There seems an interesting debate between John McCain and Mitt Romney as to who is the most reliably conservative.
McCain was recently quoted as saying, “And I promise you, if I am so fortunate to win your nomination, I will work hard to ensure that the conservative philosophy and principles of our great party _ principles that have done so well by the country we love _ will again win the votes of a majority of the American people, and defeat any candidate our friends in the other party nominate.”
George W. Bush wants to present himself as a conservative. But, I don’t think that true conservatives could possibly believe that he is. Didn’t conservatives use to rail against interfering in the affairs of other nations, didn’t they use to rail against the whole concept of “nation building”? Didn’t conservatives at one time obsess over the importance of fiscal responsibility? Isn’t a true conservative appalled by much of what George W. Bush has wrought?
George W has marched us in to over $3 trillion of additional debt, how is it possible that anyone could think he is a conservative? No wonder there is such confusion as to what conservatism actually is.
You would think that a philosophy of conservatism would be a philosophy that agreed with original principles that founded our nation, a philosophy that shared the original vision of our nation. A philosophy of conservatism, you would think, would adhere to the radical notions of the nation’s founders — that in this country all are created equal and that there should be freedom and justice for all.
But conservatism, as I hear it from the Republicans, isn’t all that concerned about justice, economic justice, anyway, and seems eager to worship a market system that blatantly unfairly distributes wealth — a system that causes a large segment of citizens to be working poor, bereft of one of the most important freedoms that every citizen should be guaranteed: freedom from want.
The thought that stands out, if one discovers true conservatism, does one discovers liberalism? But I’ll save that thought for another time.
The current debate in the Republican Party is: What does it mean to be a conservative? John McCain is being accused of not being a true conservative. This web-site says, “Ann Coulter took aim at McCain’s positions — particularly his fervent anti-torture stance — and said he and Clinton differ little on the issues.” Is this saying that, according to Coulter, if you are a true conservative you should have a pro torture stance? But the conservatism that Coulter advocates for Republicans, that justifies torture, is strikingly at odds with traditional conservative principles. Here is an interesting post that tells the thinking about torture of someone of impeccable stature, whom I assume is accepted by the Republicans as a true conservative, George Washington.
The above article also says, “McCain has been at odds with some of the conservative base for his support of campaign finance reform legislation and his vote against President Bush’s tax cuts.” So, it appears, according to the Republicans, advancing conservative principles means rejecting campaign finance reform and cutting taxes in time of war.
Since when is a vote against tax cuts automatically a vote against conservatism? Since when is it a conservative principle that taxes should be cut, regardless, even if spending runs amuck?
The conservatism of Republicans, as revealed by the McCain / Romney dispute, is showing itself to not be a well thought out philosophy at all, but rather it is revealing, to anyone paying attention, that it is simply a term used to confuse and manipulate the public. Tell me once again: What does it mean to be a conservative?
