But there are a lot of good points made in this article. Rick Santorum was not a consistent defender of the Constitution. As a senator his loyalty should have been to the Constitution not to a big government Progressive president. But I think an amendment to the federal Constitution might be a good idea. The issue of gay marriage is different than abortion. Among pro-life people there are some differences over whether abortion should be allowed in certain narrow circumstances, so that issue is best to be left to the states. Marriage on the other hand is between one man and one woman period, and there are no exceptions to that. Remember the Constitutional amendment process itself requires three-quarters of the States and therefore is...

When Santorum was talking about "radical individualism" I don't think he was attacking the political idea of individualism. I think he was using the phrase "radical individualism" as a synonym for moral relativism. He was talking about society and culture in that quote, not the government. Robert Bork even used that phrase in one of his books and he was talking about stuff like abortion and gay marriage and judicial activism. The Santorum quote about consensual sex is about the case Lawrence v. Texas when the court found a right to engage in sodomy. He was talking about the legal ramifications of that decisions and he was attacking judicial activism and defending federalism.

DHE you are promoting an insane false premise a conspiracy theory. We reject the idea of mob rule and pure democracy because we embrace the Constitution and the idea of a republic not a democracy. The founding fathers also rejected pure democracy and established a government that is purely representative but but also limited and divided into three branches. The problem is that the Constitution has been abandoned for an unlimited and massive federal leviathan, representative government and the separation of powers have been abandoned for the the Administrative state that is not represenative and excercises legislative, executive, and judicial power and acts as a fourth branch of government, the problem is that we live in what Alexis de...

In order to accept the premise of this article you must first accept the idea that liberals had good ideas in the past. Liberals did not have good ideas in the past. Therefore this article promotes a false premise. Liberals have ideas now and they had ideas in the past. Conservatives and Republicans are currently fighting against their contemporary ideas. The problem is that liberal ideas sucked in the past and they suck now. All of the problems that the author mentions are problems that were created by past liberals (Social Security, Medicare, the Welfare State, government schools, the progressive income tax, trade restrictions). The liberal solution is to continue and expand the big government agenda.

"These days, the folks on the right are not the ones standing in the schoolhouse door, telling poor minority children they cannot come in. The ones doing that are at the other end of the political spectrum." Correct. It is Democrats now just as it was Jim Crow Democrats in the past.

It depends on what you mean by liberal. As an American Conservative I am also a Classical Liberal. Liberalism in the modern sense is the descendent of Progressivism and had it's beginning with Woodrow Wilson and FDR. Liberalism is Statism. Actually sir, to the contrary, Liberals have always been destroys. Liberalism provided the new ideas were both not needed and very destructive to destroy institutions, violate and shred the Constitution and cause problems. Reaction against the Statists is noble. Opposition to change away from freedom and toward Statism is honorable. You really have to be pretty brain dead to wonder wear the liberals have gone. Look at the entire Democrat Party and liberal republicans like Bush and McCain.

Liberals use Marxist language to oppose tax cuts and favor spending for unconstitutional purposes and massive wasteful spending. This author is a phony moderate or a liberal republican himself.

Wow. I'm really impressed by your stupidity. You liberals really are brain dead. I guess if Barney Frank and Chris Dodd are actually Republicans then it was "Republican caused"....etc.

That's not what he is saying at all. He is saying that the Democrat Party is completely wrong. But he's not advocating "Republicans". He is advocating policies rooted in Conservative principles and a firm belief in the Constitution and American traditions. We are in are current situtation soley and completely because of the extent to which the Constitution has been rejected, free market economics have been rejected, and America's Founding Principles have been abandoned. The Democrat Party rejects all of those things. The centrist position stands for nothing and is cowardly.

"And now that the legislators and do-gooders have so futilely inflicted so many systems upon society, may they finally end where they should have begun: May they reject all systems, and try liberty; for liberty is an acknowledgment of faith in God and His works." -Frederic Bastiat