Why Rudy and Walker Were Right

This week, the media broke news that former New York Mayor Rudy Giuliani said, at an event attended by prospective Republican presidential candidate Wisconsin Governor Scott Walker, that he does not believe President Barack Obama “loves America.” This isn’t news. Barack Obama doesn’t love free enterprise, believes founding philosophy was fatally flawed and sees the American people as rubes with antiquated religious and racist tendencies. Sure, we can all agree that Obama likely loves America’s scenery; perhaps he loves America, but doesn’t like her very much. But that’s not what Giuliani was talking about, and everyone knows it.

But in any case, Giuliani wasn’t the media’s true target. The true target was Walker.

Using Giuliani’s comments as a springboard, media members went hunting for a faux pas from Walker. They asked him whether he thinks Obama loves America; Walker responded, quite rightly, “You should ask the president what he thinks about America. I’ve never asked him so I don’t know.” They asked him whether he believed Obama was a Christian; Walker answered, “I don’t know. … You’ve asked me to make statements about people that I haven’t had a conversation with about that.”

For the media, this represented a “gotcha” moment. Anyone who doubts President Obama’s love of country must be pilloried as cruel and inhumane. Anyone who doubts the religious sincerity of a man who invoked Christianity to support lies about his support for traditional marriage, a man who recently compared Christian history with the acts of ISIS, must be publicly scourged.

Naturally, many Republicans have eagerly jumped on the bandwagon. George F. Will said that all Republicans should say that Obama is a patriot (a strategy that worked brilliantly for John McCain in 2008). Matt Lewis of The Daily Beast wrote that no candidate should question anyone’s patriotism or stated faith. The premise seems to be that failing to demonstrate such goodwill touches off media conflagrations that damage conservatives overall.

Democrats have for years been questioning the decency of Republicans as human beings.

During the Obamacare rollout, President Obama accused Republicans of wanting to deprive people of healthcare; he openly accused President George W. Bush of being “unpatriotic” for raising the national debt. House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi said that Republicans are “indifferent” to hungry and poor children. Anyone who opposes any aspect of President Obama’s agenda has been deemed a racist.

The point here is not the media’s double standard, which is egregious but unchangeable. The point is that this perception of Republicans has pervaded the public arena. Republicans’ fundamental burden is not explaining to the American people that Democrats are great people, but wrong on policy. Their great burden is overcoming the generalized perception that they are money-grubbing Snidely Whiplashes bent on strapping widows and orphans to the train tracks.

You cannot overcome that perception by ardently pleading that the very folks who call you racist, sexist, homophobic bigots are well-intentioned but incompetent. If someone calls you a racist, and you respond by stating that they are a reasonable human being with policy differences, you grant their premise: A reasonable person has called you a racist, which means it is reasonable to call you racist. You lose.

And Republicans have been losing, at least in large part, because they grant the fundamental premise of the left: Democrats are well-meaning, even when they are wrong, and Republicans have evil intentions, even when they are right. That is a recipe for disaster in a country where intentions matter more than actions.

Walker has started the ball rolling on a national level.

Rejecting the underlying premise of all those questions from Liberals is a movement that will easily gather steam, all that is needed was a leader.

If Walker gains a real foothold, a lot of Liberals are going to be challenged, right on down the line from presidential stuff to man on the street stuff.

All we need is someone to illustrate it being done.

Rejecting the underlying premise of all those questions from Liberals is a movement that will easily gather steam, all that is needed was a leader. If Walker gains a real foothold, a lot of Liberals are going to be challenged....

The GOP needs a band of hard-core, no-prisoners polemicists to take down the Democrats and the Mediacrats every time they pop wise or sneer at Republican values and intentions.

We needed Newt to keep that job of Chief Bomb-Thrower in the House instead of making him Speaker. The job change muffled his message and ruined his opportunities to take out 'Rat lies and publicly shoot them.

On the other hand, Boehner is playing to lose (as I've posted many times) because the Chamber wants the 'Rat initiatives on dumping employer healthcare and wiping out middle-class pension and retirement. (Force us to work ourselves into our graves, goody goody for them.) Their interests are too nearly convergent (insert entire corpus of David Horowitz writings here) and people need out from under both leadership cadres, as neither is supporting the continuation of the Republic and the interests of the middle class, much less the broader liberty interest of the People.

We need an advocate for crony-free, antifascist capitalism, a Fed-free currency, and the liberty of the People. None of those ideas resound yet, because our advocates have not appeared yet to strike them into the stone of the Front Range in letter 20 feet tall, and forge the golden political rhetoric that will rally the People to the Framers' vision of America.

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.