RSS Feed MenuI am an old Republican. I am religious, yet not a fanatic. I am a free-marketer; yet, I believe in the role of the government as a fair evenhanded referee. I am socially conservative; yet, I believe that my lesbian niece and my gay grandchild should have the full protection of the law and live as free Americans enjoying every aspect of our society with no prejudices and/or restrictions. Nowadays, my political and socio-economic profile would make me a Marxist, not a Republican.
I grew up in an era where William F. Buckley fought the John Birch society and kicked them out of the Republican Party. I grew up with -– in fact voted for the first time for –- Eisenhower. In 1956, he ran a campaign of dignity. A campaign that acknowledged that there are certain projects better suited to be handled by the government. See, business thinks in the short term, as he said. That’s the imperative of the marketplace. I invest and I expect that in a few quarters, I garner the fruits of my investment. Government, on the other hand, has the luxury to wait a few years, maybe decades, for a return on a given investment. As a former businessman, I know that first hand. Am I a Marxist for thinking that?
I witnessed the fight for equal civil rights in the 1960s. And as a proud American, I applauded the passage of the Civil Rights Act and Voting Rights Act, and we became a better country because of them. Those acts made America stronger. Those acts, at their core, represented and still represent all the values upon which the Republican Party was founded. Yet today, our GOP representatives and leaders are ashamed of them. When they talk about them, you feel their discomfort, their clumsiness, and sometimes their shame. That awkwardness is so strong that it crosses the television screen and hits you in the face in your living room. Why is that? What happened to this generation of Republicans? We are the party of Abraham Lincoln, and yet we act and behave as if we are the party of Nathan Bedford Forrest.
I did not like Medicaid and Medicare when they were passed. I was opposed to them. Maybe I was too young, too strong, and too ideologically confined. Yet, over the years, I saw how Medicare helped millions of elderly Americans. I saw how Medicare helped my mom in her final years battling emphysema caused by years of smoking. You have to be blind to oppose those programs. You have to be blind to wish for the suffering of millions of Americans just because you believe in personal responsibility.
As a businessman, I was torn between my bottom line and providing health coverage for my employees. I knew that if I provided them with that coverage, their productivity increases. I did my best, but the riptide of the health insurance market defeated me. And with a heavy heart, I offered them gimmicky coverages that, deep down, I knew did not provide a comprehensive and adequate coverage, but it was the only coverage I could afford.
I voted for Nixon and for Reagan. Although I did not like the deficit spending of the Reagan administration, I blamed it on and rationalized it by the necessities of fighting the Cold War. I liked Reagan — who didn’t? Even my Democrat and liberal friends liked and respected him. I voted for Clinton, twice. I thought he was the best Republican president since Ike. No, I did not make a mistake. Bill Clinton was closer ideologically to Eisenhower and Nixon than Bush I and II could ever be. I thought that Clinton practiced and articulated true Republican ideology in his fiscal discipline, job creation, smart tax cuts, and foreign policy better than anyone since Ike.
Then something happened in the 1990s. The leaders of the GOP grew belligerent. They became too religious, almost zealots. They became intolerant. They began searching for purity in Republican thought and doctrine. Ideology blinded them. I continued to vote Republican, but with a certain unease. Deep down I knew that a schism happened between the modern Republican Party and the one I grew up with. During the fight over the impeachment of President Clinton, the ugly face of the Republican Party was brought to the surface. Empty rhetoric, ideological intolerance, vengeance, and religious zealotry became the common currency. Suddenly, if you are pro-choice, you could not be a Republican. If you are for smart and sensible taxes to balance out the budget, you could not be a Republican. If you are pro-civil rights, you could not be a Republican.
It started with minorities: they left the party. Then women; they divorced the GOP and sent it to sleep on the couch. Then, the young folks; they left and are leaving the Republican Party in droves. Then, someone stood up and told my niece and my grandchild that they are not fully Americans — just second class Americans because they are homosexual. They wished hell and damnation upon my loved ones just because they are different. Are we led by priests or are we led by rational politicians? Now, we have became the party of the Old Straight White Folks. We should rename the Republican Party the OSWF rather than the GOP.
Recently, since the election of Barack Obama, common sense has left the Republican Party completely. We are in the era of craziness. As David Frum has written, a deal was there to be made over the healthcare bill. Instead, this ideological purity blinded the GOP. As LBJ said it, instead of being inside the tent pissing out, we choose to be outside the tent, pissing against the wind. And we got splashed by our own nonsense. Why did we do that? Well, when a political party shrinks its electoral based to below 30% and is composed by one demographic group, all that is left are a bunch of zealots. We shrank it by kicking out of the party those who believe that abortion should be legal but limited. We shrank it by kicking out those who believe that an $11 trillion economy, like ours, needs a strong government, not a government that can be drowned in a bathtub. We shrank it when we sanctified Rush Limbaugh, Sean Hannity, and Glenn Beck, and canonized Sarah Palin. These are the leaders of my party nowadays. How did we go from William F. Buckley to Glenn Beck? How did we go from Eisenhower and Nixon to Sarah Palin and Michelle Bachmann? I do not know. What I do know, however, is that these leaders remind of me of the leaders of the Whig Party. And if they continue on their nonsense, they will bring the collapse of the GOP.
I do not recognize myself in the Republican Party anymore. As someone said it before, I did not leave the Republican Party, the Republican Party left me. I have the same ideological positions on most of the issues that I had when I voted for Eisenhower, Nixon, Reagan and George W. Bush in 2000. However, I just cannot trust the reins of our government and nation, of this formidably complicated and complex gigantic machine that is the USA, to the amateurish leadership of the Republican Party.
We are living through tough times. We are being challenged like I have never seen America being challenged before. China is a formidable foe, and it is out there competing against us on every field and beating us on several fronts. While our education budgets are being slashed in every state across the nation, China is doubling and tripling theirs. These are the challenges and challengers that we are facing. And we need our best and brightest to lead us, not a half-term governor or radio/TV talking heads.
Maybe I am too old and too cynical, but I think the Republican party is in the last stages of agony. If nothing happens, we might win an election or even two, but in the long run we will lose America.
CentristNYer // Apr 6, 2010 at 12:13 pm
franco 2 // Apr 6, 2010 at 11:36 am
“Am I wrong here?”
Yes. You’re wrong.
“Please tell me I’m wrong that Chris Curry who voted for Clinton twice over Bush I Dole and Perot, who’s idol is Eisenhower is someone the modern day GOP should be trying to persuade, and please also tell me how. What would Michael Steele have to do to get Chris Curry nodding his head and pulling the lever for some Republican?”
It’s certainly not surprising to anyone here that you haven’t paid attention to or absorbed anything that Frum et al have written, but if you had, you wouldn’t be asking this question. This is a party that spent the last few decades sucking up to fringe groups, promoting an irresponsible economic agenda, denying widely accepted science, nominating know-nothings like Sarah Palin and Michelle Bachmann, pushing and then mismanaging two wars, making no effort to pass genuine health insurance reform, etc., etc., etc.
How much more do you have to hear? Isn’t it painfully obvious — even to you — that if the party stops doing what it’s been doing that it stands a chance of restoring its long-lost reputation for fiscal responsibility and competence?
THAT’S what Michael Steele has to do to win back Republicans like Chris Currey and Otto and me.
JimBob // Apr 6, 2010 at 12:57 pm
The GOP got beat in 2006-08 because of the Iraq war something Chris Currey doesn’t touch on. He does call himself an Eisenhower Republican but Ike used his farewell address to the nation on Jan 17, 1961 to warn the American people about the dangers of the military industrial complex. Sounds like Ron Paul.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8y06NSBBRtY
In his memoirs Reagan wrote
” Perhaps we didn’t appreciate fully enough the depth of the hatred and the complexity of the problems that made the Middle East such a jungle. Perhaps the idea of a suicide car bomber committing mass murder to gain instant entry to Paradise was so foreign to our own values and consciousness that it did not create in us the concern for the marines’ safety that it should have.
In the weeks immediately after the bombing, I believe the last thing that we should do was turn tail and leave. Yet the irrationality of Middle Eastern politics forced us to rethink our policy there. If there would be some rethinking of policy before our men die, we would be a lot better off. If that policy had changed towards more of a neutral position and neutrality, those 241 marines would be alive today.”
Neutrality in the Middle East. Sounds like Ron Paul
If Republicans want to come back they need to embrace the ideas of Ron Paul. The biggest threat this country faces is debt. That’s what the tea party people care about. They are worried about their kids and Grandchildren’s future. And rest assured we can’t begin to solve the debt bomb until we come home.
Conservative: the GOP Is Filled With Intolerant Fanatics — Party of Old White Folks « SpeakEasy // Apr 6, 2010 at 1:19 pm
[...] Read the whole piece here. Tana Ganeva is an AlterNet.org editor. Follow her on Twitter. You can email her at tanaalternet@gmail.com Share [...]
Rabiner // Apr 6, 2010 at 1:21 pm
JimBob:
“If Republicans want to come back they need to embrace the ideas of Ron Paul.”
I’d only agree halfheartedly with this sentiment. As a Democrat I love Ron Paul’s foreign policy ideas. I also hate his domestic policy ideas and don’t agree with him on social issues.
I really have to agree with Sinz on how the Republican party is acting. They’re acting like a political party that is in a Parliamentary government not a 2 party government like the United States. The reason there has never been a successful 3rd party candidate in this country and not even a new 2nd party since the 1850s is because either the Democratic party or Republican party tend to coop the ideas of these 3rd parties into their policy platforms, thus making the 3rd party unnecessary. Democrats did this by passing Social Security and thus ending the rise of the Communist party in the 1920s/1930s. We also haven’t seen a large realignment of political parties since the 1960s after the passage of the Civil Rights and Voting Rights Acts.
If the Republican party wants to become more viable in all parts of the country and not just the South one of two things will need to happen. They will need to end this lunacy of ‘purity’ and allow deviation depending on region. A Republican from New England almost has to be pro-choice to be elected. Same goes for the West Coast in statewide elections (there are rural congressional districts that vote republican). Same goes for Gay Marriage as time goes on considering the huge generational gap on the issue.
As a Democrat I’ve come to realize over time that this country needs a well functioning policy debate from BOTH parties. When one party can get all the votes from their side of the isle, it leads to policies that tend to be less moderate in nature, more racial in changing the current system and that can lead to disaster in the short and long runs. If Democrats had the idea that Republicans would of voted, even just a few, for HCR then they would of courted those Republicans over the Far Left Wing of the Democratic Party. It would of given more political cover and the same amount of votes in the end to pass the legislation. But Republicans decided to stand on ‘principle’ and complain they were left out of the process when we all knew they’d never consider voting for the final legislation.
pj // Apr 6, 2010 at 2:40 pm
I fing the article entitled ‘How the GOP purged me’ to be silly. First of all the GOP is not opposed to civil rights. But the allogation that Sarah Palin and Michelle Bachman are extremists, just indicates how far left the author is. Sarah and Michelle are very mainstream traditional Americans. Rush Limbaugh, and Glenn Beck, is this fellow ever bothered to listen to them , would know that they are very reasonable people. The point of this article, and I am afraid of David Frum, is to protray conservatives as radicals and extremists.
Chris Currey and David Frum appear to me to fit into the slice of our population who are fiscally conservative but socially liberal. They really don’t know where to fit in. But I think that the term RINO fits them pretty well, don’t you?
JimBob // Apr 6, 2010 at 2:43 pm
Rabiner, Republicans don’t have a purity test. Olympia Snow for example. What will draw people to the Republican party is getting serious about fiscal policy. Entitlements and empire are bankrupting the country. We should begin to draw down our overseas empire and start the painful process of reforming the entitlement state. How anyone can argue that Republicans opposing Obamo’s new health care entitlement is bad policy is well just naive. Republicans as usual did a lousy job of explaining it to the American people. Adding another huge entitlement right when the country is looking at trillion dollar deficits as far as the eye can see is suicidal.
New GOP = social issues state level. Fiscal discipline at the national level. New motto = Lets get our books balanced. It’s for the children and their children.
CentristNYer // Apr 6, 2010 at 3:05 pm
pj // Apr 6, 2010 at 2:40 pm
“…the allogation that Sarah Palin and Michelle Bachman are extremists, just indicates how far left the author is. Sarah and Michelle are very mainstream traditional Americans. Rush Limbaugh, and Glenn Beck, is this fellow ever bothered to listen to them , would know that they are very reasonable people”
This is parody, right?
Sunny // Apr 6, 2010 at 3:12 pm
pj wrote:
“But the allogation that Sarah Palin and Michelle Bachman are extremists, just indicates how far left the author is. Sarah and Michelle are very mainstream traditional Americans.”
I’m sort of curious how you define mainstream.
“But I think that the term RINO fits them pretty well, don’t you?”
I’m also curious if you could provide a concise definition of RINO. Not looking for Republican in Name Only, but essentially what qualities you consider critical and necessary components of “Republican,” and how the two people you mentioned fall outside that paradigm.
ksana // Apr 6, 2010 at 3:22 pm
I am new to this blog and really enjoy the intelligent diversity of opinions so reminiscent of the old days of the GOP and its conservative wing. This is one of the best pieces that I have read in a long time. It completely mirrors my feelings and my experience, including the exact moment when I crossed the line, abandoned the Republican Party and voted for Clinton for President. It is very reassuring to realize that one is not alone and that there are others out there who are disgusted with the tone, the rhetoric, the stupidity and narrow-mindedness that has taken root in the GOP today. Is there hope and light at the end of this dark tunnel? I don’t see it, but hope that I am wrong for the sake of our country, our children and grandchildren.
Rabiner // Apr 6, 2010 at 3:58 pm
JimBob:
“Rabiner, Republicans don’t have a purity test. Olympia Snow for example. What will draw people to the Republican party is getting serious about fiscal policy. Entitlements and empire are bankrupting the country.”
I’m looking for the rule rather than the exception. The Republican Party demonized Olympia Snow as a RINO for her willingness to try to make the HCR bill more conservative and more to her liking. This should of been the way the Republican Party approached health care but they decided to take the Jim Demint approach of trying to ‘break Obama’. The Republican party needs to stop being perceived as the home of “Southern Evangelicals” if it wants to appeal widely to the other regions of this country.
Social issues have alienated voting blocs such as Jews, Muslims, Homosexuals, pro-choice women and youth. I mention youth since they tend to be far for libertarian on social issues than the Republican Party and thus agree with Democrats on more of these issues it seems. Their immigration policies and rhetoric that came out of 2006-2007 alienated Hispanics. It isn’t like Republicans are changing with the demographic shifts or the cultural shifts in this country.
Pj:
Michelle Bachman and Sarah Palin are so irrational on so many issues I tend to wonder how they were ever elected or reelected to public office. Another I’ve find so loony would have to be Steve King of Iowa. When public officials start telling their constituents to not fill out the US Census or that if we had listened to him and abolished the IRS then a crazy guy wouldn’t of flown his plane into an IRS building it’s then time to stop listening to them and vote them out of office. I really wonder how a majority of citizens in their districts really believe them, are willingly ignorant and just vote party line or Democrats haven’t had to desire to field a candidate that can tie their own shoes?
franco 2 // Apr 6, 2010 at 4:22 pm
It’s really funny to see a bunch of people like CentristNYer the author Chris Curry and others who aren’t Republicans lecture people who are actually INCLINED to vote for Republicans over Democrats, on what we should be doing.
They way they talk you’d think that the GOP hasn’t won an election in decades, and they are begging Democrats to take them back like jilted lovers. Sorry girls, we aren’t interested in you, you can stop trying to tease us – it just looks bad for you.
VA NJ MA are the three most recent elections. You might want to try to understand the trend lines. Polls are not looking good for Democrats either individually or generically. Your leader Obama is finally revealed to be so vapid that even the press acolytes are beginning to wonder. I wouldn’t be surprised if by 2012 Obi-won will have a D challenger in the primary.
These folks also write as though the GOP is the only party that ever was irresponsible and overspent. They write as though the Democrats haven’t morphed into socialists , like THEY are mainstream. Guess what. They are the fringe and the radicals.
News bulletin to you clueless drones: We don’t need you. We don’t need you at all. Your party, the DEMOCRATIC party, will lose historically in 2010 . The American people have discovered that, as bad a the Republicans have been, the Democrats are worse! You will lose the House of Representatives and possibly you Senate majority. Harry Reid is going down to ignominious defeat. Specter will be replaced by Toomey.
My God you folks win two election cycles and you get delusional.
captn // Apr 6, 2010 at 4:36 pm
Rabiner
The fight McCain is facing right now is a fine example of what has happened to the Republican Party recently. How anyone can really believe that McCain is not conservative is beyond me, but he is in the primary fight of his life. If he wins the nomination he will take the the seat easily, since he is very popular among the general electorate. His challenger, however, could very easily lose the general election, especially considering that Arizona has become more moderate in recent years. And that’s to say nothing of the large Hispanic population, which has recently left the party in droves. Once again, the right wing of the party could “win” the primary, only to lose the seat in the general election. (The ultimate irony would be if McCain ran as an Independent, and they lost the race to him. Which is what happened to the Dems with Lieberman.)
I want to pose again a question I asked earlier, and I’m interested in hearing from those who used to be Republicans but find the party too severe for them now. Do you see anybody on the national scene who can sculpt the party platform in such a way as to not alienate those on the far right, but still appeal to moderate voters?
Jill // Apr 6, 2010 at 4:38 pm
I agree with this article. I’m currently 30, and sadly, I was unaware until late into adulthood that being ‘conservative’ actually meant supporting LESS government involvement overall! I know many other liberal/democratic leaning people as well who do not grasp that the GOP was originally based on increasing freedom. The blend of lower gov’t regulation of the economy, combined with the increased trend in the ’90’s and ’00’s of conservative focus on limiting personal liberties (gay marriage rights, abortion, etc.) led to the overshadowing of what the GOP did used to stand for.
I am sick of the debate on both sides. Just looking through the comments posted here (Democrats blah blah blah, Republicans blah blah blah) leaves me feeling irritated and apathetic. I don’t care about what “Republicans” think or “Democrats” think, I care about the most logical, reasonable solution to a particular issue. I care about seeing politicians meet in the middle, and none of the comments on this article make me think it’s ever going to be possible.
Ravi.J // Apr 6, 2010 at 4:44 pm
Mr. Currey,
You were with GOP when it took a wrong, tight right turn. You were all along with GOP until it reached end of road in a cliff. Now, why are you complaining about those who drove you there? Couldn’t you have used the same prudence earlier to prevent from GOP from becoming what it is today? Why complain and blame others when you were very much part of that bandwagon? For e.g., I can’t recall you ever writing how stupid and criminal it was to drive this country into a war with Iraq!
Rabiner // Apr 6, 2010 at 4:48 pm
Captn:
That is a perfect example. McCain seems to be running such a terrible campaign though. Especially his current revelation that he’s never considered himself a ‘Maverick’ even though it is on his memoirs and was how he marketed himself in the 2008 presidential campaign in interviews and tv advertisements.
I can’t answer your second part since I’ve never been a Republican and honestly I’ve lived in a Congressional District that has been so Gerrymandered that no Republican has ever attempted to run seriously for office. If you were wondering my current Congresswoman is Diane Watson (D-CA) who I’ve never liked since I saw her debate during a special election in 2001 after the death of our former representative. I’d of considered voting for Mitt Romney had he maintained his positions that he stood for as Governor of Mass instead of changing all his positions to cater to Republican primary voters.
I’d of considered McCain if 1) he wasn’t 72 years old and probably ‘older’ due to 5 years as a POW since he nominated Sarah Palin as VP, 2) he understood economics, 3) during the campaign he didn’t let Sarah Palin alienate urban areas by saying over and over that there were ‘Real Americans’ and other Americans. That isn’t to say I’d of voted for him but I made my decision eventually in Debates. If you were curious I voted for Bill Richardson in the Democratic Primaries due to his foreign policy and executive experience as governor of New Mexico.
Sunny // Apr 6, 2010 at 5:05 pm
“It’s really funny to see a bunch of people like CentristNYer the author Chris Curry and others who aren’t Republicans lecture people who are actually INCLINED to vote for Republicans over Democrats, on what we should be doing.”
Okey doke.
I’ve been voting since 1984, the first year I was eligible.
I’ve never voted for a Democrat (though I think I did cast a protest vote for a Libertarian one year, when I was sure the Republican candidate would take my state even without my vote)
I live in a reliably red state.
I was raised Christian, and remain one.
And I’m watching my party cannibalize itself.
My leanings tend to mirror Mr. Currey’s, though I didn’t vote for Clinton. Still, I’m conservative enough and small-government enough to wonder what business it is of the feds if two people of the same sex want to form a binding contract together, pledging mutual fidelity and shared assets. I’m conservative enough and small-government enough to hate abortion, but wildly hate the idea that any young girl has to explain to some government entity that she’s been raped, or abused, or is age 11, so she can get permission to have some control over her body. I think Condi Rice, in her characteristally understated way, said she was mildly pro-choice — which fits me. I’m educated enough to believe that evolution is supported by a mountain of evidence, and the strength of my faith does not depend on insisting on a 6000 year old earth. Further, I think public schools should be teaching science, which is following the evidence where it leads, not deciding what the result will be and tailoring the evidence to suit it. I’m against amending the Constitution to bring it more in line with God’s law, though I think Huck, too, is a likeable fellow. I’m against the new placement of the 10 commandments on public buildings, though I think an historic exception should be carved out for older monuments which, at the time of their placement, were intended to demonstrate commonality — like the monument donated by the Jewish community in thanks for the local boys who served and helped to liberate Dachau.
I realize that “socialist” is simply defined as either state ownership of the means of production, or state control over privately owned means of production — and that that means our schools, roads, prisons, public utilities, teaching hospitals, and fire departments are “socialist”. We live in a mixed economy, so the question doesn’t stop when you tell me something is socialist — it stops after we’ve discussed whether it should be.
I think Mr. Obama is a likeable fellow, and I’m delighted that he’s a living exemplar of an African American male who maximized his education opportunities, and married the mother of his children *before* he started having them — and stayed married. I don’t have to hate him to wildly disagree with him. I don’t think he’s the antichrist, a Machurian candidate, or a Muslim, and I’m firmly convinced he was actually factually born in Hawaii. I found it disconcerting that the early objections to him was that he was both a radical Muslim AND that his Christian pastor was so offensive. I disagree strongly with some of his policies, but expected to — he’s a Democrat. I’m not a Tea Partier, though the debt scares the snockers out of me, too — I’ve just never been able to surrender enough of my self-will to participate in a mob.
Here’s the deal.
I don’t _care_ what the Republican party does. If a candidate is strong on the issues I feel strongly about — strong defense, strong economic principles, a big focus on how to help small businesses, rule of law, the 2nd amendment — then I might vote for them. The party will do what the party will do; when enough people decide to stop sending donations, maybe they’ll get the memo. Until then, there’s a great deal of freedom in NOT feeling like I’m tacitly supporting positions I disagree with simply by virtue of membership.
JimBob // Apr 6, 2010 at 5:09 pm
No Rabiner, the health care bill is a disaster. Democrats weren’t looking for any compromise. They see it as a naked power grab. Even Warren Buffet an early Obama supporter said the last thing the country needs is another entitlement program. Real health care reform would have focused on more capitalism and less government as the way to control cost. Being able to buy insurance across state lines. Vouchers for the poor so they could purchase insurance. Instead we get a Mitt Romney style reform and the state of Mass is going broke because of it. Obama care will bankrupt the country.
CentristNYer // Apr 6, 2010 at 5:13 pm
franco 2 // Apr 6, 2010 at 4:22 pm
“VA NJ MA are the three most recent elections. You might want to try to understand the trend lines.”
Yes, and the GOP won these three contests by doing exactly what Frum and others have been advocating here: IGNORING the radical right and moving toward the center with credible, reasonable candidates. By contrast, the tea partiers and right wing nuts who backed Doug Hoffman over the more moderate Republican in NY-23 suffered a huge loss in a district that had been reliably conservative since the 19th century.
(It also didn’t hurt that the Democrats ran awful candidates in all three states who badly damaged themselves.)
So, yes, franco, please tell us all about these “trend lines.”
Van Carter // Apr 6, 2010 at 5:16 pm
Mr. Franco,
The trouble is not the electoral success of the GOP in the near term, it is confronting the long term electoral hurdles which confront it.
The sophistry and bitter rhetoric currently being utilized by the GOP in the persons of Frank Luntz, the operatives of FreedomWorks and in some cases the GOP leadership are serving to alienate sizable tracts of the U.S. electorate.
It is a fact that changing demographics will diminish the power of white voters and older voters to determine the outcomes of elections. If the GOP continues to operate in the manner it has these past 18 months, the party will consign itself to a perpetual minority status.
Oh, and please examine the statistical realities of the Democratic Party losing the senate and the house. Last I looked there is about an 8% chance of the GOP losing the Senate and I believe about 20-25% of losing the House. Further, the presidency will not be changing for at least 2 more years after the 2010 mid-terms and continued obstruction the result of near-sighted ideological purity will only result in greater use of majority tactics such as reconciliation to pass legislation that will be less and less conservative as conservatives marginalize their ability to effect legislation.
Rabiner // Apr 6, 2010 at 5:18 pm
Sorry but buying insurance across state lines should be decided by the States. They have the power to relegate what types of insurance can be bought and sold in their states. Also if you could purchase insurance from another state and that insurance didn’t have to meet your state’s requirements on quality of the insurance plan then we would all get the worst available insurance quality from 1 state. It would be a race to the bottom basically.
The HCR bill was not government centric or there would be a public option. It does increase regulations on insurance companies which nearly all people could agree were necessary. I’m more in line with Frum’s point of view about the funding of hte program could be changed and that would be a good change to have but the goal and outcomes of increasing insurance access and attempting to lower insurance costs is a good goal.
Van Carter // Apr 6, 2010 at 5:18 pm
Lacking the ability to edit, I note a mistake in my 4th paragraph. Obviously the Democratic party currently controls the Senate and the GOP has about an 8% chance of gaining a majority.
captn // Apr 6, 2010 at 5:22 pm
I supported Hilary in the primaries, but I didn’t have any qualms about voting for Obama later. Obama doesn’t have a wealth of experience, but hes sharp as a tack. I value intelligence and policy knowledge over experience. Hilary, for that matter, doesn’t have that much experience either, but her grasp of policy is impressive. And I miss Bill
As for McCain, I’ve always liked him, but I wouldn’t have voted for him for policy reasons alone. His pick of Palin was just plain scary. As you point out, hes an old guy, and the chances of him dying in office are not small. A President Palin would have been a disaster. Her lack of even basic policy knowledge was breathtaking. How can any Republican, or any candidate for Federal office, not know what the Bush doctrine is. It was the defining foreign policy element of the Bush administration.
I should add, if I were an Arizonan, I would probably vote for McCain, just as I voted for Snow when I lived in Maine. Congress has so many members that the ideology of any one isn’t as important as how well they represent their districts. Presidents, on the other hand, have the power to broadly shape the policy direction of the entire country.
franco 2 // Apr 6, 2010 at 6:50 pm
Sunny,
I am not a GOPer. I sympathize with them and I’m very wary of Democrats which you seem to be considering you generally vote GOP or Libertarian. I am a kind of anomoly but I don’t feel alone in my vies (perhaps here)
The gay marriage thing doesn’t interest me. I think perhaps the State should end all subsidies to marriage and leave it at that – but of course that will never happen. I see the gay marriage issue as phony politically . It’s a deliberate wedge issue to force Republicans into a spot. There are still lots of traditional people in this country. That is a good thing. They hold this country together they work hard and they are people of faith – good people. For the most part they aren’t bigots and to claim that someone who holds a traditional view is homophobic or bigoted is actually quite bigoted and unfair. I don’t see these people venting at mosques where they REALLY hold traditional views. I don’t see these people putting down Mexicans and South Americans as homophobes and bigots because they are against gay marriage. They don’t disparage Chinese people or the regime for forbidding it.. Wanting to keep traditional values like marriage isn’t bigotry.
Another reason it is a phoney issue is because it affects a TINY portion of the population maybe 1%.
Face it how many gays really want to get married? Not someday…now? Not that many. I have a lot of gay friends they just want OTHER gays to be able to get married. Thay want that stamp of approval from the culture. I grew up counter-culture and I’m all for expressing oneself outside the culture. Create you own religion./ Stop with this “fairness” crap. Life is unfair, but there are many things that make it rich. Don’t force everyone else to conform to you, that’s pretty boring. Lots of people use it as an example of Republican bigotry, that’s why it has become such an issue. I’m sorry I’m just not moved.
Abortion is another difficult subject. I participated in two abortions and the second one really threw me – and I’m a guy! It’s not pretty. Once you have kids and see ultrasounds and the fact that your kid has the same “personality” as the ultrasound, it’s pretty clear, regardless of religion, that abortion may just be wrong and selfish. Nevertheless abortion is one of those issues that isn’t going to change much and all the arguments are peripheral like late-term abortions parental notification etc. Each representative can have his own nuanced views, and by the way there are many Democrats who oppose abortion and the ancillary issues surrounding it, so it isn’t a purely partisan issue.
Just because some folks who don’t believe in evolution tend to vote Republican doesn’t mean that Republicans don’t believe in science. There are LOTS of whack-jobs who vote for Democrats too.
My main problem with folks here like CentristNyer and others is the idea that Republicans need to go after votes “in the center” and abandon their base. The base is there and it isn’t going away. The fact is there are way more votes in the base than these phantom centrists. They don’t exist. Frum and friends are chasing after a phantom and want to abandon real voters.
There are things Republicans do that I am fighting as well. In fact I did not vote for McCain because Republicans crammed him down our throats. I would have voted for almost any other except Huckabee.
Speaking of Huck if you have a libertarian streak you should avoid Huckabee. He’s a theocrat. He’s a “do-gooder” and he actually likes to use State power to regulate all kinds of things. He is also a phony, a complete phony. But this post is long enough…some other time..
franco 2 // Apr 6, 2010 at 7:04 pm
But I couldn’t bring myself to vote for Obama because he’s a leftist. Leftism is the real threat. It always ends up at the same place tyranny. That’s because in order for the society to run properly according to the government people need to be coerced. We can see it happening before our eyes in Venezuela. Here it is close to the tipping point once there it will be rapid. That’s because socialism is already here and once a certain point is reached, there is no going back. I don’t know if they have gay marriage or abortion on demand in Venezuela and Cuba, but I think people are much freer here in a free country. OK you can’t get married if you are gay. Big frikin deal.
MikeB // Apr 6, 2010 at 8:30 pm
I feel very much the same as Currey. I didn’t vote for Clinton, I don’t think I ever voted other than Republican until 2008. I kept thinking the fringe had no where to go but with us fiscal conservatives. Then I watched George Bush the younger start with a budget in surplus and run up higher deficits than ever and I realized that the GOP had no interest in fiscal conservatives and I was the one they thought had no where to go. Emergency Rooms in this country are required by law to treat everyone regardless of ability to pay. Requiring people to purchase insurance to pay for that treatment is far from socialism. The fact that so many Republicans have a problem with that bit of personal fiscal responsibility illustrates why they consistently grow the federal deficit. Look at a graph of the deficit as a percentage of GDP. It drops steadily from World War II until Reagan gets elected and then it skyrockets until Bill Clinton gets elected when it starts to drop. Then George Bush the younger gets elected and off it goes again. If Republicans are supposed to be conservative its totally unclear what it is they’re conserving.