IMO, a majority of Americans won’t support reductions in our military, a cut-and-run foreign policy, radical policies like Card Check or major federal tax raises. So, I think Obama will think twice about doing those things. Most liberals don’t like paying taxes, or having union bosses monitoring their vote.

First of all, Obama doesn’t do those things. Congress does. Harry and Nancy set the agenda.

Second, what “a majority of Americans” wants is often irrelevant to Congress. Most of the individual senators and representatives already have positions set out on what they support and oppose. That’s how they got elected. Granted, a few like Kay Bailey Hutchison are a bit wishy-washy.

Third, the argument could just as easily be made that “a majority of Americans,” in many cases an even bigger one, would just as much oppose radical policies such as FOCA (in practice), a repeal of DOMA, licenses for illegals, and a repeal of the Hyde Amendment (also a fiscal issue). People oppose an extreme on pretty much anything.

As to the “picking battles,” I don’t believe any Republican, unless a swing vote, will have a choice of one in the first place. Moreover, senators don’t need a “leader” to tell them how to vote, and Mitch McConnell is largely irrelevant to what happens in the Senate. A filibuster is what happens when 40 senators oppose legislation, not one. Moreover, they have three choices: vote yes or vote no, or (Obama’s favorite) don’t vote. Republicans will have no opportunity to prioritize or choose anything. They have equal opportunity to vote the same way (or not vote) on every measure that comes up.

Before most any legislation gets any vote by the full senate, it will already have the approval of the chair of the committee where the bill is introduced, the majority of that committee, and then Harry Reid. The same goes for the House and Pelosi. Unless some new and sudden public crisis emerges, that’s how it works. The Democrats can do about all they want.

The bottom line is this. No Republican, unless they are an undecided swing vote will get any more opportunity to stop one bad piece of legislation than he or she will to stop another. The category of conservatism is irrelevant. Other than those votes that come up to the entire house or senate, it is delusional, IMO, to think they will have one iota of input (except maybe the few who agree with the Democrats’ position to give it that “bipartisan” appearance).

None of us knows the future, and I still don’t believe that fiscal conservatives will fare one iota better, especially in the current economy and especially after Obama and Democrats “spread the wealth.” They will likely fare just as bad if not worse. As far as taxes, it doesn’t matter if liberals like paying them; they support raising them.

In any event, it’s difficult to divide conservatism into nice neat categories (defense, fiscal, social). I would argue that most issues will involve significant overlap, and it’s not quite clear where many of them go. That’s another reason why it’s hard to argue one “type” will fare better than another.

IMO, a majority of Americans won’t support reductions in our military, a cut-and-run foreign policy, radical policies like Card Check or major federal tax raises. So, I think Obama will think twice about doing those things. Most liberals don’t like paying taxes, or having union bosses monitoring their vote.

Why did I mention social conservatives in the first place?

Well, it wasn’t to get your goat, Menlo.

I was simply trying to point out that, unfortunately, in this election social conservatives are on Bataan. Figuratively speaking, of course.

Following the Pearl Harbor debacle, the US had to decide which Pacific posts to defend and which ones it would have to leave to their fate.

Wake Island, the Phillippines and Corregidor weren’t abandoned to the Japanese because FDR wanted to. He had no choice. We had to fight and save what we could.

Following this election, Mitch McConnell will facing an Obama presidency and an expanded Democrat majority in Congress with many fewer GOP Senators than he currently has.

He will have to pick his battles. He can’t fight everywhere. Specifically, he can’t filibuster everything.

Some very, very dear conservative policy objectives will have to be sacrificed, because we can only protect so much.

We can’t save Bataan, because we have to save Midway first.

For the reasons I laid out above, the social conservatives are on Bataan.

We all need to get ready.

IMO, a majority of Americans won’t support reductions in our military, a cut-and-run foreign policy, radical policies like Card Check or major federal tax raises. So, I think Obama will think twice about doing those things. Most liberals don’t like paying taxes, or having union bosses monitoring their vote.

Why did I mention social conservatives in the first place?

Well, it wasn’t to get your goat, Menlo.

I was simply trying to point out that, unfortunately, in this election social conservatives are on Bataan. Figuratively speaking, of course.

Following the Pearl Harbor debacle, the US had to decide which Pacific posts to defend and which ones it would have to leave to their fate.

Wake Island, the Phillippines and Corregidor weren’t abandoned to the Japanese because FDR wanted to. He had no choice. We had to fight and save what we could.

Following this election, Mitch McConnell will facing an Obama presidency and an expanded Democrat majority in Congress with many fewer GOP Senators than he currently has.

He will have to pick his battles. He can’t fight everywhere. Specifically, he can’t filibuster everything.

Some very, very dear conservative policy objectives will have to be sacrificed, because we can only protect so much.

We can’t save Bataan, because we have to save Midway first.

For the reasons I laid out above, the social conservatives are on Bataan.

We all need to get ready.

Things look a lot brighter for fiscal and defense conservatives in the next few years, I’m afraid.

Really? How so? Where will spending be reduced? What government programs/departments will be eliminated? Fiscal conservatives are a minority even among Republicans in Congress. I’m a bit unclear on the “defense conservatives,” but I don’t see a minority blocking Obama’s agenda there.

Let me be clear: this is NOT a slam AT social conservatives.

Then why pick them out, given my above question, and point it out here?

We should annex the rest to Maryland, I agree.

Obama has to know that several of the pet liberal causes are radioactive to the general public. Reimposing the Fairness Doctrine and Card Check come right to mind.

The conservative media will howl when he tries the Fairness Doctrine, and it’s big enough and well-entrenched enough to make itself heard.

The MSM won’t go over the cliff to stand behind him on those issues, Card Check especially. (E.g., USA Today has editorialized against Card Check).

Federally-mandated green-friendly energy policies? Hmmm…Barry might hesitate to reimpose that drilling ban on the Outer Continental Shelf, no matter how much the Sierra Club wants it. Many Americans still remember $4 gas. And, I doubt he’ll initiate policies that would force most Americans to dump their gas vehicles and go buy hybrids. It’s not as if Joe and Jane Sixpack are sitting on lots of disposable cash nowadays.

But, he’s got to give Kos and MoveOn.org something. Answer—Freedom of Choice Act and lots of liberal judges.

I’ll bet that Obama’s counting on Snowe, Collins and some other pro-choice R Senators NOT voting for a filibuster of pro-choice judges or pro-choice legislation.

And, Mitch McConnell, with a much reduced R minority (hopefully over 40) will have to pick his battles wisely. He’ll have to choose NOT to engage in fights where he stands little to no chance of winning.

(Remember–the Dem-led Senate can change the rules to do away with the 60-vote requirement altogether.)

Things look a lot brighter for fiscal and defense conservatives in the next few years, I’m afraid.

Let me be clear: this is NOT a slam AT social conservatives. It’s more of an observation that the rest of the GOP won’t be able to help them much, no matter how much we’d like to.

If McCain wins, he will be the voice of the GOP and let us hope he provides more ideological leadership than Bush did. But if we lose, the we will have to regroup and rethink what it is exactly that we stand for.

If Obama gets elected we will likely get a bunch of liberal judges, that much is sure.

But on the legislative side I predict the democrats will fight with each other and prevent much action. Remember their tradition is disorganization and poor leadership. They will overreach, or get caught doing something illegal (it seems that few politicians can resist), or just be good ol’ democratic idiots. 2 years and out. So I got that to look forward to, which is nice.

2 years and out, IF the republican candidates can get their stuff together in time. It’d sure be nice to see an economic conservative running somewhere in ’10.

We will be speaking French before it’s over because TheOne is embarrassed by our inability to look chic when we (the less than 10% who actually are traveling abroad) travel the world.

(I wish they’d let me say dirty words on this site… LOL I can think of so many I’d like to be using regarding TheOne and his stooge.)

Then I hear the whole ‘spread the wealth’ speil. it’s killing me! My goodness, how is it ok to take money from people who have worked hard and been successful and give it to those who have not been so successful.

I’m one of the 45% who does not pay Fed income tax. I’m absolutely not interested in the gov’t taking money from the more successful people in this country.

Who knows, we might get some of our Tax money back then (of course, only through a temporary stimulus check – amazing how Democrats agree we should be allowed to have more of our own money back when it is just an occasional occurrence).

I just woke up from a nightmare, induced by this blog. And I’m not sure I can go back to sleep.

The Directors articulated every thing I’ve been afraid of and more. The only thing they missed was educational indoctrination of our kids – cradle to grade 12 and then college, too. They want early, early childhood programs to give HeadStart a boost, because HeadStart has not proven itself to be a very big help in giving kids a head start in school. (Even I’m shaking my head at that sentence. HA)

I really am so afraid of what will happen if TheOne is elected.

(14) Elimination of the flush toilet with an amendment to ration toilet paper

(15) Banning of “unhealthy” food items starting with shutting down fast food chains

(16) Elimination of SUVs so that other countries will “like” us more

(17) An abortion in every pot through the fourth trimester with more dead women from the repeal of regulations protecting them

(18) Endless investigations of the “crimes” of the Bush administration

Of course, I’m not sure that leaves too many countries.

If Obama is elected and the Democrats use the people’s money to fund ACORN, “Spreading-the-Wealth”, Global Poverty Fund, “Green” Initiatives, etc…we need to come up with a 21st century Boston Tea Party to let them all know we are fed up with paying for this crap and we aren’t going to take it anymore.

Maybe if a couple of million people increased their deductions to the max in order to temporarily choke off the payroll taxes being sent in to Uncle Sam…they might get the message.