If the author wants to find a legitimate reason to criticize the president, he should look no further than campaign finance reform. This act is the biggest attack on our Constitution in years. The First Amendment was written specifically to allow us to criticize elected officials and those who aspire to be elected officials. However, this law now makes it illegal to use modern media to do what our Founding Fathers considered one of the most important safeguards of our liberty.
I'm certainly disappointed and discouraged by what is happening in our nation. I'm disappointed and discouraged by the lack of courage that party leaders have shown for the past decade. If the Democrats retaking the Senate does one good thing, I hope it gives us an excuse not to make Trent Lott the majority leader again when we regain control. It is very frustrating to spend hours working for Republican candidates only to have them vote against me on the issues that I had considered most important.
On the other hand, we need to not quit working to better our country. I remember reading an article some time ago that said that Karl Rove expected about 19 million self-professing "religious conservatives" to vote for President Bush in the 2000 election. Instead, the president received only about 15 million of these votes.
Where did the other 4 million go? If they had voted for President Bush, the Florida controversy never would have happened. Even if none of them had voted for President Bush and all had given their votes in some combination to Pat Buchanan and Howard Philips, conservatives in Washington would have a stronger hand. If Pat Buchanan had received 4 million votes, the electoral college would not have changed. However, the popular vote would have shown a majority for conservative candidates. Furthermore, if those 4 million had voted for conservatives in other races, the GOP might still control the US Senate.
In less than 2 months, we will choose our Congressional representatives again. Every House member is running. A third of the Senate is running. If Republicans could retake the Senate and expand their lead in the House, conservatives would have a stronger bargaining position. That should be our current goal.
A Year Later
Bill
Wrong! (in my best John McLauglin bellow). The conservatives have more of a say in the party when it is the minority. The party needs the base to be motivated, since the spineless RINOs are usually cowering in the corner under the relentless attack of the Dems.
Once the Repubs become a majority, however, the RINOs come out of hiding to take over the policy direction of the party. This is what happened following the '94 victories- the conservatives had their way for 100 days, then the RINOs in the Senate promptly brought things to a screeching halt. It has been downhill ever since.
that Karl Rove expected about 19 million self-professing "religious conservatives"Gee, Karl, maybe it's because you expect religious conservatives to support your candidate without question. It's operatives like Rove who ensure they stay home.
Furthermore, if those 4 million had voted for conservatives in other races, the GOP might still control the US Senate.If the GOP would run conservative candidates, they would already control the Senate. People love leaders; not lukewarm party hacks. Give them something real to believe in and someone to follow. Remember, the revolution of '94 worked until the RINOs emasculated the new blood.
The problems within the GOP are not the fault of the grassroots. It is the elite who push crappy candidates and even worse policies.