1. Its too bad that this Finn repeats the standard, bogus leftist line about Republicans (i.e. the Christian conservative base) wanting to supervise bedroom behavior. This is such nonsense. And what does it even mean? If one didn't know better, one would think these words speak of people who want to regulate who has sex with who, and how they do it. Are there people who would like to institute such intrusive, unenforceable laws? Yeah, I'm sure there are, and I'm also sure they make up a tiny percentage of even evangelicals and conservative Catholics. Most Christian conservatives, like most other Americans, do not want the govt meddling in such matters.
What they do want, however, is to prevent the institution of marriage from being redefined by a handful of renegade judges. And guess what? So do Americans as a whole, as shown by poll after poll, and more importantly, by every direct vote that has been held on the matter. And the margins by which they pass show that it is a mainstream view held by many outside of the conservative Christian community.
But whatever one thinks about gay marriage or its euphemistic substitutes, one thing that should unite all conservatives and all Republicans is support for a restrained, Constitution-respecting judiciary, and opposition to judicial activism. Only those on the Left, with their contempt for the people, can support the ludicrous 'living Constitution' doctrine. If the people embraced gay marriage/civil unions, then so be it, but their refusal to does not justify the imposition of it from the Courts.
So its sad to see Finn engaging in classic liberal obfuscation on matters dealing with homosexuals by confusing opposition to a judical assault on traditional values with hostility and hatred for gay people. What Finn should tell his gay friend is that the Courts are to blame for the Culture War, and if he wants such concerns to fade from national elections, then he should support any and all atttempts to fight judicial activism. If not for the ever-present and looming threat of a federal court imposition of gay marriage, then we really could let the states handle it. We'll take all supporters of 'low taxes, strong defense and limited government', so long as it doesn't mean we must also surrender to the Courts and their attack on mainstream values.
2. Its funny how on the immigration schism, he is only concerned about one end of it, that being the loss of potential voters, while he ignores completely the danger of losing existing base supporters, who don't need to be pandered to, but who dare oppose unending mass immigration and amnesty. But who cares about them? Afterall, they're just a bunch of ignorant, hate-filled rednecks, right? How nice it would be for the Finn's of the party if they could free the party of reliance on such backwards, racist, rubes. I know they long for such a day, but if they think the deliverance will come from the current wave of immigrants, then they are delusional.
Most immigrants, and at least the first few generations of the native-born, favor the Democrats, and they do so for reasons other than immigration. Of course immigration plays a part, but so too does the big govt policies of the Democrats, as well as their ethnic pandering and racial demagoguery. Even if the GOP officially embraced liberal immigration policies supported by Finn and purged it membership of all Tancredoites, then most Hispanics and Asians would continue supporting the Democrats. As such, continuing with our current mass legal immigration will continue to mint many more Democrats than Republicans. If we increase legal immigration then it will only get worse. I've yet to encounter a persuasive argument from a pro-mass immigration conservative that says the GOP can even break even with the immigrant community. Its most certainly a pipe dream.
He then says something about 'anti-immigrant trade unions.' Aside from the unfortunate use of the bogus leftist 'anti-immigrant' charge, he gets the stand of many trade unions wrong. The AFL-CIO, for example, embraces 'comprehensive' reform. They have completely folded on this and have surrendered to calls for amnesty and increases in legal immigration. Politically correct, diversity-worshipping trade unions, which are mostly a subsidiary of the Democratic party anyway, are more in line with Finn on immigration than the Republican 'nativists' he abhors.
Finn's last line on the subject is simply bizarre. He says “Welcome. Play by the rules — before and after you come — and we’ll find a way to make you legal.” If one plays by the rules BEFORE they come here, then they would already be legal, and would not be in need of adjustment, better known as amnesty. If he's talking about those who overstay visas, then they are no longer playing be the rules after they came here.
Finally, and in general, it would be nice if Finn and others like him would simply state their true immigration agenda in no uncertain terms. Why can't they just avoid platitudes, euphemisms, and needless attacks on fellow conservatives? Why not just say you support amnesty, and enormous increases in permanent legal immigration?
I've gone on too long now, but in sum, it would be nice if those providing advice to Republicans on how to right the ship could avoid parroting leftist distortions about religious conservatives, and stop engaging in fantasies about how immigrants would jump ship from the Democrats to the GOP if only Republicans weren't so mean.
I guess I'm almost a halfass liberal already: I believe in FREE abortions for all liberals.
A shameful offering from NRO. I'm genuinely embarrassed for them.
No surprise. CINO central over at NRO did everything they could to make Nov 7th 2006 happen. They are the mouthpiece of old boy establishement DC. They are not Conservatives. People have got to wake up to the fact that Republicans lost because OUR PEOPLE STAYED HOME. They did NOT see any difference between us and the Dems. Trying to be Democrat Lite is what kept us in the Minority for 40 years. Democrats will vote against things, 2006 taught us Conservatives will not just vote against the other guys. For Republicans to win you have to FIRE UP YOUR BASE with things they can get behind.
The only thing holding this homosexual "conservative" from voting conservative or GOP (less conservative) is his own crotch.
"Show me just what Mohammed brought that was new, and there you will find things only evil and inhuman, such as his command to spread by the sword the faith he preached." -Manuel II Paleologus
You can tell this guy doesn't have a clue. It wasn't one person (Bush) or the war in Iraq. The reason why pubbies lost is because they didn't adhor to social and economic conservative principles and had no plan or promise to return to them. Current leaders became what most Republicans dispise ... BIG GOVERNMENT! By re-electing the same leaders for this Congress, they will get their ass kicked in 2 years again.
Way to go. Chester must be from the Michael Richards wing of American politics. I suppose he wants the Republicans to sell out to the cheap-labor-hungry rich.
Let the GOP say “Welcome. Play by the rules — before and after you come — and we’ll find a way to make you legal.”
Can you spot the contradiction? If they "played by the rules" they wouldn't have come.
Finn, who really is a "neocon" in the classic sense of the term, may have a point, but when he argues this badly and lashes out so wildly its hard to take him seriously.
You will see a "RELIGIOUS" "PATRIOTIC" Democratic party, as you have never seen it before.. LOL
It did not work going ot the left... now they found, it worked going to the right... So be prepared.
One example, he says that in foreign policy the US can't go it alone, then he gives the example of North Korea and Iran. In both those cases, the US is not going it alone. It is working with the a group of 6 nations in one case and the UN in the other, and achieving absolutely nothing.
If the GOP embraces gay marriage, global warming hysteria (a convenient "truth" for the statist Left), or open borders, I'm out.
By the way, Reagan commissioned the Meese commission that attempted to restrict pornography, was strongly pro-life, and never advocated the queer agenda as when he was in the White House. Reagan and his interior secretary James Watt bravely stood up to environmental hysteria.
Much like John Dean's nonsense, Finn is making up a conservatism/Republicanism that never was and then disingenously saying that the GOP left them.
I love NR but I'm not sure why they decided to publish this bilge.
Good post. Thanks for taking the time to write it.
As I see it, the problem with Finn and those in the party who are of the same mind on illegal immigration is that they don't really live with the problem. It's purely an intellectual discussion to them.
Do you think John McCain has illegals next door? Do you think Chester Finn and Bill Kristol, soon after pulling out of their driveways, pass by swarms of illegal immigrants hanging on the corner seeking work, where they can be seen doing things that to put it nicely, make people say "there goes the neighborhood?"
It's so easy to favor an open borders policy when you never come face to face with what it really means.
Abstract:
We need TWO Democratic parties, and he will belong to the one with better country clubs.
But they can run a pro-gay, pro-open borders, anti-religious (after all, Repub Christians just want to supervise Finn's bedroom proclivities), leftcoast know-it-all. Probably some relative of the editor's bishop... .
KATHRYN!! If you ever listen. The danger the GOP faces is that they are about to lose a significant number of evangelical votes. There's some very smart triangulation going on, and check out the recent Newsweek covers. The left is making nice to the religious right, after years of being treated like Not Our Kind Deah from Kind Like You, Deah.
We already have all the limplivered otherwise-unemployables like Finn we could ever need. What we're about to lose is Joe Sixpack.
Mr. Finn, I order you to leave the tent.
(Of course a flight of fancy, but it sure would be nice if the Chairman would start ordering Leftists to leave the party)