Every time one of the new hyper-leftist radical progressives proposes another component of their overarching socialist agenda, the first question usually asked by conservatives is, “How are you going to pay for it?” This is natural. We’ve grown accustomed to asking this question when pretty much any shiny new initiative is offered, even if it isn’t socialistic.
But here’s the thing. It’s time to stop asking that question for two important reasons and one exponentially more critical reason. First, the math is always fuzzy and there are far too many Americans who have a hard time properly visualizing the difference between a million, billion, and trillion. Second and more importantly, the more we ask this question, the sooner they’re going to start giving answers that would make sense to left-leaning or even moderate voters. We’re seeing it already in the latest versions of tax-the-rich-to-feed-the-poor proposals that, despite the math being abysmal, still makes sense to many Americans.
There’s a third reason this is the wrong mentality to have. It comes down to the real threat of socialism and all of its components. The financial implications, which fly over the heads of many if not most Americans, are minuscule compared to what socialism really does to Americans. It takes away our freedoms. It mandates aspects of our life that belong in the realm of free will. I may want a gas-economical car because it makes sense for my family and I like the reduced pollutants it emits, but socialism wants to force me to abandon fossil fuels altogether. That’s an example of what one component of socialism would do. Through mandates and government decrees, our rights to choose what’s best for us and our families are taken away as a direct result of every socialist proposal on the table now and planned for the future.
If conservatives keep using the economy as the argument against socialist proposals, we’re going to end up with watered down versions. Obamacare, for example, was destined to fail but it has survived so long because conservatives attacked the economic aspects of it instead of taking the proper angle of going after what it truly represents to the American people. As a result, we haven’t defunded it, haven’t repealed it, barely adjusted it, and the next variation to replace it when it finally becomes unworkable will likely be a supercharged version such as Medicare-for-All. Why? Because conservatives focused on the money instead of the underlying risk it posed to our nation. Challenges the free market economy had in regards to healthcare and health insurance in the past are infinitesimal compared to the catastrophe that will come if the government takes full control through Medicare-for-All.
Conservatives have an ideological advantage when it comes to socialism that has nothing to do with economic factors. We believe an Americans’ right to choose what kind of car they drive, who provides their healthcare or health insurance, where we work and how much we make. This last one is the big selling point right now for socialists because it goes to the heart of the ignorance being displayed by Americans who believe in raising the minimum wage. We can and should be paid based upon the value we provide to an employer. If we want to make more money, we can either improve our work, advance in the company we’re in, or find a better job that pays more. We have those choices. But in a socialistic society, those choices are reduced or eliminated. It starts because of the incompatibility with capitalism, as they’ve learned in every place that raised the minimum wage. New York was the latest to feel the sting, especially in the standard first casualty, the restaurant industry.
But this initial rejection of choices and the economic drawbacks of increasing the minimum wage are nothing compared to the socialist response: mandated income. When the jobs dry up because they’re forced to overpay their employees, two things will happen. First, we’ll see the freedom of businesses to operate as they see fit dramatically reduced. It will become harder for them to hire or fire people. It will become criminal to reduce hours. Second, those who simply cannot or will not work based upon personal preference will join the ranks of those who cannot work based on unavoidable challenges. The person who doesn’t want to work will get the same government attention and benefits as those who want to work but cannot.
This may all sound like an economic argument, but look closer. Just as our rights as individuals are attacked through mandates on fossil fuels, healthcare, and “vices” such as meat consumption (yes, they’ll come after the meat soon enough), so too are the rights of business owners attacked by other socialistic mandates.
It really does all come down to freedom and the hyper-left’s desire to take those individual freedoms away for the sake of the collective.
Would the various aspects of socialism proposed by the new left destroy the U.S. economy? Probably. Tie a few of them together and it's almost certain.
But the real threat of socialism isn't to the treasury. It's to our freedoms. That should be conservatives' focus.
— JD Rucker (@JDRucker) March 10, 2019
Conservatives haven’t had to formulate much of a script to counter socialism because Americans were once aware that it was bad. As more Americans open up to the notion, it’s imperative conservatives start asking more than, “How are you going to pay for it?” That’s not going to cut it in a battle against the willfully blinded progressive base.
Is the nation ready to revive the American Conservative Movement?
Why Tomi Lahren’s abortion view harms American conservatism
Democrats are unambiguous and united in their view of abortion. It wasn’t always this way. As recently as a decade ago, there were a good number of pro-life Democrats winning elections and expressing their views as pundits.
Today, they don’t exist.
Republicans aren’t so repulsed by the pro-abortion people in their midst. It’s understandable that as a party that’s less focused on individual issues, one can be a Republican without checking off all the various boxes. This is fine. What’s not fine is for breaks in the ranks of conservatives. There are certain things that must remain universal among those who claim to embrace conservatism, especially among those who speak for conservatives.
Fox Nation’s Tomi Lahren is one of them. She claims to be a conservative, but she’s pro-choice. That fact, by itself, is understandable because the issue is a polarizing one in which people can be swayed to one side based on personal experience. It’s not like taxes which warrant universal scorn from conservatives. There are gun-toting, tax-hating, pro-choice conservatives.
But there’s a bigger problem with Lahren’s perspective. She’s not just attacking the Alabama abortion bill and pro-life perspectives in general. She’s doing so with an argument that flies in the face of reality.
To those arguing with me over the Alabama ban, I am NOT saying life doesn’t matter I am asking you if you honestly think an all-out ban is going to stop abortion. Do you think government is the answer? Do you think it’s effective? Or does this ban just make you feel better?
— Tomi Lahren (@TomiLahren) May 19, 2019
Do we think government is the answer? No. In fact, one of the most appealing parts about the Alabama abortion bill is that it represents the first true opportunity for the Supreme Court to overturn Roe v. Wade. When it reaches the Supreme Court (and it almost certainly will) it gives us the first glimpse of how the current makeup of the court will react. In fact, the makeup of the court could actually be better if one of the left-leaning Justices retires soon.
Once Roe v. Wade is out of the way, we can finally express the truly conservative aspect of federalism that should have never been taken away – the states’ rights to determine their own healthcare laws.
If Tomi Lahren doesn’t like the abortion ban, that’s fine. Her choice. But to defend her choice by insinuating a challenge to Roe v. Wade is somehow an attack on limited-government tenets is false and harms conservatism.
Conservative Media, we need to blacklist Trump-Russia story and move on
To The Daily Wire, One America News, Washington Times, Blaze Media, and all others to the right of Fox News,
There was no collusion and no obstruction. It took over two years for this narrative to search under every stone and exhaust millions of dollars to, in the end, find nothing. The leftist media will not make many concessions, especially as it relates to obstruction for a crime that was not committed. We cannot as conservatives prove beyond an unreasonable doubt that Trump did not collude or obstruct. As Democrats in Congress keep the narrative on life support, the Conservative media needs to pull the plug.
The average American is fatigued by the Trump-Russia collusion/obstruction narrative. Meanwhile our effort is playing defense against a leftist narrative rather than reporting on issues both our base and the politically uninvolved care far more about. When the economy is strong and the border crisis is pressing, why is so much of our attention directed towards the soap opera clown show that takes place? Instead of countering this narrative, conservative media should starve the narrative of as much attention as possible.
An area which Conservatives have long failed, but have made great improvements towards, is controlling the narrative, the language and Overton Window of society. If we continue to counter the leftist narrative of the Trump-Russia conspiracy theory, we will continue to feed their power in controlling the narrative in the American political and cultural arena. Instead, let us make an effort to not only counter the narrative but set the narrative.
In our friendly rivalry as Conservative outlets, let us come together and collectively move on from the Trump-Russia story, discarding it as if it were a flat-earth conspiracy and move on.
Conservatives cannot be afraid to press the culture war
There are many reasons Conservatives have been reticent to press the culture war. Many of them were acted upon by Mitt Romney only for those conventions to be blown away by Trump winning in 2016. The Republican Party hates running on culture issues instead wanting only to use issues like abortion as shiny objects for show votes. But we must remember, Trump won and Romney and McCain lost. Trump ran on a culture issue: immigration. He won. And in my opinion, Trump made it highly difficult for him to win, not because of the issues he was running on, but because of his personality. So let that be encouragement.
For a Rainbow jihad fatwa will come after you if you aren’t attracted to a man in drag. They will pass legislation to make possessing certain guns illegal. You will be called a racist. They are already passing legislation protecting infanticide. If we do not press these issues, we will lose. If we stay silent, as Erick Erickson so famously said, we will be made to care.
But Wait! The economy is doing great
Republicans will want to focus on the economy and there is nothing wrong with that. To quote The Road to El Dorado, “both is good.” There is no reason we cannot do both. Reasonably speaking, it means we are going to have to sacrifice certain talking points. I nominate the Russian Hoax, as people are already tired of hearing about it, whereas, cultural issues such as Brian Sims dominated Conservative news cycles. People are motivated by cultural issues. Guns, illegal immigration, and abortion are among the top single issue voting groups. In 2012, Republicans ran on jobs, jobs, jobs and lost, lost, lost.
Trump can press the economy in 2020 and use it to get people to reelect him as they would any other incumbent. But reelecting Trump to maintain the economy is not a win so much as it’s not a defeat. Because let’s be honest, if the Republicans pass a balanced budget with a plan to pay off the debt in say twenty years, the economy would contract. We would undoubtedly go into recession and unemployment would rise due to a reduction in public sector jobs. Are we, as Conservatives, willing to bite that bullet? I hope so. If so, the message of austerity contradicts the message of the economy, why should the economy be our main focus? Recessions are temporary and a natural part of the business cycle as our economy evolves. The Great Depression only lasted as long as they did because of the intervention from progressives like Herbert Hoover and FDR. The Republican Party is unwilling to bite this bullet. They aren’t fiscally responsible. Coincidentally, they aren’t willing to defund Planned Parenthood, despite how they donate to candidates who run against them. Let me take that back, it’s not a coincidence. If we look at the Liberty Score of Republicans, you will see that the most socially conservative are also the most fiscally responsible as well. I am hardpressed to find an exception. Socially liberal fiscally conservative doesn’t exist in the real world today. Why? Because being fiscally conservative requires a socially conservative worldview. My evidence for this assertion is Congress.
In order to get these ends, we need to engage in the culture war as a means. Increasing spending does not earn a Republican a primary challenge. But being soft on illegal immigration will. Marco Rubio didn’t win the nomination in 2016. So it’s safe to conclude that illegal immigration is a more energizing issue than national debt. Once again, going back to 2012, Mitt Romney floated self-deportation in the primary but steered clear of illegal immigration in the general. He said he was pro-life, but ran ads to assure people he wouldn’t act on his pro-life stance. But enough using Romney as a punching bag for being a loser. Ron DeSantis in Florida ran on a Trump platform in Florida, without the Trump personality and upset Andrew Gillum in what was supposed to be a blue wave. Kim Reynolds, in swing state Iowa, signed a heartbeat bill into law in May 2018. She went on to pull perhaps the most surprising upset in the 2018 Midterm Elections in what will be a swing state in 2020. Meanwhile obvious RINO Martha McSally couldn’t beat one of the most overtly anti-American candidates in Kyrsten Sinema, in a mild red state.
But let’s look at this from the Left’s perspectives. Indiana and Texas are roughly comparable in terms of the GOP’s advantage. Beto O’Rourke came close while the “moderate” Democrat in Indiana got owned, double digits despite polling ahead, against who in my opinion was a shaky candidate. Back on the right John James ran a solid campaign in Michigan, despite losing, meanwhile the Republican in Wisconsin got trounced. Energy is the name of the game and when Conservatives bring it, we perform better. Conservatives bring that energy by fighting the culture war.
Are minorities more socially conservative then the Democrat Party? Yes. Do these same minorities tend to economic liberals? Yes. So which is the best way to reach minorities, by emphasizing the issues we have in common or by arguing that we need to roll back entitlements. I’ll take the former, because the Democrats are a confederacy, and social conservatism stands a better chance at weakening the confederacy.
Politics Downstream From Culture
The Andrew Breitbart quote is beyond true. Previously I wrote that our society was fiscally irresponsible, therefore why should we be surprised that this same society elects Lindsey Grahams and Mitch McConnells. The ideals of the American Revolution were preached in churches years before 1775. The 2nd Great Awakening preceded the abolition of slavery. Progressive theology preceded progressive policies. Cultural leftism has so far preceded socialist policies. Look at Marianne Williams who was a thought leader for a new age cult long before she was a socialist candidate. So what am I saying? Socially conservative policies will precede fiscally conservative policies.
A Caveat of Trump and State Governments
Now the first objection to this claim is that Trump has implemented some socially conservative policies. Let’s take immigration, for example, where Trump is most willing to make a bad deal with Democrats to resolve the issue. A border wall is not worth amnesty. DACA should not be kept under any circumstances. Furthermore, Trump is far too easily swayed by Ivanka and Jared Kushner who will only lead his governance astray. But if there were a Congress full of Conservatives, we would see far fewer weaknesses in the President. Congress is supposed to be the most powerful branch. If they sent Trump a balanced budget, Trump would undoubtedly sign it.
State governments, by their smaller nature, are often times ran more fiscally responsible and have balanced budget requirements in their constitutions. In fact, many legislatures either meet every other year or session that is a segment within the year. These relics of a more agrarian culture that placed high esteem on limited government are hard to undo. But legislatures like that in Annapolis will do their damage within their session.
Conservatives shouldn’t cater to people who don’t exist, rather they should fight the culture war because there are gains in this war that will lead to a culture more willing to accept austere measures. We can only win the culture war if we fight for it. We can only end abortion if we fight for it. We can only end illegal immigration if we fight for it. Play offense. Make the left defend infanticide and ask the average uninformed American: do they want that person in office? Make them uncomfortable by sending illegal immigrants to sanctuary cities, so that they will feel the cost of their own ideology. Make them admit that they believe black Americans are less competent than white Americans. Have them explain the difference between a semiautomatic and fully automatic firearm. Maybe then we can finally eliminate policies such as the outdated and cost burdensome Social Security or end the long failed war on poverty.
If politics flows downstream from culture as American history has long shown, in order for Conservatives to win, we must win the culture war.
Thanks to Trump, Americans still have free speech
Twitter suspends Houston Rockets’ account
Blue Collar Logic: How the left is acting like a villain who wants to be caught
What does San Francisco Mayor London Breed have to hide about Jeff Adachi’s death?
President Trump’s official campaign launch to be on Father’s Day
The rise of citizen journalists
Strait is the gate and narrow is the way: Churches, stop pushing a ‘wide gate’ doctrine
Did Jesus die exactly 1000 years after King David died?
The sons of God in Genesis 6 were not the sons of Seth (and Nephilim were really giants)
True inclusion is narrow and pure as Matthew 7 teaches
Jude 1:21 – ‘in the love of God’
Proverbs 4:18 – ‘path of the just’
Exodus 20:8 – ‘the sabbath day’
Luke 5:31-32 – ‘sinners to repentance’
John 3:16 – ‘everlasting life’
Culture and Religion19 hours ago
How Alabama’s abortion law sets President Trump up to be a pragmatist
Culture and Religion2 days ago
Is the Shroud of Turin the burial cloth of Jesus?
Culture and Religion2 days ago
President Trump affirms abortion exceptions for rape, incest, and life of the mother
Guns and Crime2 days ago
‘Serial rapist’ DREAMer Carlos Eduardo confesses to Houston area sexual assaults
Guns and Crime23 hours ago
Two separate illegal aliens with child sexual crime felony convictions caught crossing the border again
Culture and Religion1 day ago
17 years later, Paul Washer’s shocking message still holds true
Guns and Crime2 days ago
Illegal alien Billy Chemirmir charged in 12 murders, was never ordered for deportation
Guns and Crime2 days ago
Thomas Massie exposes the many problems with Red Flag Gun Laws