There seems to be a great deal of angst among conservatives right now. It seems every day I hear another call in to Glenn's, Rush's, or Sean's talk shows asking for advice on the clear way forward for the conservative movement. The situation is clear - without a truly conservative candidate as the nominee of either major political party for the presidency, a congressional delegation that just doesn't seem to get it, and the loss of what have been historically staunch Republican seats in that body, the future certainly looks grim.
Isn't it amazing how much different things can look after a decade? Why it seems like only yesterday that the Democrat's were dealt a stinging defeat in the 2002 mid-terms that seemed to spell the defeat of the Democrat Party itself. Then came the triumphant defeat of John Kerry in 2004, accompanied by a victory for the defense of the definition of marriage. My how the Republicans have snatched defeat from the jaws of victory!
Indeed, it's hard for conservative principles to shine like "the latest thing"- that is, until having to live several years under the malaise of misguided liberal policies. Then, it seems, every politician wants to be called a "conservative", and take advantage of the ill will of the electorate towards their political opponents.
Right now, of course, the dynamic seems to have shifted in the other direction, with the electorate early on throwing their support behind an untested candidate lacking any significant managerial experience, or much less specific experience for that matter, only reconsidering when it was too late. Perhaps that's our glimmer of hope, not that it shines very brightly.
I don't think that America has completely lost it's way. I don't believe that the conservative movement is dead yet. The majority of the Republican party still supported the conservative primary candidates in overwhelming majorities over John McCain, divided as they were among who that leading conservative candidate should be. Even among the Democrats, especially after the success of Operation Chaos, large numbers in the later states shifted heavily away from the more radical candidate, to Hillary Clinton, who, and I can't believe I'm saying this, was the more traditional, mainstream candidate.
So let's not lose heart. Our principles are grounded firmly in history, in economics, and frankly, in the Truth. It's not our principles that have failed. It was the failure to stand firmly upon those principles, forsaking popularity in the press, avoiding the tempting lure to be part of the "cutting edge" of new and "progressive" government programs designed to pander to specific influential voting blocs that would ensure re-election, and more influence.
We must instead nominate candidates who not only claim to share our ideals, but have some experience in working to defend them, finding new ways to expose their relevance in our communities and society. The temptation to compromise our principles away is very powerful, as has been made glaringly evident over the past decade. I have watched Republicans win powerful majorities both in state governments and in the Congress, only to betray their principles for short-sighted appeasement, and lose the faith of their once passionately loyal constituency. Yes, we were right after all, character really does matter.
So I exhort you conservatives; do not let your shoulders fall; do not let defeat creep into your psyche; do not give into the temptation to concede ground to your ideological opponents. Their are good conservative men raising their profiles on the field of political battle right now. Men of character like Governor Mike Huckabee, Governor Sarah Palin, Governor Bobby Jindal, and Ken Blackwell, just to name a few. These are men and women whose belief in conservatism has been tried over and again, and reinforced by success. They are standing up to adversity, inviting it some cases, and moving the ball forward.
So find that local candidate who shows promise, and get behind them. Or if you think you've got what it takes, step out into the fray yourselves. But never, never lose heart.
Wednesday, May 28, 2008
Thursday, May 22, 2008
Who layed out this primary route?
If I hadn't seen this presidential election unfold myself, I would barely believe the progress so far.
In a wide open election year, where the Democrat Party seems to have such a clear path to victory, things don't seem to have gone as planned. Not that the Republicans have faired much better.
Neither party (at least at this point) is poised to nominate a candidate which their most loyal political base of voters would prefer. On the Republican side, John McCain is seen as more of a traitor than a friend in conservative circles, regardless of the contrast between himself and the candidates the Democrats are running. Beyond his firm stance with regard to the war in Iraq, there's not much to get excited about, considering his support for the global warmist hoax through "cap and trade" policies, among other questionable economic proposals. In fact, here on the homefront, his presidency might do more harm to our economy and individual liberty than Bush's governmental expansions. Even where there is shared ideological common ground, there is a lack of measurable active support for issues which most conservatives take very seriously.
On the other side of the spectrum, Hillary Clinton, who is leading in the popular vote tally, and has also won majorities of delegates in states like California, New York, Pennsylvania, Massachusetts, which are populated by the most loyal base of the Democrat Party, appears to be on the losing side of the nominating process to an inexperienced, 1st term US Senator, with serious, though late-discovered, flaws. Though neither has conceded, if as predicted, Sen. Obama secures the nomination, it's going to be a very interesting general election race.
Pundits on both sides are really trumpeting the notion that the base on either side will come out to support their parties' respective candidates, regardless of the fact that they did not do so in the primary, simply to keep the other side from winning.
Truthfully, while the purported policy positions of Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton do not differ significantly from one another, and therefore do not create an ideological divide that is insurmountable for opposition voters, on the Republican side, the divide is a deep chasm that John McCain will have to bridge.
Once Obama has the opportunity to restate his policy positions, which he will point out, is ultimately what is being voted on, perhaps questions about his personal ideology, which came to the forefront through the Jeremiah Wright affair will get glossed over in many Democrat minds. While it is true that Obama lacks the experience to manage such an unwieldy bureacracy as the federal government, and implement his policies effectively, his oratory skill gives him significant advantage in the perception department.
Unfortunately, I think, rather than focusing on the strengths of their candidate, the Republican party will try to energize their conservative base by turning the focus of attention on the weaknesses of their opposition. This has not necessarily been shown to be a winning strategy, unless a major outright disqualification can be demonstrated - the difficulty of such a task having been demonstrated in Bill Clinton's second term election.
So, even though neither party's base seems to be to happy with their nominee at this point; the distance of the ideological divide those nominees must bridge to win back that base, just may be the difference in November.
In a wide open election year, where the Democrat Party seems to have such a clear path to victory, things don't seem to have gone as planned. Not that the Republicans have faired much better.
Neither party (at least at this point) is poised to nominate a candidate which their most loyal political base of voters would prefer. On the Republican side, John McCain is seen as more of a traitor than a friend in conservative circles, regardless of the contrast between himself and the candidates the Democrats are running. Beyond his firm stance with regard to the war in Iraq, there's not much to get excited about, considering his support for the global warmist hoax through "cap and trade" policies, among other questionable economic proposals. In fact, here on the homefront, his presidency might do more harm to our economy and individual liberty than Bush's governmental expansions. Even where there is shared ideological common ground, there is a lack of measurable active support for issues which most conservatives take very seriously.
On the other side of the spectrum, Hillary Clinton, who is leading in the popular vote tally, and has also won majorities of delegates in states like California, New York, Pennsylvania, Massachusetts, which are populated by the most loyal base of the Democrat Party, appears to be on the losing side of the nominating process to an inexperienced, 1st term US Senator, with serious, though late-discovered, flaws. Though neither has conceded, if as predicted, Sen. Obama secures the nomination, it's going to be a very interesting general election race.
Pundits on both sides are really trumpeting the notion that the base on either side will come out to support their parties' respective candidates, regardless of the fact that they did not do so in the primary, simply to keep the other side from winning.
Truthfully, while the purported policy positions of Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton do not differ significantly from one another, and therefore do not create an ideological divide that is insurmountable for opposition voters, on the Republican side, the divide is a deep chasm that John McCain will have to bridge.
Once Obama has the opportunity to restate his policy positions, which he will point out, is ultimately what is being voted on, perhaps questions about his personal ideology, which came to the forefront through the Jeremiah Wright affair will get glossed over in many Democrat minds. While it is true that Obama lacks the experience to manage such an unwieldy bureacracy as the federal government, and implement his policies effectively, his oratory skill gives him significant advantage in the perception department.
Unfortunately, I think, rather than focusing on the strengths of their candidate, the Republican party will try to energize their conservative base by turning the focus of attention on the weaknesses of their opposition. This has not necessarily been shown to be a winning strategy, unless a major outright disqualification can be demonstrated - the difficulty of such a task having been demonstrated in Bill Clinton's second term election.
So, even though neither party's base seems to be to happy with their nominee at this point; the distance of the ideological divide those nominees must bridge to win back that base, just may be the difference in November.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
