Oh, and I meant to say that NCLB increased ed. spending by $35 Billion.

Awesome! So let’s scrap education in this country and put everything into the military. Then we’ll surely succeed!

So when the Education budget increases, it’s reason for a holy crusade. But when the Pentagon budget gets increased beyond overkill, we hear crickets.

In practice, politics is the art of the possible. I accept that intelligent, well-intentioned people can be liberal, conservative, or anywhere in between. The most successful government is one that persuades not just the leaders’ true believers, but one which reaches out and persuades as many “across the aisle” as possible.

Thus, someone like Martha Rainville, who is fundamentally a conservative but pragmatic in how she applies that in the real world, should not be rejected out of hand by the idealogical purists. The mirror-image would hold true with respect to moderate Democrats.

If one accepts that not everyone is a true-blue conservative, and that government should persuade as many of the governed as possible, then there should be no problem with supporting a moderate, pragmatic Republican whose guiding principles are essentially conservative.

First, I have to point out that I will not be voting for Bernie (or Welch).

Let me take the issues you outlined:

1) Fewer government programs – the Office of Public Integrity is a new program and all new programs come with the promise of a “modest” budget. All new government programs end up costing more than projected.

The fact that she was promoting the idea of creating a new bureaucracy in the Republican Primary was extremely troubling to me. It speaks to her view of government – when you have a problem, create a new bureau or program.

What programs does she want to cut? Fewer government programs does not just mean no new programs, but cutting some of the glut that already exists.

2) Lower taxes/less government spending – I did notice that she supports the line-item veto. I even talked about that on my show before the primary as one plus about her. (Of course, only five people saw that probably.) I also think the spending database is a great idea.

The problem is that new programs and new spending (see below) will offset any benefit of cutting down on earmarks.

3) Education/NCLB – The federal government has every right to demand results for funding, but the federal education budget has doubled under NCLB, an increase of $30 Billion!

Not only that, but in her debate with Shepard, Martha Rainville said that NCLB needs to be fully-funded. That is even more money that the federal government will be dumping into education.

Education spending should be local, so the people spending our hard-earned money have to look us in the eye and account for the money.

4) Personal Responsibility/Freedom – You said, “Just listen to Martha Rainville sometime on this subject, you’ll come around.”

I admit that this is not an area that I was specifically criticizing Rainville for.

5) Gun rights – Again, not an area that I was criticizing her for. I know that the Democrats are the anti-gun party, but this is an area that the GOP as a whole has failed to be a vocal defender of in recent years.

Martha Rainville is not conservative; a fact she is proud of. That is okay for her and any other moderates who support her, but I am not a moderate. The only reason I would vote for a moderate is to keep the GOP in power.

The Republican Party in power right now got there through making promises to be conservative. (I am not talking about social issues here; I am talking about the scope and size (and spending) of the federal government.) They have not followed through on any of those promises, so I do not feel compelled to do anything to keep them in power, especially if that means voting for a moderate.

I am actually going to do a post about that later today (hopefully). Right now I am taking my kids to the park.

The more restrictions and rules the government (local, state and federal) put on me and my family, the further I march toward the libetarians.

If the federal DOE makes you go all queasy – take a look at what’s happening in your neighbor state of NH regarding public school funding. To say it’s a mess is an understatement.

From the list of things you like about the Republican Party:

1) Fewer government programs — I’m not really familiar with Tarrant, but Martha Rainville has proposed no new program for the federal government unless the benefit would far outweigh the modest cost of what she’s proposing.

For example, the Office of Public Integrity that Rainville has called for would have a modest budget and would be more efficient than keeping records in two separate offices in the House and Senate. I heard Sen. Shepard say more than once, the way to change congress is to elect more ethical representatives. Great. Start with Martha Rainville, but then recognize that the current system of peer review does not work and give Rainville credit for trying to fix the system.

2) Lower taxes/less government spending — Again, I just don’t know where you disagree with Vermont Republicans. One of Rainville’s first campaign announcements was decrying earmarks and secretive additions to the federal budget of programs that haven’t been properly reviewed. She supports a Line Item Veto, and more recently she called for an easily searchable internet database of the federal budget so every citizen can see who requested what federal dollar and to whom it was paid.

I would submit that just knowing this level of scrutiny is available would drastically change the mentality of Congress in terms of spending.

3) Education/NCLB — This point is actually the most interesting intellectually. The federal government currently spends millions on primary and secondary education. Some could argue that NCLB is a long-overdue effort to bring accountability to federal education subsidies. Personally I think it is overreaching, but it’s hard to argue that the federal government shouldn’t demand (measurable) results for its funding.

4) Personal Responsibility/Freedom — Just listen to Martha Rainville sometime on this subject, you’ll come around.

5) Gun rights — Martha Rainville is a gun owner, and a firm defender of the second amendment (her opponent Peter Welch is a member of the party that is committed to restricting gun owners’ rights, in case you’ve forgotten).

I do not disagree with you Charity that there are problems in the Republican Party, but Rainville has taken those problems on from her announcement speech when she said “Republicans in Congress have lost their way.”

Give Rainville (and Tarrant) another look. I really think you’ll find more to like. I’m sure that Martha Rainville wants a smaller, more efficient federal government. A government that gets out of the way of citizens working for a better life.

On social issues, I suspect we disagree, but what prompted the anger in my earlier comment was that you seemed to be ignoring many of the areas where you agree with Martha Rainville and Rich Tarrant to say “I don’t like one or two stands they’ve taken, therefore they’re the same as everyone I have a problem with in the national Party/actions of the current congress (BTW, where’s Bernie been on fiscal responsibility?)

Dreher also has Crunchy Con blog.