Fiscal Conservatism’s Dependence on Social Conservatism

28 01 2008

Filed under: Huckabee, Birmingham AL, Politics, Election, 2008, Christianity, Conservatism

On Saturday my family attended the Huckabee rally in Birmingham, Alabama. A few more people than expected showed up to support the former governor.

Presidential hopeful Mike Huckabee pounded on familiar, conservative themes today at Samford University, where an overflow crowd of 2,000-plus supporters greeted him.

Huckabee addressed a crowd of about 400 at the Brock Hall, not knowing at the time that a crowd estimated at 1,800 had spilled over into a nearby auditorium where they listened to his speech whcih was piped in on audio.

Finishing his speech at the Brock Hall, Huckabee quickly walked to the adjacent Wright Center and was noticeably taken back by the large crowd.

Once onstage, Huckabee said “I had no idea this many would show up! We obviously underestimated. I will never underestimate Alabama again!” The overflow crowd roared its approval.

In front of both crowds, Huckabee said as president he would lead an America that would guard its borders from illegal immigrants; protect marriage as a union between a man and a woman; fight against abortion; fight for a strong military and adopt to a flat tax system, abolishing the Internal Revenue Service. He also said he would safeguard constitutional rights so that any American could work harder and improve their lives.

Video (from the first speech):

Marvin Olasky has an excellent column in this week’s World Magazine in which he highlights how Mike Huckabee could very easily bring those outside the ranks of evangelicals into his fold by tying the fiscal leg of conservatism’s dependence on the social leg, which is his primary strength.

How does he do this? Sensitivity to immorality is at an all time low in America. The disintegration of the family leaves kids more likely to commit crimes or get pregnant. Parents are stressed and overweight. Which all lead to government programs. Olasky nails it in the conclusion:

He could explain that a conservative position on social issues contributes to a conservative position on fiscal issues: Individuals who are family-reliant and God-reliant are rarely government-reliant.

Christianity emphasizes both individuality and community. Balancing the two has been a genius of America as well. Today, rich and especially poor often leave the cleanup to government officials. If we want fewer officials, we need to reduce the number of messes. Social conservatism makes possible fiscal conservatism.

More conservatism > less messes > fiscal conservatism.

What happens if you poison society with liberalism? The exact opposite:

More liberalism > more messes > fiscal collapse.




Leave a Reply

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: