its the right thing to do in spite of its unpopularity. Its gut check time and he passes that test. Unfortunately, he fails in others: McCain/Feingold, illegal immigration, No Child Left Behind, & prescription drugs.

His legacy can be used by both sides of the political spectrum. Conservatives can say, "See. We need to elect a more conservative republican so we can get our borders secured."

Decmocrates can say, "Bush lied, people died." Catchy isn't it. Those lucky democrate politicians. All their follers need to know is that if something rhymes, it must be true. Sadly, conservatives rely on other evidences to ascertain truth.


To my Libertarian friends
Hey - we are on the same side of the political line in the sand. I want my politicians to be "Librtarian lite" Republicans, not RINOs.

And

As someone who has recently had invested funds overseas stolen by my own government, I can tell you our gov't overreaches its authority on a daily basis.

Where is it written that absolutely everything you can buy, sell, or own, or even borrow - has to be taxed (except food)?


ron paul
the only thing that is troubling about ron paul is the fact that he insists on having the "R" behind his name.

The GOP and Conservatism.
The GOP has not exactly supported the conservative movement for most of my own life as far back as I can remember (at least the early 70s). There are elitists that are every bit as liberal as the Democrats, more so in many cases, and they certainly didn't appreciate Ronald Reagan or the likes of Rush Limbaugh doing their thing. As much as it brought them power, the mere idea of ingratiating themselves to people outside the beltway who weren't even from the East Coast or from old money was as much sickening. I daresay that the Bush family is very much in the category of Washington elites who just happen to live predominantly in Texas.

So here we are, with a liberal in the White House with an "R" next to his name. So he cut taxes. So did John Kennedy. So he retaliated against al Qaeda and toppled Saddam Hussein. Well, not all liberals are immature idiots. It is interesting to note that the president bent over backward to achieve a diplomatic solution to Iraq through the UN, though looking back we now know that this was a futile effort. Now we've got an Iran begging for retaliatory punishment from us on principle and I don't see our president rattling any sabers.

He can talk a great game, but he does nothing domestically beyond the tax cuts. Perhaps we can thank him from restricting federal spending on embryonic stem cells, but the latest illegal amnesty fiasco revealed, again, his true colors. Conservatives not only believe in limited government and frugal spending, but national sovereignty and American exceptionalism, both of which he rarely speaks about.

And Congress is definitely no better. Only a few GOP congressmen have my respect anymore, and it's as though the rest have given up. Any look to the Democrats for sanity left with Zell Miller.

The idea of looking to the LP or any other third party for leadership is laughable. When the likes of Ron Paul realize what year it is and the nature of the reality we live in, call me. Until then, the LP and other third parties are nothing more than conversation clubs. The LP, in particular, is a joke. They've been around since 1971, and how many governorships have they won? How many Senate seats? How many House seats, aside the one named Ron Paul? At least the Reform Party got one governorship already. Why should anyone invest anything in this party, when the GOP can be better influenced and rebuilt?

Seems to me, Katie
that much of the comments here directly or indirectly, represent the larger problem these days with the country.

As you stated so well up front, there is a misplaced (I believe) notion that there is this:
"need for strengthened conservative principles"

We have become so accustomed to the constant onslaught from the media and the left about Republicanism and Conservatism being one and the same, we have actually found ourselves convinced this is so.

Strengthened Conservatism is less the problem than belief IN Conservatism and its tenets and whether this "ideology" is the better of the many out there for solving the problems we face as a nation.

For too long now, every Republican departure from the principles of Conservatism has been touted as the next "perfect example" of the FAILINGS of Conservatism...and nothing could be further from the truth as your quoted blogger "Jay" so correctly pointed out here:

"I have found that when you present the ideas of conservatism to people, apart from the labels, they embrace them wholeheartedly. Politicians know this. Look at the last election cycle and it is clearly visible. Look at where candidates are aligning themselves for the upcoming Presidential election, and it becomes clearly visible."

AND, HERE:

"Either you believe that government should be small or you don't. Either you believe that taxes are bad, or you don't. Either you believe that the family is the ultimate institution, requiring the greatest protection, or you don't. It is precisely this that got the Republican Party in trouble in the last election,and it will get them in trouble in the next if they do not right the ship and return to their foundation."

The problem we face is CLEARLY the lack of belief and conviction on the part of those calling themselves Conservative who find themselves in elective office...and absolutely NOT because of the notions of Conservatism themselves.

Excellent work, and discussion...well done.

Sign Up to Post Your CommentsSign Up to Post Your Comments
If you are already registered, click here to login. Otherwise, please take a few seconds to register with Townhall.com. Once you sign up, you’ll be able to post your comments immediately, use the action center, get podcasts, and more!
Note: Fields marked with a red asterisk (*) are required.
Salutation:
First Name:
*
Last Name:
*
Email:
*
Nickname:
*
Note: Nick name will be shown when you post comments.
Address 1:
*
Address 2:
City:
*
State:
*
Zip:
*
Phone:
      
Your daily must-read of conservative columns, cartoons and news. Coulter, Sowell, Krauthammer and more.
(Bi-Weekly) We highlight the best opportunities from our partners for surveys, action items and more.