Posted on 03/19/2005 12:17:20 PM PST by metalmanx2j
During the days of Jim Thompson and Jim Edgar, there was a center of gravity in the Illinois Republican Party.
In Illinois, it could not be called a particularly conservative party, to the irritation of folks like me. But it had a storyline; it was the party of clean, efficient government. People knew what to expect from it. The storyline made an effective contrast with Chicago-centric Democrats. It didn’t stand for all I wanted it to, but it stood for something.
So what does the Illinois Republican Party stand for now?
Some readers and friends have suggested lately that I seem a bit schizophrenic on the subject of Illinois Republicans these days. On the one hand, I am obviously an enthusiastically conservative Republican; on the other, I remain obviously skeptical that we have gotten our footing right and are ready to move forward.
A friend once said to me that the great tension in politics is that between people who want only to be in charge and those who want to lead a charge.
If the former prevail entirely, the process becomes vacuous, as meaningful as choosing which football team to root for. If the latter prevail entirely the process degenerates into endless ideological wars in which nothing can be accomplished.
So what does the Illinois Republican Party stand for today? It is a question I’m struggling with. I have no clear answer. I am a little disheartened.
Over the last decade I have worked enthusiastically for a lot of candidates who I thought believed in something greater than themselves. I have been surprised to discover otherwise often enough that now, when confronted with a candidate who really impresses me, my first though is not, “You could be the next great hope;” it is “You could be the next great disappointment.”
It puzzles me, and suggests to me how fundamentally peculiar my thought processes and values must be. I never disdain ambition. I think ambition, at its best, is a clue as to what God calls you to.
But if ambition goes no further than a scrabbling for power, influence or position, it is barren. All but the tiniest fraction of the most powerful, influential and highly-placed people of a century ago are dead and forgotten.
The only ambition that seems meaningful to me is ambition for service. Ambition for advancement for its own sake will never satisfy those who need public servants nor even the ambitious person whose vision is so crabbed this is all he can see.
And I’m no believer in the idea that the end justifies the means, either. To the contrary, bad means disfigure the best ends beyond recognition. This is why so many, who enter politics bursting with idealism end as mere power-brokers, bereft of any ideal save self-advancement. If eternal vigilance is the price of liberty, as Thomas Jefferson said, so it is with personal integrity and idealism.
I’m not convinced, but am fearful, that Illinois Republicans have become a small, private club of people competing to see who, 50 years from now, can be the dead, long-forgotten power broker who left no lasting mark. God knows we have plenty of applicants for that honor.
I have long believed that any political party, to be effective and vital, must provide an authentic means of expressing the will of its adherents. For that to happen, it must be guided by a culture of service.
It may be that this gubernatorial primary will set the course and determine the matter. Three candidates intrigue me.
First is Ray LaHood. I unabashedly like him. He is accomplished, conservative and has effectively worked within the system to get things done. He’s got guts and fortitude.
During the last Senate Primary, when most everyone was trying to stay out of trouble’s way, LaHood thought Andy McKenna the best man, and boldly went out front on his behalf. When Andrea Zinga was tapped to run against Democrat Lane Evans in what had been drawn as an overwhelmingly Democrat District, LaHood worked passionately on her behalf - when most in safe seats just shook their heads about the folly of running in an unwinnable district.
What is less known about LaHood is that, since Evans does not advocate much for his 17th District, LaHood does, serving as sort of a shadow Congressman in the 17th to keep it afloat. He doesn’t harvest any votes for that service, but does it because he can and it is right. LaHood is the authentic establishment candidate - the guy who, if the party in its current form is redeemable, can redeem it because he is committed to a culture of service.
Second is (and this may surprise some of you) Jim Oberweis. Many dismiss Oberweis because of his penchant for impulsively saying unfortunate things. No doubt he has been prone to that. Heaven knows during the Senate primary I was cracking Oberweis over the head at every opportunity.
But I have come to have a healthy respect for him. He certainly has a great deal of fortitude, and knows how to do battle without becoming embittered. He also is not lacking in boldness, a willingness to take big risks. And he is utterly shunned as an outsider. If Oberweis can keep the boldness, combining it with prudence and discipline, he could change the dynamics of the race.
The part of me that suspects the party needs to be reshuffled entirely finds itself strongly, if cautiously, attracted to Oberweis these days. He is a businessman, but if he were elected it would not just be business as usual. There would be a big changeover in party leaders in such a circumstance.
Third is Bill Brady. On the stump at Lincoln Day dinners, he is the only one who has been picking up genuine steam. Brady is youthful and charismatic. Whatever happens, he probably has a bright future in Illinois politics.
But part of the appeal of Rod Blagojevich last time around was his youth and charisma. The similarities between the two may eclipse the genuine ideological contrasts, and then people might decide to go for the devil they know instead of the one they don’t. I have some doubts about Brady’s staying power for this high an office at this point in his career.
If LaHood can credibly be seen as an agent of reform of the existing order, and Oberweis can be credibly seen as an agent of change, Brady remains a leap into the unknown for people. I suspect, at this point, he might be the type of candidate that voters want to date, but aren’t ready to marry. But he would signal a generational change in Republican leadership.
More than who will be elected, the defining question this cycle will be what, if anything, does the Republican Party in Illinois stand for? The answer, I suspect, will reveal itself on Election Day - and it will not be the party satraps who make the decision.
What Does the Illinois Republican Party Stand For?
Shinning rats' shoes mostly.
What a coincidence! That sounds just like California Republicans.
There's nothing wrong wth the Illinois GOP that carpet-bombing the Chicago "Tribune" wouldn't cure.
No, have to disagree. They didn't call their former governor what he was --a low life crook. They let him say that conservatives ran him from office, rather than the federal prosecutor. They didn't work with Alan Keyes, perhaps he would have sounded more moderate with party support around him. They apparently don't understand the power of conservative ideas, and they have lost some of the Republican Chicago suburbs.
I've lived in this state since '72 and I've never seen the party in such disarray.
L
LaHood's terrible. He got McKenna to try to run Peter Fitzgerald out of office in the primaries before Peter announced he was retiring.
Suburbanites have run the Republican Party into the ground. It's up to downstate to save it.
I agree with you that there are obviously problems with the state party beyond that of the Tribune's propogandizing. I just feel that if the Tribune disappeared, we could take care of the rest of the problems--the corrupt do-nothing leadership and all.
What Does the Illinois Republican Party Stand For?
Corruption.
'nuff said.
they are waaaaaay too busy down here polishing dem's shoes with their tounges. why else would they run keyes for anything??
they are waaaaaay too busy down here polishing dem's shoes with their tounges. why else would they run keyes for anything??
CDL licenses for all?
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.