As a young conservative I find myself very concerned about the way the country is going- in fact, I’ve been so since the middle of 2006. Obviously I didn’t expect the blowout in 2008, nor the economic circumstances we find ourselves in, but the concerns were building. Now, the Republican Party finds itself in dire straits after the departure of Arlen Specter.
Since November, and peaking yesterday and today, many liberals and Democrats have declared the Republican Party dead — and one could find reasons to agree with them. I, however, have great hope for Republicans. As Ed Feulner, The Heritage Foundation’s president, said when I was an intern at Heritage, “…there are no permanent victories in Washington.” Below is what I see as at least part of the path back to power for the Republican Party.
1) We need a leader– not necessarily a hard right-wing conservative, but a qualified, successful leader who is at least moderately conservative in the traditional fashion of small government, low-spending, low-tax, strong national defense conservatives (two examples are Mitt Romney and Rudy Giuliani). Few Republicans agree completely with either man, but Romney is amazingly successful in politics and business, and Giuliani did a good job as associate attorney general, as mayor and in business.
This part will happen eventually- I just hope sooner rather than later.
2) We need to stay away from gay marriage. If asked, we should be honest about our opinions, but most of the moderates and independents that we must attract disagree with us on this issue, and many young people (including myself) who are against it believe it’s the 50th or 100th important issue facing the country. Why should we concentrate on a losing issue that’s not going to solve the greatest problems facing the nation, especially when it’s nearly impossible to say, “I’m against gay marriage, but still think a gay person is no less of a valuable person than I am.” It’s how most conservatives feel, but it’s incredibly difficult to get that across effectively to a public that is increasingly in favor of, or neutral towards, gay marriage.
3) We need to change our rhetoric. In particular, we need to do so in three areas: illegal immigration, race relations, and the role of government.
Regarding immigration, we need to get the Hispanic vote, and we won’t do it by talking like former Congressman Tom Tancredo (whom I supported for president during the last primary). Many or most illegal immigrants are here to work, not take our welfare, health care, etc. We need to stop talking about a wall on the border — it’s alienating, and not as effective as economic prevention such as diminishing or eliminating the illegal immigration welfare program in America. We need to streamline the legal immigration process while still making certain that immigrants speak English and will be productive members of society. We also need to stop the drug cartels, gangs, and other criminals that want to cross the border by policing with more troops that are allowed to shoot. We need to show Hispanics, who tend to be socially conservative, how our view on immigration is better for them — after all, illegal immigrants badly affect the legal immigrant Hispanic population’s public image, as well as take their jobs and endanger their families.
Regarding race relations, we need to show how affirmative action is bad for everyone, particularly minorities — talking about how bad it is for whites is an old, tired argument that just won’t win minority votes. We need to use statistics like Stuart Taylor did in the February 28th edition of National Journal, which stated (among other things) that “more than half of entering black law students never pass the bar and never become lawyers” because affirmative action puts unqualified candidates into classrooms. We need to show how this helps maintain negative race relations, as whites will feel they are being ignored for a less-qualified candidate (see the current term Supreme Court case regarding firefighter standards in New Haven, CT), and blacks will feel whites are trying to keep them down (see Jesse Jackson, Al Sharpton, etc.). We also need to make sure we push for voucher systems like the one in D.C. to show minorities we ARE the better party for them, on issues from schools to families to employment.
Lastly, we need to stop saying “small government.” Though the current economic crisis was caused largely by government intervention — Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac, low interest rates, government housing programs, high government spending, mark-to-market accounting regulations, Democratic refusals to reign in Freddie and Fannie, etc.— the general population feels like Republicans caused it. Whatever we conservatives may think actually happened, we have to think about how the populace views us. We need to change the rhetoric to “effective government” and show how we can use government more effectively than liberals and Democrats. The time for privatization of Social Security, for instance, is definitely not now, despite how great a concept it is.
4) We need to bring back some of the intellectuals who believe the Republican Party is void of such thinking. Republicans have always been charged as being anti-elite, but we have scared away some of the very kinds of people who formed the core party ideals that created the last 40 years of Republican successes. With due respect to the strengths of former President Bush, Senator McCain, and Governor Palin, they are not going to bring the intellectuals back. We need to bring back to the forefront the William Buckleys, Ed Feulners, etc. of the world, as well as encourage young people like Heritage researchers Rachel Sheffield and Thomas Qualtere to take up the intellectual conservative standard.
5) Opportunities arise periodically, and we must take advantage of them. For example, right now is a great opportunity for conservatives to help with race relations, the education system, and showing the weaknesses of unions. The D.C. School Voucher debate has conservatives defending empirical data showing education for poor minorities improving against the powerful teacher unions and Democrats in Congress. This is a great opportunity (and the CATO Institute and The Heritage Foundation are taking full advantage) for us to show how we have better ideas for fixing our terrible education system through vouchers, getting rid of tenure and teachers unions, and specifically for improving the education of poor minorities, who will thereby put themselves on the path to greater employment, family, and other opportunities.
Conservatism is not dead — like liberals did after 2004, we need to find effective leaders, an effective local, state and national strategy, and take advantage of the opportunities the natural sway of politics, economics, and societal circumstances will offer us.
29 responses so far
1 Cforchange // May 5, 2009 at 5:08 am
Can’t trust your proclamation that conservatism isn’t dead – you’re missing a few key issues contributing to failure plus if you didn’t see the 2008 results coming your judgement must be based in fantasy.
Blaming government for our Wall St woes will not work. It’s pretty much vast majority agreed the past 8 years and the middle class neglect was epic. Examples abound like CEO pay @ 400:1 (CEO to staff) which is 20 times higher than comparables in the UK.
I’m no political hack and knew well in advance it was Rudy or nothing. Your inexperience and “party” based view will keep you in the minority.
2 Bulldoglover100 // May 5, 2009 at 5:33 am
Finally a position that is thoughtful and able to be utilized in an effective manner.
I agree or could support every point you made.
I do agree with Cforchange that we cannot blame government for Wall Street since to do so would only leave our country open for that abuse to occur again.
BUT
I would add one more point. We hav to stop the mindless bashing that goes on daily from those whose agenda is not helping. Our attempting to point fingers and scream about what the Obma admin. is doing when it can be proven that our party did the same thing hurts us more than we know I think. It is a different time and we have failed to understand that with the internet the lies can be used to hold us up to ridicule within seconds. Look at Michelle Bachmann. She has become a joke by not educating herself and attempting to lay blame when the truth is only a click away. Palin is also guilty of this with the lies that can be proven, and have been, within seconds of the lie being told. We must earn the respect back that our party once enjoyed.
3 ottovbvs // May 5, 2009 at 5:40 am
Ed Feulner is hardly an objective voice. The extremism of his think tank is one of the contributing factors to the malaise that afflicts the Republican today. Mr Siggins makes some good points although his diagnoses of causes is sometimes off the mark. Unfortunately I see little seen sign that the GOP is interested in moving in the direction of the moderation he prescribes.
4 brianburch // May 5, 2009 at 5:46 am
How could you NOT predict the blowout of 2008? Everyone saw that coming. Plush, there hasn’t been a Conservative in Congress since 1996.
You can’t call yourself a conservative if you approve pork-filled budgets, desecrate the human body through torture, fund proactive war or prevent liberty and civil marriage for all.
We won’t have a new majority until we acknowledge that our leaders and the mainstream conservative media led us astray.
5 krove // May 5, 2009 at 6:01 am
Hmm, problems started in 2006.
Wow that’s really convenient. I’m afraid you lost me right there. Another denyer of where the real blame lies and then more denial about the causes.
6 sinz54 // May 5, 2009 at 6:25 am
brianburch: There’s nothing “conservative” about gay marriage.
Remember: Conservatives believe in the concept of *traditional* freedom as practiced by our Founding Fathers and in the Federalist Papers. There’s nothing in the Federalist Papers about homosexuality. Or affirmative action either.
Conservatives are NOT libertarians. Ron Paul belongs in the libertarian camp, not the conservative camp. Keep that in mind.
7 sinz54 // May 5, 2009 at 6:56 am
I give Mr. Siggins credit for starting a dialogue on what specific changes to policy and rhetoric the GOP ought to make.
I don’t agree with all his ideas, but his basic goal of outreach is right.
The exit polls from the 2008 election are remarkable: McCain actually won the White vote by 8 points, and he won the Protestant vote by 9 points. Yet he lost the election by 6 points.
For the GOP, whose base is overwhelmingly white Protestant, these figures are alarming. It means that the GOP has to expand its appeal beyond white Protestants–or keep losing.
On this and other blogs, I have pleaded with GOP stalwarts to tell me how the GOP can win over blocs other than white Protestants. I have never gotten a convincing answer, other than generalized rhetoric about how GOP principles are universal. They may think they are, but it’s the job of convincing minorities of that which is never explained.
The one area I part company with Mr. Siggins on is the Black vote. I don’t think that conservatives will ever win more than a tiny sliver of the Black vote. Of all of America’s minorities, blacks are the only minority who owe just about all their advancement to Federal action. The Federal government freed the slaves, ended segregation, and instituted affirmative action. Most of today’s blacks–including Mr. and Mrs. Obama–were direct beneficiaries of those actions. And they’re going to read a message of “small government” as limiting the Federal Government’s ability to help blacks.
OTOH, the GOP must target Hispanics. Without the growing Hispanic vote, the GOP will lose the Southwest and a couple of the Western states too. Without those electoral votes, the GOP is doomed permanently.
And the GOP must target the young. In 2008, McCain received only 32% of the vote of those under 29 years of age. The GOP base, and the McCain vote, represent an older and aging part of the population. Again, that has to be turned around. I can remember when, during the early Reagan years, it was cool for young people to be conservative. Reagan’s age wasn’t a turnoff. Reagan’s optimism and sunny outlook were what turned them on.
8 Brutus1776 // May 5, 2009 at 6:59 am
krove: in Defense of Mr. Siggins, he did not necessarily state that the problems began in 2006, rather “As a young conservative I find myself very concerned about the way the country is going- in fact, Ive been so since the middle of 2006.” That might have been when he started getting involved, or perhaps the time he joined to serve our country and gained a new appreciation for politics. Thought I would point that out.
Cforchange: your additional insight was nice, but your closing was vitriolic and unnecessary. “Your inexperience and “party” based view will keep you in the minority.”
Conservatism can never be dead, the movement can ebb and flow with importance with the tide of history, but Conservatism is inherent in people who choose “the devil they know over the devil they don’t” Dustin, you point out the necessity of not just ‘being’ Conservative, but sometimes Conservatives need to learn how to apply that to governing. That is why the NeoCons which populate this website and countless others, became so influential in the movement. They, by not being so malevolent toward government, could come up with policies that were less extreme than liberal ones. A professor once told me “Conservatives cannot ask people to elect them to run the government when they run AGAINST government.” But then, if we ask Conservatives to apologize and go with government, who is standing “athwart history and yelling STOP?” Then again, according to Mr. Frum, Mr. Buckley was only referring to “Marxism as History” when he made his famous (infamous for the ranks of liberals who hound this board), and that is just not true.
In the end, I have to respect Mr. Siggin’s for having the ‘audacity’ to post on his board, name and mug shot and all. I cannot say I share that for the members who stand up as polemists while hiding behind your nifty computer names (almost as cool as Brutus1776
9 Brutus1776 // May 5, 2009 at 7:28 am
Sinz54: those are really interesting points you raise, I am really curious about your views on the Federal Government and the black vote. That is a really important point indeed. It’s important for Republicans to start articulating that just because we don’t want the Federal Government doing it, doesn’t mean that the state and local governments can pick up more slack. I think that explaining to the people of DC that electing a crack head / Tax dodging mayor is not going to help the problems at all, and as a matter of fact, every large city which is run by Democrats through and through tends to be a cespool of corruption and crime. This is not helping the black family, education, youth or anything that Americans hold dear.
10 sinz54 // May 5, 2009 at 8:25 am
Brutus1776: I thought I already explained my view. Let me try again.
Our principled opposition to affirmative action, dooms us with the black vote. The main reason why the late Jack Kemp was far more popular with blacks than the rest of the GOP, is that he broke with the GOP on this issue and supported affirmative action (wrongly, in my view).
Blacks see affirmative action as their way into the middle class.
Further, polls show that the baby-boomer generation of blacks still believes that America is a fundamentally racist society. The election of Obama has not changed their perception. And they believe that without affirmative action, blacks would go right back to being second-class citizens. So they want affirmative action maintained permanently.
But affirmative action, which honors certain minorities with the status of Protected Classes, recipients of special protection and special favors, is totally alien to our conservative philosophy of individual equality and individual liberty.
So that’s it. Write off the black vote, and look elsewhere for votes.
11 Brutus1776 // May 5, 2009 at 8:54 am
No sinz54 please don’t get me wrong. I completely understood what you were articulating in your original post. Part of it included some points of view I had not fully considered, and why I found them ‘curious.’ I was simply trying bow my head.
12 RLHotchkiss // May 5, 2009 at 10:08 am
The problems that conservatives face is that they have to come up with an alternative to unions that will result in a rise in wages for working class workers. The deal these workers made with Reagan was that they would also benefit materially from the changes that he made. This is simply not the case. Unless Republicans can actually produce wage increases, and relatively quickly unions are coming.
The Reagan generation is reaching the height of their earning power, and for a significant percentage of them their wages and benefits are going to be less than they where for their parents. Unless conservatives have an answer for this they truly face a long time in the wilderness.
“You can’t send your kids to college on ‘no gay marriage’ and you can can’t send them to college on ‘no affirmative action’, you need real income from your job.
13 sw // May 5, 2009 at 10:31 am
excellent article! Unfortunately, it will probably be attacked (or Frum, as the face of this web site, will be) by the self-involved, self-promoting talk show hosts. I cannot stand their collective whining about “life” and their imbecilic putdowns of us “moderates.” Perhaps it’s all about inflating their already artificially pumped-up book sales (“There, I said it!!”) or appearances on O’Reilly or other careerist trips. We can’t allow ourselves to be defined by these egotistical windbags, whose shows on TV as well as radio are getting dumber and dumber (i.e. Hannity and Beck). I love the wilderness — for hiking, not for politics.
14 Chrisc23 // May 5, 2009 at 11:42 am
Great article. We need more debates that will strengthen our party.
As Governor Mitch Daniels recently stated “the Republicans need to stop whining”. We lost. For now we just have to let the Democrats run the show and see what kind of ideas they can come up with. If they do come up with a health care plan, I’m sure there will be flaws and in 2010 or 2012 we can run on improving it.
People always ask me why I’m a Republican. All politics is local. My parents are Republicans so I’m a Republican. The town I live in is governed by Republicans and they do a good job of keeping taxes low and keep limited government. I look at towns and cities ran by Democrats and see a disaster. And this is how we rebuild ourselves.
Democrats have wackos, Republicans have wackos. Unfortunately we have to deal with them. Republicans need to be aggressive. Get out and meet and greet the public. Bring a stack of voter registration forms and start getting people on our side. You won’t rebuild our party by standing like a statue.
I can tell you the Democrats ARE aggressive. They go door to door and really are enthusiastic. Republicans need to do the same.
Frankly the Republican party needs to bring many new faces. Rudy Guiliani and Mitt Romney are great, but I feel they are over exposed. We need some young blood in the ranks. Get more women out there. We WILL come back. It is just a matter of how hard people are willing to work.
15 choccity2005 // May 5, 2009 at 12:00 pm
I agree in part to this article but further needs to be added.
1.Guiliani and romney are not good leaders b/c they lack one special thing…IDEAS.We need to be an Idea party.A out of the box party,even if the idea is tough,we still need to articulate those ideas.This is what was george bush’s biggest problem he could not articulate a single sentence.Newt gingrich,charles krauthammer,and david frum are idea men…..We need a leader with ideas and who can articulate them.
2.ALL Conservs need to be for civil unions,with the rights and protections for all gay people.Marriage we contend to be with a man and a woman…..but we want all who would want to enter into a civil union to be able to.Why?B/c there is a difference between men and women.So there should be a difference between a heterosexual marriage and a homosexual one but all gays should have all the rights and privileges of a marriage in a civil union.
3.Illegal immigration….We need to put the military on the Border.With the so called guns going into mexico from us as calderon has stated.The drugs from mexico going to the u.s,There needs to be a military proponent on the boarder.Or a quadruple increase in border agents.WE want to stop american guns going to mexico to kil people,and we want to stop the flow of drugs to the the U.S.Not only do we stop drugs,guns but the main purpose is we stop illegal immigration.We fine employers of illegals $100,000 per illegal we find at thier buisnesses.the employers will be given names of welfare recipients in thier district and they will go work for the companies,and the companies will reimburse the districts and thier states for the wages of the welfare workers.Those that have children here,without any other crimes…they go through mccains comprehensive immigration reform.They must all register to go through the fines,english classes and they can only be citizens after a 7 year period.If they get convicted of any misdemeanor or crime they will be deported and forfeit all thier rights.Now this plan closes the border.Reduces drugs in this country to half,lessens the burden on our prison system,helps mexico deal with the drug cartels and keeps guns out of mexico.We then deal with the 12 million illegals here.those that do not sign up for the illegal immigration plan,they will be deported when they are found.the ones that sign up have to go through hoops and keep a clean record,plus work and pay taxes for 7 years,learn english,learn the history of america and then they can be citizens.A PERFECT SCENARIO….It’s that easy.
16 choccity2005 // May 5, 2009 at 12:21 pm
4.Affirmative action:As a black man i am against affirmative action based on race.I do not want my house to be on fire and i get the middle of the class but they are a minority,i want the best.i want the best fighting in our military and i want the best in the courtrooms and on the benches.I am for economic affirmative action…If thier is a spot on a boardroom,or for a college and thier is 1 spot for two candidates,with equal grades…..the one whose parents make 40 k a year should take precedent than the one whose parents make 100 k,just b/c someone is poor and worked hard to get somewhere they should not be passed over someone wealthier.That appeals to the low end of the economy and is something they can rally to.To make strides in the black community you must go to the black community as Jack KEMp did.R>I>P.As michael steele has.This will reep rewards in the future.
5.We need to call it effective government.i agree but we also need to debate in the northeast,we need to go to the urban centers,to the ghettos,the projects……and promote conservativsm.Black churches,hispanic churches and make pamphlets and brochures of conservative candidates.The churches in the ghetto and churches in general is where LIBS…HATE TO GO.We need to galvanize the black church.We need to galvanize the hispanic church.That has not been done.Open our arms around the black and hispanic church.faith based initiatives was a great idea from bush…so promote it.School vouchers to christian and perochial schools,private schools.Take that message to the churches and the communities in the ghetto.Show parents how the teachers unions are against the learning of thier children.Show them how the democrats have controlled detroit,new jersey,L.A,Oak,San fran,conneticut,baltimore,flint michigan…for years,decades and what have they brought you…where are the JOBS!!!unemployment in 109 metropolitan areas are in double digits.All these things conservs can be promoting….screaming,put the dems on the defensive.instead we are on the defensive about gay marriage and abortion…does that make sense?Abortion….hey it’s law,i would wish there was not abortions but it is law and thier is nothing i can do but try to hasten abrotions by improving sex ed to teenagers,promoting birth control and condom use,especially on college campuses,and giving all parents the right to opt thier teenagers out of those classes if they see fit.Abortion debate dies!!
17 choccity2005 // May 5, 2009 at 12:33 pm
Like siggins said conservatism is not dead,but it is in HIDING.It’s in witness protection.the dems control the debate,the dems have us on the defensive.
6.STOP DEFENDING GEORGE BUSH!!!!i hate to hear conservs defend george bush on this economy,If a democrat had this economy as messed up or atleast not know it was getting messed up hannity and rush would be all over him and rightly so.SO now how can we sit back and defend him?I defend BUSH when i feel he was right but i critize when i feel he is wrong.It’s the same way i treat obama.That’s what conservs need….they should be the first to throw corrupt members of thier party out.the first to call to bring each other up on ethics violations,the first to break news that a representative is taking advantage of the people he represents.Then can you be called a patriot.Vitter cheated on his wife with a prostitute……If i was a member of congress i’d be calling for his removal.That destoys the perception of a good old boy party.you don’t talk about my scandals and i won’t talk about yours is a FAILED POLICy,that the dems do best.NO…Repubs should be asking for earmarks,until the national debt is clean.To stand up and say obama is wasting the tax payer money but you want a pig odor museum is the height of HYPOCRISY!!What you say on the campaign trail,you do when you are in office and if you haven’t done it in your first two terms you may not run for re-election!!!Fly coach as much as you can.SHow the country you mean what you say and you say what you mean…….i tell you this will seperate us from the dems,give us principles all can see and the whitehouse,the congress and the senate will be ours and we will never lose it again……if we follow this playbook.
18 nick@thelobbyist.net // May 5, 2009 at 12:35 pm
Enjoyed your comments, RJ.
Keep up the good work, Dustin.
19 sinz54 // May 5, 2009 at 5:37 pm
choccity2005: Actually, if you fined employers enough for hiring illegal aliens, you wouldn’t need to put troops on the border. When it comes too costly to hire illegal aliens, they’ll stop coming here.
We just saw that with this recession we’re in. As companies contracted their businesses and laid off workers and stopped hiring any more workers, the influx of illegal aliens declined. No work, no illegal aliens.
However, the dirty little secret is that our economy runs on illegal aliens. It’s what keeps the price of produce at your supermarket low.
The GOP could score if it proposed that all American agribusiness and mega-farms should automate many of their operations with robots. Don’t laugh, that’s how the Japanese are doing it. They aren’t next door to Mexico and their population is aging. So they are investing heavily in farm robots for sowing, spreading fertilizer, milking cows, inspecting eggs, etc. The more robots, the fewer illegal aliens we need.
That’s the type of far-out proposal that might turn on young voters.
20 choccity2005 // May 5, 2009 at 9:21 pm
sinz54:We do need troops(quadruple border agents) on the border.When you have sanctuary cities like san francisco that will give illegals housing,foodstamps,welfare and tuition.you need to shut down the flow itself.You have many cities that would house them.So even though they have no employment,they still have shelter,food,opportunities.
the troops shut all that down.
The troops also do 4 things:
1.Stop drugs from coming into the U.S(atleast by half).This then lessens the criminals brought to jail/prison,brings alot of organized crime to it’s knees.The main source of money for gangs is drug money.Gets alot of kids and adults off of the drugs…lessens the supply,and if anything the cost will go up.
2.Stops guns from coming from the U.S to the Drug cartels.Which helps calderon to defeat the cartels,they become less armed.If the military in mexico is corrupt they would then findout where the guns are coming from.
3.Stops illegal immigration,gives conservs cover with ideas 1 and 2 not to be labeled xenophobes.The stopping of illegals saves the nation billions in education,healthcare,welfare….etc.
4.There are millions of people on welfare in this country.They get a check every month to sit on thier backsides and do nothing.They get thier housing,food,healthcare through medicaid,daycare and actual money from the government.Set up a system where they work the jobs the illegals use to do.Make them pick the fruit,vegetables,clean the houses or whatever.then let the company pay thier wages back to the states and cities.Welfare people get thier benefits,company gets thier work,illegals have no jobs,government gets repaid some if not all for what they give the welfare recipients and it’s a win/win.Illegals have little education or skills and so do welfare recipients.
5.We shut down the border,we stop any al qaeda members from ever getting in here.We use soldiers we are paying to guard europe of all places.Cripple gangs in this country,drug cartels in mexico,lesen the burden on states and cities.Now all the illegals still here can either go back home cause there are no work for them or choose to be citizens.If they choose to be citizens they have to pay fines,learn english,go through all the immigration hoops for 7 years.
The G.O.P should pay me for that solution i just gave them.Obama should pay me…Win,win all over the board.the only people who wouldn’t like it is drug cartels,illegal lovers and american gangsters.
21 HHomer // May 6, 2009 at 5:21 am
choccity2005 I admire your enthusiasm but disagree with much of your reasoning.
The war on drugs has been lost, any success in reducing supply will merely increase profitability for the drug gangs and raise the stakes all round. The creative conservative solution is legalisation and regulation, we’d spend less on enforcement and make lots in taxes. Are you planning to close the border with Canada too? A lot of drugs come into the US from the north. The truth is a nation the size of a continent can never ‘close’ it’s borders completely.
22 sinz54 // May 6, 2009 at 7:37 am
HHomer: Schwarzenegger just opened the door a crack (no pun intended) to the discussion of decriminalization of marijuana in California.
The “creative conservative solution,” IMO, should be to propose a set of regulations, laws, penalties, etc., that are consistent with the best known theories and practices of medical science. This would also appeal to the college-educated young, who have looked at the GOP’s moral puritanism and concluded that they’re just a bunch of reactionaries.
Scientists have pretty conclusive evidence that marijuana, as it’s used by most, is both less addictive and less dangerous than either alcohol or tobacco. And there is no real scientific evidence that marijuana is a “gateway drug” to harder drugs. Millions smoke marijuana who would never touch heroin or cocaine. Including cancer patients and terminally ill patients, who smoke it for pain relief.
So why continue to treat marijuana as this menace to society requiring Federal agents to stop it?
23 choccity2005 // May 6, 2009 at 11:35 am
HHomer: I don’t see any points in which you disagred with my reasoning.First i am all for the legalization of marijuana.Cigarettes and alcohol kill more people,ruin more lives and cost taxpayers alot more money in terms of healthcare costs.I believe it should be a state right.If california wants to legalize it,then so be it.Let it be taxed and regulated.Exported even…..they are suffering bankruptcy and who are we to say no.There is no information that says it is more dangerous than cigarettes.
Now when it comes to my 5 points i wrote earlier.The troops on the borders will cut the drug trade in half.If the cartels were making 100 mil a year,they will be making 50 now.You start legalizing pot it in certain states and that hits the cartels even further.That hits the drug gangs even further.they may bring in 30 mil a year now.that’s a 70 mil dollar hit possibly more.
You are slowly destroying the cartels,now bribing officials,buying weapons,buying houses isn’t so easy.If you think the cartels are fighting now,when that pie gets smaller and smaller…..plus the pressure from the calderon governemnt,you may see them disapear alltogether.
It has been reported that close to 80 percent of the heroin,cocaine,marijuana and other drugs come from mexico.
i also believe every state should legalize gambling,Online gambling,legalize prostition designated in certain areas of the state.Regulate it,tax it,offer help with addiction and so forth.This puts the pimps out of buisness,this also cripples the underworld.the only people that are helped by not regulating these things are the underworld,cartels,mafia and street gangs.
This would give the u.s billions of dollars,in new revenue.States would be able to lower property taxes b/c of the tax money derived from it.
We have had zero solutions to these problems,the problems just get bigger and bigger.If it does not work ,laws can be made to end it.But you can’t tell me what is going on now is working.
The war on drugs then would be able to succeed.You can’t police crack,cocaine,heroin,crank,etc…..when you have a billion dollar buisness of sending drugs into the u.s.you slow down the drugs from coming in.you focus on the big harmful deadly drugs.this is how you win that war on drugs.
I’m a REALISTIC CONSERVATIVE.There needs to be more like me
24 Realist // May 6, 2009 at 12:11 pm
As long as the GOP is beholden to blowhard Rush Limbaugh, it’s not going anywhere anytime soon. The much ballyhooed “rebranding effort” is completely dead in the water after Rep. Cantor was forced to bow to his lord and master and “rebrand” his own earlier statements that it would be based on a listening tour.
And what exactly is the current function of Michael Steele at the RNC? Now that he has been stripped of any budgetary control thanks to a rebel coup by the old guard, is he anything more than a television personality?
It will be interesting to see how Steele’s insanely destructive statement that moderates are welcome to sit at the table, but not to change anything, works out in attracting more competitive candidates to sign up.
There is some hope, however, that there will be such a moderate candidate, and he may already be on the scene: Gov. Huntsman of Utah has stood up to Rush and I wish him luck.
25 dragonlady // May 6, 2009 at 10:30 pm
The majority of voters agree with Republicans on gay marriage. I would not put it front and center but I wouldn’t shy away from it either. The left certainly wontwell essentially cede the issue to them. Look at all the personal attacks against Carrie Prajean. Gay marriage should be put in the ‘change rhetoric’ column. Marriage and family is the building block institution to a civil society. How it is structured affects the entire cultural context. We should support traditional marriage because of the unique value of what a mother and father can provide to a child. Do we really want to make kids merely commodities to adult desires? If we legalize gay marriage, why not polagamy? (As a woman, I prefer we not endorse an institution where women are clearly inferior to men). It also may curtail religious freedom, even if churches aren’t forced to marry gay couples. They will be pressured to play ball, like the Catholic adoption service in Boston. Of course we should allow room for disagreement, and also respect the states’ roles in defining marriage. If a state wants to allow domestic partnerships or civil unions, I wouldnt oppose it.
Also, polls show voters prefer less rather than more govt. Effective governance can be more easily achieved with less government. Government can be more agile and responsive to the public if its lean versus a sprawling bureaucracy. Govt should focus on creating conditions for individual success, and provide temporary help in times of bad luck, not be the continual nanny to fall back upon.
26 danbmil99 // May 7, 2009 at 1:09 am
dragonlady: “We should support traditional marriage because of the unique value of what a mother and father can provide to a child.”
Ugh, what crap. Do you know any same-sex families? Do you have any idea what “values” they promote in the lives of their children? This kind of bigoted, religion-inspired nonsense is what is killing the GOP. God does not give a crap about your antique, close-minded views on what is and isn’t acceptable in OTHER PEOPLE’S LIVES.
So take your bigotry, your hate, your fear, and shove it somewhere else. True conservative values don’t need your baggage.
27 danbmil99 // May 7, 2009 at 1:12 am
BTW I think this is an excellent article. Well written, and hits just about every point right. While I am personally for gay marriage, and I believe the trend is obvious, the population is not quite there. What is critical is to stop sounding like Glenn Beck, Sean Hannity, Rush Limbaugh, and our own Dragonlady — people suffused with fear and hate and dread. It’s a downer. People want positive energy. The GOP right now is like the walking dead. No one wants a zombie over for dinner.
28 choccity2005 // May 7, 2009 at 10:17 pm
danbmil99:I agree and disagree with your points.First i love glenn beck and hate hannity.Second, As a conservative i could really care less if gays got married.I don’t want to police anyone’s bedroom.Yes there will be some people like pedophiles who will exploit it to adopt children,but thier are heterosexuals who exploit children.Marriage should be up to the states.
maine,mass,iowa,vermont all have legalized gay marriage and i support that decision.texas,florida,california,georgia…has said No to gay marriage and i support that too.
I am a christian and my bible tells me NOT to judge.So i don’t.I just believe in state rights…….I wish abortion could be apllied to that same scenario.
Some might say well slavery should of been a state right……I agree.You know why….b/c eventually throgh civil unrest all slavery would have been abolished.plus all africans were brought here against thier will.
So i totally believe in state rights…I’m a conservative federalist.This stops all the social garbage that’s going on in this country.
Your gay,and you want to get married…you go to maine and live.
Your in maine and you don’t like it…move to texas.That should be the criteria for all these social issues:
Affirmative action
abortion
legalizing marijuana
prostitution
gambling
etc…let the states decide.
NO MORE DEBATES!!
29 race42008.com » Blog Archive » A Blueprint for Republicans // Sep 29, 2009 at 9:14 am
[...] piece was originally posted on NewMajority.com on May 5, 2009. It was revised and updated for this post.) by Dustin Siggins @ 8:09 am. Filed [...]
You must log in to post a comment.