In the wake of the Nationwide Tax Day Tea Parties, conservative groups and the GOP are asking, "What's next?"
Here's my answer: It's time to reform the Republican Party so that it is more convincingly responsive to the concerns of those who were at the Tea Parties.
Conservatives understand that government is inherently greedy, that big government is destructive, and that redistribution is unfair. On these key issues, the Republican Party is out of touch with mainstream conservatives and out of step with most voters. The Democratic Party simply ignores our demands for fiscal responsibility or uses the issue as pretense to cut spending on national defense and to increase taxes on those who are already bearing most of the burden. This is why the Tea Party Protests came to be.
If the GOP does not quickly align itself with those who are serious about fiscal responsibility, it will find itself walking down the path to extinction. This will open the door for the growth of right-of-center third parties who will splinter the conservative vote. As a result, the Democratic Party will solidify its power, move further to the left and impose socialism on this nation.
If we do not act decisively, future generations will pay a great price.
What do you think?
More
After the April 15th Tea Parties...what's next?
Afterburner: The Cost of Media Bias
Read This: Obama muddles torture message.
One Hundred Million Dollars! Is Obama watching Austin Powers movies?
17 comments:
Sorry to disagree, as I agree with most of what you write here, but the Republican Party is basically done for.
As a Tea Party goer, I'm for pure Conservatism, not the Neo-conservatism of the new Republican Party. (Whatever it stood for in the past, it is now gone.)
For me, it's the Constitution or nothing.
Besides, I don't believe all that much in parties, anyway; neither did George Washington.
The only benefit of political parties is the congregation of like-minded people, nothing more.
I voted for Welcome back Carter, who is now polling at 88.7%.
What's your defintion of "neo-conservatism" Son3?
John Adams didn't really believe in parties, either, & he ended up being fragged by his de facto Federalist party & anachronistically steamrolled by Jefferson's Democratic Republicans.
Son3: Let me qualify my remarks below by saying I'm not a member of the GOP.
If we conservatives are going to get things moving in the right direction, we'll do it by taking over the GOP...not by building a whole new party from scratch. It's infinitely easier to work with existing political networks.
If the Republicans go the way of the Whigs, several parties will compete to fill the vacuum: the Libertarian Party, the Constitution Party, and of course, the Democrats and others. In the end the Democrats would emerge much stronger, and there would be no hope for conservatism in America.
I sympathize with the "constitution or nothing" sentiment. We have a beautiful constitution, and we'd all be much better off if we would actually adhere to it. I want to see us move in that direction. But we have to have to take in steps. Even a revolution progresses in a step-wise fashion.
Bottom line: to get anything done, we have to build consensus to build majorities and win the battles we need to win. To that end, we have to rely on the power of political parties. They're a necessary evil.
ADF: Carter is coming in a lot stronger than he did back before the inauguration. I'll be posting a comparison of the results at the end of the month.
Tough one here for me too, I was an emphatic republican when I was young and up to the 94 congress. When I became more aware of the party I was gradually very dissafected and like Son3 just considered myself a conservative/libertarian, I did vote for McCain but my guy was Ron Paul. Anyway I don't really have any faith in the party, I wish I did....
With what we have for Republican leadership in the House and Senate today, I'd say more conservatives are republicans just be default. Even voting for mcCain would have been a TRAVESTY if he hadn't been running against a FAR FAR WORSE travesty!
hey, RightKlik...your remark about you leaving Obamanation if someone paid you, at my site, CRACKED me up. Great point.
Okay, I can see that we're on the same page here, so there's little disagreement.
The thing is, the American people are sick to death of party-politics, sick of the Left/Right paradigm, sick of the two-party system, and aren't going to put up with either party. That is what I garnered from the Tea Party I attended.
I understand about splintering the Conservatives' votes with third-parties, but what choice do we have? Elect Stalin because Hitler is too much of a Socialist?
We are tired of professional politicians using their party to mooch off of us; third-parties are usually run by people who are fed up with professional politicians.
The two-parties are two sides of the same coin; they've got a monopoly.
Maybe you could try to reform and run-out all the crooks and traitors from the Republican Party, but would that fix our country?
I suppose my true point is we aren't going to get our country back with party-politics, even if we get it back at all.
I don't think we should give up, not at all, but we've lost so much freedom, I don't think they'll let us take it back.
I'm going to run for local office someday, but if that doesn't work, one's alternatives are few.
Maybe I'm way off, after all, I'm only 17, but I feel like I've fallen into a rabbit-hole into a world of nonsense. Nonsense everyday, everywhere, with no end in sight.
ADF: I would define Neo-conservatism as an umbrella term for the policies and opinions of those who would call themselves Conservatives, but are actually against the basic principles of Conservatism.
The eventual incremental incorporation of certain erroneous ideas or policies into the Conservative mind-set eventually corrupts the very word "Conservative", until it becomes a different ideology altogether: Neo-conservatism.
For instance, Sean Hannity, who would call himself a Conservative, is for the Patriot Act, an extremely un-American and anti-Conservative piece of legislation that removes all expectations of privacy from ordinary citizens; this makes him a "Neo-conservative".
Left Coast Rebel: Ron Paul was mine, too, but McCain's at the other end of the spectrum!
Ron Paul has no speaking talent, that was his problem; he has the politics and the brains for it, but he hasn't the charisma.
First of all, I get a chuckle out of your photos!
We have to support strong candidates for Congress in 2010. Especially the House where every member is up for reelection. Volunteer for your local candidate, start in the primaries, if your chosen candidate doesn't win the primary, bite the bullet and support the Republican regardless. Nothing is perfect, and in seeking the perfect candidate we ended up with a liberal congress and BO (barack not the dog) in the White House.
LCR: Even Reagan had to make compromises that still make us cringe. Lesser leaders are bound to disappoint us sorely.
Moving forward we have to rely on our principles...not in parties or politicians.
Z: I said I'd never vote for a Democrat, but when faced with the possibility of a Socialist president (Obama), I caved in and cast my vote for the Democrat RINO (McCain).
Son3: Two parties would be enough if they were both committed to upholding the constitution. The only way that would happen is if the voters demanded it.
The blame for our problems rests with the voters who are undereducated and under-involved politically. I think the tea parties have been an encouraging first step in correcting these problems.
Another point I would emphasize is that even in the best case scenario (conservatism makes a comeback), conservatives who disagree on important issues will have to come together under the same tent and live with some uncomfortable differences. And building the consensus we need will require us to prioritize the issues.
GJ: I agree. The time to start working diligently for the 2010 elections is yesterday. And I do think we'll do better in 2010.
that is easy, raise money and vote especially on a state and local level since control of state houses will be all important with the census in 2010.
Great pic of the messiah-in-chief in the bumper car!
Great comments here. Son3 is only 17? Let me know when you start your campaign! But until Son3 is president, or Texas actually secedes from the Union and allows me to immigrate there, I'll take Gingrich in the interim. He had me worried when he went all "global warmings" with Hillary, but now I think he was just playing the game all along.
RK, I agree with some points, but disagree with others in here. But it essentially comes down to (just my opinion here...) ALL of the people in Washington have reached a level of greed that will never be overcome unless we can somehow get a viable THIRD PARTY.
The Liberal party, the Green Party, and those like that are not powerful enough to do this, and the way the Dems/Repubs in power have written the rules, it is next to impossible for that to happen.
A great idea that has been going around on talk radio (usually around election time) is the NO INCUMBENT idea. I'm all for that.
And, I live in Texas, and I'm wondering...was Gov. Perry just puffing out his chest? Next year is an election year, and he's proven in the past that he'll say whatever it takes to get re-elected (Hey Gov, where is the fence you preached about? Oh yeah, AFTER getting elected you said it was preposterous for Texas to pay for what should be a federal issue.)
The problem with Republicans today is that they are totally cowed by the very liberally biased press.
A candidate preaching the virtues of conservatism is skewered at every possible opportunity.
To be fair, it's not all the MSM's fault, but way too many Americans are voting for "free stuff" and the politicians know it. It seems like a free-for-all with too many grabbing all they can get at anybody's expense.
Yes, the biggest problem in America is the fact that it's full of brainwashed idiots. (Present company excluded.)
We must reclaim our culture; our survival as a free nation depends upon it.
DaBlade: I'll keep you posted! :-)
RV: Yes, that's a very important point. This is a fight that will require a lot of effort and resources at every level of government.
DaBlade: I'd certainly take Gingrich over Obama.
HarryO: I'm not opposed to the emergence independents and third party candidates, but we have to be very careful about how and when we allow that to happen. Let's remember that Bill Clinton probably owes his success in '92 to Ross Perot, and George Bush can thank Ralph Nader for his help in 2000.
Right now, defeating Obama and his socialist friends has to be our top priority. If a good conservative third party can start building from the ground up by winning a few seats in Congress, more power to 'em. But for now, in the key races, conservatives have to draw on the resources of the Republican Party.
Yes, the GOP is a big mess, but cleaning house is easier than building a new one. And we don't have the time or any of the other resources that we would need in order to build a party that could seriously compete with the Democrats within the next 2-4 years.
Thinking back on the elecion in 1992, consider the following possibilities in 2012:
A:
Obama 43.0%
Republican 37.4%
Third Party 18.9%
B:
Obama 49.3%
Republican 50.0%
Cube: That's definitely another important point. We need to promote Republican candidates who aren't as interested in media approval. That seems to have been one of McCain's worst flaws.
Son3: I'd say about half of all registered voters are in dire need of civics lessons.
Right on. We can't afford another Ross Perot. A third party would guaranty dem control of the country. I don't like our two party system, but I don't see any way to fix it without losing what little power we have left.
It's time to reform the Republican Party so that it is more convincingly responsive to the concerns of those who were at the Tea Parties...spot on my friend!!!
KE: Yes, unfortunately our political system only allows for two dominant parties. It just doesn't work the way a parliamentary system does. The poly sci majors can say a lot more about that than I can.
So we're stuck with what we've got. And as long as the libs have the upper hand (with control of both houses of Congress and the White House) conservatives can't afford to experiment with third party options.
WHT: I don't know if the GOP has woken up to that fact yet...so now we just push harder.
Post a Comment