Saturday, December 13, 2008

Faith is Road Back for GOP

Five weeks after the election and we're still seeing essays like this one warning the Repubican Party against embracing social conservatism at the risk eternal banishment from political power:

I’ve noted several times how the religious right has become an anchor which is making it hard for the Republican Party to move on from their recent defeats and revise their positions to ones which voters outside of the deep south might accept. In the past when political parties have suffered defeats they have recovered as new ideas took hold. I’m not sure if this is possible for the Republicans. At present they have lost too many voters to win without the religious right and the religious right appears unwilling to moderate their views ....

Maybe over time enough people in the religious right will moderate their views to the point where people like [James] Dobson lose their influence. Otherwise I see no choice for the GOP other than to bite the bullet and separate itself from the religious right and be willing to endure a period as a minority party while they attempt to rebuild. s long as they are tied to the current views of the religious right the Republican Party will have a tough time surviving as a meaningful party of the 21st century.
I've been thinking about the GOP's road back all month, and since reading folks like Ross Douthat (God bless him) will drive you crazy with mind-numbing policy-wonkishness, I'm more prone to map out a comeback in terms of basic ideology and values. Besides, beyond tax policy, deregulation, and peace through strength, what do Republicans really have that's all their own? Why, social conservatism, of course, and they'd be entirely brainless - not to mention morally bankrupt - to let it go.

Not only that, there's a culture war going on, and the left's agenda to drive religion and decency from the public sphere is much worse than reading conservative policy papers. Take Michelle Goldberg, for example, and
her smear of Newt Gingrich:

I've been reporting for a long time on the central role of the religious fundamentalism and sacralized nationalism in the Republican Party--that's how I've ended up on the kind of calling lists used by groups like the National Committee for Faith and Family. Still, I'd have expected some attempt to modulate the message of perpetual kulturkampf in the wake of the election results, the public disaffection of so many prominent conservative intellectuals, and the cascading economic disasters threatening millions of Americans. Perhaps, though, people like Gingrich can't imagine any other way. And so, with the defeat of Republican moderates rendering the rump GOP more right-wing than ever, he apparently sees a path to power in challenging Sarah Palin and Mike Huckabee for leadership of the Elmer Gantry wing of his beaten party. Maybe he's clueless about the future of Republicanism, but if he's right about it, it's hard to see what kind of future Republicanism has.
I mean really, first of all, does anyone outside of the nihilist left use meaningless jumbo phrases like "sacralized nationalism"? What's up with that?

Maybe that's just more inside lefty-lingo to delegitimize people who think human life is more important than "convenience" and that sometimes making decisions requires not only agreeing that something is wrong, but in fact embracing the opposite, that which is morally right and eternally just.

Yep, that's what this is all about. I just can't get it out of my head that if the GOP does what all the secular ayatollahs want, well, we'd be handing them the greatest inauguration present since Franklin Roosevelt was sworn in on a New Deal platform. I mean, let's just give away the store, you know, the game's just not it worth anymore. Those few traditionalists still left after The Lightworker takes office can move up to a cabin in Colorado or some other former red state and just wait it out until the collectivist state withers away.

Seriously, of all the proposals for the GOP comeback, Richard Land's was best: "
Stay Faithful to Core Values." The number one plank on the agenda is to promote life, that is, conservatives must stay true to the preservation and promotion of life, from birth to natural death; and that requires refusing to cut corners with moral equivalence and acceptable talk of abortion, gay marriage and the capitulation to Islamist evil whose terror rose once again in Mumbai, and whose plague of violence we'll see in the months and years ahead unless America stands tall in our heritage of exceptionalism and greatness of right.

There are no shortcuts, and all this talk of "sacralized nationalism" and the need for Republican "moderation" is, frankly, insulting it its combination of electoral hubris and sheer stupidity. Of course, the Democrats haven't even taken power in D.C. yet, and Obama's Chicago model of machine corruption is already promising to make traditional moral values the hottest game in town.


Joe "Truth 101" Kelly said...

Either you're blind or just a paid apologist for the right wing Professor. All your leader Bush has done is wage a war and occupation based on lies. His administration deals with greaseballs like Chalabi among others who if given the chance to seize power would be as bad and perhaps worse than Sadaam. The Bush administration has capitulated to the Syrians and Iranians for their interference in Iraq which has led to the deaths of hundreds of American Soldiers. If they had evidence Iran and Syria were supplying insurgents with weapons that killed Americans then why are Damascus and Tehran not parking lots right now? It's because Bush and the rest of the right wing fools you and your cohorts supported in 200 and 2004 capitulated to these jokers instead of taking the moral high ground you and Mr. Land say you hold dear. The Religious Community is on to the scheming of the right wing of the Republican Party Professor. They will no longer be held hostage to people of your ilk claiming moral superiority.

Anonymous said...

I am currently involved in a better late than never group, which consists of local (3 county wide) conservative/ Republicans, most younger than old, but a lot of old folks; plenty of veterans, plenty of passionate women, plenty of passionate youth, amd all of us, ready to make changes, not in our mindset, but in our methods of representing our selves.

I will continue to tap into your wealth of thought, intelligence, and as a conservative news outlet! Please visit me at our website, and may you have a Merry Christmas, and a very Happy New Year!

God Bless,

Laura Lee - Grace Explosion said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Law and Order Teacher said...

The Republican Party has lost its way. As long as the values we hold dear are valuable, we will be able to be viable. When we gave away our moral high ground, we lost in the polls. A political party is nothing if not an advocate for a set of beliefs. When it abandons its beliefs it ceases to be anything worth voting for. In this election we went over to the middle and therefore we lost our voice. Voters need a choice and in this election McCain allowed himself to be made out to be something he wasn't. He wasn't black or white, but gray. I don't think the voters felt he represented a set of values. BO is a celebrity and in America that's important. BO has no set of values that he will hold onto through thick and thin. He is a weather vane who goes along to get along. The American people respect stark choices. They want a choice to pick, either A or B. In this election they had neither. So they went with the celebrity.

Laura Lee - Grace Explosion said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Bob's Blog said...

I agree with you, and thanks for pointing to Mr. Land's piece, with which I also agree.

Tom the Redhunter said...

"Truth 101" said "All your leader Bush has done is wage a war and occupation based on lies."

Yes yes, Iraq was much better with Saddam in charge.


Rich Casebolt said...

If they had evidence Iran and Syria were supplying insurgents with weapons that killed Americans then why are Damascus and Tehran not parking lots right now?

Because you and others wouldn't support them to do what it takes to decisively take down even the most egregious example of tyranny out there ...

... Saddam Hussein.

If this Administration couldn't even have your support to do that ... WMD or no WMD ... then why should they stick their neck out any farther?

Besides, turning Damascus and Tehran into parking lots would kill a LOT of innocent people ... something this Administration had the wisdom to avoid in Iraq ... in stark contrast to our enemies, who were responsible for the vast majority of civilian casualties.

It was this contrast -- of a just and resolute America vs. unjust and capricious enemies -- that eventually led to the Iraqi people turning against them.

You see, our leaders saw what you get when you do a people dirty ... for the initial skepticism of the Iraqis (the lack of "flowers and hugs") has its roots in what we did to them in 1991, when we stopped short of removing Saddam and instead let him kill 30,000 of them ... with 'nary a protest from our "peace movement" or anyone else.

BTW, standoff warfare is never adequate to mitigate threats that can express themselves through insurgent terrorism. You have to control the ground ... which brings me back to your refusal to support the effort in Iraq.

The greatest mistake made by this Administration in Iraq was, from the fall of the Saddam Statue to the Ready First in Ramadi implementing the clear-hold-build strategy that led to the Awakenings and the success of the Surge, fighting this war "on tiptoe", with one eye always looking for politically-expedient courses of action to mitigate the UNPRINCIPLED criticism of those like you, T101.

Criticism based in a lack of confidence in the virtue and universal applicability of the founding principles of this nation, leading to the view that rights-respecting governance and totalitarian dictatorship are morally equivalent to the degree that both should be treated equally with respect to sovereignty.

A lack of confidence that has diminished freedom and peace in this world.

So you can stop with the Leftist talking points ... for there is at least as much, if not more, blood on the hands of those whose lack of wisdom led them to espouse those points, as there is on the hands of this Administration.