Did the NY congressional race redefine conservative?

Me, I've always defined conservative as strict constitutionalists with emphasis on fiscal soundness and state's rights superceding federal rights. What happened in the NY race just overthrew every thought/belief I had. It seems the media are now defining Republican and Conservative as monikers for those *I* call right-wing nutjobs who want a theocracy (albeit a loose theocracy surrounding christianity as opposed to an individual sect) embedded in our system.

Hopes for fiscal conservates throwing the religious nutjobs out of the center of the Republican party seem to have died.

Where do we go now? It feels more and more like there is nowhere left for fiscal conservatives who are socially liberal to go. The Democrats have largely moved away from social liberalism and the Republicans have moved away from fiscal conservatism. In the past someone like me could base her vote on whichever set of issues seemed to be the most pressing at that moment in time. But now? Blech!

I think a problem that is often made is that people draw connections where they shouldn't be. Specifically:

Conservative = Republican
Liberal = Democrat

It sounds like you're probably a Liberal Republican, Kula. I can see where Liberal Repubs would have problems in this day and age, since the 2 parties are polarizing everything.

Cuch, I wish I could agree with you about the polarization of the parties. But while the Republicans are clearly allowing a group I consider fringe extremists to take over the Democrats at the moment don't seem to be seizing the opportunity to actually accomplish any socially liberal goals. They (the Dems) seem to be floundering in what I shiver to call 'Carter Syndrome' where actually getting stuff done is taking a back seat to holding on to power.

vote Libertarian.

Opps, hit submit too soon

That is why we must really work to get some viable third parties out there. The Republicans and Democrats are not speaking for us anymore. They are speaking for their own ans special interest. Until they feel threatened they won't change how they act. (although they have both worked together to make any third party challenge to be much more difficult than it already is)

Nah. Libertarians don't believe that any action is better done federally and I think there are some things that are better done collectively, as a country.

Kula, you're kinda catching on the basic problem with politics since... well... the beginning of time. People who take a hard line, never waver, and shout loud will be the people who guide politics.

You ARE a Libertarian. Most of America is Libertarian. But, the Libertarians have the same problem other parties have: extremists. The whole drug issue tears them up, it's a bad platform when exposed to normal politics.

But, in general Libertarians are socially liberal, financial conservative. That's it. Now, whether you want to abolish income tax and legalize cocaine is a whole different discussion.

The idea of libertarianism that you put forward is vastly different to the one put forward on the Libertarian Party's website (and wikipedia). You almost make it sound relatively sane.

I think most of America is not as libertarian as you would like to think. Going through the party platform has yielded quite a few things that most Americans would adamantly oppose, or would rapidly come to regret if it came to be.

For what it's worth, I'm socially liberal, fiscally conservative, and find Libertarianism a neat idea, but one that's not viable for the US at this time. To shade this the right way, I also find the governmental systems in Starship Troopers in the same way: A neat idea, but one that's not viable for the US at this time.

http://www.lp.org/platform

letsee.. abolish social security, abolish public education and employers can choose to not acknowledge unions (yeah that's helpful). I do also love the freemarket idea for healthcare since the insurance industry has proven to be so amiable to minimizing profits to maximize affordability for clients. Oh, and we are leaving the environment protection up to individual property owners.

I guess you can count me as one of those oddball americans that is not libertarian. I kinda think there are some things a collective does better than an individual.