Posted on 11/10/2006 6:56:53 AM PST by JamesP81
This column is not going to be pleasant, but then again, it’s not supposed to be. In the aftermath of the election, while conservatism might be intact, the GOP got its rear end handed to it on a silver platter. The blame for this falls squarely on the three major factions: social conservatives, libertarian conservatives, and the GOP leadership.
I am not going to be nice any of these camps. The Nice Guy approach hasn’t worked, so we’re going to try the rough approach. No republican of any stripe is going to like me after readings this, and I couldn’t possibly care less about that. I can tolerate some social dislike if it gets things done.
The three camps in the GOP have taken to pointing fingers at each other with wild abandon, but I tell you the truth, all have seriously screwed the pooch this time. All sides are trying to hook up a towing chain to the tree in the other sides’ eyes while ignoring the forest in their own respective eyes.
However, all is not lost, and there’s still a chance we can recover some ground in 2008, especially considering that the left wingers are naturally good at embarassing themselves. This is going to require a change of attitude in every camp though, and it’s going to require a reduction in the general pig headedness of said camps.
I’ll start with the GOP leadership. This is actually the simplest one. The GOP leaderships needs to LEAD. When no one leads, the people don’t follow. The GOP did everything they could to play Mr. Nice Guy with the libs, but that’s not why we elected them. Conservatives always do better when they stand up for their base and for what’s right. See the 1994 congressional elections. One thing the leadership could do is put forth a party platform acceptable to social cosnervatives and libertarian conservatives.
I guess it helps that I find myself in both the social and libertarian conservative camps. It makes it easier to see where these two camps went wrong.
The libertarian conservatives are right on their insistence for less taxes, smaller government, no censorship, reduced education spending, and a secure border. What they get wrong is the issues of abortion, stem cell research, and euthanasia. I can understand not wanting to decide something like gay marriage at the federal level (thus leaving it to the states), but you have to remember what the federal government’s purpose is. The federal government exists to secure the rights of the individual, and any action taken by the government that is not related to that end is an illegitimate action.
I keep hearing about respecting people’s rights from the libertarian wing of the party; but what about the rights of the unborn? I’m sorry, but if you think that we should allow a woman to dismember her child before he’s even born, then you’re not serious about protecting individual rights no matter what you say. If libertarian conservatives want the lefties out of office so we can have small government, then they need to actually respect the right to live of the unborn and the infirm. Basically, the libertarian conservatives need to get over abortion and euthanasia. It ain’t gonna play. Those issues are total losers. You can get virtually everything else you want, and you can probably even get the gay marriage thing to be resolved at the state level, but you’re going to have to let abortion and euthanasia go. Americans of sincere faith are not going to tolerate it.
Now, for the social conservatives. This is a little harder, as social conservatives tend to be a lot more hetereogeneous on non-social issues than libertarians are on social issues, so I’ll just hit them all and if, as a social conservative, this doesn’t apply to you, then don’t worry about it. If it does, then please have the decency to be ashamed of yourself. As Christians, our stance against abortion and euthanasia are admirable. Those are things that we can justify outlawing both on moral and civil rights grounds. However, a great number of social conservatives see absolutely no problem with an amnesty for 20 million illegal aliens. If that happens, we’re probably going to see that the actual number of illegal aliens is more like 40 million and 80% of them will vote democrat. So we can forget having a conservative with traditional values in the oval office probably for the next 20-40 years. We’d better think long and hard about what that will mean. Another thing I see social conservatives a little too comfortable with is large government in general. There is this predisposition to be far too accepting of the government and of using government for charitable ends. While the intentions behind such a belief are noble, they are wrongheaded. Government’s purpose is not for charity; as the Church, we are supposed to do charity. The government’s job is to protect individual rights, and nothing else. It’s also not the federal government’s job to decree what material is acceptable, and which isn’t. Censorship is a terrible thing, even when used against material that is objectionable. Remember, any power we cede to the federal government today can and will be used against us when a day comes that people hostile to the Christian faith come to power, as they did this past election. Frankly, I don’t care how much objectionable crap is on the Internet (and I admit, there’s a lot of it to go around), the Internet is greatest weapon of free speech ever forged by Mankind, and it’s wild and unregulated nature is what makes it effective. So please just leave it alone. The consequences of too much liberty are as nothing compared to the consequences of too little. Promoting education spending is another area social conservatives have completely wrong. The 10th Amendment to the Constitution specifically reserves any power that is not explicitly granted to the federal government to the States and the People. The Constitution says nothing about education. In fact, there should be no such thing as a Dept of Education. The Dept of Education needs to be closed and federal taxes reduced by the amount that funded it. Education is for the States and the People; let them take care of what is rightly their business.
Social conservatives: forget big government. Forget looking to the government as a master or a way to legislate people into being Christians. Instead of outlawing objectionable material on the Internet, be leaders in the community and teach the people why this stuff is wrong and should be avoided. These pro-big government stances are complete electoral losers. Please quit dragging down the rest of the GOP by supporting unelectable crap like censorship and other forms of big government. Unless, of course, you want someone totally hostile to us in power for the rest of our lives.
If this seems harsh to you as a reader, then I have accomplished my goal. It’s supposed to be harsh. We no longer have any room for the spineless approach.
I want to see libertarian conservatives quit doing everything they can to kill the unborn; I want to social conservatives worship God instead of the government; and I want to see the GOP leadership to at least open a dictionary, look up the word ‘leadership’, and read the definition.
And for God’s sakes, and this applies to all three camps, grow up people.
And BTW, one more note for libertarian conservatives: going around mocking social conservatives is really counter-productive. Quit doing it.
Very well said.
You might not like me anymore after you read my post ping.
I can't disagree with that. The reality is that any political organization large enough to win at a national level is going to have some degree of factionalism. It is up to the party leadership, and that is not necessarily the President, to unite us, by providing enough principled agenda items for the factions to agree to vote together. The GOP failed to do that.
That is pretty much the truth. GOP had a leadership failure.
Excellent
And BTW, one more note for libertarian conservatives: going around mocking social conservatives is really counter-productive. Quit doing it.
Unlike, say, your mocking libertarian conservatives as "doing everything they can to kill the unborn"?
James, you know me better than that! What makes you think there's ANYthing in your post I'd find disagreeable?!
At least I have your attention. That's a good thing.
Hypocrisy usually draws my attention.
I cannot find fault with the majority of your argument. But bomb-throwing, while a good way to get attention, weakens your credibility and therefore your argument.
Now, now. I didn't say that.
I understand bombast. But straw man arguments? Those are beneath you, and beneath the forum.
Everything I said in my post was true. There are no strawmen here. Libertarians are dead set against observing the rights of the unborn. Social conservatives don't understand that government isn't the answer. There is nothing untrue about those statements, and it's about time the problem was brought up so it can be dealt with.
"libertarian conservatives quit doing everything they can to kill the unborn"
There's a difference between wanting the abortion fight waged in the states and actively pursuing abortion.
That's a straw man. It cheapens your argument.
I forgot to add that I am against open borders and any kind of disguised amnesty.
I am against gay marriage and believe homosexuality is against the will of God.
No offense but my point is there may be a lot of over-lap in these categories. I also don't like being put in a box. Those boxes we were already thrown in may have lost us some election.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.