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.

[KC_Conspirator]

Right on.

[beckysueb]

I do agree with you there. The primaries were really stupid. But I just wish our candidates would have realized that and hung in longer.

[beckysueb]

But giving them President Hussein is just so wrong. Don’t yyou see that?

[napscoordinator]

Used to be one of my favorites over at Townhall. Heck with him.

[beckysueb]

Thats probably including all the besotted Republicans who are voting for Obama, too.

[beckysueb]

I know you’all are doing what you think is right in your own way, but sucjh disjointed efforts are so hopeless. It would be so much better if we could face it united.

[beckysueb]

Fair5ness doctrine, abortion, tax cuts, WOT, to name a few very important issues. Obama is a disaster.

[beckysueb]

None of them? He is prolife etc. But I am just tired of talking. I am going to just give up. No one listens anyway. I am just tired.

[beckysueb]

I totally agree but with Obama, they won’t have to sneak across the border. They will be welcomed with open arms.

[beckysueb]

That statement is so true. One of El Rushbo’s undeniable truths of life.

[ARE SOLE]

Man factmart, this has been a brutal thread.

Regards

[Theophilus]

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.

I can't question it. I can't affirm it either. Which is better a knife in the back or a knife in the stomach?

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%.

John Robert's seat on the DC Circuit has been unfilled since 2005. I guess the Gang of 14 is ensuring that the seat goes to an abortion sustainer.

Samuel Alito's seat on the 3rd Circuit is also unfilled since 2006. I'm sorry but John McCain is no friend of life.

Conservatives are going to try the "Nuclear Option" this time, since McCain refuses to use it against the evil liberals. The comity of the Senate is a false god and not worth sacrificing children to.

[DoughtyOne]

Couldn’t agree more. Good points.

[Brian S. Fitzgerald]

[ZULU]

I voted for Romney after Hunter and Thompsn backed out. I would have voted for Huckebee if he were a choice.

Now we have crap and have to make the best decision.

[ZULU]

Well, you are consistent. But I ma not chosing a candidate on fear, just on the only available options.

But I have an open mind - if the McCainiac annoys me enough, I’ll write in Teddy Roosevelt.

[Jeff Head]

Understood bro...and the reasoning as well and I respect it.

I just cannot let those other issues go as long as there is any chance to hold that ground. As much as I dislike McCain and what he has done and the way he has betrayed us on a number of critical issues, I still believe we would hold some ground and it is worth holding.

Particularly on abortion and the war. There is blood on the ground in both, real blood...and I cannot let it be ceded to the Democrats because to me, it would mean it was shed in vain.

But that's just my view on it.

[Right_in_Virginia]

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

Conservatives are a minority in a minority party.

My question is: What are you going to do about it?----Whine and throw up hatred or channel your energies into a new party?

So....what do you want to do: Rage against the GOP or channel your energies into something productive?

[hiredhand]

Thanks! :-)

[Jeff Head]

We have to pick the high ground we are to fight from.

With McCain, there is a rational hope and recongnition that despite his betrayal that there is some high ground remaining...and this is not so much any kind of endorsement for McCain (I detest the way he has betrayed conservative principles in several critical areas) as much as it is a hard look at the reality, leaving emotion aside.

...with the Democrats in charge, there will be no high ground whatsooever that we can hold. The unborn, our own soldiers, those who have fought hard for so long for our current positioning on the SCOTUS, will all be cast out and aside IMHO with the wash.

As much as I detest McCain and his actions on immigration, free speech, global climate, etc. I cannot stand by and see the others be cast aside as well.

But that's just my opinion. I certainly understand the emotion and the passion behind other strong conservatives whom I respect who will have nothing to do with the man (McCain) whatsoever.