GOP: Where Are We Going?
http://www.cnn.com/2009/POLITICS/05/02/gop.townhall/index.html
I am not one for lamenting the loss of a defector, least of all one like Senator Arlen Specter. Frankly, as a person he isn’t much of a loss.
But what I am concerned about is the lack of any central focus or message from the opposition party.
Frankly, the Republican ‘opposition’ has been token at best. Every time they hear an Obama proposal, there only claim is ‘tax and spend’…which may be true, but isn’t going to win any elections by itself. Second, I think there is clearly too many people fighting to be the voice of the party…Michael Steele, Newt Gingrich, Paul Ryan, Eric Cantor, Mitch McConnell… you can go on and on. And that list doesn’t even include the Governors…
I thought that the Tea Party Movement might clue in Republicans on a real core opposition message: Government can’t do everything, should not try to do everything, and should be limited in its scope and breath. This is the core of the conservative movement, regardless of what ever other lobbies and issue groups try to take the mantel of leadership of the right. Before there was the silent majority; before the Republican Revolution; before pro-lifers and the NRA; there was the core of the Reagan Revolution, that a limited and competent government was the best kind of democracy to allow America to prosper and live free. That is the core belief we must get back to.
We as Republicans forgot that in the last decade. George W. Bush definitely deserves some of the blame, but the core of the party does as well. When you no longer have a central ideal to rally your supporters to, you don’t really truly have a national party. Winning elections is important, but not at the cost of who you are; ideals, and ideals, matter.
The goal of a large tent party is a worthy goal. However, that should not be the central driving force of the party. The current Democratic vision did not come about because of a ‘large tent’ mentality; it congealed around the common belief that Mr. Bush was a failure. The Reagan Revolution did not come by making a ‘big tent’ the ultimate goal. Reagan had a vision, and formed a movement. And those who were marginally in support of him were welcome to enter the party, as long as they understood what the central theme of the party was. Politicians like Arlen Specter came to power under that premise. Specter would not be where he is if it were not for the right wing conservatism of Ronald Reagan.
No, the change that has occurred is that the Republicans lost their way…and once that happened, the party’s demise was just a matter of time. Moderates, as usual, have no real core principles, and thus are following the path that is most likely to secure their political futures. Don’t be surprised if other RINOs follow Specter’s lead.
The Republican Party leaders better forget about their own political futures, and come together on a common theme. And frankly, President Obama is making this easy for us. Being the party of smaller, competent, and less intrusive government could be an easy sell to the American public by 2010. Mr. Obama ran as a moderate, non-taxing-and-spending liberal. He has been nothing of the sort. If Obama keeps his promises on cap-and-trade and nationalized health care, the middle class will see their taxes and fees increase dramatically. It is necessary; the rich cannot afford that kind of cash infusion. Then we will see if the public at large is willing to accept Mr. Obama’s vision of a new America.
Republicans that in power must stand on principle. This will not always be easy. Gov. Tim Pawlenty of Minnesota this week vetoed a tax increase from the Democratic legislature, which would have increased taxes on those making over $250,000 ala the Obama tax increase. He vetoed the bill, then went off to start fishing season. Now, Minnesota will have to make tough choices going forward regarding the budget, but isn’t that what are leaders are elected to do?
Obama’s policies are not widely popular. For example, 63% of people are against investigations into terror interrogations. And the large deficits and debt Obama has predicted has not been well received. Here is an even better barometer: Obama’s budget passed the largely Democrat dominated Senate 53-43, with 4 Democrat Senators as well as new defector Arlen Specter voting against. That is not a large margin for error. And the liberal wing of the party keeps pushing him left…and this country is not a left of center country, regardless of what the media says.
2010 has the potential to be a rebound election. Things always look darkest before the morning. Parties have been ‘dead’ before. Heck, look at the Democrats as early as 2004, and you can find a plethora of articles talking about their demise. Political cycles are a fickle thing.
Republicans looked lost after the Nixon and Ford years…only to have the rise of Ronald Reagan. After 40 years of Democrat rule in the House and the first Democrat president in a decade, Newt Gingrich was able to corral the Republicans into the majority. And I am not sure anyone would have taken a bet 4 years earlier that a popular outgoing second term Democratic President in a good economy would not be able to get his relatively popular Vice President to succeed him, as happened in 2000.
Conservatives must come together now. We don’t need a national leader at this moment. 2012 is a long ways away. No, we need a simple, coherent national vision. We need to use the internet, blogosphere, Twitter/Facebook, and other avenues to build the grassroots necessary for future success. That is the only way to restart the next Republican Revolution.
UPDATE: I MUST BE PSYCHIC…FROM CNN…
http://www.cnn.com/2009/POLITICS/04/30/gop.rebrand/index.html
CNN has learned that the new initiative, called the National Council for a New America, will be announced Thursday.
It will involve an outreach by an interesting mix of GOP officials, ranging from 2008 Republican presidential nominee John McCain to Jeb Bush, the former Florida governor and the younger brother of President George W. Bush.
“However, this is not a Republican-only forum,” reads the letter announcing the new effort, a copy of which was obtained by CNN from Republican sources involved in the effort. “While we will be guided by our principles of freedom and security, we will seek to include more than just our ideas.”
“This forum will include a wide open policy debate that every American can feel free to participate in,” the announcement letter reads. “We do this not just to offer an alternative point of view or to be disagreeable. Instead, we want to ask the American people what their hopes and dreams are. Since January, the President and the Democratic Majority in Congress have – rightfully so – put forward their plan for the future, now we must listen, learn and lead through an honest, open conversation with the American people that will result in building policy proposals that will yield the best results for our nation’s long-term success.”







Your advice to the GOP is great. As a Democrat, I hope they embrace it. Then we will truly be a one-party country.
Bring it on.
Here’s my question for you – if the Republican Party does go back to a small-government platform, does that mean you see the party backing off on regulating people’s sexual/lifestyle choices, the way most libertarians I know believe is consistent with their views? Here’s what I think the GOP’s real problem is – you guys, possibly as a result of coalition-building, have embraced way too many ideological contradictions. You’re the party of small government and individual choice – except when it comes to gay marriage. You’re the fiscally conservative party – except when it comes to military/security spending and hawkish military adventures. As a result, your position vis-a-vis the Democrats hasn’t really been big-versus-small-government, but rather a difference in spending priorities. I think you guys really need to take a step back and figure out what you’re really doing here, and what it is you really want.
Honestly…I hope so. I am not a big supporter of same sex marriages, but frankly, I am more liberatarian in my social beliefs. Live and let live. I think the gay marriage issue will be there, because social conservatives feel that it is imposing on their lives…whether right or wrong. But I agree with you. There is an ideological divide among republicans.
Jon, I also agree with you and have to say it’s nice to hear a liberal comment that doesn’t became a third grade name calling contest. Thank you. I thing I’d like to point out though, is that the original purpose of the federal gov’t was to maintain a military and defend the borders of the US. And that was about it. Thus, the conservatives will, and should in my opinion, always maintain a strong military. Thus, lots of spending.
The intrusion into the lifes and liberties of the citizens of the US is a modern believe system based on falsehoods that have failed and failed again from one end of the globe to the other.
I’d like to use you gay marriage point as an analogy. Is this an issue for the gov’t to be involved in? I’d say no. I personally think that this is an issue for the community(ies) that those individuals live in should deal with. I have gay neighbors, they live together, and we all get along. It’s a community issue that is, maybe not understood fully, but supported and thus a non-issue. But for some reason the gov’t (local, state, and federal) think and feel they can judge the merit or lack there of in gay marriage. And see the trouble we have for it.
As I see it the Dems want to replace all Common Law, past precedent and court decisions, with new Legislative Law, Acts of Congress etc., and all old Legislative Law; Local, State and Congressional enactments, with Common Law, that is new court decisions of the Unconstitutionality of those previous enactments. All they want to do is to keep stirring the legal and moral pot so that there is a constant flux and turmoil. This they call “progress”. When Teddy surrenders and serves time (two to five years) for vehicular homicide is when I believe that the Dems have some moral backbone.