Founding Fathers, it amazes me that we ever had a revolution, a Constitution and a new nation born.

If you study the lives of the brave men who banded together to form this great nation, you would find them to be very different in their beliefs and personal values. But they united around one thing, freedom from tyranny.

We have to find a way to work together to stop the greatest threat to freedom and liberty. Still, we need to separate the wheat from the chaff of our own side, or we can be defeated before we even start.

Nice post.

If you study the lives of the brave men who banded together to form this great nation, you would find them to be very different in their beliefs and personal values. But they united around one thing, freedom from tyranny. We would do well to follow their example.

I would much rather see the leaders of this “movement” debate principles after victory than see defeat caused by division.

I too am one of the ones that was changed a lot by the Tea Party, As of now I consider myself on both sides of the divide. And look for solutions where both will agree, and also where we can agree to disagree on some issues.

I am pro-life and do not agree with gay marriage and many of the Social Conservatives beliefs, but see that there is much where the Federal Government should not be involved, it also helps to have a few lawyers in the family to understand the intricacies of law. And much of what SoCons want can be done thru fiscal policy also, i.e unfunding Planned Parenthood, and much more.

I was thinking about doing a post similar to this over the weekend. And agree with all the points .

This is an excellent post. And is a must read for all sides of the Conservative Movement. We all are against the Left, and should not be pointing the guns at each other, leaver that for the left. The circular firing squads need to stop, and stop now. A lively debate is good, and helps both sides of the Fiscal /Social, but we also must understand there is much that we agree on or have similar ideas on, but different ways to go about it.

you deserve to be recommended. Kudos.

Here’s where I find common ground: Jim DeMint, Tom Coburn, Mike Pence… NOT Mike Huckabee or Rick Santorum.

The former group are all SoCons but they don’t hit you over the head with it. FiCon is a 70% winner issue that can win swing voters everywhere. SoCon is a base issue that scares the swing voters.

I’m an agnostic libertarian, but I oppose Christian-bashing as much as any of you do, and I hate First Amendment violations as much as I hate Second, Fourth, and Tenth Amendment violations.

All the common ground we need is in the Bill of Rights. Get the government the heck out of our businesses, our churches, our communities, and our bedrooms.

SoCon in many ways…and I agree with your roundup: Yes on DeMint, Coburn, and Pence; no on Huckabee and Santorum. One reason you have not touched on concerning why these particular SoCons may be more acceptable to actual FisCons than H and S is the following: most of the time, if you scratch a SoCon you find a FisCon lurking underneath. However, H & S are Big Government “conservatives” (only two of the three preceding words are true — follow the scare quotes…): as runner12 says, there are snakes in the grass on both sides.

The “FisCon” snakes are those — usually politicians, not activists — who ostentatiously CLAIM the mantle of “a fiscal conservative and social liberal” — these people, like the Maine Twins and various others, are just not conservative at all, on anything,

Harking back to a couple of old posts by Leon Wolf A Friendly Reminder for the Circular Firing Squad and Don’t Blame Me – I Voted Conservative from 2005:

On the Senate:

the best indicator of whether a Senator is likely to support anti-pork measures like the Coburn amendments, is whether they also opposed government-funded embryo destruction or supported a constitutional amendment for the traditional definition of marriage

And the House:

The first interesting finding is that, of the 19 Republicans were seen as obstructionists to H. R. 4241 [ed: the anti-pork "Coburn" issue], only four of them (Johnson, Pickering, Jones and Ehlers) also voted with the majority of their Republican colleagues against the “Stem Cell Enhancement” (Embryo Destruction) bill. Similarly, less than half of these squishies voted with the majority of their colleagues on the Federal Marriage Amendment. The reality is that, while the RSC gets most of its press these days for being a “fiscally” conservative group of Congresspeople, they are in actuality just a “conservative” group of Congresspeople, and their conservatism stretches to all areas of government.

it would serve our coalition well to frame a partnership on federalist lines. This would serve both sides by allowing them to pursue their main objectives, while moving secondary and tertiary objectives (which is largely where the partnership bogs down) to the state level. Additionally, confining the federal government to its Constitutional duties has long been a goal of conservatives of all stripes and most libertarians, so movement towards this general goal would be good for all parties involved.

If libertarians/fiscons cannot fully endorse the Constitutional role of the federal government as pertains to gay marriage, abortion, defense, and other such issues then they should keep from taking actions that are obviously un-Constitutional regarding these issues.

If social conservatives can’t go so far as to advocate that the federal government take its Constitutional, minimal-to-nonexistent role when it comes to issues like drugs, pornography, smoking, and other such issues, they should at least refrain from damaging a somewhat federalist coalition by pushing blatantly un-Constitutional action on these issues.

Many of these issues can and will be handled at the state level — and in a country the size of Europe, that is both appropriate and beneficial (see the EU for incompetence from a similar org). We should also realize that on most issues, libertarians, fiscons, and socons are in agreement, and that they need not be enemies on account of some differences.

Good post, runner.

“Limited government ensures the maximum freedom for all Americans. At the same time, we can continue to fight the Left as they try and cram their social agenda down our throats.”

As far as I can tell, the Left’s social agenda amounts to letting me marry whom I like, consume whatever substances I please, reproduce as I see fit, and end my life in whatever fashion I so choose. In contrast, when “SoCons” cram their agenda down my throat, it’s more literal; i.e., government-mandated feeding-tube insertion. I guess the former just feels a lot more “limited” than the latter.

Here is my rant.Basically we will be bankrupt soon. Social issues wont seem so important when we dont have enough food.

I am always baffled by this exact discussion. For me it isn’t a great big divide, it isn’t one type of conservative or the other. I think of it in the KISS mode. Keep It Simple, Stupid.( or silly if you are that P/C ) All the “Social issues” in the world won’t mean a damn thing, when this country is bankrupt. After all, without the funds, there is no discusiion on how to spend them. The government does not have the authority to beome the Social Engineers that they think they do. The last “Social Engineer” to come out of the closet while at the head of a powerful country, was….Adolf Hitler. Whole lot of Murder went on in that Social Engineering experiment. Everyone is equal, period.

I am an Independant Conservative. This is government we are talking about here, not preschool playtime, or an academics debate.They are messing with people’s lives . Being a Conservative to me means wanting the federal government to be held in check by the people, and doing what they were created to do. Defense, Infrastructure, and Laws and regulations, National commerce, Foreign treaties, etc.

The Federal government wasn’t created to feed people, run Auto companies, Healthcare, Banks, or any other businesses period. They also do NOT have the rights to interfere with States laws.They especially were never given the damn power to take from the working man and give it to the freeloaders and parasites too lazy too work.(mostly based on race, whether you want to admit it or not) Yet that is where we are at today, more than ever we have a Tyrannical out of control government. We have been brainwashed into thinking the government has the power to “Legally” do these things. They DO NOT.

I didn’t mean to drift there,but is this is such a divisive issue? Is it necessary? This big government is headed for bankruptcy. Thats right, wont be any money to steal and very soon. This year States will start filing bankruptcy. Either we all act like plain conservatives, who want this government stopped, then cut back by a minimum of 40% THIS YEAR, or we all watch this country implode. So, I really don’t care about issues that arent related to money right now, won’t be a country left if we go bankrupt. Without money to eat, “Social issues” won’t seem quite so high up on the scale, trust me.

I have my own set of “social morals” and I dont care who doesn’t like them. I am a Catholic, I will pray when and where I want to, and noone is going to stop me ever. I dont need politicians or a corrupt government’s permission to do anything.Abortion lovers wont be able to afford them when the govt is broke, but that wont stop them. Alleys and coathangers will be used . Gays? Do your own thing, no matter what a corrupt bunch of Tyrants says, I for one, will not put up with children being subject to the Queer, perverted, suggestive flaunting of gays in front of them. Do what you want, just don’t let me catch you trying to “suggest” that lifestyle to children before they learn and understand the true perversion of it. What is sad is that most young adults enliisting into the military are still very vulnerable, mentality wise. DADT was a way to address the issue for ALL involved. The Repeal was a way for the Perverted minority to over-rule the majority once again. So ANY Tyrant who calls themselves a Conservative, yet voted and connived to repeal that law, should be kicked out of our Govt immediately. This is all about the Government enacting laws and rules against the majority wishes of this country.That makes every one of them Tyrants, not representatives of ALL the people.

We may be forced very soon to enact a real TeaParty-Tax revolt. I for one will not pay taxes without fair representation. See race-based wealth redistribution fraud like Pigford 1 and 2. See mandated discrimination against White and Asian folks in hiring practices in our gov’t today. It was always illegal to ask the color of your skin when filling out a job app. NOT ANY MORE especially when it comes to gov’t jobs. Make it fair to all or I wont be paying in, EVER.

States are losing their identities. This too is the push by the Marxist-Socialism pimps. Look at the EPA in Texas. I,d say NO EPA you wont be regulating nothing in Texas, you dont have the authority.Never mind letting them get that crap started, dont give them a dime. Tell them to go to hell.

This is EXACTLY what happens when people start letting Tyrants do things to them under the guise of Social Justice fraud, or the Save the world lies they tell. Nothing more than common beggars and thieves, the whole lot of them.

Bring back the true Conservative Party. You are either in or out. Smaller , more transparent government, The Rule of law, and stay out of our lives.Spend our money wisely, and if we catch you stealing or sending money or contracts to family or your campaign cronies, you will go to prison.Zero funding for any Social programs period. Welfare reform. Want free rent, food stamps, and electricity? You will work 40 hours a week for it, period. Been havin 8 kids by 7 different dads for a bigger check? Best get to hunting them boys down, cause the honest, hard working folks are getting darn tired of that game. I do support equal justice for all. Equal prison time for corrupt Politicians in the SAME prison as the rest of the criminals. Wont be any more “White collar crime” resorts.
Take out all the Social Engineering, race-based B/S agenda out of Congress today, and they will be forced to address the real issues. Until then, they are just a part of a nasty, fake drama to try to get reelected. The people need to say either cut X amount of dollars off your budget THIS YEAR, or we wont be sending in any taxes. No taxation without PROPER representation, period.

It’s the nature of the primary season. We will be battling with people we thought were our allies in order to give our preferred candidates an advantage.

But this season I hope there is a difference. We have to remember that the primaries are not the final battle and that there is a greater foe that needs defeated. To that end, I hope that we will not inflict fatal wounds among those who should be friends and that we will come together healed and more powerful after these preliminary skirmishes in order to use our combined strength to defeat those who would enslave us.

Our differences are not so great that we cannot form common cause. Our hearts are not so hard that we cannot forgive the slights and bruises from the heat of the moment. We must forgive each other and unite in order to gain victory.

sounds too damned preachy don’t it?

The Tea Parties are, according to the surveys I’ve been pointed to by various Red Staters, largely SoCons, but the issues motivating them, pushing them into the streets, tends to be FiCon in nature.

What I’ve seen recently, though, is an attempt to Change the Tea Parties from a FiCon grass roots protest into a vehicle to push SoCon traditional sticking points to the forefront… “Tea Parties are largely anti-abortion” .. “Tea Parties are anti-gay”.

None of these SoCon issues are significant factors in the early Tea Party reporting by Malkin and others.. just the FiCon stuff comes across. Sign after sign asking the government to not tax grandchildren, to not accept the “new Louisiana purchase” or the “Cornhusker kickback” or “Taxed Enough Already”. In short, while the bulk of the Tea Partiers are SoCons, what got them into the streets was a FiCon issue.

I Hope that this attempt to re-brand the Tea Parties fails…. Each of the social issues these alleged leaders already have anti- groups, and yet they can’t get people off the sidelines the way these FiCon issue has.

Hoping the Tea Parties don’t Change…

Mew

Thank you for putting the social issues on the same footing as the fiscal issues. I would have been very happy to see a reference to national security issues as being equally as important. It would be difficult to sit on a three legged stool with 2 tall legs, and one short one, or with one tall leg and two short ones.

The Ficons want to be left alone. No new government programs.

Is that so hard to do?

Agree on the big tent coalitions.

The approach we must realize is acknowledging that life is a continual set of problems. Each new direction or alternative has its own set of problems.

The trick is, to exchange your current set of problems with a smaller set of problems. Rinse, repeat.

If we could get the big tent in order by having ficons/socons that they are more powerful together to defeat the left (bigger problem). They could then tackle the new smaller set of problems of differences between ficon/socon after largely defeating the left.

We are SORELY in need of 30,000 ft views. We need to be reminded of the big picture to give some needed perspective. Otherwise we get caught up in minutae and remain divided.

Job one:

Unite, agree to disagree on issues, in order to gain requisite power.

Two: undo damage by the left
three: start having discussions on remaining issues that divide.

The approach should be a funnel. Layout problems from largest to smallest. Attack in that order. Keep trading in your current set for a smaller set. Don’t let perfect be the enemy of the good.

mainly because he really doesn’t seem to want to. If he did have any desire to run, he just shot off his second foot-

http://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefing-room/news/135153-daniels-no-regrets-about-wanting-truce-on-social-issues

I found his comments concerning an enemy army threatening to invade the US interesting as well. He has already stated that he would cut the defense budget even further than the current Lib admin., and our equipment and weapons are already past their depreciation stage. What would he propose to fight that enemy with, plastic water pistols?

I suspect that by the time he gets around to deciding if he will run or not, the race will have long ago started without him.

so vote them out. Fiscal only because too many are RINO’s or they are just weak and cave in to demands from angry liberals who beat down on the GOP for more entitlements.

In GA I’m looking for an alternative to Senator Johnny Isakson because he voted for START. He won but 2016 isn’t that far away.

Senator Eric Erickson has a nice ring to it.

We live in a social liberal state, therefore Limited Government cannot exist. It is the people that have determined the size of our government. Changing the government will not change the people! Change the people and the government will follow.

Limited government is the result of a conservative people, this is what our nation was founded upon! If we want a Limited Government then we must work together to change the minds of the people, not the government of the people. We work to build a majority of people that choose to live conservative in all aspects of their lives: Socially, Fiscally, and Spritiually (with the foundation if humility before our Creator).

We’ll see who the real fiscal conservatives are in the Republican Party. The real money is in Baby Boomer entitlement programs and defense. There’s no way to get to a balanced budget without reforming the entitlements(Social Security Medicare) and making big cuts in defense. Those that say the department of defense should be excluded are deluding themselves.

We need to find a way to purge our country of all the communist. They are so confident that they have beaten the “giant” that they are no longer in the weeds. We need to rise up and be heard. This needs to be a non violent re claiming of our great country. unfortunately I’m not sure we can last another 2 years of Obama. The GOP had Obama on the ropes and let him back up. It is just so disheartening that many of the GOP HELPED OBAMA get back into the game. We had him down to a count of 9 and some of the GOP let him back up.

What worries me is that there are still so many people that are unaware of what is really happening. There are people that think America cannot fall. If any of what Glenn Beck is saying about the economy and hyperinflation, we are in for a really rough ride.

Do any of you here on RS think that GB is right about the economy and hyperinflation coming?

I personally don’t care about the social issues all that much and when I do think about them I tend to lean Barry Goldwater’s way and apply limited government principles that suggest the government has no business in my bedroom any more than it has any business in my wallet, but I can reason with SoCons and most SoCons lean towards limited government in most areas.

It isn’t about all of us having warm fuzzy feelings for one another. It is about having a common enemy in the communist left.

No analysis to back me up, though.

I’m not sure if you’re implying the following, but if you are I disagree with the sentiment: “I hope and believe the days are long gone of social conservatives supporting candidates who are not fiscally conservative …[and] champions of limited government.”

More often I’d say it’s the “establishment Republicans” who attempt to get So-Cons to go along with the program and support the R-candidate who’s fiscally conservative but not socially conservative. If I have so time (or anyone else out there as well), this would make a great diary. Again, however, I readily admit, I’ve got no analysis to back this up. The only examples off the top of my head I can think of regarding politicians who are social conservatives but not fiscal conservatives are Bush 43 and Huckabee. (I’d vote for Bush 43 again in a heartbeat — and the best of physical health to the Huckster, but not his political health in 2011/2012.

I’ve long thought that the best thing the social conservative movement could do for its cause is to develop an appreciation for strategic pragmatism.

The overreaction to Mitch Daniels’ pronouncement of a truce is a great example. Daniels is not unfriendly to the social conservative cause. He may not exactly be Mike Huckabee, but neither is he Arlen Specter.

There are other examples of this as well. But, to some SoCons, it seems that the concept of strategic pragmatism is just a euphemism for capitulation.

It’s precisely the opposite. Just ask the socialists — who have advanced their agenda a long, long way here employing strategic pragmatism. There’s a long-term purpose to virtually everything they do — they’ve never once taken their eye off the ball. But they realized long ago that they’ll never get this country where they want it in large, violent steps.

Take an honest stock of where things stand — and do it regularly. Adjust accordingly…but without ever surrendering your values and goals. And, for God’s sake, stop looking at everybody who isn’t precisely where you are as an adversary.

…to the States (10th Amendment), sooner we can slash the size of the Federal Leviathan down to it’s proper size as invisioned by the Founders.

Both social and fiscal conservatives can agree that we need to restore the allocation of authority between the national and state governments originally contemplated by the Constitution. To do this we must amend the Constitution to restore the original meaning of the clauses which have been most distorted by the Supreme Court to allow the unconstitutional expansion of federal power. These are many, although the most important may be the interstate commerce clause and Section 1 of the 14th amendment. The distortion of the interstate commerce clause is the largest source of expanded federal regulation and spending which fiscal conservatives object to, and the distortion of section 1 of the 14th amendment is the largest source of the imposition of anti-traditional leftist moral values which social conservatives object to. With the restoration of these original meanings, the debates will return to the states, where there will be a diversity of outcomes but people will be able to “vote with their feet” if they find the outcomes in a particular state to be unacceptable. See http://www.timelyrenewed.com

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QglwWTgCE3o

The GOP is composed of many more groups than just “FiCons” and “SoCons”. And neither the FiCons or SoCons are wield any great power within the party. The single most powerful faction in the coalition is probably the business wing, and they are the ones driving the GOP towards bigger government.

Also, while social conservatism is somewhat well defined, fiscal conservatism means whatever anyone wants it t mean. It’s a term searching for a definition.