Where is the love?
Over the weekend, a few conservatives were discussing the term George W. Bush made famous in his 2000 presidential election campaign, the term "compassionate conservatism." We also heard about education reform to end the "soft bigotry of low expectations."
What happened to these feel-good, mushy euphemisms? Is it possible for one be tender-hearted and caring towards fellow human beings while being politically conservative?
One of the discussion participants said the term "compassionate conservatism" will end with the Bush years, that we'll never hear it again because it just doesn't compute.
I'm not sure I agree with the premise, although I concede the point that the term "compassionate conservatism" didn't resonate with the public. I just don't think we had our talking points clear and concise enough to break through the perception barriers.
But indeed conservatives are loving and caring. So much so, they're willing to be misunderstood.
You see, it's very compassionate to encourage people off welfare rolls and to equip them with the tools they need to become successes in their own right.
It's very caring not to dump all our immediate gratification costs onto our grandchildren to pay in the decades to come.
It's incredibly tender-hearted to promote a natural family cultural foundation where children learn self-control and discipline from their parents. Citizens who are self-governed are the only way we as an American society will be able to maintain a republican democracy.
So, conservatives, don't let anyone make you think you're not loving, caring or compassionate . . . indeed, you are at fault with your commitment to others' welfare.
If we could just express it in ways those about us could understand . . .
Cross-posted at www.illinoisreview.com: crossroads of the conservative community
7 comments:
George Bush is a big-government liberal in all areas except abortion and gays. Maybe I should take that back, because a liberal would at least try to fund his big government programs rather than pay them with debt.
George Bush is a President in the tradition of Lyndon Johnson. He's a failure at war and a big government bloater at home. Maybe in 2008 we can get a real conservative in the Reagan tradition like John McCain for President.
John McCain is a conservative?!?!? You have to be kidding me!
I am hoping for George Allen!
Good call Jeff....you know who takes the conservative side of things when going against Bush (yet is vilified by the GOP)? Hagel...he's someone to watch in '08.
George Allen will probably govern like LBJ and Bush. McCain is a real conservative who will shrink government and stand up to deficits and run the war efficiently. Hagel is also a real conservative.
Oh lawdy, George Allen is an even dumber version of Dubya than Dubya. May we be spared such additional nincompoopery.
Is this post an intentional parody?
[I]t's very compassionate to encourage people off welfare rolls and to equip them with the tools they need to become successes in their own right.
Of course it is just cruel to kick families off of public aid while simultaneously cutting job training and education funding.
It's very caring not to dump all our immediate gratification costs onto our grandchildren to pay in the decades to come.
But it will be our children and grandchildren who will have to foot the bill when the Chinese central bank needs to be repaid for the money borrowed to pay for the Bush tax cuts.
indeed, you are at fault with your commitment to others' welfare.
Oh, never mind. This is clearly a parody.
You see, it's very compassionate to encourage people off welfare rolls and to equip them with the tools they need to become successes in their own right.
Yes Fran, and it was President Bill Clinton that pushed and passed into law Welfare Reform, and Democrats who have been the champions for increased funding for education and job training.
It's very caring not to dump all our immediate gratification costs onto our grandchildren to pay in the decades to come.
Yes Fran, and it was Bill Clinton who balanced the budget, and George Bush who has run up record federal deficits, borrowing against our children's futures.
It's incredibly tender-hearted to promote a natural family cultural foundation where children learn self-control and discipline from their parents. Citizens who are self-governed are the only way we as an American society will be able to maintain a republican democracy.
Yes Fran, and it's Republicans who support economic policies that place unbearable financial strain on families, tearing them apart (lets remember money problems are the #1 cause of divorce), while Democrats fight for programs like Family & Medical Leave that support families. Let's also remember that Republicans have an unbroken history over the last 60 years of opposing increased voter participation and one person, one vote, while the President argues that he is above the laws of our Democracy.
That's not to say that there aren't many, many compassionate conservatives, because there are. It's just that they aren't in power, and never have been. The Republican Party continues to be, first and foremost, the party of big business and the rich. Even conservatism is only a means to an end for them, which is why I believe they will never follow through on their threat to overturn Roe -- they fear a backlash that would topple their economic policies.
Post a Comment