“The Republican Party doesn't have a Tea Party problem; the Republican Party has a Conservative problem!” ~ Rush Limbaugh
As the bin Laden stories begin to subside, the media is turning its attention towards their extremely subjective bias that Republicans are in tatters and Obama in undefeatable. Now, if Republicans would coalesce as a principled lot, this absurdity could be fought efficiently and effectively. Unfortunately, we have wavering Republicans who are still caught up in the go-along-to-get-along establishment mentality.
In an effort to reclaim the majorities they once enjoyed, some Republicans are starting to forget the message of November that was integral in giving them the necessary kick-start. Regaining leadership cannot simply be about power alone, but PRINCIPLE must accompany that power handed to them only by the People, else all will be for naught. And if there’s one block of voters that hold their elected representatives to a higher accord, it is conservatives.
The liberal media would also have you believe that the only viable option conservatives have in not only the coming presidential election, but practically any piece of legislation proposed, lies within ‘moderation’, which is simply code for ‘caving’. So starting with the latter…
With the impending debt ceiling battle rapidly approaching, some Republicans are beginning to get weak-kneed when it comes to demanding principled budget reforms of both fiscal and social origins (yes, believe it or not, both make up ‘conservatism’…we’ll return to this in a moment). Here we’re presented with a near perfect scenario for negotiation: Ryan’s budget and a possible constitutional balanced budget amendment (ala Mike Lee), in exchange for raising the debt ceiling on an exhorbitant tally already. Raising the ceiling in exchange for responsible future budgeting…sounds reasonable, huh? J. Robert Smith informs us in an American Thinker piece that, “In the last couple of days, news reports have it that both House and Senate Republicans are wavering on Paul Ryan's proposal to reform Medicare.” Smith continues…
"Seems that focus-group and survey research driven Republicans would rather work with Senate Democrats and President Obama to arrive at small, largely cosmetic, budget cuts and formulas than lay down "markers" that boldly contrast GOP positions on spending and the role of government. Voters deserve to know that there are stark differences between the parties - if, in fact, stark differences exist."
This spinelessness is reaching all the way to the chairman of the tax-writing panel (Ways and Means Committee) of Congress. Rep. Dave Camp says, "I'm not really interested in laying down more markers, I'd rather have the committee working with the Senate and with the president to focus on savings and reforms that can be signed into law." Smith concludes, and I’d agree:
"Congressional Republicans are making a huge political miscalculation with their "Let's join hands with the President and Democrats and work together" approach. This may seem to satisfy voters in the short run, but come 2012, when the GOP needs to present a record of strong contrasts between Democrats and themselves, nothing meaningful will exist. A record of timid budget cutting and mere baby steps (if that) toward governmental reform provides cover for spendthrift Democrats that they don't merit."
Now moving to the former (the coming presidential election), we have a Washington Post piece that would have the liberals picking our presidential candidate to size up against Obama! Chris Cillizza reports:
“A Daniels candidacy probably would be taken as a sign that the games are over for the Republican Party, that it is time to buckle down and organize to beat President Obama.
“He will turn a race that is about less serious politics into a race about more serious policy,” argued Alex Castellanos, a Republican media consultant who is not aligned with any candidate heading into 2012. “Daniels is the adult in the room saying the party is over, it’s time to clean house. That contrast in maturity is how a Republican beats Obama.”
The president has acknowledged as much about Daniels, telling an Indiana television station that the governor is “a serious person” before adding: “I have some significant philosophical differences with him.”
Should Daniels opt not to run, on the other hand, the unpredictability that has ruled the race would almost certainly continue unabated.”
Folks, something’s very wrong when we’d have the Democrat President casting the moderate Daniels as the “serious” candidate to challenge him. And perhaps more is wrong with those Republicans who’d fall for such dubiousness! As an Ace of Spades piece makes the point, “Mr. Truce on Social Issues is still not ready for primetime.” Gabriel Malor continues…
“When asked if he was ready to debate President Obama on foreign policy, Daniels said "Probably not."
So he gets points for candor, I guess, but you know what would be better than a candidate with candor? A candidate who has candor AND is prepared to take on the President.”
Amen to that!
So what the media and establishment Republicans are practically telling us is that they’re not only unwilling to challenge Obama (and the Democrats) on his devastating domestic policies and the status quo of entitlement, but they’re unable to challenge his foreign policy as well? Hogwash. Tell that to most of the early GOP contenders who attended the first Republican debate last week! Or how about a guy like John Bolton?! And it cannot be stated enough that the Tea Party provided a path towards responsible governance by helping to usher in historic Republican gains in November (and Daniels is no tea partier), including some that brought much needed principled conservative reinforcements, particularly to Jim DeMint in the Senate. Momentum is on our side, but we cannot allow ourselves to become pawns of the made-to-order media, nor the establishment (I know, somewhat redundant), which ill-inform that responsible governance is unattainable and that the race is over before it’s even begun if we choose a man (or woman) of moral and constitutional Principle (there I go repeating myself again!). Something to never forget: Ronald Reagan campaigned on uniting social and fiscal conservatives. As one absolutely affects the other; perhaps more important to note is that both serve as foundations of conservatism.
