I continue to ponder the future for conservatives and libertarians in the U.S. Here is another good essay on what happened in the last election and what needs to be done.
Obama got 55% of the female vote; much of it because of the so-called Pro Life vs. the so-called Pro Choice divide. Conservatives who profess to be committed to the doctrine of limited federal government, but who champion the extension of federal authority into the most personal and private aspects of a woman’s life are, in our opinion, CINO’s — political Conservatives In Name Only. We, of course, understand that the process of life begins at conception. That is, indeed, a precious process. But those who favor the extension of any federal jurisdiction over that process make a mockery of
political conservatism and are, we believe, political Conservatives In Name Only. Many of the women who voted for Obama over this issue did so, we believe, not because they embrace abortion, but rather because they oppose federal interference at so personal a level. In a word, they found it
There has been much written and said about the nation’s changing demographics. White Americans of European extraction will, in just a few decades, no longer represent the majority of the nation. We believe the pundits are obsessing over this reality and, many, for all the wrong reasons. It should
be seen more as an opportunity than as a threat. Republicans should enthusiastically embrace this dynamically changing landscape. They have much more to offer minorities seeking a better life than does the left. It would be a grave error to assume that members of these growing minorities do not, or will not, aspire to achieve the traditional American dream. Most minority Americans can be, and should be, easily attracted to, and accommodated within, a broad Republican tent. Here’s a wake up call; many of the innovators on whom the future economic health of the country will depend are newcomers to the United States, many from Asia and India. That’s something to celebrate, not something to fear.
The issue of gay marriage is slowly playing out at the state level where legislatures and courts are legislating and adjudicating the propriety of extending or denying what seems to us to be a rather basic civil right. We do not question the right of any religious institution to address this issue on the
basis of religious doctrine. We do, however, think that politicizing the issue in Washington, and drawing partisan battle lines with federal initiatives such as the Defense of Marriage Act has been gratuitously polarizing and ill advised.