I promised this weekend I would do a presidential primary post. Well, here in the She’s Right household, it is still the weekend. My husband had a four-day weekend, thanks to the generosity of his employer, so to me, it’s like Sunday, only I didn’t go to church this morning.
Now to get down to business.
After the elections in November of 2006, I wrote my reflections of the state of the Republican Party. If you are new here, you might want to take a look at it, just for frame of reference.
The bottom line was that it was time for the Republicans to lose because they had betrayed the values that got them elected in the first place.
Much to the chagrin of my more liberal readers, the GOP did get elected by the American people in to a majority. Dare I say that was an endorsement of their platform at the time, which included: A balanced budget/tax limitation amendment, an anti-crime package, welfare reform, parents’ rights, stronger child pornography laws, middle class tax relief, legal reform, small business incentives, capital gains cuts, national security, term limits, and cleaning up the corruption in Congress, and then some. It’s all here.
Those values were winning values. It isn’t the voters that changed, it was the GOP. The politicians failed to live up to their promises. (I know, there’s a real shocker!)
My point in bringing this up is that the Republican Party is now at a crossroads where they, or we, need to decide what the party stands for.
This presidential primary is about defining the party. Not choosing the most likable candidate. Not choosing the most electable candidate. Not choosing the candidate that can beat Hillary.
It is time to stop trying to game the election. It’s time to choose a candidate that best reflects the values of the party.
Who is that?
Is it Mitt Romney? I don’t know. I mean, I don’t know how he feels about any of the issues.
Mitt Romney, governor of Massachusetts, was pro-choice, pro-gay marriage, pro-gun control, and pro-tax.
Mitt Romney, presidential candidate, is pro-life, pro-traditional marriage, pro-NRA, and anti-tax.
So, which Mitt Romney are you asking me about?
Let me just say, no, Gov. Romney is not the face of the reformed GOP.
Gov. Huckabee, as I have posted about before, is decidedly not conservative on issues such as taxation and government programs, and he hopes to win a free pass on examination of his record by playing the God card. No thanks.
Rudy Giuliani has the tough on crime persona, but he is pro-gun control and too liberal on all of the social issues – alienating two of the larger GOP constituencies.
And poor John McCain caused irreparable damage to his conservative bona fides with that anti-constitutional campaign finance reform legislation, among his other swipes at conservatives.
Ron Paul wins points all over for his pro-Constitution stance. Small government conservatives, and other libertarian factions of the GOP, have been waiting for a candidate like Congressman Paul. And his refusal to play the political game is refreshing to say the least.
My only concern with Ron Paul is that he loses the law-and-order crowd with his stance on legalizing drugs and prostitution. I don’t think that he is the best choice to reinvigorate the party.
The GOP needs someone who can unite all of the factions that make up the Republican voters.
The only candidate that fits that description is Fred Thompson. He is taking small government/states’ rights positions on most issues, he’s for lowering taxes, lowering spending, upholding the right to bear arms, securing our borders, fighting terrorism, and he’s pro-life. There is something about Fred Thompson that pretty much every faction of the GOP can be happy about.
The most common reason given by people who do not support Fred Thompson is the late and rocky start to his campaign. Granted, his campaign has been disappointing, but I do not think that is any reason not to support the candidate that conservatives everywhere can rally behind.
The bottom line: Republicans win when they stand up for conservative values.
That is why She’s Right supports Fred Thompson for the Republican Presidential Nominee for 2008.
January 1st, 2008 at 9:42 pm
“Much to the chagrin of my more liberal readers, the GOP did get elected by the American people in to a majority. Dare I say that was an endorsement of their platform at the time…”
Wow, we’re still talking about the Contract on/with America? Most of that stuff never even got enacted into law. The GOP won back then in response to an overreach on the part of the Clintons mostly due to the backlash against their universal health care plan. It’s funny now how most of the serious candidates for President talk about the need to do universal health care…more than a decade later…hmmmm…
“This presidential primary is about defining the party.”
I would modify this slightly to say that U.S. Presidencial primaries are basically about selecting who you want to lead your party (these individuals do come with their own set of values and priorites of course).
I really hate to defend “Mr. Stuffed-shirt Republican” Mitt Romney, but I don’t think he was pro gay marriage and taxes during his short stint as MA Governor…those things happened because of his Democratic state legislature. He is though (as I heard “The Duke” Mike Dukakis say recently on C-SPAN) “a Fraud with a capital F”.
I recently saw another forum on C-SPAN over the holidays about how the GOP has been struggling with it’s two sides…the radical reformer side (that wants to wipe out much of the New Deal and the Great Society programs) and the let’s-just-get-along-and-change-things-slowly-at-the-margins-maybe side (the “big govt.” Republicans). The guy who was speaking described each side much better than I just did. This struggle has been going on in the GOP for almost a century at least.
What about Alan Keyes and Duncan Hunter? Can’t a black man get a break in the GOP?
Is your new buddy Fred on the ballot in VT yet?
January 1st, 2008 at 9:55 pm
There are several outstanding black conservatives who would be great presidential candidates for the GOP. Unfortunately, Alan Keyes is not one of them.
You know, I was wondering if Fred is on the VT ballot, too. I am not sure.
There is a similar battle within the Democratic Party between the reformers and the status quo. There always will be, within both parties.
January 1st, 2008 at 10:48 pm
“The modern conservative is engaged in one of
man’s oldest exercises in moral philosophy; that is,
the search for a superior moral justification for selfishness. ”
&
“Liberalism is, I think, resurgent. One reason is that
more and more people are so painfully aware of the alternative.”
– John Kenneth Galbraith –
“Conservatives are not necessarily stupid,
but most stupid people are conservatives.”
– John Stuart Mill –
” I never meant to say that the Conservatives are generally stupid. I meant to say that stupid people are generally Conservative. I believe that is so obviously and universally admitted a principle that I hardly think any gentleman will deny it. Suppose any party, in addition to whatever share it may possess of the ability of the community, has nearly the whole of its stupidity, that party must, by the law of its constitution, be the stupidest party; and I do not see why honorable gentlemen should see that position as at all offensive to them, for it ensures their being always an extremely powerful party . . . There is so much dense, solid force in sheer stupidity, that any body of able men with that force pressing behind them may ensure victory in many a struggle, and many a victory the Conservative party has gained through that power.”
– John Stuart Mill ( British philosopher, economist, and liberal member of Parliament for Westminster from 1865 to 68 ).
See why it’s so much better to be liberal than conservative at http://LiberalsLikeChrist.Org/Liberals .
January 1st, 2008 at 11:56 pm
Yep, the K-street corporate lobbyist hack who can barely stay awake (or keep others awake), talks about his concerns about the “Soviet Union” and somehow thinks that a refusal to answer a question about one of the most important environmental issues of our lifetime,”hands down” is somehow a plus, is the only true conservative in this race. Good thing the bar is set so low.
He’ll be out shortly after Duncan Hunter. Pathetic, but not surprising. What’s really pathetic is you actually believe him. Psst, Charity, here’s a little secret… he’s an actor.
January 2nd, 2008 at 9:13 am
JD, I didn’t say he was the only “true conservative.” I said he was the only candidate that offers something to each faction in the GOP.
Yeah, I know that he is an actor. He also was a senator. Besides, when did being an actor exclude someone from being a Republican president?
January 2nd, 2008 at 10:00 am
Did it ever occur to you that some of the “factions in the GOP’ need to be given the boot if they’re ever going to achieve some measure of permanent success? That as long as the Godidiots are calling the shots, the GOP will never really be mainstream?
I think it’s really funny that you pick a schlub like Thompson over a nutjob like Paul.. your big concern about Paul is his stance on drugs might not sit well with the authoritarians that comprise a huge element of the GOP base? At least he’s being consistent. I figured you’d at least shoot for consistency over electablity, considering that neither candidate has a chance in hell.
January 2nd, 2008 at 10:01 am
I hope Paul runs as an indy too, it will make the ass-whupping of the GOP into an all-out massacre.
January 2nd, 2008 at 2:55 pm
This is not about electability. It is about recognizing that I am not the only Republican and that the party belongs to everyone else, too. I cannot say that my brand of conservatism has the rights to define the GOP. That is why I like Thompson. He offers something to everyone, IMO.