Mods v. SoCons: The War of Words Continues
Nathan Greene
11 Comments
By Emily Geiger
When I read Beaumont’s piece in the Register yesterday, I knew it would stir the already festering pot. And then, of course, people read Krusty and read all sorts of things into it that I’m not sure were really there.
Here’s the thing people need to remember, especially the moderates who focus on fiscal issues rather than social ones. The election of Scheffler and Lehman as our national committee-people really isn’t that big of a deal. Sure, it’s a moral victory for the social conservative grassroots, but there’s only so much national-committee people do. Scheffler and Lehman are far more dangerous to these moderates in their roles as activists.
As activists, they can cajole legislators and perhaps even change some hearts and minds. As national committee-people, they can either maintain Iowa as first in the nation (i.e. maintain the status quo, which not many people even really notice) or blow Iowa’s first in the nation status and tick a lot of people off for decades to come. Not exactly a win-win situation.
For a long time, the moderates (who have held the elite positions in the party) have told the SoCons that we need to focus on the issues on which we all agree (i.e. the fiscal issues), so the SoCons should just shut-up and get on board. After all, we’re better off with moderate Republicans than with Democrats, right?
So, the little SoCon worker bees should just keep our mouths shut and do what we do best: door-knock and make phone calls, and do it with a smile.
Now, the perception being put out there by people like Diane Crookham-Johnson is that the tables have turned. The reality is that the moderates are still in control of things like our state chairmanship and the RNC. But, let’s just say they have turned. Shouldn’t the moderates just focus on the fact that we all still agree in the fiscal issues and shut-up and get on board? After all, we’re better off with SoCon Republicans than with Democrats, right?
So, maybe the elite moderates should just keep their mouths shut and do what they do best: write their big, fat checks, and do it with a smile.
Reader Comments (11)
I don't write checks so that I can keep my mouth shut. Most ridiculous post ever.
Well, then don't expect social conservatives to do all the leg work and not have a voice either. That's the whole point. What's good for the goose is good for the gander.
Wow, you could not be farther off the point Emily. The current state chairman was too conservative till he got to where he is now. Remember who threw him out and with whom they replaced him with. But don't let that get in the way of the weak point you are trying to make.
All these SoCo talking heads do not represent the reality on the ground. The SoCo's who are not interested in complaining and obsessed with losing for the sake of "I told you so" politics are supporting McCain and other Pro-Life R’s100%.
Education: Just because you are an obsessed SoCo DOES NOT MAKE YOU CONSERVATIVE! In fact quite the opposite. Obsessed SoCo's will throw out every other aspect of conservatism just for a Mike Huck who is 100% on social issues. Now a reasoned smart SoCo factors in things like well rounded conservatism and Win-ability. They do not get obsessed with a pure SoCo candidate who has no chance in a general election. IF YOU DO NOT WIN YOU DO NOT GOVERN. WINNING UNFORTUNATELY TAKES MONEY! And a coalition of people with all different conservative beliefs.
Lost Republican, this is getting a little bit old telling some moron that socons aren't going to cut you out of the party. Socons aren't going to grow the government. Socons want a smaller government, socons want lower taxes, socons want fiscal responsibility, socons want personal responsibility and socons want a strong national defense. The thing is there is also an issue that socons want that quite often gets thrown under the bus, that is our social issues. Abortion is the biggest, we don't believe that killing children should be an option. The Defense of Traditional Marriage is something we want to preserve our religious freedoms. You are afraid that socons will ignore the issues that you hold as convictions, now you know how they feel.
Go ahead and attack Huckabee. He isn't in the presidential race. Your pathetic attack on social conservatives shows that you have no clue about what a social conservative is. And just who determines who has a chance of winning in the general election? You? Truth you need to get another name for yourself, such as mistruth.
Well said Al. Mods don't like it when you turn their arguments against social conservative around on them. Social conservatives have been expected to do all the work and and have gotten almost nothing in return.
Yet mods get upset when you suggest that they should keep giving their money, and not get everything they want in return.
How is this a fair arrangement? I do think that to win, it would be best if both sides could get along, but there has to be give and take. So far, the give and take has been rather lopsided. The mods need to realize that, along with money, you need a ground operation to win, and most mods aren't willing to put forth the effort. That is where the passionate social conservatives come in who are willing to give of their own time and energy.
Both sides need each other, and in order for all this to work, both sides have to respect each other, but the mods have not shown any respect, and that is what's led to these problems.
Anon, I don't think that it is as simple as saying the moderates are against socons. I am beginning to think that there may be some outsiders attempting to undermine the party and what we stand for.
I was passing out Goldwater fliers and bumperstickers at the Iowa State Fair when most so-cons still didn't know what a polling place was. I don't want my country to go to hell just because you think everyone who doesn't speak in tongues will go to hell. It gets a little old telling some moron that you won't have a chance to win an election without my money AND my groundwork.
Lost Republican,
You have just shown that you have got no clue as to what a social conservative believes. If that is your only worry, then you sound more like a Democrat than a Republican.
I am a social conservative. I have never voted for nor do I hope I have to vote for a pro-choice candidate. But that is not the most important issue to the general voting public you state your position and move on to the issue of the day. Since when have we had a chairman that is not pro-life. Being pro-life is not good enough anymore and it is sickening. Why don't you losers care about winning that is what is so frustrating. Winning is the most important thing! Read Hawkeye GOP today he has a really good read on this very point.
Truth, I want to win. Go over to Iowa Defense Alliance. There is a great post up over there that explains what is going on. Social conservatives like myself got tired of basically being told to shut up and fall in line. That is what is going on. We aren't out for just one or two issues, we want all the issues. We want lower taxes, we want personal responsibility, we want less government, and we want our values and convictions protected.