The Republican party is no doubt a conservative party in America. Objectivists have often thought this is the party to reform, to persuade to leave tradition and religion behind in favor of individual rights. Unfortunately, Objectivists and those who advocate for true freedom away from not only state control of economy but state control of personal lives are losing out to another ideological force vying for the Republican party’s future - the Tea Party conservative movement.
http://www.politico.com/news/stories/1109/29057.html
It seems instead of spearheading a reform in the Republican party towards laissez-faire, it’s been more apt to support theocrats and right wing radicals. New York’s 23rd district was purged of a moderate Republican who supported abortion and gay rights in favor of a much more socially restrictive member of the Conservative party, a minor third party in NY. Now, this same group seeks to gain seats in the Congress come 2010. Just what we need
It is a problem in this country that very vocal minorities of extremists on both sides have wrestled control from the more moderate voices.
It would seem to me this is in part because those of us to want to work and earn what we keep and leave everybody’s lives up to themselves
-
are too busy living our lives to do this grassroots crap that both the left and the right do
-
we aren’t of much value to politicians since we don’t want anything redistributed to us. Face it- politicians gain power by offering to steal from Peter to give to Paul. If we don’t want the politician to steal at all they get no power from us.
I’m not sure that this dilemma is one that can be resolved.
New York’s 23rd district was purged of a moderate Republican who supported abortion and gay rights in favor of a much more socially restrictive member of the Conservative party, a minor third party in NY.
I’m not sure if that is the whole picture. The spin from the GOP is different. On TV yesterday, some of them were saying that the “moderate” was not just moderate on social issues, but also supported card-check and a public-option in healthcare.
She was certainly Left-of-center on those issues. I know people in that district, and they say she came off more as a blue-dog democrat. I am certainly not saying she was at all a good candidate, but I watched this whole thing come about on the blogosphere. It all started by criticizing her social views. Then eventually she became seen as a left wing lunatic.
It’s just the continued American tradition of two false alternatives.
If that’s the case, let’s hope the Democrat wins that seat. If he does, and if the GOP judges that it has to be more relaxed on social issues, it may been a useful drama.
from all the conservative websites Ive been checking, they’re really making this into more of a battle over fiscally conservative ideals, not social ones.
from all the conservative websites Ive been checking, they’re really making this into more of a battle over fiscally conservative ideals, not social ones.
I can try and collect some key posts later, but it started as opposition to her abortion position.
To Softwarenerd, there hasn’t been a Democrat representing that district since the 1800s.
To Softwarenerd, there hasn’t been a Democrat representing that district since the 1800s.
If CNN is right, it looks like there’s going to be one now. If the real reason for the GOP revolt was social issues, a democratic win is good news. OTOH, if this woman was for things like card-check and stimulus, it could well be that the social-conservative types got the ball rolling and the fiscal conservatives came along happily though they may not have done so if she was a fiscal conservative.