Posted on 05/21/2006 1:33:27 PM PDT by FairOpinion
CAIRO, May 21, 2006 (IslamOnline.net) – The patriarch of US conservatives urged his followers on Sunday, May 21, to learn their lesson and stop their financial and logistic support of the Republican Party whose leaders throughout the years have "betrayed" conservative voters by failing to honor their election promises.
"Conservatives should dedicate their money and volunteer efforts toward conservative groups and conservative candidates," Richard Viguerie wrote in an opinion piece in The Washington Post.
"They should redirect their anger into building a third force -- not a third party, but a movement independent of any party. They should lay the groundwork for a rebirth of the conservative movement and for the 2008 campaign, when, perhaps, a new generation of conservative leaders will step forward," he added.
Viguerie took aim at President George W. Bush's tenure, saying that he has "never seen conservatives so downright fed up as they are today."
"The main cause of conservatives' anger with Bush is this: He talked like a conservative to win our votes but never governed like a conservative.
"Many conservatives have concluded that the benefits of unwavering support for the GOP [Republican Party] simply do not, and will not, outweigh the costs," opined Viguerie.
"Betrayal"
The veteran conservative said Bush has "betrayed" American conservatives by adopting a "Big Business" agenda not a conservative one as he promised before his election and re-election.
"Sixty-five months into Bush's presidency, conservatives feel betrayed. After the 'Bridge to Nowhere' transportation bill, the Harriet Miers Supreme Court nomination and the Dubai Ports World deal, the immigration crisis was the tipping point for us," he said.
Viguerie also cited approval of the Republican-controlled House of more taxpayers' money for an embryo-killing type of stem cell research and a "hate crimes" measure that could lead to the classification as "hate" of criticism of homosexual activity.
"In today's Washington, where are the serious efforts by Republicans to protect unborn children from abortion? Where is the campaign for a constitutional amendment to prevent liberal judges from allowing same-sex marriage?"
He went on: "We've been rewarded with an amnesty plan for illegal immigrants. We've been rewarded with a war in Iraq that drags on because of the failure to provide adequate resources at the beginning.
"Now we know what they do when they have control."
"Temporary Defeat"
Viguerie said the current relationship between the Republicans and the conservatives is similar to the one between a cheating husband and his forgiving wife.
This, he added, "makes me think of a cheating husband whose wife catches him, and forgives him, time and time again. Then one day he comes home to discover that she has packed her bags and called a cab -- and a divorce lawyer."
Viguerie advised American conservatives to stay home in the mid-term Congressional elections in November, saying that the expected win of Democrats could be for the long-term good of the conservatives.
"Sometimes it is better to stand on principle and suffer a temporary defeat," he put it wisely.
"If conservatives accept the idea that we must support Republicans no matter what they do, we give up our bargaining position and any chance at getting things done," he added.
Viguerie reminded the Republicans that it is largely the defection of conservatives that is driving the president's poll numbers to new lows.
"Unhappy conservatives should be taken seriously," he warned the Republican camp.
"When conservatives are unhappy, bad things happen to the Republican Party."
He cited the conservatives' key role in past Republican defeats during the eras of presidents Thomas E. Dewey, Richard M. Nixon and Gerald R. Ford.
"The current record of Washington Republicans is so bad that, without a drastic change in direction, millions of conservatives will again stay home this November."
Patriarch? We don't need no stinkin' patriach. (Unless you mean William Buckley.)
Who is this loser? I been involved in the Conservative movement for almost 30 years and I have NEVER heard of this clown. Guess someone better clue in Pat Buchanan that his allies the Islamofacists don't think he is the Godfather of "Conservatism" any more.
Do you see the problems Hillary is currently having with the far left?
You might want to look behind that curtain for yourself.
What problem do you have with this?
I most certainly have an issue with supporting UNELECTABLE conservatives, which will result in a DEMOCRAT TAKEOVER of the country.
--
You must be loaded. I take it that you are a card carrying member and major backer of the New Majority and likely the Main Street Partnership as well.
How telling that moderates seek to tarnish a person who carried a lot of water for the conservatives for many years and now speaks out in his later years.
How touching, and how telling of your own "conservative" agenda..
The CONSEQUENCE of conservatives staying home or voting 3rd party will be a DEM TAKEOVER OF CONGRESS.
Is that what conservatives really want???
What kind of conservative could possibly prefer the Dems to the Republicans?
In 2008, after two years of a Democrat Congress, how desperate will you be to get rid of the Dems? Desperate enough to support a moderate against a Democrat?
How quickly you both seem to forget that we get the government we deserve. We, the People, are responsible for who we elect, collectively. Just because you didn't vote for someone doesn't mean you didn't help put them there. Especially if you voted for a third party candidate or didn't vote at all.
Playing the victim in this is wrong. It is the Dem mentality. Every participant in a democratic or republican system is responsible for the outcome of a vote. Win or lose, you're counted by your vote or lack of it.
By default, a non-vote or vote for an obvious third party loser is a small fraction of a vote in favor of the third party loser's agenda, and a pronouncement that you're okay with the person who wins. An absence of a vote or a vote for a losing third party is an assent.
And in terms of stats, it is more often that a third party candidate loses or causes the best possible mainstream candidate to lose, than the third party candidate ever wins in a surprise upset. While there's something cool about that latter scenario, it happens rarely, and when it does it is almost entirely in very local elections.
So, if so-called conservatives are so hell bent on teaching Republicans a lesson, they better be willing to live without complaints under a Democrat Congress. I don't want to hear whining from either rottndog or NormsRevenge when, or if, the Democrats tie up the President in investigations, impeachment hearings, or deliberate lose the mission in Iraq, late in the game. I don't want to hear complaints about violations of right wing freedoms by Democrat operatives or by the liberal Congress. I don't want to hear complaints when a Democrat Congress forces Armed Forces Radio to drop the conservative view point talk show hosts. I don't want to hear complaining about Nancy Pelosi's halitosis stinking up the Speaker's office. I especially don't want to hear a peep out of either of you if somehow Pelosi, or whoever is selected as Democrat Speaker of the House, somehow ends up sitting in the White House, because by choosing to punish Republicans by voting third party, or not voting at all - you've assented to accepting the possibilities that may result from your votes.
And if you think I'm spinning so hard I must be dizzy, you should look in the mirror. I think FairOpinion has the right of it. We may not always agree with Congress or the President, but there are a fair number of things we do agree on with them, and those things are important. And when it comes to the Democrats, you can be pretty much assured that we disagree with them 99% of the time, and the 1% of the time that the Democrats are on the right side of the issue, they're lying in order get your vote.
UNELECTABLE?... Who determines whos unelectable the lead lemming?..
What about conservative Democrats...you'd rather have liberal Republicans?
Try thinking second-order...short-term losses, perhaps, but lomg-term gains...if only conservatives can have the discipline to allow RINOs to lose.
"We may not always agree with Congress or the President, but there are a fair number of things we do agree on with them, and those things are important. And when it comes to the Democrats, you can be pretty much assured that we disagree with them 99% of the time, and the 1% of the time that the Democrats are on the right side of the issue, they're lying in order get your vote."
===
Precisely!
The man who "built the conservative movement that elected President Reagan in 1980."
or
an anonymous guy posting on the internet who registered as a Freeper 16 months ago.
Tough Call
Some "long term gain", when the Dems controlled the House for 40 years!
"I would vote for Hillary 10 times before voting for McCain once"
Wow...not lawyers? Actualy citizenry, not professional politicians?
It could be convincingly argued that Karl Rove's path in directing the rise of George W. Bush was mentored by Viguerie, a fellow Texan. You're making a mistake in blowing him off.
Not because he's not a conservative, but because he actually is, unlike most of the GOP establishment.
See ya!
Uh... he is a great contender for the title of patriarch of conservatism. Without him... yikes.
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.