Posted on 02/16/2007 8:30:44 AM PST by meg88
The GOP Should Dump Its Litmus Test By Michael Reagan FrontPageMagazine.com | February 16, 2007
The philosopher Diogenes is said to have wandered around ancient Greece holding a lantern and seeking to find an honest man.
My fellow Republicans, sans lanterns, are now wandering around the political landscape seeking to find the perfect Republican presidential candidate.
I don’t know if Diogenes ever found that honest man, but I do know that those Republicans are never going to find the perfect candidate, simply because he does not exist.
Some Republicans insist that the only perfect candidate would be a clone of my Dad, Ronald Reagan. Aside from the fact that there is no such thing, it’s important to recognize that Ronald Reagan, as he often admitted, was anything but perfect.
One of the criticisms about former Massachusetts Governor Mitt Romney focuses on his record concerning the abortion issue. We are told by the modern day Diogenes clones that he can’t be trusted to fight abortion because he once, more or less, supported a woman’s right to butcher her baby.
It may come as a surprise to these purists, but Ronald Reagan once supported abortion too. Yet nobody ever questioned his strong pro-life credentials after his conversion to Republicanism. They accepted his sincerity. Why can’t they accept Mitt Romney’s?
Romney’s record shows he should be totally acceptable to all conservatives, yet because of one dubious question concerning the validity of his conversion to the pro-life side, he is deemed unsuitable to carry the conservative banner.
The same is true of Rudy Giuliani. On every major issue, he is a solidly conservative and extraordinarily adept executive, but because he backs abortion and some form of gun control, America’s mayor -- the hero of 9/11 and the man who did the impossible by cleaning up New York -- is all but ruled out as a 2008 candidate.
Not one of the major candidates is free of some real or imagined flaw that offends some conservatives.
This is madness, and if it does not stop, the GOP is going to lose the presidential election in 2008. In the search for the perfect candidate we are going to end up with an imperfect candidate. Keep in mind the truism that agreement with someone on most issues and disagreement on others is seen as normal, but should you agree with someone on every single issue imaginable … well… to put it plainly, psychologists say you’re nuts.
I recently got a letter from a conservative Christian organization that asked me if the current GOP candidates are the best the Republican Party has to offer.
“Is it possible that GOP conservative ranks are this thin?” the letter writer asked. “Has the GOP nothing better to offer? Should not pro-family pro-life voters also want a low taxes and limited government candidate before they vigorously support him? Increased taxes and expanded government hurts everyone. Was Ronald Wilson Reagan an anomaly and did he represent the values of his party?
“These GOP candidates,” the letter instructed me, “are little better than Bob Dole, Gerald Ford, or [George] H.W. Bush. Did anyone notice they all lost?”
This makes me wonder if anybody can stand up to the litmus test these people are applying to candidates.
Ronald Reagan had one litmus test he applied to candidates. Were they Republicans? If they were he backed them all the way. He would let the party choose the candidate and he would support and vote for the candidate. He didn’t go sniffing around trying to find some flaw in their character or their past. Once nominated, they were his choice.
And nobody was more candid in admitting that he was anything but perfect than my Dad. He knew that like all men, he had his flaws and he spent a lifetime combating them. Had today’s GOP litmus test been seriously applied to him, he could not have passed the test.
The Democrats don’t have litmus tests. If the nominee is a Democrat, they support their candidate all the way, and if they lose it isn’t because they didn’t fight like demons for their man or woman.
If we want to win in 2008, Republicans had better wake up, and quit talking Ronald Reagan and start being like Ronald Reagan.
Which is irrelevant to whether he would or would not make a good president. I just don't think that after Clinton, that kind of "louse" behavior has much in the way of "legs" with the average voter.
He also said he admired Ginsburg... when he wasn't pandering for the GOP nod. I'll take him at his word.
it is extremely telling that the fox poll had 53% Republicans hoping for someone NEW to enter the race for the republican nomination. every single republican i know feels that way. there is a lot of dissatisfaction with the current candidates.
Okay, let me play along with this for a bit. The Rudy fanatics say that the social conservatives and "one issue" people have to compromise in order to get a decent electable candidate. Assuming that these people do compromise their strong principles and support Rudy in the general, what compromises will Rudy give them in return? Name one specific act that a Pres. Giuliani would do to reduce the number of abortions being performed. Name even one anti-gun federal law on the books today that he would want repealed. This vague talk about "strict constructionalist" judges just isn't reassuring me.
Others take delight in posting that they'll never vote for candidate X if he's the nominee.
They're trying to warn you that nominating a left wing candidate will result in losing the general election. Now is the time to choose someone that can draw from the entire GOP.
Ford.
Ford was doomed for pardoning Nixon, but he almost pulled it out. Carter presented a false face of optimism and too many voters bought it.
I don't know what the "world is weary of" but I am weary of the courts making decisions which are the province of the people or the legislatures. I will certainly not support or vote for any candidate who thinks the courts should make such decisions.
I will also continue to "carp on" and support any single issue which I think are important no matter who is "weary" of it.
Ah, now the Rudy Rooters are speaking for the American people!
Dang, why even have an election...
People always hope for "someone new"...It's part of our optimism, that maybe out there our "perfect candidate" actually exists. I'm surprised it was only 53% actually!
Exactly so. Hillary must be defeated. I cannot begin to imagine another Clinton WH.
ping.
Casey couldn't speak at the convention because he refused to endorse Clinton. Lieberman's problem was that he lost the Democratic primary.
Apparently the 2006 election did not make a dent in your brain. The U.S. has turned more moderate - not liberal, not conservative but more moderate in their voting!
True, no candidate is a perfect candidate but pro-life is a proven winner. No Republican candidate for president can win the general election without a solid pro-life position.
I think Reagan would look around today and wonder, is it time to bolt the GOP. He bolted one political party. So don't act like Reagan was some permanent party saint. He wasn't.
Yes, he almost pulled it out. Had Reagan jumped on his bandwagon with vigor from day one, instead of making Ford seem very, very small, he would have won.
I love all the folks here trash talking Micheal Reagan. Dear god is he not Reagan enough for you guys? Why do I think some of those here who so demand a strict "Reagan Conservative" were probably bad mouthing the man while in office.
Ditto Michael Reagan!!! Rudy Giuliani or Mitt Romney with both be an excellent leader for this great country.
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.