I'm beginning to love the way Jonah Goldberg thinks; a young Charles Krauthammer with practical insight and sensitivity concerning authentic conservatism.
Or am I missing something? Perhaps he is a bit vague or obtuse concerning what he means by "social and religious conservatives."
Some excellent quotes from today's NRO column (h/t Black Kettle) concerning the mission statement for the post-election conservative worldview ...The GOP would simply cease to exist as a viable party without the support of social and religious conservatives.And isn't this the truth; it is that simple for the opposition ...To listen to many pundits and analysts, it means Republicans must become Democrats.Clarity is key in political thought ...This is not to say that one can’t be a moderate on this issue or that and be a Republican. But the idea that social liberalism and economic conservatism can coexist easily is not well supported by the evidence.If it were only possible ...One can be socially liberal and fiscally conservative, in the sense that you’re only willing to constrain your statist do-goodery to the extent you’re able to pay for it. This is certainly an intellectually defensible position."Ill-equipped" is an understatement historically; look at Bush 43s spending fiascos ...
But politically, this is hard ground to defend. It turns out that people who buy into the logic of social liberalism, not just on abortion but racial and other issues as well, usually find themselves ill-equipped ideologically to say no to additional spending on causes they care about.The religious right is much more likely to stop being “right” than stop being religious. And secular conservatives and libertarians who passionately believe in limited government should be very grateful indeed that most of today’s religious conservatives believe in it, too.True! And true again!