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.***]
If this is the best the democrats can do, with all the chips in their favor including a rampaging vicious liberal press, lunatic entertainers, and nut-head independent filmmakers, a long hard-fought conflict to defend the Republic, they cannot sustain.
The border fence issue came up at a bad time, and you had "independent minimum wage advocate organizations" running around the country (read, DNC operatives.) In Mizzou, a local paper credits one of these groups to helping local demos win. Interesting?
I agree there has been excessive spending, but after 911 and Katrina there's been alot of need for spending.
Lets try to stay united, focused, and try not to indulge in self loathing and finger pointing. We're still winning this battle overall, which will become clear in two years because the demos have nowhere to go but back down again.
The democrats will self-destruct, because the best choices have been made. To alter any course will lead to undesirable results. They are in a 'zugzwang' politically. They are damned if they do, and they must do what will cause them to be defeated; and they are, obviously, damned if they don't.
A call to refocus on Reagan conservative ideals is always good, though. Its a great post. Thanks.
I agree with you, lady, about the media and it's constant negativity. Day after day since the war began all stories about it were horribly negative. It wasn't even close to fair and balanced reporting. To say that the media is a main reason (and there are several others) for the defeat of Republicans is not just making an excuse, as some conservatives maintain, it is a reality.
BTW, it is always a great comfort to listen to Rush during these politically disappointing times, another area of agreement! : )
That sounds so reasonable - until you reflect that the man hasn't been born that read-only (as opposed to internet and call-in talk radio) journalism cannot smear and second guess as much as they have done to Newt.I was dumbfounded by the way that the Republican Congress caved the minute big journalism turned on the sob story pressure after Clinton vetoed the budget and blamed the result on Congress. Funny, when Reagan vetoed a Democratic Congress's budget, it was a "Reagan shutdown." It takes a lot of chutzpah to withstand the flattery and derision of big journalism . . . but if you can't do that you will be pushed around and rolled over forever.
Bob Dole, for instance, was an awful choice as a candidate, though a good guy all around.
And we tend to regard with great suspicion anyone who has not been trashed by the MSM.
And you fanatic types like to make things up as you go along. Didn't like Ford, adored Reagan and was immensely proud to vote for him. Voted for Bush the first, not conservative enough for me so I voted 3rd party in 1992 and learned what a disaster move that was...
Other folks just don't have the brain cells to see what "teaching the GOP a lesson" did to the country.
Cut him some slack, it's the only thing he can think of.... he's relied on the same exact MO and insults for years.
Then why are you RINOs spitting on his principles now?
“We will have no more of those candidates who are pledged to the same goals as our opposition and who seek our support. Turning the Party over to the so-called moderates wouldn’t make any sense at all.” --Ronald Reagan
I know, and it's pretty pathetic for him to such a pathetic response, given he claims to mantra of Reagan, who had to be the second most humorous men to occupy the highest office in the land. (The first being Lincoln).
Reagan would never have had such a lame respone. Oooooh liberal. That stings.
"...Ford was a moderate liberal Republican, and Reagan thought he was part of the problem, so he declared against him." --Peggy Noonan
Me, too, wholeheartedly. The problem with this gent is that he is a "purger", an always tiny, pure ivory tower, itty-bitty GOP tent... no moderates allowed as Republicans ever, no matter how liberal the state. California, Massachusetts, Vermont, New York, etc... that's a one-way street to never controlling any of the three branches of government. The liberals have been slowly and relentlessly pulling the country left through incrementalism for decades by standing solidly together with the whole spectrum on the left, I think the only way to pull the country rightwards is for conservatives to do the same on the right in blue states.
How in heaven can you stand it? It absolutely sickens me when I hear even a few minutes, given the fact that we are forced to pay for that leftist bilge with tax dollars.
Well, now I really am confused. It sounds as though Reagan was neither fond of Radical conservatives, or moderates and yet I thought the "BIG TENT" was his idea.
If you revered Reagan so much, why did you just spit on him and turn the country he adored over to the Islamofascist and communist loving left?
Was Bork a "radical conservative"?
That's a bad case of projection you got there.
We lost this election because we have failed to win this war.
"The two political managers made clear that an 'ultraconservative' campaign would not win in California and that they were not interested in joining another Goldwater debacle. Neither was he, rejoined Reagan."
Reagan's political instincts and shrewdness were evident in these early meetings, and belie the persistent claim that he was a political naif. Reagan-understood that with a Democratic voting edge of three-to-two in California, a Republican could only win by appealing to crossover voters. This required a united Republican Party more than a centrist campaign. A unified Republican Party would be his primary strategy as well as a condition of running."
http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_qa3827/is_200107/ai_n8961512
You are the single-most pathetic debater I've seen in all my years on FR.... how old are you?
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.