The Ghost of Snapped Shot

Or, welcome to my low-maintenance heck.

<<
 >
>>
Where is Republican Party going?

I was perusing the net tonight and happened upon the site, A Certain Slant Of Light, after perusing The Diggers Realm. On Light's front page is a great article that you all should read.

Upon my initial read of this article, I had thought he was all wrong. I thought he was going to say that McCain's rise in prominence was normal and just a normal growth of the Republican Party. I thought this because he was taking an opposing view from that held by David Limbaugh. I have read many of Limbaugh's articles and I have agreed with many of them. And for ACSOL to take an opposing view from Limbaugh's, I figured I would be getting upset soon.But, after reading even only half of his article, I knew that ACSOL had it nailed and Limbaugh was incorrect. ASCOL cites Limbaugh as saying that McCain's rise is a result of the "neo-Rockefeller" republicans (or as we call them, RINOS) have started their attempts at taking the party back from the Reagan conservatives or the neo-conservatives.


He [Limbaugh] writes:
… what we are witnessing is a resurrection of the historical GOP turf war between the Reagan conservatives and the disgruntled Rockefeller moderates. This neo-Rockefeller branch of the GOP sees this moment — McCain’s inevitable nomination, albeit by default, and the politically confused state of evangelicals under the tutelage of Mike Huckabee — as an opportunity finally to retake the GOP from the Reagan conservatives.

They want to remake the party in their image. They are the neoconservatives, the national-greatness types who profess to believe in conservative ideals but have no problem achieving them through liberal ends — i.e., more government.


ACSOL takes this notion to task by pointing out how this "degrading" of the conservative nature of the Republican party was started years ago.

Fact is, McCain’s presidency, should he prevail over Barack Obama or Hillary Clinton, will in most respects — particularly vis-a-vis the war in Iraq and a patent indifference to porous borders and illegal immigration — likely walk in the footprints of Bush ’43’s. Indeed, the “paradigm shift” that Limbaugh speaks of has been largely effected over the past seven years. To be sure, it’s not just now in its nascent phase.


I also think Limbaugh is wholly wrong here. This moderateliberal wing of the Republican party are NOT, IN NO WAY, the neo-conservatives that became energized during the Reagan and Gingrich Revolutions. These people are the wimps that allowed socialism to creep into this nation an inch at a time. They are the ones that allowed illegal immigration to become nearly 14% of our nation. These RINOS are the ones that allowed Jimmy Carter to become president and are now continuing to allow him to destroy this nation by traveling to terrorist homelands. These people are the ones that have allowed social security and welfare to turn our nation into RUSSIA #2 under socialist policies. And here, Limbaugh is right. They believe in Big Government and its problem-solving abilities.

Reagan conservatives are not apoplectic over the prospect of a McCain-led transformation of the Republican Party away from Reagan’s principles of small government, fiscal constraint, and the federalism of the Founding. Rather, they’re still suffering from irreversible buyer’s remorse and an acute feeling of disenfranchisement vis-a-vis Bush, who campaigned in 2000 and 2004 as a conservative, but in many regards was anything but, both realities of which have been exacerbated by John McCain’s rise to presumptive nominee status, not recently jump-started.


These people are the ones that believe that giving money to our enemies will make them our friends. They have similar views that the left wing of the Democrats have. The fact that they call themselves Republican means nothing. They are just another means to the socialistic, anti-capitalistic, communistic end to our great nation.

Update: Another problem that we truly conservative Republicans have with this election cycle is that McCain was not our candidate of choice. He was selected by the media and by the democrat party. And, we really did not have a truly conservative and principled candidate to choose. Romney is a RINO no matter what "price is right" suit he wears. Any politician that can run a New England state that voted in Kennedy, and allow same-sex marriage and forced state-mandated healthcare upon its workers is not worthy of the Conservative Republican party. The "Huckster" was even worse than Romney.

Many of us conservatives would have liked a chance to see Hunter, Tancredo or Gilmore. These candidates seemed to have a strong conservative streak. Fred Thompson? He might have been someone interesting if he just gave us a chance to see and hear him. He spent most of his time silent before putting his name in and then really only talked via web-blogs. What about Tommy Tancredo? He jumped ship even before it left protected waters.

Who would I have really liked? Chuck Hagel. George Allen. J.C. Watts.

ACSOL sums it up really succinctly...

This penchant of the Republican Party for producing lesser of two evils’ choices is getting old and is, for some of us anyway, a compromised path we may no longer be willing to tread. This may be the year for a line to be drawn in the sand.


It is time to create a true Conservative Party. It is time to create a party that votes in its party members. A person who seeks to become a member must complete a questionnaire that would determine their conservative principles. If at any time a member fails to uphold those principles, an elected monitoring body can either notify, censure or disbar the member. This would give its rank-and-file members assurity that the politician that they are voting for will be truly conservative.

 


Comments:

#1 Ron 05-May-2008
You would have liked Chuck Hagel? That's worse than John McCain!
#2 captainfish 05-May-2008
I admit that Hagel is not 100% conservative, but really who is. I must say that I think he is better than McCain.

I guess I should have written it..."Who would I have really liked to have seen run..."
Powered by Snarf · Contact Us