What REPS need to do to turn the tide

Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by Donna Holt (dljholt) on January 3, 2009 at 8:48am

Through my involvement in the Republican Party, I have come to realize that there is a distinction between those who call themselves Republicans and those who live by conservative principles. I do not wish to offend anyone with the points that I must make, as I know that many, if not most of our Republican leadership operate under the most admirable intentions. My demur lies not with this framework itself, but with the occasional lack of consideration for political principles within it.

I believe that the moral prerogative that charters the party cannot be cast aside merely at the bidding of the mechanism itself. I am of the belief that our party no longer serves principle, but is more focused on winning elections. I do not believe, as I have found many others do, that winning elections ought to be our ultimate goal. Winning an election is a means to an end, not an end itself. Our end, if it be just, is the implementation of sound policies -- those that are requisites for a free society. Certainly, the Republican Party realizes great victories in countless elections year after year, but seldom it seems are the principles that we find so reputable nearly as victorious. It saddens and concerns me that we often see that the most important standard that our candidates are held to, is one of mere victory. If this is our goal, then we really have no goal at all.

The message of America -- that of peace, liberty, and prosperity – has loosened its guard. The inclination of power, which inevitably seeks nothing but its own advance to victory has permeated our leadership. We are failing in our sacred duty of self-government, which is to offer compassionately to one another the contract of liberty, and to stand relentless in defense of the moral action which that ideal necessitates. Will we continue to mollify this decree, a responsibility as intrinsic to ourselves as the rights which it defends? If I see that my enemy is winning, my inclination ought to be to fight harder, not to drop my own flag, and lead the charge with theirs. But that is what many conservatives did in this last election. They have lost their faith in the Republican Party and of the once sacred values of conservatism that are no longer evident.

Our Republican candidates must adhere to some very basic criteria. The party must reject candidates who do not accept the fundamental precepts of natural rights, or the American notion of federalism. They must understand the moral consequences of human action as broadened to the wider sphere of economics, and the system that most effectively incorporates that action -- the free market system. We must see in them a deep respect and concern for human life, and a boundless consideration of the human spirit. They must value individualism over collectivism and statism. We should expect that they would do honor to the Republican Creed.

These candidates will be bound by their oath of office to uphold the Constitution of the United States to the best of their ability, and if that binding is weak, we should assume that their understanding of the proper functions of government is just as weak. The Constitution is not perfect nor is any human capable of being a perfect Constitutionalist. But without the constituting of a philosophically sound mandate on the purpose of government, there can be no rule of law by which justice is maintained, and no civilities by which we may improve our governance. Foremost, candidates must understand and abide by the mutual contract of liberty, the piPce de résistance of the American ideal. I believe this is a very broad and flexible set of standards.

One of the worst things that we can do is support more candidates who will dismantle and distort the message of limited government even further. There are Republicans , in name only, who show no qualms in vehemently declaring their "progressive" policies (in this context, this means Big Government). Over the years, I have preserved a portion of society's collective memory which reminds me that an alike vein of progressive "Maverick" policies brought no-holds-barred welfarism to the United States and that "Change" is what Hitler brought to Germany in 1933.

There is indeed an ideological lineage around and within the Republican party that I am proud to count myself as a subscriber to -- embraced whether wholly or in part by the likes of Barry Goldwater, Walter E. Williams, Howard Buffett, Jeff Flake, P. J. O'Rourke, Gary Johnson, Felix Morley, Robert Taft, Ron Paul, Bob Marshall, Ken Cuccinelli, Calvin Coolidge, and many others. But this gives no credence to the policy of rubber stamping.

If we are to save our Republic, it must be done by individuals such as ourselves, through education and political action. The former is my primary aim, and with the latter, I must proceed carefully. Thus, while I can vote for whomever I wish in the privacy of the voting booth, I do not want to be dishonest or misleading in my intentions. I would imagine more respect for me would be lost if I were to simply lie instead of making a principled decision that you might not agree with. It is regrettable that I cannot commit to always abide by the by-laws of the Republican Party, in particular the section that requires me to support the Republican nominee for every respective office if that candidate does not demonstrate through practice, adherence to the conservative principles that are the very foundation of our great nation and to the Republican Creed.

Permalink Reply by Larry Miller on March 21, 2009 at 10:45am

The irony of Donna's post is that the idea of setting aside principle in chasing election victory is that it has not resulted in election victory. If party leaders and consultants would only begin to comprehend this, we may start winning elections and have R victories mean something.

Permalink Reply by Phillip Whitaker on April 6, 2009 at 12:44pm

Conservatives have been vilified in recent years for what is claimed to be "rubbing people the wrong way." The pharse comes from the old farm amusement of taking a black cat into a dark room and rubbing his fur backward. Sparks and a really upset cat quickly result. There are two solutions to the "upset and sparks." Leave the cat alone is a possiblity, but what's the fun in that. The other solution is to turn the cat around. The rubbng then becomes a welcome experience for the cat the one holding him. Given the growing assault on Consittutional freedom in this country, it is not likely that we cna leave the cat alone any longer. We should either turn the cat around or expect sparks to fly and cats to howl. Rubbing a cat may be voluntary, saving our Constituion is mandatory. A return to sound conservative principles by all those who seek or hold office is an absolute necessity. That will only occur when the ones running and ruling know assuredly that their job depends on their performance. Even if they never see the light, voters must be sure they feel the heat.

Permalink Reply by Chris Winslow on May 14, 2009 at 11:39am

Branding is a corporate concept that does not fit the discussion in my view. We simply need our candidates for office both present and future to align their stances and votes with basic conservative pillars: peace through strength, promoting a culture of life, and responsible fiscal decisions to name a few. I think we do a pretty good job of this in Chesterfield County. If we take the major policy choices of this administration and Congress both now and in the future and offer the conservative alternative to the public, it is only a matter of time before Virginia is again Red. ie. When the Bush tax cuts expire, we point out that this effective tax increase will result in less investment and fewer opportunities. When Obama pushes for a single payer health care system, we educate the public of the consequences - fewer health care choices, the beginning of the end of private insurance, and much higher taxes. When Obama's defense budget cuts occur, we highlight the vulnerabilities created as a result. In short, with Virginia's proximity to DC, I think we should follow the established and historical path to victory: run against the administration.

Permalink Reply by Chris Winslow on May 14, 2009 at 12:03pm

Interesting to see both the Washington Post Editoral page (!) and the lucid George Will discussing the consequences of Obamanomics today.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/05/13/AR2...

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/05/13/AR2...

Permalink Reply by Joe Cacciotti on June 7, 2009 at 7:06pm

I agree with Larry Miller's statement on March 21 "setting aside principle in chasing election victory." And I agree with Donna's Statement on January 3 "requires me to support the Republican nominee for every respective office."

I and thousands of Voters will no longer Vote or support any candidate that will not honor and protect our US Constitution, restrict and deny any Federal Regulations, Laws, fees, etc. that infringes on Virginians Rights, requires the Federal Gov. to honor our 10th Amendment.

The problem is not so much with the Republican Party, the problem is with the candidates who will lie, mislead and go back on their word to the voters in order to get elected or re-elected.

Eric Cantor is one example who had sold out the American Tax Payers by voting YES to TARP 1, by not forcibly demanding our Boarders be protected. Representatives from both parties are skilled on paying the blame the other party or person and not accepting the blame for what they have done. Eric Cantor,who voted yes, and 421 others who voted yes and no to restricting executive pay, was in-violation of the Constitution just by placing the vote.

Americans will no longer stand silently by while America is being destroyed by our Representatives. The "Tea Party" movement is growing stronger everyday, and it is WE The People, who will be Taking Back America and not the Republican or Democrat parities.