19 June 2007
Political expedience must be a family value
10:17 AM
“Family values,” the President lectured us, “don’t stop at the border.”
(One wants to respond, “Border? What border? Family values means never having to acknowledge a border.” But I digress.)
We hear from Republicans that hispanics are very conservative people and if the Republicans will just roll over on the matter of whether nation states have the right to enforce their borders they (i.e., Republicans) will garner a larger percentage of the hispanic vote. My own (hispanic!) family experience tells me otherwise.
It is true that my hispanic family, especially the elders, are very socially conservative. Being, for the most part, Roman Catholic they are very much pro-life; and they probably would not be in favor of same-sex marriage. But when it comes to issues like taxes, welfare, limited government and other (conservative) issues, I’m afraid they aren’t very conservative at all. I recall well when my abuelita (that’s “grandmother” for you “gringos”) chastised my father for voting Republican. “When have the Republicans,” she said, “ever done anything to help the poor?”
On her view, one role of a good government is to take money from people who have “too much” and give it to those who don’t. Oh, yes, she is a conservative all right – a conservative Democrat. And, alas, her generation of the family is by and large the last of the socially-conservative-but-fiscally-liberal. Her children, nieces and nephews, as well as most of her grandchildren (and their cousins) are now both socially and fiscally liberal.
The problem with Republicans is they believe – and they should know better – that being socially conservative is identical with being fiscally conservative.
Besides, a political party ought to to the right thing, not the thing it believes will get them more votes. In fact they ought to do the right thing even if it means they lose votes (see, e.g., Psalm 15). A political party ought to be in favor of border enforcement on the sole grounds that nation-states have the right to their borders.
(One wants to respond, “Border? What border? Family values means never having to acknowledge a border.” But I digress.)
We hear from Republicans that hispanics are very conservative people and if the Republicans will just roll over on the matter of whether nation states have the right to enforce their borders they (i.e., Republicans) will garner a larger percentage of the hispanic vote. My own (hispanic!) family experience tells me otherwise.
It is true that my hispanic family, especially the elders, are very socially conservative. Being, for the most part, Roman Catholic they are very much pro-life; and they probably would not be in favor of same-sex marriage. But when it comes to issues like taxes, welfare, limited government and other (conservative) issues, I’m afraid they aren’t very conservative at all. I recall well when my abuelita (that’s “grandmother” for you “gringos”) chastised my father for voting Republican. “When have the Republicans,” she said, “ever done anything to help the poor?”
On her view, one role of a good government is to take money from people who have “too much” and give it to those who don’t. Oh, yes, she is a conservative all right – a conservative Democrat. And, alas, her generation of the family is by and large the last of the socially-conservative-but-fiscally-liberal. Her children, nieces and nephews, as well as most of her grandchildren (and their cousins) are now both socially and fiscally liberal.
The problem with Republicans is they believe – and they should know better – that being socially conservative is identical with being fiscally conservative.
Besides, a political party ought to to the right thing, not the thing it believes will get them more votes. In fact they ought to do the right thing even if it means they lose votes (see, e.g., Psalm 15). A political party ought to be in favor of border enforcement on the sole grounds that nation-states have the right to their borders.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
About Me
- James Frank Solís
- Former soldier (USA). Graduate-level educated. Married 26 years. Texas ex-patriate. Ruling elder in the Presbyterian Church in America.
Blog Archive
-
▼
2007
(187)
-
▼
June
(23)
- A caller to Rush Limbaugh’s show yesterday (28 Jun...
- If not twelve million, then why one?
- Think tanks occasionally provide information which...
- Listening to Ted Kennedy singing this song – a fav...
- Strange bedfellows
- Even if there were no hell. -- Wisdom Sunday
- Indeed: “For all of our vaunted interest in the s...
- If a (documented) man will not work...
- Sanctuary Cities: The New Nullification?
- Oh, goodie. Another immigration bill. You can do...
- Hugh Hewitt sums up the entirety of his voluminous...
- Political expedience must be a family value
- “Let us in peacefully or we’ll smoke you out.”U.S....
- Episcomuslimican?
- I’ve been tracking for some years now the nature o...
- UPDATE (to this posting): I got to thinking some ...
- Democracy sure can be a pain in the ass, eh Senator?
- Now it’s “You’re in favor of this bill, or you’re ...
- “Support this bill or you’re a racist.”
- "Inordinate Affections" -- Wisdom Sunday
- And yet another exercise in mis-characterizing opp...
- According to Lindsey Graham people like me view bi...
- I have expressed doubt about the notion that scien...
-
▼
June
(23)
0 comments: