« BACK  |  PRINT

RS

MEMBER DIARY

GOProud, Conservatism and the Definition of Words

By: Drew Ryun (Diary)  |  February 7th, 2011 at 04:29 PM  | 

RESIZE: AAA

We are at a turning point as conservatives. And quite frankly, we are a movement saved by the tea party-a plain spoken, salt of the earth movement that refuses to get wrapped around the axle by the Republican Party and the conservative establishment inside the Beltway. Even the word “conservative” itself was co-opted by the Bush Administration and elements of the Republican Party so much so that no one knew what meant until the reawakening that began April 15, 2009.

I, for one, believe “conservative” still means something. I also believe “conservatism” is a comprehensive ideology.

Which brings me to GOProud and the dust up around CPAC. Are they, as they claim, a conservative group that is fiscally conservative and socially liberal? I would suggest they are not conservative at all (more on that below), just as my brother Ned challenged the bone fides of pro-lifers who continue to grow the size and scope of government.

But let’s start with the obvious. We all know where GOProud is on the social issues. They are chaired by a pro-choice lesbian who is a former NOW chapter president and their stated goals are to win the same sex marriage battles in individual states.

But what of their claim to be fiscal conservatives? Let’s start with domestic partnerships. A social issue, you say? Ever wonder what the price tag for the American taxpayer would be on domestic partnerships? For just federal employees, both current and retired, to have domestic partners, the cost is $600M over the next ten years for the American taxpayer. In case anyone missed the forest for the trees, no fiscal conservative seeks to grow the size and scope of government.

Who did GOProud endorse this past fall? Mark Kirk, a man with perinial mid-50s rankings by fiscal groups,received their endorsement. Why? Because he was “right” on gay issues. Mary Bono received their endorsement as well and no one would call her a fiscal champion-she’s #232 in the Club for Growth’s Power Rankings for the House. But again, she supports same sex marriage. Same was true with Charles Djou, who ended up losing on November 2nd. Oddly enough, I know they suggested people vote for Ron Johnson in Wisconsin and Tom Coburn in Oklahoma, but not one dollar was spent on their behalf by GOProud (in looking through GOProud’s financial reports, it appears they spent $11k trying to defeat Barbara Boxer, $10k trying to beat Barney Frank, almost $2k to help Richard Hanna in NY and $13k to help Charles Djou. That’s it. Talk about a tempest in a tea pot.).

Where is GOProud on other issues that are central to conservatism?  Earmarks? Silence, even in their much ballyhooed letter to Mitch McConnell and John Boehner after November 2nd. On unions? Silent at a time when states are collapsing under the financial burden of unions and their pensions. START? Crickets. Apparently, GOProud is unfamiliar with any of the three legs of conservatism, simply using elements of it as window dressing while aggressively pushing their homosexual agenda.

So what is conservatism? Is it a quantified body of doctrine? A comprehensive worldview that presents a vision for what the world should look like?

I say all of the above. And, just as importantly, I believe words still mean something. They have to. When we lose the definition of words, we lose a fundamental element of society as a whole. Which is why I argue that “conservative” means something and conservatism is an ideology that one adheres to to be called a conservative. I respect GOProud’s right to state what they believe in. It’s not conservatism, though.

Ronald Reagan often spoke of the three legs of conservatism-social, fiscal, national security. I think one can emphasize different elements of conservatism (I lead with fiscal issues or I lead with social issues), but unless you believe in all elements of it, you are not a conservative. Period. They all intertwine. If you are missing one part, you are missing the whole.

Tags: , , , , , , , ,

COMMENTS

POSTING RULES  |  LOGIN TO COMMENT  |  REGISTER TODAY

  • Pingback: Gilberto Curcuru

  • Pingback: Hien Jou

  • Pingback: Auto Forum

  • Pingback: Welcome to My Blog

  • Pingback: Reverse Number Lookup

  • Pingback: distilling wine

  • Pingback: umow sie na randke

  • Pingback: darmowa strona z randkami

  • Pingback: rewelacyjny portla randkowy

  • Pingback: super randka

  • Pingback: randki internetowe

  • Pingback: steel strapping

  • Pingback: rubinetteria

  • Pingback: wedding planner tuscany

  • Pingback: Media Streaming

  • Pingback: Look At This Website

  • Pingback: top article

  • Pingback: web design barrow

  • Pingback: breastactives pills

  • Pingback: Karaoke on sale

  • Pingback: desain interior rumah

  • Pingback: biaya bangun rumah

  • Pingback: Julie Leiendecker

  • Pingback: Union Millwork Installers

  • Pingback: aloe vera juice for hair

  • Pingback: cv

  • Pingback: cv wzór

  • Pingback: madamelux

  • Pingback: sofy rozkładane

  • Pingback: bmx bikes

  • http://seekingliberty.wordpress.com fmaidment

    …that you can’t be both gay and conservative. Just that, from the information you’re relating here, GOProud isn’t.

    Which has got me pretty upset, since they offer themselves as a counter to the Log Cabin Republicans, which has shown itself to be a faux-conservative gay group.

    I know there are gay conservatives out there. They don’t advocate gay marriage. They don’t advocate a lessening of morality in the public square. They aren’t fiscal or social statists and they aren’t against having a strong military. Tthough they may not personally be happy with DADT, they’re far more concerned with other policy issues. They are gay, but it is not what defines them and you’d frequently not know it unless they’d first told you. But it is my fear that their numbers may be far smaller than I had once thought.

    All of this indicates to me that the Right is no place to play identity politics. It’s not what we’re about. We’re about individual freedom, individual responsibility, individual achievement and individual identities. Let the Left make hay out of group identiies. It may have worked while they’re in the minority, but dis-unity has been their greatest achillies heel these past 2 years.

  • americanelephant

    you say, “So what is conservatism? Is it a quantified body of doctrine? A comprehensive worldview that presents a vision for what the world should look like?

    I say all of the above.”

    Ok, let’s accept that as completely true, for the sake of argument.

    Here’s the problem, only 40% of Americans consider themselves conservative. Try to win an election with 40%.

    That’s why Ronald Reagan built a COALITION, Some people were social conservatives, some people were fiscal conservatives, some were defense hawks, while others were various combinations of the three.

    Conservatives must coalesce with people with whom we agree on most isseus, if you want a movement of people who agree on all issues, you are building a losing movement, a MINORITY movement, not a majority. It takes a big tent, Reagan coalition to win majorities in America, you are building a puritanical, tiny little PUP tent movement.

    And While I congratulate you for strutting your 100% idealistic purity, that type of thinking is HARMFUL, not helpful to the cause of winning elections.

  • http://www.hakubi.us/ Neil Stevens

    She was one of the R votes for Cap and Tax. She also lost 10% of the vote to a third party candidate last November, turning CD 45 into a big blue stripe in the 2010 Swing Chart:

    http://unlikelyvoter.com/swingometer/2010-house-of-representatives-swings/

    That big blue stripe in Southern California stretching to the Arizona Border? That’s CD 45, showing a swing to the Dems because of the third party split. She still won, but by less.

  • americanelephant

    GOProud is practically brand new. (just 2 years old), they have made limited campaign contributions because they have limited funds. They endorse people who are the Republican candidates — candidates who both support and do not support the so-called “gay agenda” because they are the Republicans ON THE BALLOT — which you then try to hold against them.

    Unfair and misleading points.

    And did you at anytime try to contact GOProud to ask them about their positions before misinforming people? It is clear from your arguments that you did not, and are unfamiliar with them.

    Do your homework before writing so you are not misinforming people please.

  • http://www.hakubi.us/ Neil Stevens

    So of all the people they could have endorsed they endorsed a cap and taxer?

    Come on.

  • http://teapartisan.wordpress.com Socrates

    It’s said that every problem can be solved with the addition of another level of indirection.

    The application here is that people are once again conflating Republicanism with conservatism.

    Republicans have a big tent, allowing anyone who is generally for limited government, free enterprise, robust national defense, the importance of prudence, and traditional virtue on some level into the Party.

    But rigid conservative ideologues like myself are only one element of the party. The most proper one, to be sure, but only one.

    Because an unspoken element in conservativism is tradition, the belief that the way things are, or even were recently, is the way they ought to be. We seek harmony, the cooperation of free people in society together. Conservatives may accept change, but they do not revel in it, nor certainly demand change for its own sake. There must always be a reason for it. The change we seek is always a return to soundness, a settling of the waters.

    And so we conservatives can differ over whether a robust national defense means having bases in Europe or moving them to this hemisphere. We can debate whether the federal government has the Constitutional power to regulate growing certain plants for one’s own use. We can argue about what is prudent, because two very different courses of action may both be considered conservative.

    But we have a question here: can one be called a conservative and not adhere to traditional moral virtue? Are not other versions of a stable, harmonious society possible?

    You had best be able to show a functioning, stable society in the fulfillment of your plans. If what you plan leans to strife, or instability, or a bigger government, or any number of other unforeseen problems, I do not call it conservatism. I’m not sure what it is, but I know what it’s not.

  • http://teapartisan.wordpress.com Socrates

    Actually, the only test for admission as a Republican is if you can support other Republicans.

  • americanelephant

    “The application here is that people are once again conflating Republicanism with conservatism.”

    Not conflating, simply recognizing that conservatives have NO other path toward victory and actually implementing their vision EXCEPT through the Republican party.

    Reality.

  • americanelephant

    they endorsed Republicans all over the country.

    William F, Buckley, who I’ll wager has more conservative bona fides than ANYONE here said ?The wisest choice would be the one who would win. No sense running Mona Lisa in a beauty contest. I?d be for the most right, viable candidate who could win.”

    That is what GOProud did because they are more concerned with winning and actually advancing a conservative agenda, then strutting around pronouncing how much more intellectually PURE they are and losing.

  • Finrod

    Your best shot at debunking GOProud’s lack of fiscal conservatism is that domestic partnerships might cost the federal government as much as $600 million, over 10 years? Barack Obama was able to find more than that to cut this year.

    I suppose tax reform, free-market healthcare reform, Social Security personal savings accounts, judges that don’t legislate from the bench, defending against Islamic radicals, and defending the Second Amendment doesn’t matter a hill of beans to you? What about ending taxpayer funding of abortion? That’s (gasp) a SOCIAL CONSERVATISM issue. Butbutbut I thought GOProud wasn’t socially conservative on anything.

    Lame, very lame. NOT recommended.

  • http://teapartisan.wordpress.com Socrates

    We can share votes and candidates with people without calling either our fellow voters, or even the candidates, conservatives.

    Words have meaning. It’s a thing for us.

  • silkywiley

    I disagree, sir. It seems to me that the Republicans have won when the state a strong message in all the categories, social, fiscal,and defense.

    The biggest wins have been when there is an inclusion of the social conservatives. Social conservatives have an impulse to stay away from politics, many consider politics corrupt and corrupting and will withdraw unless there is a genuine social conservative issue.

    The new “young” conservatives steeped in PC and inclusion seem to me to be somewhat embarrassed by social conservatives. They are so retro and not with it in the new era. You can’t expect them to come to the elections on the other two legs of conservatism. They put their spirituality ahead of the worldly concerns.

    I began life as a fiscal conservative, I have always been strong on defense. I came to social conservatism late in life, because of a lifetime of watching liberal social issues corrupt and undermine our great country breaking down the most basic instution of civilization, the family, the extended family not the 50s socially engineered “nuclear family”. My guess is that many of the young will come to the same conclusion some time down the road.

  • http://www.hakubi.us/ Neil Stevens
  • http://www.hakubi.us/ Neil Stevens

    So you’re just looking silly here.

  • http://teapartisan.wordpress.com Socrates

    The question is about conservatism, not what is electable.

    I am fairly certain the diarist is well-versed as a vote counter.

  • americanelephant

    I’m sorry, who was the primary challenger who beat, or even came CLOSE to beating Bono?

    Yeah. Kinda the point.

  • http://www.hakubi.us/ Neil Stevens

    They chose to. They chose to endorse Bono Mack *because* she’s to the left on marriage.

    GOProud is a single issue fringe organization.

  • americanelephant

    I think you, and the author are confusing the latter for the former.

    Is a social conservative a conservative if they support the Faith Based initiative to open government support to religious charities instead of just secular ones? By the definition prooffered, no, but there are millions of them, and you can bet they count themselves among the 40% of Americans who self-identify as conservative.

    This whole article is nothing more than masturbatory. Look at ME , I’m the PUREST puritanical conservative.

    Its damaging and masturbatory, NOT helpful. It does nothing to grow conservatism OR the Republican party, it alienates, and turns off people who would be our allies.

    Anyone wanna show me where Reagan or Buckley engaged in this sort of masturbatory chest puffing?

    They didnt and they wouldnt because its counter productive.

  • americanelephant

    Are you inside their heads? Did they say this somewhere?

    Citation please!

  • lineholder

    There’s no call for this comment. it is totally unnecessary.

  • http://teapartisan.wordpress.com Socrates

    I know a self-pleasing, lotus-gazing article and comment when I see one, thank you.

    And having been at this site for five years now, I know the look of a commenter who won’t last out the day.

    Nice knowing you.

  • americanelephant

    SHOW me where Reagan or Buckley ever engaged in this sort of masturbatory puritanism.

    with links please.

  • runner12

    gotten the boot, but may I just say that the two words he put together have to be one of the most ridiculous word combinations ever invented. When I read it I was not sure whether to laugh at the smallness of his/her intellectual argument or be offended. Oh well, proof that there are some REALLY weird people out there.

  • http://www.hakubi.us/ Neil Stevens

    Why did they use their limited resources to endorse Mary Bono Mack instead of a) endorsing Clay Thibodeau, or b) staying silent?

    RedState certainly doesn’t endorse in every race when there’s no good choice.

  • americanelephant

    …does the conservative movement want to be?

    Because among the 40% of Americans who self identify as conservatives are MILLIONS who do not meet the authors masturbatory, puritanical definition.

    I’d guess his exclusionary definition chopped the Conservative movement down from 40% to somewhere around 10-20%

    I suppose it makes that 10-20 percent (a group to which i probably belong) feel real good (hence the word masturbatory) about how pure they are

    but what else does it accomplish? Other than alienating people who consider themselves conservatives until a bunch of puritans make them feel unwelcome for not being pure enough.

    No thank you. Not the kind of Conservatism Reagan OR Buckley or I support.

  • lineholder
  • americanelephant

    Since when? All it takes is an internet connection and a keyboard.

    You are confusing endorsement with financial support. They didnt spend a dime on her race.

    And I bet dollars to donuts, Reagan and Buckley would have endorsed her too.

  • americanelephant

    What’s out of line about it. The word masturbatory? I know it isnt a swear word because Michael Medved uses it on the air all the time.

    Furthermore, the point is spot on. The entire column is “Youre not a REAL conservative, because blah blah blah”

    Where does that get anyone, other than a masturbatory high for puffing up their chest and strutting around saying look how PURE I am.

    Masturbatory Puritanism. Excellent description if I do say so myself.

  • Bill S

    So stop. Now.

  • americanelephant

    And stop what exactly?

  • http://www.hakubi.us/ Neil Stevens
  • Bill S

    For using crude language.

    And for generally being a jerk about it.

    Leave the thread.

    (Mgmt)

  • americanelephant

    Saying that millions of people who consider themselves conservatives arent TRUE conservatives. You dont think thats intentionally exclusionary, elitist and insulting? The I would respectfully suggest you arent thinking clearly.

    And what crude language? If Michael Medved, perhaps the most prudish conservative around, uses the word regularly on the air, and its not listed as vulgar in the dictionary, then I’d suggest you’re wrong.

    But, you apparently work here. I dont regularly comment here, so I was unaware that this place was run like BigLizards or the Daily Kos, but apparently it is.

    I will go talk ABOUT RedState on Twitter and other blogs, instead.

  • Bill S

    You wouldn’t be the first.

    You won’t be the last.

  • acat

    What Kirk represents is the fact that the Illinois GOP is still not over the Obama election. No, not 2008, the one way back in 2004 that split the state party.

    A guy named Jim Ryan was the Repub nominee in 2003, and was crushing the almost unknown Dem candidate but .. he ran into some trouble, something about the papers from his divorce from Jeri “7 of 9″ Ryan being unsealed and leaked to the press by a “fellow Republican”. Ryan withdrew in disgrace.

    The (IL) Social Conservatives, having had Ryan foisted upon them, demanded a seat at the table to pick the replacement. Seemed like a reasonable request since they were the best organized to get the new candidates’ name out. The (IL) FiCons (who controlled the party apparatus and would pick the candidate because – hat tip ColdWarrior – most SoCons were *not involved* in the party) gave them Alan Keyes…. then didn’t give him any support. Keyes went down in flames against the Dem with the thin resume and no name recognition… Barack Obama.

    Kirk is, literally, the closest the Illinois GOP has come to agreeing on a statewide candidate since. It’s a bit backwards from CPAC – the SoCons are right on this one – they supported Kirk, while the FiCons let R-Gov-Cand Brady sink. (the by-county vote totals tell the tale)

    Yes, Kirk is not a SoCon, and yes he was endorsed by GOProud. He’s still going to vote with the Conservatives more often – much more often – than former holders of that Senate chair Roland Burris and Barack Obama. Worse for the fairy tale above, Kirk is former armed services – he’s not likely to be using the services as a social experiment, unlike D-Sen-Cand Giannoulias would….

    This misunderstanding of what Kirk means does not help your case, Drew.

    Mew

  • edwyrd

    they always start an argument with self righteous indignant question. i think it is to put their opponent on the defense. you can bet that what follows is a bunch of fluff

    gays cant be social conservatives as long as they promote homosexuality in ANY dimension. PERIOD.
    if they want to join us in voting for conservatives because they can’t trust libnerals with the checkbook, that is up to them.

    can anyone really say that if the libs were more or less fiscally responsible that GOProud would even exist? or that we would not more clearly see them a poison pill? i respectfully submit that american elephant is more the UNamerican donkey…

  • Brian Hibbert

    When did GoProud endorse Kirk??? In the primaries where you’re taking sides within the party and picking candidates for the party to put forward or after?

    All of the articles I can find that mention the Kirk endorsement were in October or 2010 a few short weeks before the general election! Good Lord!!!! I also endorsed Kirk at that phase. In fact I was pushing him HARD after the primaries because I just couldn’t stand the thought of Senator Alexi. And so far, Kirk has performed better than I anticipated and has caved far less to the Dems than was expected. I’m THRILLED that he won in the general election. He wasn’t my choice in the primaries, but there was no other choice in the general.

    Now, if we can just get a decent candidate to replace Durbin (I’d be happy with a Kirk clone in that seat too).

  • Finrod

    But Mark Kirk was a vote to repeal ObamaCare. Heck, he cosponsored the repeal bill, even.

  • acat

    It’s getting the shambling remnants of the party to all shamble in the same general direction…. behind the candidate.

    Mew

  • Locked and Loaded

    I followed it to read the GOProud News Archives dating back to October and found that the organization has very little to show for itself. Sure, they have posted an agenda and spoken out in support of DADT, but really, what else have they actually DONE?

  • Locked and Loaded
  • Finrod

    From the reaction from many here, you’d think they had single-handedly brought socialism to the United States.

    They’re very new and are under attack from people in their own party. Merely surviving is a credit to them.

  • http://teapartisan.wordpress.com Socrates

    He’s a finger-in-the-wind guy, but in the most bestest way possible: he actively seeks out constituent opinion, and seems to value doing so as a personal principle. I’m quite pleasantly surprised by it.

    It’s not how I think a Senator should behave, but I’ll take it over what I thought I was getting.

    But he voted for DADT repeal and START ratification, which means he hates America.

  • acat

    he was a rep for a FiCon (read not-SoCon) district… and in a state where the party apparatus is dominated by the FiCons. He’s not DeMint, but he’s also not Snowe.

    Mew

  • Locked and Loaded

    name the issues in which they have actively advanced a conservative cause. And feel free to use a loose interpretation of conservatism. Just remember, showing up for parties and making pronouncements mostly aimed at the membership don’t really account for much.

  • Brian Hibbert

    next month. It’s the Tazewell dinner March 26th in Morton, Ill. if anyone’s interested in attending, contact me and I’ll get you some tickets.

  • http://www.erickerickson.org Erick Erickson

    n/t

  • acat
  • runner12

    It amazes me that this is so difficult for people to understand. No conservative is advocating the premise that you cannot be a conservative if you are gay. That is absurd.

    The problem is with GoProud and their tactics that have undermined their credibility as a conservative organization. Mr. Ryun and to a greater extent EE, have clearly laid out why GoProud cannot be called a conservative organization. Those who cannot see this are either blinded by their own personal idealogy on this issue or are willfully refusing to admit that they were wrong about GoProud.

    Also, Mr. Ryun just debunked the myth that GoProud is a pro-life organization. No group that is chaired by a former NOW chapter president can be pro-life. Their position is more pro-choice lite, than pro-life.

  • runner12

    It amazes me that this is so difficult for people to understand. No conservative is advocating the premise that you cannot be a conservative if you are gay. That is absurd.

    The problem is with GoProud and their tactics that have undermined their credibility as a conservative organization. Mr. Ryun and to a greater extent EE, have clearly laid out why GoProud cannot be called a conservative organization. Those who cannot see this are either blinded by their own personal idealogy on this issue or are willfully refusing to admit that they were wrong about GoProud.

    Also, Mr. Ryun just debunked the myth that GoProud is a pro-life organization. No group that is chaired by a former NOW chapter president can be pro-life. Their position is more pro-choice lite, than pro-life.