Posted on 01/31/2004 12:41:27 PM PST by jimkress
Had dinner with an old friend last night, a long-time Republican political operative who – in 1981 – talked me into taking a sabbatical from journalism and going to Washington as a press secretary to Congressman Paul Findley.
He’s been a Republican all his life. Grew up in a GOP family. Served more than one term as a county chairman as well as a Republican National Committeeman.
So it surprised me when he opened the dinner table conversation with: “I’m not going to vote for George W. Bush in November. I may vote for John Kerry if he’s the Democratic nominee.”
Strange things can happen in this world. Joe Gibbs can come out of retirement to coach the Washington Redskins one more time. Hell, the Carolina Panthers might even win the Super Bowl. But when a lifelong Republican tells me he might vote for John Kerry, I wait for a voice to start saying “you’re entering another dimension…next stop – The Twilight Zone.”
“I’m a Republican because I believe in less government, of letting states make the decisions that affect our lives,” he said. “I believe in a balanced budget. But my party no longer believes in any of these things. I can’t be a part of what I think is destroying this country.”
His comments echo what I have been hearing after three weeks on the campaign trail. Republicans are fed up with an administration that has created the largest federal bureaucracy ever, with record deficits and with increasing federal power and control over our lives.
But they’re not just fed up with George W. Bush, they’re fed up with a Republican-controlled Congress that passed the largest, most pork-laden transportation bill in history, that abandoned its promise to impose term limits and that broke most of the promises of the 1994 “Contract With America” that gave them control of Capitol Hill in the first place.
My friend’s theory: “You know the old bromide that power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely? Well, my party has taken it step further. Absolute power leads to madness. It makes me, a Republican, long for Democrats back in control. That is pure madness but I can’t help it.”
I’ve been around politics as a journalist or an operative for nearly 40 years and the dissension within the GOP is the worst I’ve ever seen. At a Republican caucus earlier this week, California Republican Congressman Chris Cox headed a group of conservative members who told Speaker of the House Denny Hastert that a GOP Congress was being undermined by Bush's actions in the White House. One member reportedly said a GOP Congress could deal more effectively with a Democrat in the White House than they can with Bush.
“At least we know what to expect from a Democratic President,” he said.
I would never waste my vote on a third party, but even if I were to ever consider that possibility, I sure wouldn't give it to the Constitution Party. Despite their name, they're not about ending judicial activism and running the government along strict constructionist lines; they're about reinterpreting the Constitution to fit their own fundamentalist Christian agenda. If they were ever to attain power, we'd be dealing with the same kinds of "living document" semantic legal twisting we deal with now ... the only difference is that it would just be coming from the far right instead of the far left.
They're a Margaret Atwood novel, not a political party.
The war and fear mongering is losing its appeal. Anyone really care what that nitwit duct tape Ridge is saying? How many times can the neocons yell terrorism before get tired of the nonsense? Rove is going to have to get a whole lot more creative.
Richard W.
What does CP stand for ~ Crack Pot? :):)
Nice attempt at flaming, and making the poster the topic, rather than the points clearly raised.
Your counter-argument is, in a word, nonsensical. If it doesn't matter whether a Bush or a Kerry sits in the White House, insofar as spending is concerned -- which would appear to be your jerry-rigged point, based on your wide-eyed faith in the magical powers of "a Republican Congress" to "restrain spending" -- then there's no
plus side to electing the avowedly liberal Kerry, and plenty of downside. (Again: read his own campaign site, for heaven's sake. You are, at best, sadly misinformed as to what he pledges to do, if elected.)
If, on the other hand, it does matter which man sits in power, insofar as spending is concerned: then you can scarcely argue, either coherently or convincingly, that "it's the makeup of the Congress which really matters, ultimately."
That's the whole problem with the "Bush Is Really the Prince of Darkness" arguments of the so-called "true conservatives" hereabouts, ultimately: they're flimsy, inherently self-contradictory ones... and fall apart upon the briefest, most cursory of inspections by the well-read observer.
Please, tell me how your CP vote will make "this $h!t" stop.
If they did, then Kerry will be President. Will that give socialism the boot?
I think even half that could turn the ship around in the right direction.
The trouble is, in their arrogance, Rove & Co. don't believe the defectors and detractors will outnumber the "mushy-middle" centrists they hope to seduce...At least until the GOP mutiny becomes fairly obvious and they do an about-face on the Amnesty-For-Illegals scheme.
The clown patrol is truly in charge. OBL himself could walk across the southern border. The neocon really don't have this little war on terror fully worked out yet. I guess maybe they don't want us to notice all those thousands crossing the border every week. Some war on terror.
Richard W.
If you're serious you already know the answer.
I think you're over-estimating the "clout" of the stay-at-home-3rd-party voters this time around.
Perot was charismatic and patriotic. He captured the hearts and minds of unwitting folks. There's not a Perot-type in sight, and unlike his father, this President George Bush knows how to campaign and he's extremely likeable too.
I like that lets throw out all the scum and start with the Constitution. I voted reluctantly for George B Redux and was disappointed.
I don't care about the rest of the world, he does.
Borders should have been closed on 9-12 and illegals kicked out, but we are leaving our borders open and we are going to legalize illegals.
I vote for gridlock and maybe stop the insanity of the increases in spending and maybe forcing someone anyone to shut the borders and get rid of the illegals.
I don't think that was my point.
I was saying that the attitude that we must always vote for the party allows the party to ignore the conservative viewpoint.
After all, we are seen by the majority of voters as extremists, and in that sense are a burden to the party. If they can take us for granted, and be sure of our votes no matter how they trample on us, they will.
If, however, we walked on just one election, they'd have to return to their base.
So the attitude that we have to vote for the party is what permist this Sh!t to continue.
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.