My 30-something super conservative co-worker echos these sentiments, he can't stand organized religion and most of the conservative social viewpoints. I was so happy to hear him talking shit about bachmann on friday. Maybe there is hope for their movement, as much as I hate to admit it. I'd rather be arguing about economics than civil rights.

The problem is, their economic positions are actually much scarier and more damaging to far more people than their (losing) position on gay marriage.

Abandoning the sexual "morality" planks of the Republican party now would be a terrible losing gambit, which is why it simply won't happen. Other out-groups may come and go, but as long as they keep punishing women and never let up, they'll always have some kind of base to fall back on.

Actually, the far left is scarier than the far right. At most the far right wants to dictate our sexuality prohibit abortions; at most the far left wants government control over what we drive, our money, our fuel, our land, our water, and on and on and on.

@4 Let me correct you, because you missed a few things:

At most the far right wants to dictate our sexuality, restrict or cut off access to birth control and contraceptives of all forms, criminalize all sexual behavior outside of monogamous relations between heterosexual married couples, institutionalize bigotry, discrimination and unequal rights for LGBT Americans, outlaw pornography and all lesser forms of sexual expression in media, shame rape victims as "sluts", and prohibit abortions, even forcing pregnant rape and incest victims to carry fetuses to term.

It's hard for me to take anything you say about the "far left" seriously when you're so eager to downplay the goals and ambitions of extreme right-wingers. And personally, I'd rather have the government push me toward alternative fuels and energy sources than dictate how I can have sex with my wife in my own goddamn bedroom.

The Republicans began running on social/religious issues precisly because they couldn't win while running on the real issues. Every Republican who has won the presidency since the mid-60's has done so by making "values" part of the debate, which has not only affected the general election, but has also had an effect on the Democratic primaries.
The hard part for me to guage here is how much of the Republicans anti-worker/pro-rich sentiment will be easy or easier to see if they were to kick the Christian-fundy set out of their party. The R's are the party of religious fundamentalism, but they are also the party opposed to spending on infrastructure (while spending on invading other nations), opposed to environmental protection (because it costs wealty corporations "too much" to comply with these regulations), and the party that enacts policies that make workers lifes more difficult while doling out pointless tax breaks for the wealthiest in our nation.

If Giuliani can also explain to his Republican colleagues how they can abandon Culture War issues and still manage to convince working-class evangelical Christians to vote for them, he might be on to something.

The social conservative side of Republican politics has been scaring away otherwise conservative voters for a long time now.

4- Of whom is this "far left" of which you speak? What multinational news corporations do they control? What extremely wealthy & organized religions speak for them every Sunday? Please list the think-tanks that operate in DC w/ close connections to congress & the white house that further this "far left" agenda.

(And if you're scared of those bandana-clad chuckleheads who break windows, then, all I can say is... Do you run from kittens as well?)

@10: That's easy, George Soros and Media Matters.
@11: You can thank Richard Nixon for the clean air and water acts and the EPA.

Demonize it if you like, lie about it if that makes you feel more justified in your own beliefs, slander representatives of it if somehow you find surety in your views in doing so-

But fiscal conservative and social conservative are two sides of the same coin. They both regard government as a necessary evil to be rigidly controlled and limited to the degree possible while retaining a functional modern state. They both see the past as a blueprint to be modified for modern needs, not torn up and discarded to meet the emergency of the moment.

Mr. Guiliani has a moderate to left leaning constituency in mind, courting the urban voter. Fine. Certainly it's good political strategy for him.

Conservatives to moderates represent the majority of this nation. From the suburbs to the deeply rural areas they look at Capitol Hill or Manhattan residents with bemused wonder, deeply puzzled that anyone could live or think that way. While the denizens of New York City or LA or Seattle may not agree with their viewpoints, that disagreement is part of our political process. As much as Jim McDermott represents the voters in Seattle, Doc Hastings represents those from the East side of the state. Neither are evil for doing so necessarily, they're doing their jobs.

We can have discussions about the relative merits of a strong social safety net or a strong military or universal healthcare or energy policy (such as it is.) We can discuss whether the national debt is more compelling than the dubious value of pumping borrowed money into a stagnant economy via the Federal government.

I just wonder why it seems this conversation can't seem to happen in good faith anymore. Mr. Savage is pleased to wish all Republicans dead, and Mr. Mahar to compare them to a mass murderer and terrorist. Beck or Limbaugh in their turn use incindiary dialogue to whip up ratings and therefore revenue at the cost of honest political discussions. As do their counterparts, Maddow and Olbermann.

What bothers conservatives is that chaos seems to be winning. I had to explain to a young man loudly playing obscenity laced music at the park that this wasn't appropriate today. Disgusting vulgarity like Mr. Savage detailing a menage a trois between his boyfriend, himself and some thankfully un-named other as not cheating on Colbert isn't grounds for making sure he never gets another public speaking gig. Marriage is being denigrated, as is fidelity and integrity by the left.

Can you really wonder that the right sees your viewpoint as destructive, even evil on occasion, when this is the fruit of your labors over the past few decades? Really?

>>They both regard government as a necessary evil to be rigidly controlled and limited to the degree possible while retaining a functional modern state.

This statement is to political punditry as Garanimals is to couture.