The conservative senator . . . described how the party had strayed from its own "brand," which . . . should represent freedom, religious-based values and limited government . . . "McCain, who is proponent of campaign finance reform that weakened party organizations and basically put George Soros in the driver's seat," DeMint said. "His proposal for amnesty for illegals. His support of global warming, cap-and-trade programs that will put another burden on our economy. And of course, his embrace of the bailout right before the election was probably the nail in our coffin this last election."
Conservatives need to ask themselves this question though. Would a more "orthodox" conservative have done better than John McCain? Line them up. Newt Gingrich, Mitt Romney, Rudy Giuliani, Mike Huckabee, Bobby Jindal--would any of them come as close as John McCain at 52-46%? What about the Tennessee Triplets of Hard-Working Fred Thompson, LAMAR! Alexander, and "Diagnosing Terry Schiavo is Easy" Bill Frist? Ex-Senators George Allen or Rick Santorum could have run. They're both effective politicians and about as orthodox as "movement conservatives" can get.
But the answer is no. Newt Gingrich has only recently been replaced by Sarah Palin as the most unpopular politician in America. Giuliani is extremely popular until people actually have contact with him. Mike Huckabee isn't any more of an orthodox conservative than McCain. Allen and Santorum were defeated in the swing states of Virginia and Pennsylvania respectively--Santorum by 19 points.
And Bobby Jindal wasn't any more ready for prime-time than Palin.
Conservativism just isn't that popular right now and conservatives would have found that out if they had nominated someone more conservative than John McCain.
Posts
1 comment:
Today, i listened to a far Right talk show host in my city call the sitting President "a liberal." As conservatism continues to morph from a political philosophy into a religion, conservatives tend to ape Marxists (the last true believers on the stage) and claim that conservatism hasn't worked, because "no one has tried."
Hannity and pals seem to forget Reagan's '86 tax cuts, his running "tail between legs from Beirut," his failure to pardon the Iran-Contra yahoos, or his agreement with Gorby at Reykjavik to do away with ALL nukes. They forget they didn't like Reagan and asserted he wasn't a true conservative (just like Stalin and company and Castro and friends aren't "true Marxists").
So, in essence, no matter who the cons supported in this "no chance election," they would have claimed the guy or gal wasn't conservative enough.
It's why they think more conservatism is in order and why they will allow us to establish a governing coalition for the next decade. There used to be a saying: "Republicans win elections, but cannot govern; Democrats can govern, but can't win elections." Thanks to folks on the right, now those dolts can't even win an election!
PS Just so you know, I ripped the whole Reagan theme from Thomas Franks and his book Wrecking Crew, a fine read if one gets the chance.
Post a Comment