Comment: In a certain respect they could be

(See in situ)

In a certain respect they could be

considered socialist, but really they are Totalitarian statists. They support the governments intrusions on our personal liberties in hopes to remedy their own personal ideologies. Social conservatism started as a grass roots type movement mostly lead by church leaders and conservative groups in protest against immoralities. However, the Bush/Rove divised a political scheme to make these groups believe the state can solve these issues. By using these tactics, they convinced these groups into believing this guy is one of us and should be trusted. The events on 9/11 gave them the cohesion they needed to support other Totalitarian personal liberty destroying statist measures and to support aggressive wars, which has always been a liberal/progressive tactic. Social conservatism is not Socialism by definition, but has made the foolish decision to believe the state can solve their issues.