Republicans

The conservative blame game

Drew McKissick — Tue, 25 Nov 2008 15:22:01 -0500

It has been said that nature abhors a vacuum, but you can't prove it by the space between the ears of some in the Republican Party today, or in the conservative movement for that matter.

Take columnist Kathleen Parker for example, who in her most recent column lamented the presence of "oogedy-boogedy" religious conservatives within the Republican Party and derisively referred to them as the "low brow" crowd.

She went on to suggest that such people should just keep their faith to themselves; essentially saying they should either cease to have their values informed by their faith, or cease to cast ballots on the basis of their values. Of course, this seems rather selective, as one could just as easily ask her and others in the socially liberal camp to do the same.

Given that an AP/IPSOS poll demonstrated that 40% of the Republican coalition was comprised of evangelical conservatives, (Parker's "low brow", "oogedy boogedy" set), and, assuming she's interested in GOP electoral success, it would seem that math isn't exactly her strong suit.

One should note that the cultural views she seems to have a problem with are nothing new in this country. In fact, they've been around since before this was a country. What's new, (or newer), in American politics are the cultural liberals who demand that people (via government) actually sanction their behavior.

Keep in mind that while the GOP was busy losing the recent elections, gay marriage was rejected in three more states, (even California) - an issue that has won thirty out of thirty-one elections across America. Not exactly a national outcry for social liberalism.

By the way, Ms. Parker is the same "conservative" columnist that was celebrated by the mainstream media for her denigration of Governor Sarah Palin. The same who, just a week prior to the election, penned probably one of the most sexist columns written by a supposed "conservative" woman that I've ever seen, in which she suggested that the only reason McCain picked Sarah Palin as his running mate was because he had the hots for her.

Anyone this vapid no longer merits serious attention.

Then there's Mike Huckabee, who's pushing a new book that takes some real classy potshots at other members of the conservative movement, especially libertarians who happen to believe in small government and sound money. This is the same strain of American thought that Reagan once referred to as the "heart and soul" of conservativatism.

Of course Huckabee's probably the guy who's most responsible for making John McCain the Republican nominee this year, not exactly a big help to the movement.

And let's not forget those from the McCain campaign itself (OK, not exactly a bastion of conservatism) that committed some of the most blatant C.Y.A. in recent election history by trying to blame Sarah Palin for McCain's loss while the ballots were still being counted. The anonymous smears attempting to portray her as some backwoods rube where not just low class, but telling as to where this crowd was coming from to begin with.

What everyone needs to understand is that the biggest part of the GOP base is conservative all across the board, meaning in terms of social policy, economic policy, foreign policy and the size and scope of government.

Moreover, the same can be said of the American people. When you break it all down to its constituent parts, a consistent conservative approach to government, economics, taxes, foreign policy and culture is where the largest plurality of the American people are...and where the GOP needs to be.

Any one conservative group that calls for the others to be subordinated and/or assigned blame for Republican loses is not only wrong, but ignoring reality.

The blame for the GOP's current situation lies with those that have forgotten this truth. Those that went on spending binges with tax-dollars that would make drunken sailors blush; those who pushed for amnesty for illegal aliens; those who decided to subordinate social and cultural issues in elections to the point where some conservatives wondered what was in it for them anymore.

These are the people who don't deserve to be anywhere near a leadership position again.

In the end, this is all a tempest in a teapot fomented by some very small people doing the equivalent of jumping up and down and yelling "look at me!" They won't matter.

But the conservative movement will matter. It will go on, and it will grow. It will do so precisely because it's rooted and grounded in the reality of the human condition and the values upon which our country was founded.

We believe that the chief ends of government are to protect individual life, liberty and property. We believe in lower taxes, sound fiscal policy, smaller government, strong national defense and the traditional culture and values that have made the United States the greatest nation on the face of God's green Earth.

So to those who would seek to marginalize one faction of conservatives at the expense of another, let me just say that there are more of us than there are of you. Meaning there are more of us in this party who would consider ourselves "comprehensive conservatives". And we're not going anywhere.

When Republicans Act Like Democrats

Steve McCullough — Wed, 05 Nov 2008 14:49:35 -0500

Barack Obama has now been elected the forty-fourth President of the United States. He ran a very organized campaign and has made history as the first man of color to be elected to the nation's highest political office. Democrats have increased their margin of representation over Republicans in both houses of congress and hold a majority in the senate which should allow them to pass almost all legislation they desire. This election can be seen as either a repudiation or an opportunity for the Republicans Party. I see it as a little of both. First, let me say right up front, that I do not like political parties. I don't care if they are Democrats, Republicans, Bull Moose, or Whigs. Both George Washington and John Adams, our nation's first two presidents, believed that political parties would lead to the downfall of our political system of representative democracy since it allowed special interest groups to gain too much power over political candidates. Today we can see their fears have been realized in Washington with billions of dollars worth of political influence financing campaigns. Trial lawyers, trade unions, the medical industry, abortion advocates, financial institutions, and a host of other lobbyists roam the halls of congress doling out money to any politician willing to compromise his principles for a chance to get a piece of the pork. As we recently witnessed in the mortgage industry meltdown, even those who are supposed to be overseeing quasi-government agencies like Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae can collect hundreds of thousands of dollars from those whom they are supposed to be regulating. This is a classic example of the fox guarding the henhouse. In the election of 2000, Republicans won both houses of congress and the presidency. This was a great opportunity for those elected to enact the conservative core values which defined the Republican party in the 1980's - limited government, fiscal conservatism, strong national defense, and strong social values. These are the ideas which Ronald Reagan communicated to Americans which allowed him to unite his GOP base along with "Reagan Democrats" to win landslide elections in 1980 and 1984. However, for six years the Republicans in power ignored these conservative values and acted like big-spending Democrats. They ran up a huge deficit and instituted a myriad of expensive government-sponsored social programs such as the Medicare drug program. When our military became bogged down in the Iraq war and the deficits and spending kept growing, American voters got fed up. In 2006, Republicans lost control of both houses of congress. Americans wanted change and any change seemed preferable to the status quo. The GOP lost its way and this year put forth a squishy, middle-of-the-road presidential candidate in John McCain who claimed he was well-suited to reach across the aisle to work with Democrats. In truth, McCain had repeatedly demonstrated this with his record for tag-team legislation, working with Russ Feingold, Ted Kennedy, John Edwards, John Kerry, and other liberal lawmakers. "Reaching across the political aisle" always entails selling out conservative values - something McCain seemed willing to do more often than not. At the tail-end of his political campaign McCain tried to convince voters that he was a real agent for change in Washington. The voters didn't buy it. Then there was the other candidate who was, by his mere appearance, an obvious change to the stereotypical politician. Thus, we now have president-elect Barack Obama, the first mixed-race American to take the oath of office. So, what does all this mean for America? The country will now fall under the control of big-government politicians controlling the executive branch and both houses of congress. Taxes will be raised on the top 5 percent of wage-earners (including most small business owners), who now carry 60 percent of the income tax burden, and millions of checks will be sent out to the 40 percent of those who pay no federal income tax. Capital gains taxes, already the second-highest in the world, will be raised from 15 percent to 20 or 25 percent. The Bush tax cuts will be repealed and the estate tax will be reinstituted. An extremely costly government-sponsored health care program will be enacted which will cover both citizens and illegal immigrants. The government will very quickly run up a trillion dollar deficit once all of Obama's programs are implemented. The Supreme Court will probably see two or three more activist liberal judges appointed. There will be an attempt to culturally redefine America. Affirmative action will be strictly enforced across the country and there will be a move to provide "reparations" for those of African-American heritage. The courts will shoot down all restrictions on abortion and America will become the most pro-abortion nation on earth. A liberal Supreme Court will attempt to change the definition of marriage at the national level. There will be many challenges to the Second Amendment right to own firearms. Conservative talk radio will be restricted by the so-called "Fairness Doctrine" and there will be more political correctness and speech codes on college campuses. Twelve to twenty million illegal aliens will be granted amnesty and Democrats will attempt to make them citizens as quickly as possible and register them for their party. Military spending will be cut by 25% and America's armed forces will come under the influence of the United Nations. No global consensus - no military action. And what does this portend for the Republican Party? Actually, this is a great opportunity for the GOP. Americans are not Europeans despite the wishes of Democrats that we were more like them. Most Americans believe that independence, hard work and entrepreneurialism leads one to success. These are the conservative core values which our Founding Fathers incorporated into the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution. Most Americans want a limited, fiscally-responsible federal government, low taxes, and a strong military which will defend our country. Most have Judeo-Christian values and do not want to redefine marriage. They believe that Americans have the right to defend themselves with a firearm. Will the Republican Party learn a lesson from this election and return to its conservative roots? Only time will tell. If Republicans continue to act like Democrats they will live a long time in the political wilderness. If they rediscover their true identity and unite behind a conservative standard bearer, America may experience a second "Reagan Revolution".

What will Congress look like?

Drew McKissick — Thu, 30 Oct 2008 13:36:14 -0400

I know we've all been focusing so much on the polls in the presidential race, and they are tightening...the question is whether they're tightening enough, but we'll see.

But the other thing to keep in mind is how this all effects the future makeup of Congress. With McCain making it a closer race, even if he doesn't win, it's good news for a lot of really close House and Senate races...especially the Senate, given we need to make sure a possible President Obama does NOT have 60 votes and the ability to roll over Republican filibusters...knowing that the filibuster will be about all we have to stop the flood if he wins.

With that in mind, polls that look at the "generic ballot" numbers are instructive, (asking what party will you support for congress...w/out mentioning candidate names). Over the last several months we've seen Republicans at a double-digit deficit in most of them, but that's been changing ever so slowly.

Now comes today's Battleground Poll which has the GOP only down 4 points, (45-41%).

If that's even close to being true, I don't think the Dems make 60 in the Senate...then we'll just need to spend the next two years beating up on Republican Senators to stay strong. Of course, that's a whole 'nuther subject.

GOP 'Brand' Improving According to New Poll Released by Pew Research

Gary Gore — Fri, 19 Sep 2008 12:29:10 -0400

Pew Research Center has a brand new poll out that reflects some very favorable numbers for the Republicans going into the peak of the election season.

The poll shows that 'independent voters' now have an equally favorable opinion of both parties - 50% to 49% - a 1-point edge actually going to the Republicans. As recently as August, the Democrats had held an 18-point advantage over the Republicans in this very demographic; a huge gap that had previously held for over a year.

Batten down the hatches Sarah!

Drew McKissick — Wed, 10 Sep 2008 12:20:33 -0400

The game has changed. In an election of McCain vs. Obama, the race was all about Obama. Not anymore.

Win or lose, picking Sarah Palin will go down as the greatest single thing McCain has done for his own campaign, as well as for the conservative movement. Conservatives are rallying like never before to her presence on the ticket.

She’s a fiscal conservative who favors tax cuts and has actually used a veto pen. She’s a born-again Christian, pro-life, pro-family, pro-gun…she hunts, she fishes, baits her own hook, has five kids and doesn’t look like a member of the NOW gang. What’s not to like? Indeed, that, plus a record of conservative reform and demonstrated political skills on the stump and I’d say we’ve got ourselves a star. And at age 44, one with a potentially long future at that.

While attending the convention, one of my fellow delegates remarked that his young daughter, after seeing her speak, said that she was glad McCain picked a “regular” woman, and not one of those “angry women” – presumably teen-speak for an angry feminist.

She’s a conservative reformer with a smile, which makes it harder to morph her into a snarling Grinch, as the media prefers to do with conservatives.

For McCain, this was a pick that made sense in so many ways.

• First, up until his picking Palin, conservatives were focused not on him, but on their opposition to Obama’s liberal issue positions and their hopes for conservative nominees to the federal bench.

• Picking a pro-choice running mate would have divided the Republicans at worst (and guaranteed a loss this November), or left conservatives voting, but not working for McCain at best.

• McCain had been gaining support among conservatives with promises to pick judicial nominees in the mold of Antonin Scalia and John Roberts. Had he picked a pro-choice running mate, that promise would have had no credence with conservatives. The Palin pick gives them more confidence in that promise.

• Palin also helps McCain wrest some of the “change” mantle from Obama – a designation Obama has pretty much bet his entire campaign on.

• Finally, her presence in the race diminishes the novelty of Obama’s candidacy.
Politically, she’s a threat to liberal dominance of the so-called “gender gap”, which has women supporting Democrats over Republicans in past elections by an average of five to ten points. Palin does nothing if not improve that take, and there’s no chance she loses any of McCain’s share among male voters, (that whole “guy’s gal” thing).

In other words, she’s a dagger aimed right at the heart of the liberal political base, and they know it. And they’ll do everything they can to take her down.
Dozens of liberal political operatives have descended on Alaska looking to uncover (or invent) any dirt they possibly can on Governor Palin.

Their first line was to attack her experience…until they remembered Obama’s experience. They attacked her for being pro-life. They attacked her for having a child with Down syndrome. They lamented her seventeen year old daughter for her decision to get married in light of her pregnancy. They have attacked her for supporting the Second Amendment. And now they are attacking her religious beliefs as a born-again Christian, (she’s a radical!).

The liberal media attacks have been so overboard that even MSNBC had to take two of its leading anchors off of election coverage. (How over the top do you have to be to get canned by MSNBC?)

The irony of the media’s withering attacks on Palin between the day she was announced and the day of her acceptance speech is that they assured she would have a tremendous (if curious) prime-time audience to speak to. Worse yet for liberals, the American people liked what they saw, (her approval numbers are higher than either McCain’s or Obama’s)

The other risk to liberals? Much like Clarence Thomas did for blacks, Sarah Palin proves to other women that you don’t need liberals, liberalism or government to make it in life. That being the case, the left has a greater interest in destroying her than any other Presidential or Vice-Presidential pick in history.

Batten down the hatches, Sarah. We haven’t seen anything yet.

The Palin Aftermath

Gary Gore — Thu, 04 Sep 2008 16:50:26 -0400

Now that the dust has settled and all the reviews have come in, it is clear that Sarah Palin had a stellar performance during last night's convention coverage. Most all political analysts across the board agree that, not only did she do exactly what she needed to do during her presentation, but she did it with an exact precision that would be impossible improve upon. Further adding to the impact of the Palin speech and the ramifications it is sure to have on the dynamics of this presidential campaign, the Nielson ratings have now come in from last night and 37.2 Million viewers across America were introduced to the Republican vice-presidential nominee while giving one of the most highly praised political performances in recent memory.

During FoxNews' analysis of her speech, with a laugh, Chris Wallace had to remind longtime Democratic Party operative and current FoxNews contributor, Howard Wolfson, that the reason he is getting paid by FoxNews is to offer criticism and disagreement directed towards the opposing Republican Party, their candidates, and elected officials. Wolfson said, “Well, I think Senator Biden’s got to bring his 'A Game' when he comes to this debate. She gave a heck of a speech and what I was particularly impressed with was her ability to stick the knife into Barack Obama with a smile, do it effectively. She was very, very good.”

Of course, over at MSNBC, Keith Olbermann did not appear to shed any tears brought on by her speech, as appeared to occur last week in Denver following Obama's words at Mile High Stadium. But, that wasn't really to be expected anyway. There was actually a point though during MSNBC's coverage though, that I was seriously expecting some more sparks to fly between Olbermann and Chris Matthews. There was a point during the speech deconstruction where Matthews in heaping a surprisingly amount of praise for Palin stated that her presentation had an aura of a "Norma Rae" type of empowerment to it, whereafter Matthews quiped that, perhaps, it was a combination of Norma Rae and "Tracy Flick", as portrayed by Reece Witherspoon in the movie, "Election". Anyone familiar with that film is aware just how much of a snarky comment that was. With Matthews and Olberman just a few days removed from some serious on-air friction, I really thought for a second there Matthews was going to mix it up again with his on-air partner, with such a quick, sarcastic retort to the highly analytical and vast amount of praise he had just devoted to Sarah Palin.

So, despite such a commanding and poised performance to which she is being credited, it still doesn't look like some in the media are prepared to give up on the pettiness and cheap shots. And that may just play into the Republican ticket's favor. It's not really certain how much that "us versus the media" factor can play into the success of a presidential campaign. It didn't end up working for George H.W. Bush in 1992, but some say it was affective for Richard Nixon in 1968. It's unclear this early how the media's handling of Governor Palin is going to end up playing out in the longrun.

Though, we do have an early indication from Rasmussen that seems to indicate that the American voter is not taking the actions of the media in a positive manner, at all.

Over half of U.S. voters (51%) think reporters are trying to hurt Sarah Palin with their news coverage, and 24% say those stories make them more likely to vote for Republican presidential candidate John McCain in November.

Thirty-nine percent (39%) also believe the GOP vice presidential nominee has better experience to be president of the United States than Democratic presidential nominee Barack Obama.

Wow. 51% of American voters not only think that our major news media is being unfair to Sarah Palin; they actually believe that they are essentially trying to hurt Sarah Palin. That seems to be a pretty clear indication that the perception is pretty strong about what we already know about the liberal press.

As occurred last night, it was to the advantage of McCain-Palin to go into last night from the position of underdog. It surely seemed to draw the crowds to watch what was to be said in reaction to the events of the last week. If the media doesn't get their acts together and start acting like legitimate journalists, those numbers tuning in could equally relate to the numbers that take to the polls in November by way of a backlash to their clearly unfair actions we've seen to date.

***

Update: From StopTheACLU we have a bit of number crunching of the Nielson ratings that have been reported from last night.

* The Sara Palin speech generated 37.2 million viewers, just a 1.1 million viewers short of Barak Obama’s record-breaking speech on Day 4 of the Democratic Convention. The Palin speech was carried on only six networks while the Obama speech was carried on ten (including BET, TV One, Univision and Telemundo).

* Palin attracted a large female audience (19.5 million women, or 4.9 million more than Day 3 of the Democratic Convention).

* Ratings for viewers 55+ (25.2) continue to be about ten times higher than for teens (2.2)

* Day 3 for the GOP attracted more Hispanic viewers (1.4 million) than Day 3 of the Democratic Convention (1.2 million), even though Univision and Telemundo did not carry the speech.

Very interesting stuff, indeed.

Republican Convention: Day One

Drew McKissick — Mon, 01 Sep 2008 12:38:33 -0400

Day one is here, and the first thing on the agenda is Gustav watch. As a result of the storm's arrival, the first day's convention schedule was cut short and will run from 2:30 to 5:30...which means no primetime coverage tonight. Not sure what's planned to try and take up the slack from a message standpoint, but we'll see. We're assuming there will be a video message from Bush, given that he was supposed to speak tonight.

In the meatime, still get great reaction to the Palin pick for VP. Haven't run into anyone, whether RNC members, delegates or just conservative leaders in general that have any problem with it. Quite the opposite in fact. They're pretty much ecstatic and think it's a homerun, and I tend to agree.

She checks so many of the boxes that we need - and McCain especially needed - in a running mate. And the demographic angle gives the Dems fits. She's sort of like a Swiss Army knife of candidates - she's got a little bit of everything.

The other important thing about this pick is that it gives social conservatives a high level of confidence now in what type of judges McCain would appoint to the judiciary. Picking the wrong person here would have undermined any faith in his promises to appoint judges like Alito and Roberts. And given that the next President will likely be able to appoint one to three members of the high court, that issue is what will move conservatives to work on behalf of the ticket more so that anything else this fall.

VeepWatch

Drew McKissick — Fri, 29 Aug 2008 08:28:54 -0400

It's like a political version of "Survivor". All we've been hearing is who's been "voted off the island", so to speak. Pawlenty tells a reporter it's not him. Fox reports that Romney's nowhere near Ohio and not going there. So the former top two picks are out.

But now we hear that Alaska Governor Sarah Palin flew from Alaska overnight with two of her boys. Could it be Palin? Sure. She's a solid, pro-life, pro-family conservative. Picking her avoids ticking off Romney people by picking Huckabee...avoids ticking off Huckabee people by picking Romney, etc... But she is a first term governor. But then again, she IS a governor. And would be the only person on the ticket with chief executive experience.

And then there's the obvious. She's a "she". Which is aimed straight at the women out there who really wanted to see a woman on somebody's ticket...and are put out with Obama for not taking Billary. Which means Barry will spend the next few days being asked if he regrets not putting her on the ticket now.

And it would have the virtue of countering Obama's "first" (as in first black nominee), with the potential of the first female vice-president.

It would also be fun to watch Joe Biden try and attack a woman in a debate.

Personally, I still would have gone with Mitt. I think he brings more to the economic debate because of his experience. But Palin would be a solid (and strategic) choice.

More to come.

UPDATE:

Palin gave a great speech I thought. Really made a good impression (which is crucial right now, since she has such a low national profile). And did a good job showing herself to be a real conservative and a real reformer.

This does put the Dems in a bit of a box now. How do you attack her? Surely not for inexperience, as it just highlights Obama's own inexperience.

Greetings from Minneapolis

Drew McKissick — Wed, 27 Aug 2008 09:31:30 -0400

I'm up in Minneapolis for the Republican National Committee meetings this week, leading up to next week's convention and will be blogging daily while I'm up here. I've also set up a Twitter feed (sign up here) so I can pass things along between trips to the hotel room...and a Flickr feed to pass along some interesting photos. Those will be available up at the top of the homepage for the next two weeks, so check back often for updates.

For the next few days I'll be working with fellow RNC members to try and reform our primary schedule for the 2012 primaries and beyond. The general consensus is that, with so many states continuing to rush to the front of the calendar in each cycle, we're moving towards what will soon be tantamount to a national primary - which pretty much everyone agrees is an awful idea. (I've written more on that previously here and here). The problem is getting enough states to agree on the solution.

The Rules Committee meets today, so more on that later.

In the meantime, we're having a great time watching the entertainment from Denver...and waiting to see if Bubba continues to stick it to Obama tonight.

Stay tuned.

(Don't forget, you can sign up for the daily email summary feed from Feedburner, if you'd rather have these updates sent to your inbox)

Last chance to take VP survey

Drew McKissick — Fri, 15 Aug 2008 10:30:37 -0400

We've had over 1,500 people participate in the GOP "Veepstakes Survey" so far and there's only 3 days left to have your say. We'll be totaling up the results and announcing them this coming Monday morning.

So, if you haven't yet, take the survey and let us know your opinion. Who do YOU think McCain should pick as his running mate? Who shouldn't he pick? What issues are most important to you?

Click here to participate!