|
|
|||
|
|||
|
|
GOP Soul-Searching John LeBoutillier With the 2006 mid-term election over — and the 2008 presidential election about to begin — the Republican Party faces one crucial, soul-searching question: Will we be the party of Reagan or the party of Bush?
If we make the correct decision, we will again become the majority party in this country; if we err and repeat our recent mistakes, we will go back to being a permanent minority party.
Let us make some quick and simple definitions: The political philosophy of Ronald Reagan, which became the dominant thinking in the GOP in the 1980s, was a libertarian conservative way of thinking: Government should not and would not interfere in the day-to-day lives of Americans.
Also, government programs, if they could not be cut or dismantled (an almost impossible task in today's PC/entitlement-loving climate), would at least not grow any faster than necessary.
Certainly no new entitlements or big government programs would be enacted.
The role of government was simple: Less is better. And less federal involvement. And as many federal tasks as possible should be turned back over to the states.
Story Continues Below
Under Ronald Reagan, the Republican Party was also able to remake its image from a "country club" Republicanism to the party of main street. Reagan so appealed to working people that a majority of union members voted for Reagan, despite the anti-Reaganism of their own union leaders.
In foreign policy, the Reagan Doctrine was clear: peace through strength. Or, as Churchill said, "We arm to parley." Ronald Reagan, lifelong anti-communist, indeed talked to the Soviets. Indeed he made deals with them, but from a position of military, economic and moral superiority.
The Reagan Era, and especially his military rebuilding after Vietnam and Carter's emasculation of the Pentagon, accelerated the end of the Soviet Union. No, he didn't cause it; many others, both Democrats and Republicans along the way since 1946, share the credit. But Ronnie Reagan caused the ending of this dread "disease" through a constant, steady philosophy.
The result wasn't just the ending of communism, but the elevation of the United States of America as the "shining city on the hill" he so often talked about. And it will forever be his legacy as one of our greatest presidents.
The Republicans under Reagan projected a sunny, happy political demeanor.
We believed in our conservative way of governing, but we respected our opposition and treated them with respect. Humor was a useful tool of combat, both self-deprecating and as a way of tweaking your opponent.
Reaganites have always believed in trying to convert others to our way of thinking. Now, in stark contrast, is the Bush philosophy: Both George Bushes are big government descendants of the Rockefeller wing of the Republican Party. They both love power and loved expanding the power and reach of the federal government.
They both often bragged that they wanted to be known as the "education president," thus ignoring the long-held Republican tenet that the federal government had no role in primary and secondary education; that was for local communities and states to handle.
G.W. Bush, in total contravention of the Republican platform upon which he ran and was elected in 2000, which called for the abolition of the Department of Education, increased education spending his first year in office by a whopping 11 percent. And then he teamed with Teddy Kennedy to pass the No Child Left Behind program which has ended up being a total fraud of a program.
Teachers now "teach the test" so that they get rewarded and promoted; the students, as usual, suffer by being used as guinea pigs for this political program.
G.W. Bush misled his own party members on the Hill about his Medicare Prescription Drug Program: the White House lied about the true cost of this new entitlement program. In truth, it costs a whopping $400 billion more than the Congress was told.
Where is the fiscal restraint? G.W. Bush's Republican government spends more money than any government — ever. And he has allowed the National Debt to rise to an unfathomable $8 trillion! And all of this with, unlike Reagan, a GOP-controlled House and Senate!
GW.. Bush, and his father, love Fortune 500 CEOs and fat cats. Under both Bushes, the image of the Republican Party quickly changed from Reagan's party of main street into Bush's party of Wall Street.
On foreign policy, G.W. Bush also misled the nation in 2000 when he said, "We have too many of our soldiers spread around the world engaged in nation-building."
Now, six years later, we are bogged down in Iraq, doing just that, nation-building - and it isn't working. Our wonderful soldiers are not policemen and should not be refereeing a Sunni-Shi'ia internal Muslim civil war.
Because of Iraq, and Bush's attitude toward other countries, we are now the most hated and reviled nation in the world.
Demeanor: the Bush way is snide, sneering, chip-on-the-shoulder arrogance, devoid of humor or lightness. And his GOP acolytes have followed suit: just look at Delay, Rove, Mehlman, Dan Bartlett, and some of their conservative media supporters: They are just like Bush. They cockily echo Bush's governing philosophy: You are either with me or against me. The Rush Limbaugh mocking of a Parkinson's-ridden Michael J. Fox was a new low and brought this new, derisive description of him on the day after the election - a "gasbag drug addict." So, too, was Ann Coulter opining on foreign policy: "We should invade the Middle East and convert them all to Christianity." How can these people be leaders and voices of conservatism?
What a way to run the conservative movement and the Republican Party. No wonder we got creamed in the latest elections!
Instead of trying to win over others, the Bush way is you basically write them off and play to the base. And now the back-biting has begun: Karl Rove, the genius "architect" says in a new Time magazine interview that Iraq wasn't the problem, the congressional leaders were.
What arrogance and blame-gaming! And so typical of these people: They are never wrong, can't think of a mistake they have ever made and always have to blame anyone else, even members of their own team.
Indeed, the contrast between being the party of Reagan or the party of Bush is stark.
The decision of which direction and tone and image to choose is vital.
If we follow the Bush model, we will self-destruct into a dysfunctional party than can't win anymore. But if we return to the Reagan philosophy, we can and will win. And in the process we can restore this country to its rightful role in the world: a model of how all people can live and work together.
Editor's note:
Read more on this subject in related Hot Topics:
|
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||
Print Page 
Forward Page 
|
| All Rights Reserved © 2009 NewsMax.Com |