Conservatives: Sitting Out 2008 Is the Height of Idiocy by Ben Shapiro

Family Security Matters ^ | 14 February 2008 | Ben Shapiro

[K-oneTexas]

Published: February 14, 2008

Conservatives: Sitting Out 2008 Is the Height of Idiocy

Ben Shapiro

 

The conservative base isn't fond of Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz. They disagree with him on a wide variety of issues, and they feel insulted by McCain's ardent desire to please those across the political aisle.

           

But conservatives are fools if they stay home in November.

           

There's plenty to question about John McCain, but there's one thing conservatives can't question: McCain is better than Hillary Clinton. He's better than Barack Obama. And it's not close.

           

McCain is a hard-line proponent of victory in Iraq. He has pledged to lower taxes. He has always fought governmental corruption, even if that has led him to absurd extremes like campaign finance reform. He is a strong pro-life voter. He says he will veto any bill that has any earmarks. In 2006, McCain received a 65% rating from the American Conservative Union, which measures whether members of Congress are in line with conservatives on major issues. In 2005, his score was 80%.

           

Here are Hillary Clinton's scores in those same two years: 8% and 12%. Obama scored 8% both years.

           

It's simply unthinkable to equate McCain's record with either Clinton's or Obama's. McCain is a left-leaning Republican, which means he ranks in the upper half of the Senate in terms of political conservatism. National Journal, by contrast, ranked Clinton the 16th most liberal senator in the Senate in 2007. Obama was No. 1.

           

Despite the vast difference between McCain and his Democratic opponents, many conservatives are threatening to boycott the 2008 election. They argue that the Republican Party has abandoned conservatism, and that in order to reclaim the Party, the GOP may have to go through the purifying ritual of cataclysmic electoral defeat.

           

This is historically ignorant. Intraparty squabbles are constant with regard to choosing presidential candidates. Parties do not move toward a particular ideological group because of electoral defeat – they move toward a particular ideological group because that group is most motivated to back a single candidate. Ronald Reagan was a rising force in the Republican Party before Gerald Ford lost to Jimmy Carter -- he almost wrested the nomination from Ford in 1976. The Democratic Party's recent move to the left has not been a reaction to their electoral defeats in 2000 and 2004 – after all, Al Gore and John Kerry were certainly quite liberal. The problem with the conservative movement in 2008 wasn't the movement -- it was the lack of a candidate. And sending the GOP to ringing defeat in 2008 won't push the Party back to the right unless there's a candidate to rally around.

           

If conservatives think they can rally around a challenger in 2012 and oust an incumbent Democrat, they should think again. Conceding the White House in 2008 could easily mean an eight-year term for either Hillary or Obama – and such an eight-year term would wreak havoc on a country already overburdened by taxes and under assault from Islamic terrorism.

           

The proposed conservative boycott of the GOP in 2008 also demonstrates a massive misunderstanding of the GOP's role. The GOP isn't constructed to nominate conservative candidates. It is constructed to win. It's the conservative base's responsibility to nominate conservative candidates. In 2008, the conservative base failed. That isn't the GOP's fault. Punishing the GOP fruitlessly punishes an organization that isn't to blame.

           

Conservatives must recognize that the choice in 2008 is between John McCain and Clinton or Obama. It isn't about McCain vs. Romney or McCain vs. Huckabee anymore. And if McCain wins, that doesn't preclude conservatives from rallying around a more conservative candidate next time. Dooming the country to at least four years of Democratic incompetence and appeasement won't solve conservatives' problem.

# #

FamilySecurityMatters.org contributing editor Ben Shapiro is a graduate of UCLA and Harvard Law School. He is also the author of the recently published "Porn Generation: How Social Liberalism Is Corrupting Our Future" as well as the national best seller "Brainwashed: How Universities Indoctrinate America's Youth." He practices law in Los Angeles.

[Colonel_Flagg]

But conservatives are fools if they stay home in November.

This conservative isn't staying home, but I won't be voting for McCain unless I get a lead-pipe solid conservative influence both on the ticket and his decision-making. For one thing, I have to save my state from Senator Al Franken, and that's enough to make me crawl over broken glass to get to the polls.

[factmart]

I don’t care who his VP is. VP is the kiss of death.

[factmart]

I was a Fred head too, What a disappointment.

[factmart]

I was a Fred head too, What a disappointment HE WAS I mean.

[factmart]

Great post!

[factmart]

Great POST

[factmart]

It wasn’t so long ago that Ross Perot was able to take 20 percent or so of voters, and the painful result was eight years of WJC, surely our memories are not that short.

YES BUT WE GOT CONTROLL OF BOTH HOUSES OF CONGRESS.

Clinton didn’t get any of his laws passed. THATS THE POINT!!!!!

[Grunthor]

Thank you, I understand now.

[factmart]

You know a lot of people think that the dems are getting on Free Republic to hurt McCain. If that is true they are smarter than anyone who voted for McCain in the primaries. When they did that they handed over the election to the dems,

I have been a freeper since 2000 and believe likes Ann Coulte, never vote McTraitor.

[Centurion2000]

Maybe it's time to choose between destroying the GOP or building something entirely new.

F#$% the GOP. Let them learn that you cant out-socialist a full blown communist democrat.

[KC_Conspirator]

You dont win by losing.

[alarm rider]

Give me someone to vote for, not someone to vote against.

[hiredhand]

Ben Shapiro says - "McCain is better than Hillary Clinton. He's better than Barack Obama."

We say NOT. McCain is a turd who won't flush. The entire article is full of fear-mongering, and as I've been telling people, we will NOT be driven by fear.

You have spoken well. The GOP can suck it up and deal with it. I believe they made a grave miscalculation this time around. I believe they seriously misjudged the reaction of enough people to throw the elections into a tailspin for them.

I don't think they can recover from it now. It would take too much time to rebuild trust alone.

But as it stands, we're playing a giant game of "chicken" with the GOP, as they are with us. They're standing their ground, spewing crap like what Ben Shapiro writes and hoping we'll give in. But we stand equally as solid and look them back in the eye, unwilling to change, and warning of the results. Their shrieking becomes louder and more shrill as time goes on, but we don't budge...nor will we budge... and so we all continue headlong into the train wreck that is approaching.

The GOP abandoned me. I didn't abandon them. They moved farther to the left...not me. They ignored us for 4 years with regards to our attempted communications of our opinions on illegal immigration. I know it's bad timing, but now it's our turn to ignore them for at least 4 years. It's mildly amusing that they should solidly ignore us for four years, but all of the sudden they want to open "dialog" to petition for our support and try to convince us that Juan McPain is an old school conservative.

For me to tell them to kiss my ass just doesn't adequately express my contempt for them right now. But it's a good start! :-)

[Ingtar]

One reason that comes to mind is his recent comments about talk radio and especially during those of Reid’s letter to Limbaugh.

[EternalVigilance]

Give me someone to vote for, not someone to vote against.

I'd be happy to.

[EternalVigilance]

An excellent post.

[wita]

...and my point is if, and I realize to some that might be a big if, the President can have a veto pen. I don’t hold much hope for getting complete control of Congress, but we have just enough control at the moment.

[K-oneTexas]

Turning the country over to socialists (Hillary or Obama) is losing. I will not participate in that action and exercise my vote against it. I will not effectively create a stronger Dem Party or help to weaken even further this two party system. One majority party is not an option.

For me voting other than the GOP is doing just that, participate in the giving away of the country. I don't need to hear about ceremonial vote to let someone I'm not pleased with them. I realize that the Dems have more registered voters than the GOP. This battle has always been there, GOP has been the smaller second party for years but worked to attract others with the issues they chose to defend.

I believe that giving a vote to a 3rd party candidate who may or may not even be on the ballot in all 50 States is for me - not a viable option. Sitting at home for me - not a viable option.

McCain can be controlled by having elected officials willing to speak and vote in accord with conservative ideals/principles in the Senate and House. By having an electorate willing to send emails and make phone calls when elected officials act against those ideals/principles they hold. This we have seen work.

I still believe in a GOP that can be ... cause no other party can make a difference in the short term of 2010, 2012 and 2018. I will vote for the GOP even with McCain in the front seat. I will try to keep what conservatives I have here in Texas in office. None of them are totally perfect. Last perfect person around, that I know of, died on a cross aver 2,000 years ago.

[hiredhand]

Thanks. :-)....even though I get no joy from writing things like that! :-)

[beckysueb]

Exactly! People are just so mad because they didn’t get their way its like well I’m going to hold my breath till I pass out.