Skip to comments.Social Conservatives Fight for Control of the Republican Party
Posted on 10/28/2008 11:00:34 AM PDT by lewisglad
A focal point of the GOP fight is the selection of the next chairman of the Republican National Committee -- the party's power center for fundraising and strategic thinking.
Conservative champion Rush Limbaugh, who often provides the rallying cry to the party's most ardent supporters via his radio program, last week laid out a similar warning, suggesting that a McCain win would do little to deter conservatives from pushing for major changes.
"One step at a time," Limbaugh told his listeners. "We're going to drag McCain across the finish line -- then we start rebuilding the conservative movement. It's going to happen whether he wins or loses, but especially if he wins too."
Party insiders are pushing for the party to name Michael Steele, the African American former lieutenant governor of Maryland, as its chairman to help the GOP broaden its appeal.
Both meetings are precursors to the Republican National Committee's winter meeting in January, when the new chairman will be elected by the committee's approximately 160 members.
"There is a new blood in the party that is interested in communicating the message of the party -- the conservative message," said Kim Lehman, executive director of the antiabortion group Iowa Right to Life, who in July defeated a state legislator for one of the state's seats on the national committee.
Former California GOP Chairman Shawn Steel, a newly elected committeeman, described his colleagues as "mostly dynamic and frustrated conservatives that really want to see a dramatic change for the RNC in the way that it communicates to Americans."
Even in a year of Democratic strength, there are some positive signs for conservatives. Gay marriage bans, for example, stand a chance of being approved by the voters in two big states, California and Florida
(Excerpt) Read more at latimes.com ...
How about the limited government and fiscal conservatives?
Can’t we all just get along?
It’s not simply “social conservatives”, it’s real GRASSROOTS conservatives. We in the grassroots believe in ALL aspects of conservatism: pro-life, pro-family, small-government, individual liberty, etc.
Personally, I want all the David Frum’s, the Michael Gerson’s, David Brooks’s, and the Colin Powell’s of the world out of the party. I’ll take their votes and their support, but I don’t want them anywhere near the leadership or influencing the leadership.
Steele is OK by me. I’ve enjoyed watching him on FOX News
Not so fast.. How did conservatives LOOSE control of the conservative party?.. Who are the malefactors?.. We need to name some names... Else the problems will remain.. Because the problems are PEOPLE..
Exactly, it was the MODERATE RINOS who got us into this mess.
The “social conservatives” have been riding the back of the GOP bus the past 8 years while the NRO types have driven us over the cliff.
“How did conservatives LOOSE control of the conservative party?.. Who are the malefactors?.. We need to name some names”
Frum, Kristol, Brooks, Douthat, all the other cocktail Rockefeller GOPers.
Good article.... a little light at the end of this RINO tunnel.
Sarah will clean all of the RINO’s out in 2012. I have no doubt in my mind about that!
I wish the fiscal conservatives would win instead
excuse me, but what the *#$( kind of story is this a week before a Presidential election????
What kind of ‘fighting’ is anybody doing within the party right now?? This is utter nonsense.
With a guy about to be annointed who is becoming more and more clearly a Marxist, the LA Times is suddenly concerned about ‘social conservatives’???? You’ve got to be kidding me.
“I wish the fiscal conservatives would win instead”
I don’t think social conservatives have a problem with the fiscal cons. The problem has been the RINOs.
The RINO's can form their own party as far as I care.
Social Conservative. Rhymes with Compassionate Conservative. Synonymous with George W. Bush.
I’ve got some bad news for you: there’s already a huge wedge and its been growing for years — really since the first Bush took office. This election (and the four previous ones) would be in the bag but for conservatives that have been staying home in droves since 1992. To answer this trend, what does the Republican party do? It nominates John McCain to run — the exact OPPOSITE of what it should have done. While I’ll concede that there weren’t very many good conservative presidential candidates this cycle, the main reason is the mess Bush and Congress have created — not the mess the RATS and the media blame him for, but the ones caused by ignoring conservative principles.
Conservatives are NOT “united” in trying to elect McCain. They may be holding their nose to keep Obama out, but even then, there are literally millions of votes the Republican party is throwing away because it refuses to nominate true conservative candidates that will actually behave as conservatives when elected.
Edited slightly, concur wholeheartedly
turd in the punchbowl
Not all the NRO types are bad. Most of those guys are great. David Frum, however, is not one of my favorites.
I think it’s clear at this point that the David Frum and Michael Gerson-inspired “compassionate conservatism” has been a disaster for the GOP. Under Bush, the GOP lost its identity as a small government party. I would prefer people like Dick Armey, Newt Gingrich, Jim DeMint, Sarah Palin, and Fred Thompson be in leadership positions.
This whole argument is stupid. Most social conservative are also limited government/fiscal conservatives. There is no huge gulf. The problem here are the Bush/Romney Republicans.
And it seems now from the polls the independent voters are starting to come home to McCain....
Once this election is over, we need to start planning how to take back our country.
Over the past several years we’ve watched people trying to take God out of the Pledge of Allegiance and In God We Trust off our money.
We’ve watched retailers stop saying Merry Christmas, Nativity scenes banned from public display, educators take words out of books and teachers trying to indoctrinate our kids.
Bit by bit, they’re taking away our religion, our freedoms, our guns, our constitution and our youth.
We need to organize and put a stop to it or we’ll see this years election scenario repeated again in four years.
They are NOT going to stop and we need to fight back and fight hard.
Social conservatives? What a load of crap.
Either someone is a conservative or they’re not.
Conservatism is based on PRINCIPLES, not this or that pet issue.
That’s part of the PROBLEM with the GOP. We’ve looked at all kinds of ISSUES as our cause(s) instead of underlying principles.
Do you suppose that the conservatives staying home in droves might have something to do with a non-conservative getting the nomination?
Your arguments don't hold water, FRiend.
You claim that conservatives have been staying home since 1992, presumably because of the two Bush presidents, and that "The Republican Party" nominated John McCain.
...except that it was the Republican voters who nominated John McCain. Remember the part about him winning the primary? Did the party somehow fix the election? The voters chose him, not "The Party".
Oh, and the same goes for Bush I and Bush II. The voters put them in the White House, not "The Party".
The Republican Party is the way it is because of how the voters within it are. That's an obvious statement, of course, but you seem to be ignoring it anyway.
"The Party" isn't some vague and distant "them"; it's us. The majority of we, as a group, including you, nominated and elected Bush I and Bush II, and nominated John McCain.
Part of a Republican form of government is that individuals don't always get to see their man in office. That's no different now than it has been for over 200 years. To see whomever you believe is the "right" man in office, you need to campaign for him and convince the majority that you're right.
Welcome to politics.
The Republican Party will be over if this guy is the next chairman. He has ruined the Party here in Florida.
He absolutely hates anything conservative, and does his best to hamper conservative candidates running for office here in Florida.
Allen West asked for his help, and the answer was a loud and clear: NO!
Once West got support from Steele, Thompson, and Hunter he finally came around and donated $500 to West's campaign..... two weeks before the election.
When the biggest donors in Florida asked Greer why he wasn't supporting West his answer was: "You people don't see the big picture. I'm working on the big picture and West isn't in it."
Time for Sarah to go hunting for RINO’s.
You betcha. And we need to join her and back her up 100%.
I don't know about that- there is definitely a strain of social conservatives who are okay with big government, so long as they are in charge.
Look at the last 8 years- Bush rode to power on the shoulders of the Christian Right. The rest of the party came along, but that was his base contituency within the party. And we've spent 8 years expanding the government and its spending at the behest of that wing of the party.
The problem here are the Bush/Romney Republicans
Bush and Romney draw their support from different wings of the party. W is clearly a product of the social conservative/Christian Right part of the GOP. Those are the people who got him elected in 2000 and 2004.
Social conservatives almost always support limited government and fiscal restraint. However, a lot of NE Republicans abandon the social conservatives every chance they get.
Ditto that Fox. I can’t STAND Greer. Please spare us from him or we really WILL have to start another party. They simply don’t seem to get it.
How are you Fox? How’s our guy West doing in the polls?
Doing good SE Mom. West is doing good as well.... I haven’t spoken to them since the Michael Steele, Fred Thompson, Duncan Hunter fundraisers.... I’ve been working on getting Wexler defeated the past few weeks.....
We might not be able to get him this time round though.... but he’ll be definitely gone two years from now ;-)
You mean like “First Principles”?
Ugh- Wexler :( He and what’s her name Wasserman-Schultz...they make me sick.
Is it looking good for West? I hope so- we need him in the House.
~~Sigh~~ yep, exactly :)
Did you see the terrific video Fred did? Miss him- now more than ever :(
It’s close for West..... tons of undecideds..... so it can go either way easily.....
His opponent isn’t doing anything publicly.... he isn’t even attending Obama rallies!!! Cancelled all debates and forums..... and polling shows his name id is below 40%.
So the West race is going to come down to Party id.
Party ID? In that area? ....mostly Dem, isn’t it?
No, more Reps. then Dems.
If more indies go Rep. then West wins..... if they go Dem. then Klein wins.......
If 10,000 more indies go Dem. then West loses....... right now there are 10,000 more Republicans then Dems. in this district..... but most indies sway Republican.....
So, it comes down to which Party indies identify with...... it’s gonna be close.....
Whew...man oh man I hope he gets it. He’s SUCH a gem and he can help rally the troops, so to speak, in the House. We’ve got a good nucleus now with the ones who voted against the bailout.
We socons can’t even control this social conservative website.
Before the nomination was sewed up, most Republicans voted against McCain, even though most of the early primaries were in less conservative states. As you may remember, a fair number of them were open primaries with many non-GOP voters, who voted heavily for McCain.
George H. Bush was nominated because he was Reagan's VP and ran as Reagan II. George W. Bush was nominated because the expected leading conservatives, Quayle and Gramm went nowhere, leaving nobody but Keyes to oppose Bush on the right. It was a sequence of unfortunate events. It was not as straightforward as you imply.
I was wondering the same. Anything is better than the socialist conservatives we have been seeing lately though.
I think FReepers are well-informed enough to know that it isn't a simple process, and I certainly never intended to imply that it is.
I was responding to a post which had attempted to place the blame for Bush I, Bush II and McCain on The Party. It's precisely because the process is not straightforward that such blame is unhelpful and misguided.
The idea was presented as if those conservatives who refused to vote were right to do so, and that it's all the Republican Party's fault. I strongly disagree, and urge disaffected conservatives to become more involved, campaign for and otherwise support conservatives, and never EVER refuse to exercise your priceless right to vote just because you don't love any of the choices.
Anyone waiting for perfection in a candidate had better run for the office himself or change his attitude. No career politician is ever going to make everyone happy.
Rock on Sir Rush.
Amen, baby. And don't forget little Billy Krystal, dumbhead Douglas Feith, and that disgusting cabal of pukeneos. These termites have been eating away at the party structure far too long.
The nincompooneos were obsessed with religious cleansing of the party; they kicked so/cons to the curb. The pukes sucked off loser after loser----Giuliani, Mehlman, Martinez.......the list goes on and on.
Worst of all, the stupeneos led us over a cliff into Iraq......effecting massive transfers of US wealth into Mideast hellholes (and into the pockets of war profiteers).
Chief Puke, Richard Perle, is actually going into the oil business in Iraq-----thanks to blood spilled by young Americans, and his cut of trillions of US tax dollars.
Pukeneos also foisted amnesty on the US, saddling us with millions of drug runners and criminals undermining US ntl security........and conniving Third World lowlifes using multiple stolen identities who have destroyed our economy.
"Tell you what, pukes---if you don't like the new Republican party----too fricking bad."
I wish you’d learn to say what you really think. ;-)
Go ahead... let it out! LOL.
I might come back to the Republican Party if there is a purge to rid the Mehlman/Martinez/Giuliani/McCain elements after 2008.