Sunday, May 10, 2009

Grassroots Conservatives Must Rise Up

This morning's Los Angeles Times features a colloquium on conservatism, "SOS for the GOP." Not much here is really new. We find the same-old "progressive conservatism" in Morley Winograd and Michael Hais', "The Republican Party ignores young 'millennials' at its peril." And "moderate" Mickey Edward argues against the Goldwater legacy in "The nation needs a better GOP."

This is the kind of thing that only time and elections will resolve. I'm simply more inclined to agree with Richard Viguerie and his contribution to the collection, "
What Republicans need is a mutiny":

The current GOP leadership has no message or vision that appeals to the grass roots. We never hear from them the boat-rocking message of successful conservatives.

Instead, the public's image of the GOP is that it is incompetent (think Hurricane Katrina), corrupt (think Jack Abramoff, Randy "Duke" Cunningham, etc.) and without principles (think wild spending, bailouts, earmarks and a lack of a true conservative vision). Republicans can try smoke and mirrors, but they really need new leaders who will reverse the big-government policies of Bush 43 and congressional Republicans and articulate and move a conservative agenda forward.

Democrats have nothing to fear from today's Republican Party leaders. That's why Democrats have taken to targeting Rush Limbaugh and others who aren't in formal leadership positions in the GOP but who forcefully articulate a conservative vision.

Republicans need the political equivalent of Alcoholics Anonymous. First, they must admit their problem (many are in denial). Next, they must promise never to do it again. Then they must recognize what caused the problem ("Washingtonitis," abandoning the principles of the party and allowing people who didn't believe in the principles of the party to assume leadership positions). Last, when in a hole, stop digging.

Instead, Republicans are still digging. The GOP has lost the Goldwater/Reagan vision of rolling back unconstitutional government and restoring it to its prescribed authority. Its leaders seem barely capable of fighting for basic GOP principles of low taxes, a strong national defense and traditional values.

The American people have said clearly in the last two national elections that they don't like the GOP of Bush, Karl Rove, John McCain, Mitch McConnell, John Boehner, etc. All the rebranding efforts and pandering tours won't work as long as the party remains under the leadership of the team that was a party-wrecking disaster on the order of Richard Nixon, Gerald Ford, Bush 41 and Bush 43.

In the 2008 election, Republicans acquiesced to the Specter/Colin Powell wing and nominated the one member of their party most famously critical of conservatives and most open to partnerships with people from across the aisle, John McCain. That obviously didn't work.

For Republicans to remove the stigma of Bush 43 and his GOP Congress, they must be able to honestly communicate to Americans that they are "Open Under New Management" -- but with old, time-tested principles.

The second debate is whether conservatives should tone down on social issues such as abortion and marriage.

Those, however, who win without principle have neither an agenda nor a mandate and rarely change anything for the better. In the history books, centrists and accommodators end up alongside James Buchanan, who compromised with slavery, and Neville Chamberlain, who compromised with Nazism. Political leaders we respect are ones who changed political reality, not those who accommodated themselves to political reality.

Leftist activists on social issues not only advocate loudly, even threateningly, they are happy to achieve their objectives through unconstitutional methods such as judicial activism.

Certainly, conservatives need to appeal not just to the faithful but must use logical and constitutional rationales on social issues. But stay quiet? I think not. What would have become of the great social and political debates of our country -- slavery, segregation, suffrage -- had activists acquiesced to the political establishment?

Thomas Jefferson wrote, "I hold it that a little rebellion now and then is a good thing, and as necessary in the political world as storms in the physical."

The political establishment is averse to conservative boat-rockers, which is why conservatives should withhold financial support from all GOP national committees and establishment politicians but support principled organizations and candidates. They should run candidates for every party and public office except when there's a principled incumbent conservative.

Conservatives should no longer look to Republican politicians for leadership and should assume the role of leading the opposition to Obama and the Democrats. We believe we have a party and a country to save, and the GOP establishment is in our way. Let the rebellion begin.
See also, Fred Barnes, "Be the Party of No: It's the Route to Republican Landslides" (via Memeorandum).

20 comments:

PRH said...

The comments are "Right On"...the Conservatives need to tell the Specter/Powell wing of the GOP to take a hike, or take a hike ourselves...many of us have already migrated to a 3rd party or independent status.

AmPowerBlog said...

Thanks Pat!

Phil Jennerjahn said...

Amen! It is time to clean house and make it clear who we are and what we stand for as Conservatives.

Listening to and following the Moderates will only make us lose elections in the future.

Larry Miller said...

The party envisioned by the "moderates" would have no reason for existence.

M. Bouffant said...

20%. That's what you have. Good luck w/ your "rebellion."

Chuck Pelto said...

TO: AP, et al.
RE: It's Revolting!

Anyone care for a TEA Party?

Regards,

Chuck(le)
P.S. As co-chair of my Republican Party precinct in my county, I've been telling the local 'aristocracy' and the world that I'm giving them until 2010 to get their 'act' together.

If they fail that, I'm going elsewhere.....

Steve said...

In my state, neither of our Democratic senators have to run in 2010. The only incumbent is our Representative who is a member of the Republican Study Group, but still feels the need to bring home the bacon for parks, etc. If we replace him or abandon him, the seat goes to a Democrat who is even less likely to listen.
I agree that we need to find men and women of character who will work to not just stop government growth (a fantastic achievement by itself) but to reverse it.
Going third party has its attractiveness to those of us who want to be "pure" in our limited government beliefs. But it just hands the game to the Democrats.
What we need to do is to take over the Republican party from the inside. No more of the good old boys club, or waiting your turn. Stand up! Stand up for your country and fight to take it back!
As to the Social Conservatives, their problems lie with activist courts that ignore the prohibition of deciding political questions. The SoCons would come with us if we promise to impeach activist judges.
Democrats want to keep government out of our bedrooms, but have it intruding everywhere else. I want government held under strict control and limitations.

tom swift said...

I believe the real weakness in these dreams of a conservative resurgence is the religious angle. From where I'm sitting, the First Amendment (that business about establishment of a state religion) is non-negotiable, and I certainly will never vote for a party if its platform pretends that any portion of the Bill of Rights simply doesn't exist.

George B said...

As Tip O'Neill said, "All politics is local." Conservatives should field conservative primary clallengers in the many safe House districts. In congressional districts where any Republican can win, that Republican should be a conservative. Why waste safe seats on "pale pastel" Republicans?

TMink said...

Anything that a guy named Bouffant does not like is likely a winning strategy!

But I am not sure the Republicans need survive for this to happen.

Trey

Anonymous said...

We need to boot the New Hampshire primary as the first one, and move it to Texas. Why the GOP lets a lot of eastern Libs nominate our candidates I will never know, but the primaries have got to change, or we are doomed forever to pantywaist candidates.

Mike said...

I'm in agreement on lower taxes and lower spending, but it seems clear to me the Republican Party has lost its way on cultural issues. The most obvious is gay marriage. Once scientists proved that homosexuality was genetic (there have been all kinds of studies on this published in the last 3-5 years) gay rights became a civil rights issue. It's just obvious. As long as the Republicans fight this they will lose 80% of the people under 30.

Dave said...

M. Bouffant,

Enjoy it whilst you are able.

80% of the American Idol-watching government-schooled (by members of your party) dumbMasses are laboring under the erroneous belief that the current economic downturn was somehow caused by Bush.

It wasn't, but that is what many think.

Obama will get away with pinning it all on Bush for another three months or so before it becomes "Obama's economy."

I figure by then gas at the pump will be setting people back between $5-6/gal., which is going to hit an already weak economy right in the bag.

We'll see how comrade Bamster's approval numbers look then, as I am guessing the unemployment rate will be closing in on 11-12%.

-Dave

Principled Conservative said...

How peculiar, to correlate apathy towards abortion or gay marriage as a political issue with overall lack of principles.

I am disgusted by the magnitude of influence government has over the social mores of my community, my state, and my country.

If you believe gay marriage and abortion need to be solved at the federal level, then it is you who need to re-examine your principles. The Constitutional arguments for making these national issues are precariously weak. Those satisfied with having the issues resolved by D.C. are nothing more than statists who reject the genuine conservative principles of local governance and individualism.

shoprat said...

You would think that they would want us to nominate unelectable candidates if they were sure that it would mean more victories for themselves. They know that they have power for now, but they will lose it suddenly and totally unless the GOP simply becomes DEM lite.

Anonymous said...

Does a happy dance! Woohooo!

The RINOs aren't willing to win because winning requires enthusiastic volunteers, and they can't get those with the lame program. Instead, they prefer to pay for pros because pros don't really care about the goal, just about doing the job. Unfortunately, volunteers are simply better at the game than pros are, and so RINOs LOSE.

Yes, its time for a mutiny. Don't send in money to the RNC. Send it to conservative writers...like me. Or actual conservative senators, or buy a billboard and put your message up. Something. But don't give money to the drunk. He needs to hit bottom, and maybe then he will stop abusing his long suffering wife.
Tennwriter

Dave said...

Aside from running off the RINOs, which is a good thing, the republicans also need to stop letting the MSM select their candidates for them, as happened with McCain.

You can bet they will try it again in next time around.

The more immediate problem for them is too get it together in time to make some serious inroads in congress in the 2010 mid-term elections.

If Obama's "plan" is not thwarted significantly between now and 2012, what happens at that point isn't going to matter very much.

-Dave

richard mcenroe said...

I've been saying this for a while now...

Anonymous said...

Here's me saying what I always do. The center-right of the party is only asking that the right of the party don't go out of their way to alienate every potential GOP vote with demands of purity.

Emerson

Tom the Redhunter said...

Hmmm. Lets start with this: I'd rather win with a candidate that agrees with me 75% of the time than lose with one that's 100%.

I guess it depends on what it takes to become a "RINO," but we need to be realistic; we're simply not going to get 60, or even 51, hard core conservatives in the U.S. Senate. Not. Going. To. Happen.

Further, we cannot win if we continue to be a regional party. Right now Republicans in New England are scarce as hens teeth. We need Republicans there, and need to accept that they'll be more liberal than we'd like.

Unless we gain a majority in Congress and the White House we cannot get our agenda into action. Heck, we won't even be able to get it to the floor to a vote.

So while I'm not disappointed to see Arlen Specter go, focusing on hunting RINOs is the path to political suicide.