Posted on 02/03/2006 10:23:16 AM PST by Impeach98
RINO vs. Reaganite
--------------------------------------------------------
Posted: February 3, 2006
1:00 a.m. Eastern
© 2006 WorldNetDaily.com
Note: This article can be found online here: http://www.wnd.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=48644
These days there are signs of fatigue setting in among many Republican Party faithful, and if the Grand Old Party is going to win the critical 2006 and 2008 elections, it better figure out what direction it wants to lead America.
There seem to be two schools of thought amongst Republicans on how the party can best maintain political power: those who place a premium on the possible political consequences of a stand on particular issues and what is most pragmatic vs. those who are driven by an ideology derived from a defined set of principles, without regard to perceived political ramifications.
Two Republicans stand out as the leaders of these respective camps. On the side of pragmatism over principle, weighing in at 257 pounds is a man who used to hold the title of "Mr. Universe," and now holds the title of governor of California, Arnold Schwarzenegger.
In the other corner stands Sen. George Allen of Virginia, and while his father was inducted into football's Hall of Fame, Sen. Allen's muscle is most fully on display when he leads an audience to follow conservative convictions in the spirit of Ronald Reagan.
Both Schwarzenegger and Allen are currently engaged in critical election campaigns that will likely define their legacy. Schwarzenegger is seeking re-election to the governor's office in California, while Sen. Allen is seeking the Republican nomination for president in 2008.
The means by which Schwarzenegger rose to power is consistent with the way in which he stakes out his positions on the issues. His Republican credentials have been muted at best. He served on George H.W. Bush's Council on Physical Fitness and Sports, and pushed for after-school programs in California to ensure that latchkey kids had somewhere to turn when school ended but mom and dad were both still at work.
Despite his lack of partisan politicking, Schwarzenegger was at the right place at the right time in 2003 when California's immensely unpopular – and thoroughly corrupt – governor, Gray Davis, was subject to a recall campaign that ultimately succeeded.
After Schwarzenegger won the election to replace Davis, Republicans were so excited that they endorsed Arnold for re-election before he had even announced whether or not he would run again. Conservatives in the state shook their head in dismay as the party of Reagan and Goldwater locked itself into supporting a politician who married into the family of Ted Kennedy.
Like with any act of drunken excess, California Republicans are now sobering up to the consequences of their actions.
California is massively in debt, with Schwarzenegger proposing more bonds, fee increases and massive big-government programs. He's dumped his Republican chief of staff for the liberal, lesbian Democrat who had previously served as the top adviser to recalled Democrat Gov. Gray Davis. And Schwarzenegger's judicial appointments have caused an outcry of complaints from conservative judicial activists.
All of this is on top of the fact that Schwarzenegger's positions on cultural and social issues puts him to the left of Hillary Clinton.
But – and this is the key point – the state party leadership is still behind their man and they're not turning back. In three weeks, Republican delegates are expected to turn back an effort to rescind the party's endorsement of Schwarzenegger and leading Republican candidates are signing a letter of allegiance to Schwarzenegger and the direction he is taking the party.
The reason: Pragmatism over party principles is believed by many in the Golden State to be the key to victory for the GOP.
More than 3,000 miles away, George Allen has charted a different course.
Now a U.S. senator, in 1993 the conservative Reaganite from Virginia pulled off a shocking upset by overcoming a 27-point deficit in the polls to win the race for governor.
All throughout his campaign, and continuing throughout his term after he was elected, Allen championed his version of "Jeffersonian Conservative" ideals.
Unlike Schwarzenegger's push for higher fees, Allen pushed for tax reforms. Unlike Schwarzenegger who stumbled in his efforts to address the debate over parental notification for minors who have an abortion, Allen fought for and won a widely respected parental-notification law.
While Arnold Schwarzenegger demonstrated a weak stance on law-and-order issues when he granted a clemency hearing for the founder of the Crips, George Allen worked to overhaul Virginia's criminal justice system and brought back truth in sentencing.
In the U.S. Senate, Allen has remained a stalwart crusader for conservatism. When President Bush nominated the pro-American pit bull John Bolton to serve as U.S. ambassador to the United Nations, liberal Republicans on the Senate Foreign Relations Committee balked, whined and literally even cried over the selection. But Allen was a rare bright light, showing conviction and determination.
If you think I am partial to the vision that Sen. George Allen offers for the Republican Party over that offered by Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger, you are correct.
But here's the rub: Schwarzenegger enjoys the unquestioning support of the Republican establishment in California while the GOP establishment at the national level remains cool to Allen's presidential bid.
This is the absurdity of where the Republican Party stands today, supporting someone who oozes charisma and that they think can win, but who embraces an agenda in conflict with his own party's platform. What kind of victory is that?
On the other hand, party insiders leave a principled man who has advanced the causes and ideas we as Republicans hold dear, to wander in the pastures of obscurity because they believe he might lose.
Elections are supposed to be about the battle of ideas. We cannot allow those who wish for us to stop fighting for those beliefs to prevail. We must stop the poll-driven focus on regurgitating to voters what they say they feel on a given issue, and offer leadership that lays out a path for America based on our conservative principles.
This is what Ronald Reagan did. This is what George Allen exudes. And this is the roadmap the Republican Party must follow.
--------------------------------------------------------
RELATED OFFER:
Stand up to anti-military crowd! Fight back by supporting the new radio ad campaign of MoveAmericaForward.org.
--------------------------------------------------------
Melanie Morgan is chairman of the conservative, pro-troop non-profit organization Move America Forward and is co-host of the "Lee Rodgers & Melanie Morgan Show" on KSFO 560 AM in San Francisco.
Didn't Allen vote for No Child Left Behind and the Medicare bill? Is that what it means to be a Reaganite?
Schwarzenegger can be elected in California, but he wouldn't stand much of a chance in flyover country.
I have just a general statement on the whole RINO vs. Reaganite headline. IMO Reagan -if he was President today- would be considered a RINO by many conservatives today - as they did back in the '80's. (See his policy on illegal immigration, for instance.) People have short memories. Many conservatives today believe that if you don't agree with them 100% you are not a conservative. [Putting on flame suit]
I think Howlin calls it "realism"...
;)
It doesn't matter whether Schwarzenegger can get votes in California vs. some other state.
Whether he can or can't shouldn't matter to Republican Party leaders. They should have nothing to do with him, because he does not support the platform of the Party he claims to represent.
Reagan wasn't perfect either.
But you can tell the difference between a Reagan and a George Bush Sr.
You can tell the difference between a Reagan and a Lincoln Chafee.
And you can tell the difference between a Reagan and a Schwarzenegger.
Since Sanford has said he's not running, and Pence is still a rep without executive experience, I'm at a loss for who I should support in 08. I do hope the Republicans get their act together though and stop with the thinking that we need a RINO to win.
You know the rules. When speaking of another poster, make sure you ping that poster.
yes ma'am!
And many Democrats in the pre-Reagan days would be considered Republicans when held to today's scrutiny. You know, back before conservative Democrat politicians became extinct. Strangely, there are still conservative Democrats (my father being one) but they side with the Republicans out of principles.
It has got to be Pence!
Bush and Reagan both failed to address these issues.
They both however were strong in the face of threats against free societies.
They both believed in a supply-side tax cutting policy (even though Reagan once raised taxes).
They both believed generally in free markets and pro-growth monetary policies.
They both were/are overall social and cultural conservatives.
And they both were/are more conservative than most Democrat politicos on their biggest weaknesses: spending and immigration.
Then he should have ran for the Majority Leader position in my opinion. Most people don't know who Pence is! And I even live in Indiana for God's sake!
I am so glad that Boehner is now House majority leader. I am all for cutting pork. The three pillars of Reaganism would be LESS GOVT, STRONG DEFENSE, and TRADITIONAL VALUES. I am strong on 1 & 2 and mostly on the same page with 3. The Bushies better make a turn around while they can still salvage themselves.
That's the one bad aspect of Free Republic's fame.
In the late 1990's we were able to have a place to share and comment on a whole series of news stories and opinion pieces under the umbrella of "CONSERVATISM"
After FR also then helped conservative candidates and causes our brethern in the moderate-to-liberal ranks (many of them GOP establishment staffers) found Free Republic and now post here ad infinidum ad nauseum about how winning with the lowest common denominator is better than losing, and you're not a REAL REPUBLICAN or a REAL CONSERVATIVE if your going to cause us to lose.
That's always their excuse to sell out. And they aren't the odd man out like they used to be.
Oh well, the price you pay for a popular forum like this.
Hi. I think you and I have discussed this before. :~) I think he made other mistakes as well. He allowed education to become a huge big-government program, after cutting taxes he raised them later, he withdrew from Lebanon after a couple hundred Marines were killed by terrorists (continuing a trend of appeasing terrorists), etc. That said however, I believe he was the greatest President of the 20th century. All Presidents make some mistakes. My point is, though, that many conservatives who criticize other conservatives for being "RINOs" forget that they used to slam Reagan for espousing some of the same ideas as these "RINOs". And they claim they want a Reaganite.
What the h*** is Mitch Daniels doing? He seems AWFUL!
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.