Is this party for me?

While I would say that many here are fiscally conservative/socially liberal, I don't think that's the defining characteristic of a Modern Whig. Mostly, I'd say it's a willingness to look at the issues outside of any predetermined ideology and look for rational solutions.

Thus, some of your questions don't have pat answers. And won't until people have a chance to evaluate them.

Hello!
In my opinion regarding where Whigs stand on these issues, I'd say:
(1) Free trade is a complicated subject to begin with; currently, so-called free trade agreements help corporations increase their profits but harm Americans. I'd refer you to this link: http://american_almanac.tripod.com/carey95.htm and particularly the sentence, "To raise the value of labour throughout the world, we need only to raise the value of our own."
(2) Given the Whigs' historical support for infrastructure and economic independence, I'd say that a Whiggish solution would involve alternative energies to prevent America from being dependent on enemies like Iran. And part of the solution would be to encourage Arabs to reach an agreement about staying within their own borders and nuclear non-proliferation.
(3) The Whigs were in favor of limited involvement in foreign affairs, and America has been very involved in Israel ever since the Cold War. There's no simple answer there but it would be fascinating to ask the opinion of the American people.
(4) Social Security is a public good; it is not contributing to the deficit. I don't think Whigs would approve of switching over to stocks, and I doubt that they'd support nationalizing pension plans. But that's the kind of issue where public participation -- perhaps a referendum -- is needed.
(5) Whigs are of the John Locke tradition which holds that the private acts of citizens, which do not harm others, should not be illegal. As far as SOPA goes, hmmm, I'm inclined to think that Whigs would regard the Internet as a public good, and as such, not something that should be turned into a corporate fiefdom, which is clearly the intent of SOPA.

I will make this very short. I am inclined to agree with what newindependentwhig said above, especially point 5.

1. What is the stance on Free Trade vs Fair Trade?

Most people here seem to support fair trade vs. free trade. Personally, I respectfully disagree with that position.

2. What is the stance on current intervention in the Middle East (the "where we stand" section is very vague about this)?

Yes, I agree the parties position is very vague. I think there may be several factions within the party that disagree on this subject--"Where We Stand" looks like it was designed to please all of them.

Personally, I reject non-interventionism while simultaneously rejecting adventurism. I think this philosophy is called "Liberal realism," amongst several other names. I'm also Wilsonian enough to support humanitarian intervention in extreme cases. But my approach to foreign policy is in a constant state of flux.

3. More specifically, what is the stance on the Israel/Palestine conflict?

I don't think the party's taken a stand on this.

4. What is your stance on Social Security?

Again, I don't think there's and official position. But few people in the U.S. are really against Social Security.

5. What about other hot button issues such as SOPA, legalization of Marijuana (I don't use the stuff, FYI), etc.

Most issues seem to be subject to debate.

"I would generally classify myself as a fiscal conservative/social liberal. That seems summarize what the people here are. Am I correct? Or do I need to continue my ongoing search for a political party that shares my beliefs?"

Yes, most people here do appear to be fiscally conservative and socially liberal. I'm not--I reject balanced budgets in favor of responsible borrowing and proper capital budgeting, and take a center-right to conservative stance on a number of social issues (and a center-left stance on others), but yeah, most people be are FC/SL.

FYI, I'm not formally a Whig yet.

Right, I can see that because you still think that we, the MWP, are going to tell you how to think, give you a complete platform line by line. WRONG ANSWER man.

And to the OP, MWP might share your beleifs, but we are here to help you hone and refine them, NOT to tell you how to think. This IS a new paradigm, and it may seem quite unusual at first.

Has ANY political party found answers? Man, the Reps and Dems couldnt solve problems if you put a gun to their heads - aint that clear yet?

Why?

Because your traditional political party does not solve problems and drive to consensus solutions. Heck, in today's context, THEY CANT! It's all about having a different platform than the other guy, and promoting a non-centrist agenda.

Can we really expect to get modern, effective and sustainable public policy done in that context? Correct, no way in hell. Look at the 4000 ppg healtcare law. That's the garbage the parties and special interests give us today. Bullcrap, ineffectual and VERY EXPENSIVE TO administer,i.e., garbage. Garbage in, garbage out.

MWP's goal is to get citizens involved in drafting legislation and finding solutions. Then to give their MWP ( or non party affiliated independent)representative the draft for submission to legislative bodies. Using political parties as our proxies for participation and the policy process has gotten us into the mess we're in today. We can still wright the Republic, but can you see how we have to approach it so very differently to effect the proper changes?

Are you begining to see how we are different? MWP's form of participation does not tell you how to think, but endeavors to provide a path for personal discovery and enlightenment to eventually effect much better public policy, and to provide mechanisms and institutions to build consensus and commmon ground among ALL citizens.

Someone has to unass this divide and conquor strategy of the two dominant parties.

It be MWP.