Posted on 11/11/2006 2:42:16 PM PST by Reagan Man
As I write this column, three days after the midterm elections, the Democrats have taken over the House of Representatives and, with the concession of Sen. George Allen (R.-Va.), have captured the Senate as well.
Make no mistake about it—this is Republican loss and not a conservative loss.
Republicans lost because the Bush Administration and the Republican leadership too often cavalierly abandoned the populist conservative message and policies of President Ronald Reagan.
For far too long the American people have come to view the conservative movement and the Republican Party as one and the same. Indeed, they are not.
Conservatives need to re-establish their identity and independence from Republicanism. The Bush Administration has been hijacked by neo-conservatives who believe in “big government conservatism.” The very phase is an oxymoron—designed to give cover for big government intervention in both the domestic and foreign policy arenas.
The neo-conservatives support open borders, expansion of the education bureaucracy and promoting democracy in the Mideast through military intervention.
Republicans paid a heavy price at the ballot box for their failure over the last few years to live up to the ideals and standards which the American people believed they represented when they took the House of Representatives from the Democrats a decade ago and when Bush won the presidency in 2000.
This election turned out to be just what many conservatives had feared—a referendum on the performance of the Bush White House and the Republican Congress, rather than a contest between the two competing party’s visions for America.
Republicans lost touch with almost every element of their base.
Economic conservatives could not understand it when the Bush White House teamed up with Sen. Teddy Kennedy (D.-Mass.) on “big government” legislation such as the No Child Left Behind Act and the Medicare prescription drug bill. And they could not understand why “conservative” leaders such as former Rep. Tom DeLay (R.-Tex.) carried the water for the President on behalf of this massive expansion of government.
Conservatives were perhaps most dismayed with the administration’s failure to secure our borders and to deal with illegal immigration. And many conservatives such as Bill Buckley, Brent Scowcroft and Pat Buchanan were skeptical early on about the war with Iraq which they viewed as unnecessary and not a part of the War on Terror.
To further complicate matters, Republicans—who were elected by promising the highest standards of integrity—were involved in one scandal after another involving members of Congress, Republicans lobbyists and some members of the Bush Administration.
Exit polls indicated that the American electorate had become more than skeptical regarding the war in Iraq, concerned about the war on terrorism and the scandals in Washington.
One final nail in the coffin of the GOP was the failure “at all levels of government” in responding to the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina. (One note: In my opinion this emphatically excludes the leadership by Gov. Haley Barbour of Mississippi in efforts exhibited in rebuilding his state.)
In short—the mid term elections can be summed as crisis of confidence in the GOP controlled Congress and the Bush White House.
Sadly, it seems that the “Party of Reagan” has been hijacked by the neo-cons, the big government crowd and the pragmatists.
The debate for the heart and soul of the Republican Party and the conservative movement has begun. Let’s hope we are up to the job.
The question is this: Do we want do the stay the course or do we want to want to return to the “Party of Reagan?”
[***Mr. Rotterman is a senior fellow at the John Locke Foundation and a GOP consultant.***]
I find it really maddening to listen to, but I want to know what the other side is up to. It helps when I get in discussions with others to shoot down their arguements. To be forwarned is to be forarmed.
Thanks.
Kuchel earned the wrath of conservatives for publicly refusing to endorse or support Goldwater's candidacy, even after the Republican convention. Ronald Reagan had Kuchel in mind when, a week after the election, he told Los Angeles County Young Republicans that, "We don't intend to turn the Republican Party over to the traitors in the battle just ended."
I also would love to see them defunded, they are a complete waste of our tax dollars.
Old enough to recognize your kind at a glance.
I am not taking sides here. The question in my last post was sincere. If Reagan didn't like moderates and he didn't like the most far right conservatives, how does that make sense with his belief in a BIG TENT?
Don't pay any attention to these liberal FReepers. This "Tamzee" character use to call herself, "Tamsey". She's infatuated with Bush, Ahnold and will probably be defending the liberal Rudy Giuliani next, at some future date. Once a liberal, always a liberal.
The MSM relentlessly portrayed Bork as a radical conservative, yet Reagan made him his nominee for the Supreme Court. If you're contending that Reagan didn't like "radical conservatives", it might help to have some idea of what one of them allegedly is.
Reagan Man, if we were to go issue by issue I do believe Tamzee would not be as conservative on the issues as I am or as you are, but it would be pretty darn close. She is a conserative not a Liberal.
Right. Bush is a social conservative and a fiscal liberal. Arnold is both a social and fiscal liberal. Tamzee is still infatuated with both of them for their liberal qualities. Next up, liberal Rudy Giuliani.
I have a long history of debating this leftwing moonbat. Her defense of Ahnold during the recall election is all the evidence anyone needs to see she's a lover of liberal politicos and liberal policy.
I've noticed that seemingly all of the Ahnold groupies have taken to openly calling for the abandonment of conservatives principles since election day.
The battle for Iraq was the major issue. However, if Bush and the GOP had not spent the taxpayers money like liberals, not expanded the federal bureaucracy, not enlarged the welfare state to new levels, and not promoted liberal immigration policy to include amnesty for illegals, conservatives would have come out and voted for Republicans in droves. Bush moved the GOP away from conservatism and dragged it further left over the last 5-1/2 years. That cost the GOP the election last Tuesday.
It makes me ponder on Nixon.
>>>>What's needed is a dose of pragmatism here.
The future isn't in more doctrinaire conservatism, it's moving back towards the center a la Arnold Schwartzenegger.
Republicans will have to become more centerist or be resigned to be perpetually the minority party.
That is pure defeatist trashtalk concerning the future of conservatism and the GOP.
"The MSM relentlessly portrayed Bork as a radical conservative, yet Reagan made him his nominee for the Supreme Court."
In consideration of the nomination it was only how Reagan saw Bork that was significant, and obviously if Reagan nominated Bork to the Supreme Court Reagan didn't view him as a radical conservative.
"If you're contending that Reagan didn't like "radical conservatives", it might help to have some idea of what one of them allegedly is."
From the context of Tamzee's post in #43, it appears that to Reagan a radical conservative was someone who wanted 100% of what they wanted or they would take nothing.
"The American new conservative majority we represent is not based on abstract theorizing of the kind that turns off the American people, but on common sense, intelligence, reason, hard work, faith in God, and the guts to say: “Yes, there are things we do strongly believe in, that we are willing to live for, and yes, if necessary, to die for.” That is not “ideological purity.” It is simply what built this country and kept it great."
Reagan's Speech at the 4th Annual CPAC Convention: A New Republican Party
Read the Reagan speech I link to in post #118. I think it says everything about Reagan's "big tent" philosophy. Good stuff.
Pro-life
Pro-second amendment
Pro-tax cuts
School vouchers, or even better leave education to the states
Pro-death penalty.. fry them as painfully as possible
Pro-Patriot Act
Cut government size by eliminating the dozens of useless, self-perpetuating depts that simply exist to create redtape
Strict time limits on welfare and prosecute fraud brutally
Unions should be illegal under RICO
Increase military spending
Pro-border fence
Privatize social security
Pro-drilling ANWAR
Eliminate all federal money to ACLU, arts programs, CPB-NPR
etc....
About the only actual issue I differ on with the "tiny tent" faction around here is I don't think it is feasible to deport millions of illegal aliens much as we want to. Allow them to come forward and apply legally as temporary guest workers, give them a huge fine as a punishment for not doing so before, and long prison sentences for any illegals we catch afterwards that didn't come forward.
I agree with Reagan Man's "issues" just fine... he just refuses to face reality that less than 51% of the population agrees with us on these stances. If you try to point that out, he insists you must be a liberal.
Ridiculous, childish and really, really un-Reagan like ;-)
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.