Was American Conservatism ever much more than hand-wringing and saying "this is evil" while at the same time taking great pleasure engaging in vicious cruelty if not outright elimination towards vulnerable groups? I'm speaking of American Conservatism itself and not any political party.
I'm not much of a "good" vs "evil" person but I will say IMNSHO American Conservatism has always engaged in a disproportionate amount of evil against fellow humans not to mention animals.
"Fiscally conservative but socially liberal" is about as least-offensive as it gets in how they engage in cruelty but in the American political system when someone votes that way it helps direct national policy in both a fiscally and socially conservative direction. "Fiscally conservative but socially liberal" is ultimately a statement of self-interest and focus that requires a willful ignorance of or apathy towards what is happening and has happened from a vote and/or power shift.
For those wondering what that self-interest would be I'm talking about not just soothing their own minds by telling themselves they aren't enabling the bad (read: dominant) portions of the American Right but getting social points by convincing your average liberal that they don't vote to hurt people they vote to lower taxes. That's both an abstraction and a deflection. Fiscal conservatism will always cause real-world pain and hardship for the poor/vulnerable because it's a feature, not a bug.
@oddfox@mastodon.socialTL;DR: American Conservatism has always been cruel in a remarkable way that lacks much of any self-awareness of action and consequence and those of them who pretend to be "socially liberal" generally do so to prevent their social standing from running into problems like being "cancelled" by libs and institutions they want to keep the company of.