In this time of great moral and economic peril, certain individuals continue to call for a radical transformation of our nation’s traditions, laws, and customs.
Then-Senator, now-President Obama championed “Hope and Change” and subsequently delivered class warfare rhetoric, socialized healthcare, appeasement, and anti-Americanism, to name a few. Similarly, Republicans—most pointedly, Republicans in Name Only (RINOs)—want to dilute the conservative message because “it alienates moderates and independents.”
Proponents of such change, particularly liberal Republicans, succeeded in undermining conservatism in 2006 and 2008. Towards the end of his presidency, President George W. Bush emboldened big government policies like No Child Left Behind, TARP, and billion-dollar budget shortfalls. Conservatism suffered a similar blow when John McCain clinched the Republican nomination in 2008. He was representative of the Republican Party gone awry: unabashedly moderate, disconnected from everyday life, and irresponsible in conduct. Without running mate and conservative champion Sarah Palin, McCain would have been a total failure.
In 2009, Ed Feulner of Heritage Foundation wrote about the importance of reconciling all tenets of conservatism: “I suggest that what is now needed is a politics of inclusion, not exclusion–no casting out of social conservatives or neoconservatives or any other kind of conservative, but a renewed fusionism that will unite all the branches of the now-divided conservative mainstream.”
After President Obama’s coronation into office on January 20, 2009, the tide began to change.
People united under the Tea Party Movement banner to reclaim limited government principles, constitutional values, and fiscal responsibility. Their efforts materialized in November 2010 after Republicans reclaimed control of the House of Representatives and won several Senate seats.
Similarly, Americans continued to champion traditional values. In 2008, Californians overwhelmingly voted 52 to 48 percent in favor of Prop 8—which defined marriage as between “one man and one woman.” Additionally, LifeNews cites Gallup analyst Lydia Saad on the ascent of pro-life views in 2011: “Americans are rather conservative in their stance on abortion, with 61% now preferring that abortion be legal in only a few circumstances or no circumstances. By contrast, 37% want abortion legal in all or most circumstances.”
Nevertheless, moderate and liberal Republicans have called for a moratorium or the complete elimination of social issues from the Republican Party.
In a 2010 interview with Weekly Standard, Indiana governor Mitch Daniels said presidential candidates “would have to call a truce on the so-called social issues. We’re going to just have to agree to get along for a little while.”
Republican feminist Margaret Hoover similarly called on the Republican Party to drop its pro-life plank. Hoover said, “If we don’t make inroads in the next 16 months, we’re going to lose the next generation.”
“People like you who try to divide our party on social issues, that is not the way forward for the Republican Party,” she added.
Moreover, the “brilliant” Meghan McCain—daughter of “Lord of the TARP” John McCain—has taken every opportunity to deride conservative women and social issues.
McCain said, “I consider myself a progressive Republican. I am liberal on social issues. And I think that the party is at a place where social issues shouldn’t be the issues that define the party.”
Recently, I heard the same rallying cry to hose down “extreme” conservative viewpoints at a conference. The male attendee—one markedly dumbfounded by conservatism at this conservative conference—bemoaned how Michele Bachmann and Rick Santorum, along with social issues, are “too extreme” for the Republican Party.
The horror, the horror!
The question beckons: Who are these people to chide conservatives for holding their beliefs? Why must political expediency—not principles—be the sole path to winning elections?
In 1980, Ronald Reagan ran for president as a conservative and won. He did not pander to moderate viewpoints. On the contrary, he succeeded as President of the United States because he championed conservative ideals.
Renowned conservative thinker Dr. Robert P. George of Princeton University expounds on this by presenting the case for sound conservatism in “No Mere Marriage of Convenience: Uniting Social and Economic Conservatives.”
He writes, “Sound conservatism, as a matter of principle and not mere pragmatism, will honor limited government, restrain spending, and provide honest money and low taxes — while at the same time upholding the sanctity of human life in all stages and conditions; the dignity of marriage as the conjugal union of husband and wife; and the innocence of children.”
As a result, it is imperative to vote conservative in 2012, so as to defeat President Obama and restore this country’s greatness.
Throughout history, moderate Republican candidates lost in general elections. Next year, voters can select a conservative candidate—a social, fiscal, and national defense conservative—to implement real change in Washington, D.C.
Till then, I will cling to my fishing rod, anti-Communism, family values, and Constitution before succumbing to big-government, leftist and equally Marxist-Leninist viewpoints— so should you.
We at TheCollegeConservative hold no prisoners and will not kowtow to Cultural Marxism. You have been warned!
Gabriella Hoffman // University of California at San Diego // @gabby_hoffman