Posted on 09/10/2002 8:38:50 PM PDT by nonliberal
Citizens for a Sound Economy August 14, 2002
A Conversation with a Conservative
There is a widening gap between the values of Washington Republicans and America's conservative base. I have had two very different running conversations this year. The first is with inside-the-beltway Republican politicians. They tell me things are going fine and they’re doing the best they can. The other conversation has been with conservative activists all across America. They tell me how bad things look. They say it appears the politicians don’t care about freedom anymore.
Activists get involved because they want to make a difference. They hold core beliefs and values and are willing to sacrifice their time and money to advance these beliefs. They’re willing to organize their neighborhoods, develop phone banks, distribute literature and mobilize voters. They do really important work. But rhetoric and spin is not their thing – they’re involved in the process because they want to see results. And, right now, they aren’t seeing results.
President Bush remains remarkably popular with the conservative base. I sense people view him as a decent and honest man, and like all Americans, conservatives support the commander-in-chief. But there is uneasiness with some of the decisions of the “Bush Administration.” In particular, the farm bill and steel quotas have frustrated conservatives because they want to see the size and scope of government reduced – not expanded.
More worrisome, if you are a partisan Republican, is the growing frustration of the conservative base with the generic “Republican Party.” Take away President Bush’s personal popularity, and there is genuine anger and disappointment with the performance of the Republican Party.
Government is growing right now – at every level and in almost every area. That is a factual statement and it upsets the conservative activist base.
Social Security is headed towards bankruptcy and the Republican Congressional Committee is advising Republican congressional candidates not to talk about the issue. That is a factual statement and it upsets the conservative activist base.
The activists I talk with can’t believe Republicans would allow liberal demagogues to get away with scaring seniors citizens, let alone scaring Republican candidates. When politicians who are on record supporting personal retirement accounts flip-flop in the heat of battle, activists quickly become disillusioned.
Activists know, like most Americans, that the current structure of Social Security is unsustainable. Because they care about public policy, they have read the policy papers and the reports. The activists believe personal retirement accounts provide the only viable alternative to tax increases and benefit cuts.
And, here is something else conservative activists believe: That Republican politicians know Social Security is going bankrupt and personal retirement accounts provide the only viable solution to tax increases and benefit cuts.
So, when a Republican politician flip-flops on Social Security reform, the activists don’t view it as a change of heart based on facts. They see it as a political sellout caused by the unwillingness of the politician to fight for his or her core beliefs.
As I said, conservative activists do really important work. Precinct walks, phone banks, literature drops, voter mobilization – the work that makes a big difference in off-year elections. But it’s voluntary work. These dedicated citizens have complete lives and other obligations. They do the volunteer work on behalf of freedom because they’re motivated and they think they can make a difference. When their leaders let them down, activists stay home, and that hurts freedom.
Political leaders running political campaigns can make their own decisions about strategy. Elected officials make their own decisions about how and when to fight for freedom. On the other hand, their decisions have consequences – and from the conversations I’ve been having all year with our best activists, it appears the politicians have decided they don’t need their base. The problem is that on Election Day this November, the conservative base may decide they don’t need the politicians.
..which is sad.
Very sad...since whenever the Republicans CAMPAIGN standing up for conservative issues...they win and win big.
ALA Newt and the boys and Reagan.
redrock
Heil Hitler! LOL
Heil Hitler! LOL Koolaid anyone?
Very sad...since whenever the Republicans CAMPAIGN standing up for conservative issues...they win and win big. ALA Newt and the boys and Reagan.Aye, precisely my point. Speaking of which, I'd really like to see Newt come back in again. He's served his time, IMHO. We need him working again.
Too bad...so sad.
"We have an implacable enemy out there, who spends every waking hour--and a good deal of R.E.M. sleep--plotting just how they can kill as many Americans as possible, and destroy THE most basic freedom, the right to continue living without worrying about being blown to little gobbets."
True..this Nation has enemies. Outside our borders and inside our borders. And the one's inside our borders want to remove our freedom's just as much as the one's outside.
"And all you stupid-*ss single-issue jokesters can think about is...your single issues."
Yep...single issue voter here.
RESTORING and MAINTAINING the ONE vital piece of our Government..the one thing that stands between us and slavery.
The Constitution.
Nothing more...nothing less.
"Tell you what? Instead of acting like the flip-side of the Leftie record (they're spending all THEIR time trying to figure out how to beat down GWB's poll numbers--even if it means they have to ham-string the country in the midst of war to do it), why don't you call a temporary truce, and get behind Pres. Bush?"
Asking questions about what the President does or doesn't do is part of our DUTY as Americans.
...and if he needs an old...slightly beat-up ex combat medic...I'll be there in a flash.
Will you?????
Or all the rest who want everyone to be silent???
"Just STFU and try pulling YOUR oar while it's needed to save this ship of ours."
No....and parting of saving this ship (your words) IS ASKING QUESTIONS of those in Government.
..or perhaps you would prefer someplace like CUBA...where asking questions of those in Government is grounds for prison.
"THEN you can moan and belly-ache about how they just don't make 'em like Jeff Davis any more, to your heart's content (if it's EVEN possible to use a word like "content" with reference to you lot)."
Personally...I never liked Jeff Davis.
...and no one is moaing and belly-aching...just asking that OUR Goverment be honest.
..and stick to the Constitution in ALL things.
redrock
That bears repeating.
That rule applies only leading up to elections. After the election, I fully intend to continue bashing the RINOs every chance I get.
The only hope we have to overcome these obstacles rests in the courage of those who dare to speak out against the direction this Country is being taken by their elected representatives. I strongly believe in the concept of government Constitution over party. I think people are perfectly capable of handling the duality of loyalty for the war effort without having to blindly accept leftist socialist dogma.
Wrong! (in my best John McLauglin bellow). The conservatives have more of a say in the party when it is the minority. The party needs the base to be motivated, since the spineless RINOs are usually cowering in the corner under the relentless attack of the Dems.
Once the Repubs become a majority, however, the RINOs come out of hiding to take over the policy direction of the party. This is what happened following the '94 victories- the conservatives had their way for 100 days, then the RINOs in the Senate promptly brought things to a screeching halt. It has been downhill ever since.
Baloney. Conservatives comprise about 25% of the GOP and that has always been the case. We hold far more leadership positions within the party than our percentages would logically support.
Candidates from both major parties MUST appeal to and get very many votes from the "center" to get elected (winning).
When either party fails to do this, the LOSE. Goldwater, McGovern, Dukakis.
The only conservatives which pass muster with the hard core conservatives on this board, for the most part fall into the losing type, hence they uphold "principles" and they LOSE.
Reagan appealed to the non-idealogical center, based on personality. He also compromised principle enough to stay popular.
Many times, principled conservatives are weak politicians, and they LOSE. Winning takes personality, political skill, money, and solid positions. Political skill involves compromise, when strategically beneficial.
Get us candidates with those strengths, and conservatives can win.
Let's see: Should I worry about parsing Laura Bush's words when she addresses the National Garden Club, to see if she might have said something that wasn't sufficiently "pro-life"?
OR should I remain concerned about the fact that a few million radical fanatics want to kill me and my family, and concentrate on what my government is doing to prevent it?
Gee, it's not a tough choice for me. Makes me wonder about you, though. Briefly.
Sorry, this is just asinine.
Worrying about whether you can smoke pot without being hassled by a cop, isn't even in the same universe as worrying about when the bad guys might be detonating a dirty bomb, poisoning an aquifer, or killing a few thousand citizens with a crop duster--or any of the myriad schemes they can come up with.
You people are so pathetic, I'd laugh if it weren't so horrid.
Take a hike.
Wrong yourself! (in whatever silly voices you try to use) I'm not interested in what's best for the party. I'm interested in what is best for the country. If the Republicans are in the minority in Congress, it doesn't matter whether the conservatives control the party because the Democrats will control what comes out of Congress. Whoever controls what comes out of Congress will control the country.
What happened following the '94 victories is that we passed some good reforms and became bogged down after the Oklahoma City bombing. Clinton blamed the bombing on conservatives, and the idiot media supported him. Afterwards, the idiot sheeple believed him. Even with that setback, we passed welfare reform. I don't care how many dedicated conservatives were leading the Republican Party, we would not have passed welfare reform if the Democrats had the majority in Congress. We came within a few votes in each house of overriding Clinton's veto and passing a partial birth abortion ban. That ban wouldn't have even come to the floor if the Democrats had held Congress, and no amount of great conservative leadership could have brought it to the floor.
I'm not advocating that we support RINOs in the hope of winning Congress with a left-center position. If a candidate is just wrong on the issues, we shouldn't support him. However, the notion that we are stronger as a minority party is silly. What we need is the combination of conservatives leading the party and the party leading Congress. Until we have both of those things, we are losing. If the Republicans win the Senate and gain in the House, we will be in a better position to advance conservative causes.
A Year Later
Bill
The voters have spoken. Time will tell.
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.