Holding my nose and voting Republican

Townhall ^ | Oct. 25, 2006 | Linda Chavez

[13Sisters76]

Blog | Talk Radio Online | Columnists | Your Opinion | The News | Photos | Funnies | Books & Movies | Issues | Action Center

Holding my nose and voting Republican By Linda Chavez Wednesday, October 25, 2006

I am not happy with the Republican Party, but on Nov. 7 I will cast my vote for my incumbent Republican congressman and senator nonetheless. I don't feel I have any choice -- and it's not just that the Democrats running in my state are particularly unappealing candidates.

I'm angry at Republicans for abandoning their principles. This Republican president, aided and abetted by Congress, has increased federal spending at a reckless rate, even when the costs of the war in Iraq are taken out of the equation. I'm embarrassed by the scandals that have plagued some Republicans and by the abject failure of the leadership to do anything meaningful on lobbying reform.

I'm sickened by the cronyism that protected former Congressman Mark Foley and put children at risk. I'm disappointed that after years of claiming to be the party of colorblind equal opportunity, Republicans have actually expanded racial preferences in federal programs. I'm disheartened by the demagoguery on immigration and the refusal to do the one thing guaranteed to stop illegal immigration, namely, enact a broad guest worker program.

But none of these issues will make me stay home, much less vote Democratic. The fact is I don't trust the Democratic Party to lead this country in a time of uncertainty and war. While the Democrats say they want to refocus the nation's energy on the war on terror, they've demonstrated time and again that they oppose the most effective means of fighting terrorism.

Democrats would interfere with the National Security Agency's ability to intercept communications between terrorists abroad and their agents in the United States. They would extend to terrorists being held overseas access to the U.S. civilian court system, which could jeopardize national security by making classified intelligence available to the terrorists and their attorneys. They would treat terrorists like common criminals rather than as combatants who are at war with us.

Nor do I trust that Democrats would do the right thing in Iraq -- not that the current administration has had a stellar record there, either. I'm tired of debating whether we should or should not have gone into Iraq -- both Republicans and half the Democrats in the Senate voted to authorize the war in 2003. The question is what the United States should do now. It's clear the war is going very badly and that Iraq is on the verge of a civil war. Democrats have offered no clear plan except to leave Iraq as quickly as possible, regardless of the consequences.

And I don't think the Democrats would back tough measures if Iran and North Korea continue to pursue nuclear weapons either. Certainly the Clinton administration's record with respect to North Korea doesn't inspire confidence. Democrats like carrots a lot better than sticks and are more concerned with "world opinion" than American interests.

Democratic control of Congress also worries me when it comes to the economy. Democrats always want to raise taxes in order to pay for social programs, transferring money out of the hands of ordinary people and turning it over to bureaucrats. Most Democrats are also infatuated with government regulation and rarely find a government directive they don't like. Higher taxes and more regulations are a recipe to cool our healthy economy. Democrats seem to want to punish businesses rather than encourage the creation of more wealth. And they have a nasty propensity to encourage envy and class warfare, which benefits no one.

Politics is sometimes about making the least bad choice. I know some of my fellow Republicans will stay home on Election Day, hoping to send the party a message that they're fed up with the current leadership. But putting the Democrats in control won't bring about needed changes -- it will make matters even worse. The place for revolt is within the party itself, by urging the elected representatives to pick carefully when they choose House and Senate leadership in January and by challenging incumbents in primaries next time if they don't stand up for basic Republican principles.

Linda Chavez is chairman of the Center for Equal Opportunity and author of Betrayal: How Union Bosses Shake Down Their Members and Corrupt American Politics .

Be the first to read Linda Chavez's column. Sign up today and receive Townhall.com delivered each morning to your inbox. Sign up today!

Copyright © 2006 Salem Web Network. All Rights Reserved.

[EdReform]

But none of these issues will make me stay home, much less vote Democratic. The fact is I don't trust the Democratic Party to lead this country in a time of uncertainty and war. While the Democrats say they want to refocus the nation's energy on the war on terror, they've demonstrated time and again that they oppose the most effective means of fighting terrorism.

Democrats would interfere with the National Security Agency's ability to intercept communications between terrorists abroad and their agents in the United States. They would extend to terrorists being held overseas access to the U.S. civilian court system, which could jeopardize national security by making classified intelligence available to the terrorists and their attorneys. They would treat terrorists like common criminals rather than as combatants who are at war with us.

"The only way America will ever be defeated by death-worshipping theocrats who've crawled out from under a Dark Ages rock is with the help of the mullahs' fifth column - academia, the media, the judiciary, public education, Hollywood and the Democratic Party.

Of the two suicide cults America confronts, liberalism is by far the more lethal."

-- Don Feder, In The War On Terror, Liberals Are More Dangerous Than Muslims -- A 9/11 meditation, September 19, 2006

[SJackson]

Third Party/Stay at Home Voters

2007 They're Just Like Republicans Congressional Leadership

Nancy Pelosi, Speaker of the House	John Conyers, Jr, Chairman, House Judiciary Committee
Tom Lantos, Chairman, House International Relations Committee	David R. Obey, Chairman, House Committee on Appropriations
John Dingell, Chairman House Energy and Commerce Committee	Chaplain for the US House of Representatives??
Charles Rangel, Chairman, House Ways & Means Committee	Jane Harman, Chairman, House Intelligence Committee
BARNEY FRANK, Chairman, House Financial Services Committee	Henry Waxman - House Government Reform Committee
Patrick Kennedy, Chairman House Entertainment Committee	Honorary Chairperson, House Committee on Conspiracies
Harry Reid, President pro Tempore of the Senate, 3rd in Presidential line of succession.	Joseph Biden, Chairman, Senate Foreign Relations Committee
RUSSELL D. FEINGOLD, Chairman, Senate Judiciary Committee	Jay Rockefeller, Chairman, Senate Intelligence Committee
Robert C. Byrd, Chairman, Senate Appropriations Committee	John F. Kerry, Chairman US Senate Committee on Finance
Joe Liebermann, Chairman, Senate Homeland Security Committee	Chris Dodd, Chairman, Senate Rules and Administration Committee
Carl Levin, Chairman Senate Armed Services Committee	John McCain, some things will stay the same
Ted Kennedy, Chairman, Senate Committee on Immigration	President in Waiting.
First Man	Patrick Leahy, we’ll find him a job
Barbara Boxer, we’ll find her a job.	Senate Chaplain???

[pissant]

I never bother to read her. Gave that up years ago.

[Bosco]

Held my nose and voted absentee in Ohio this morning. Will be on vacation in San Francisco on election day.

I think we may visit Berkeley - I understand the West Coast Liberal's plumage is very colorful this time of year. From what I hear, their range/numbers are gradually decreasing.

[Seaplaner]

The place for revolt is within the party itself... Writer Chavez is correct.

"Conservatives" who don't vote are actually voting to accelerate illegal alien entry. That's the little "message" your buddies the Dems will send you, if they take Congress.

(Yeah, I know, flame away.)

.

[Prime Choice]

So turning congress over to the Dems will have no impact on our ability to get the Alito and Roberts type justices on the supreme court? Are you smoking crack?

And let's recap on how the Dhimmicrats filibustered on all manner of nominees and the best we could get was a tepid quasi-response from RINO Frist and crew.

And let us not forget that if it hadn't been for conservatives standing up to this RINO bullcrap, we'd have Harriet Miers on the court!

You must be on crack if you think that's any better.

[Rb ver. 2.0]

"no REaganesque type candidate in the wings "

Why should there be when RINO's do just fine?

[ruffedgrouse]

--And let us not forget that if it hadn't been for conservatives standing up to this RINO bullcrap, we'd have Harriet Miers on the court!-- Judicial review of legislation (state or federal) is authorized nowhere in the United States Constitution. Why we've tolerated it all these years is beyond me. Most representative republics (and constitutional monarchies like the UK) don't have it. If we didn't have it, we wouldn't be agonizing about the SCOTUS all the time.

[gcruse]

Used to live in San Jose, CA, and visited SF often. It's amazing what they've done to what used to be paradise. Nose plugs will help you in your stay there.

[mysterio]

When did we forget that WE run things?

We don't run things. The oligarchy does. It's the law.

[KentTrappedInLiberalSeattle]

"... all of which, of course, will spiral dramatically downwards under a Democrat-controlled Congress. NOT."

-- corrected by KentTrappedInLiberalSeattle

[Niteranger68]

Oh come on, there is no avoiding the 800 pound gorilla in the room. We need to be reality based. And the reality is that Republican power favors government growth. The reality also is that we don't have the luxury of punishing them for their big spending ways because the alternative could very well be the end of us.

If it were me, I would always consider if any open criticism of my party would produce fodder for the opposition. For us, the opposition is the Democrat party and the MSM. Since the latter never clarifies that the internal Republican strife is mostly due to a lack of conservatism, we should always do the math before publicly dumping on the party. It's like driving 20 miles out of the way to save 2 cents a gallon on gas.

[fireforeffect]

Sounds like a personal problem.

I only get to vote in four federal elections. Representative every two years. Senator every six years for each one. And President every four years.

MY representative and senators are not perfect, but generally vote the way I like on most issues.

Not a thing I can do about a representative from another district or another State's senators.

I have sent money to my reps and sens, but not a dime to the Republican party.

[Prokopton]

"Don't give me Newt, for craps sake. The personality of a root canal ain't reganesque. LOL

The GOP will hold both houses, hopefully minus McGavick and Kean."


Wow. You don't like Newt and you'd rather see Chafee, Dewine, Menendez and Cantwell as lawmakers. There's something wrong with this picture.

[laotzu]

it's only the conservatives who are told to shut up and suck it up

Republicans forget it was conservatives who put them in power.

You dance with the one what brought ya. To not do so is rude....kinda like telling us to shut up.

"A political party is a mechanical structure created to further a cause. The cause, not the mechanism, brings and holds the members together"
Ronald Reagan

[MAD-AS-HELL]

You are right. Rinos are now in vogue.But don't dare call Bush a RINO. He is the ultimate conservative by creating a new medicare entitlement program and allowing Ted Kennedy to pen the education bill. Reagan would be proud.

[The_Reader_David]

I suspect Chavez means a real guest worker program, not the amnesty provision in the dead Senate immigration bill.

Personally I think a combination of all the tough enforcement measures proposed in the House with a guest worker program, possibly even with an amnesty that allows those here illegally w/o other criminal records to be regularized as guest workers (who have to go home after some specified time), but definitely with no amnesty provision that puts them on a track to citizenship, was, and is, the way to go.

It properly addresses the *separate* issues of border security and economic migration by disentangling them, making the security issue easier to deal with.

[13Sisters76]

I agree with opening up LEGAL immigration more. This is a country of immigrants and it wouldn't be what it IS without them. It is the ILLEGALS I have trouble with, and a "guest worker" program doesn't address it. In the hands of the left all that is is an amnesty program for those who continue to thumb their noses at our laws.

[13Sisters76]

I looked at these pics and just got so ill. We canNOT allow this to happen!

[AxelPaulsenJr]

There is a vast difference between dim and Republicans. I totally disagree with your statement that they are all just one party.