I’ve been spending much more time reading conservative stuff than liberal stuff. No, I’m not in danger of going over to the other side, but “they” make some good points (and almost-good points) that need to be debated. At this point I’d rather wallow in (partial) disagreement than chant “Amen” in response to my ilkmates.
Example: In a post about what Republicans should do in November to win over disenhanted voters, Anonymous comments, “Just hope the GOP has a coherent economic libertarian viewpoint and doesn’t get sidetracked with their central planning-like social fetishes.” To which Old School Grump adds:
Anonymous at 10:34, you make an important point. Republicans can probably win over plenty of Independents and Undecideds if they will focus on small gov’t and fiscal restraint–which, while not exactly their strong point ‘lo this past decade, is currently an attractive claim that is up for grabs, and they are the most credible potential grabbers.
BUT, at the same time, they need to back off from the hardcore rote conservative stance on social issues. Why should it be that if I want to vote for someone who proposes less government, I have to accept a package that includes active anti-contraception, anti-abortion, anti- any school sex ed that addresses birth control, anti-gay rights, and anti-stem cell research declarations?
OSG sounds like a solid libertarian–not to be confused with a liberal, of course–and the sentiments above are a pithy expression of the libertarian viewpoint. Feel free to quibble.
[Correction note: I originally had “what Republicans can do in 2012,” and I corrected it to ” . . . in November.”]