Excerpt:
Third, the dividing line between economic and social issues remains far less crisp and definitive than generally assumed. Take for example the Democratic determination to provide widespread coverage for abortion as a key component of ObamaCare. Social conservatives fought this provision as a matter of pro-life principle, while economic conservatives opposed it as an expensive new entitlement — providing government funding for an elective procedure that remains, at best, deeply controversial.
Or consider current efforts by leading conservatives to trim federal funding to National Public Radio and the Corporation for Public Broadcasting. “Culture Warriors” dislike these programs because they support a politically correct, shamelessly leftist perspective, while fiscal conservatives despise them because they offer a prime example of bureaucratic bloat — a federal intrusion into an area (television and radio broadcasting) where the private sector does a mostly adequate job and even manages to turn a profit.
Most of today’s major economic issues in fact feature some significant social component, and nearly all socio-cultural disputes involve an economic dimension, influencing the spending crisis and the overall growth of government. When it comes to current battles over the meaning of gay rights, for instance, there’s no question that remaking society to treat gay and straight relationships as indistinguishable will impose a significant burden on taxpayers. If gay partners receive the same Social Security and Medicare benefits as married couples, a system already stretched to the breaking point will bear additional expenses running into the billions. This reform may or may not follow the dictates of fundamental fairness, but it is hardly without cost; you can’t provide equal benefits for a whole new class of beneficiaries without creating obvious problems in the system’s balance sheets.
[…]The only real alternative to government as a source of assistance, authority and a functioning civil society remains the “little platoons” described by Edmund Burke — families and communities shaped by attitudes that count as both economically and culturally conservative.
Michael Medved is kind of a Republican-In-Name-Only, like another famous radio show host Hugh Hewitt, but he’s right about this at least. I like Dennis Prager and Mark Levin better when I am listening to the radio.
WINTERY KNIGHT 
Medved a RINO? If by RINO you mean staunch conservative (which all too many Republicans are not), then I agree.
If you mean he leans liberal, I’d love to see some substantiation on that. I’ve not heard anything of the sort ever pass from his lips.
LikeLike
Well, he backed McCain dude. Even Hugh Hewitt did not like McCain at all.
Here you go:
http://townhall.com/tipsheet/MichaelMedved/2008/01/06/call_off_the_rino_hunt
LikeLike
Really WK. Medved a Rino? The irony is incredible given Medved’s passionate dislike for the term. But, I would say that he is likely to support a Rino in order to maintain GOP predominance in Congress. That alone doesn’t make him a Rino, but it does mean he’ll compromise conservative values. Someone not long ago wrote a piece about such tactics and wondered how it has helped the conservative cause. The pundit’s assessment was that it hadn’t at all. All major issues where a Rino could have voted right, he voted left, meaning his (R) next to his name was worthless.
But Medved’s idea of conservative is pretty weak as well when applied to McCain. He spoke of the American Conservative Union giving McCain an 86% (I think it was) conservative rating (didn’t matter that John Kyl, also from Arizona ranked in the upper 90’s). So I looked at the ACU and found that one can see how they rank a dude over the course of his political career. McCain used to rank in the 90’s himself. But over the last ten, to perhaps twenty years, he’s been ranked as low as 50%.
Now Hewitt’s another matter. I don’t know why you’d consider HIM a RINO, though I didn’t care for his Romney support all that much. I’d like to see Romney in someone’s cabinet, but not as prez himself.
As to Medved’s piece, I agree with him. Social issues need to be considered, but tied to economics in a manner that is easily understood as well as honest. Mitch Daniels of Indiana thinks the GOP should shelve social issues in seeking to attain prominence. This is a RINO move in my opinion. Had we been more stern about social issues 50-60 years ago, we might not have the massive amount of abortions, STD infections, divorces, suicides, and a host of other problems that has impacted our health care system, as well as our culture in general.
LikeLike
OK, OK. Medved is a RINO, and Hewitt is sometimes a RINO. Yes, because he supports to King of RINOs, Mitt Romney, who is conservative on absolutely nothing – socially or fiscally.
Yes, I know that Grudem likes him… I don’t know why…
LikeLike