The Conservative Reader

Art Smith August 26th, 2008

I’m hoping that the fact you have come to this web site means that you care more about government than the average person.  If you care about government, how we do government, and who is doing the work of government on our behalf, then this article is for you.

I’ve alluded to this before, and I want adequately convey, that a knowledgeable, thoughtful electorate will help ensure that the best people represent us, and will be able to hold politicians accountable.

“Knowledgeable” means not just watching the 15 second sound-bites, but watching debates, reading up on candidates’ positions, and looking for independent resources that assess candidates’ records.  It also means seeking to understand the issues, how they impact Americans, what the history and background are on the issue, and how all parties speak to the issue.  Sometimes a position is important both in what is said and what is not said.

“Thoughtful” means taking the time to really think through an issue, and not to take a position simply because a party, candidate, respected person, friend or family says to.  Everyone has their own way to analyze and think through issues, and being thoughtful means taking ownership of the position based on ones’ own guidelines.

For me, researching topics on the Internet, in newspapers, interacting with politicians, listening to people who are deeply involved in the topic, reading historical content regarding the topic (where applicable), and asking my wife and my other family members and friends are all important aspects of becoming “knowledgeable” about a topic.  I try to include sources from both sides of the political spectrum if available, and when thinking about Constitutional questions, I like to refer to any source material that is available such as the Federalist Papers.

My “thoughtful” part goes like this: I try to abstract topics out to a higher level where possible and determine where within my own principals the topic falls.  Then I try to analyze what I’ve learned within the context of the applicable principal(s).  I also try to assess the real impact on people in terms of short term and long term events and policies.

And reaching a conclusion is sometimes the hardest part.  Like many Americans, my heart goes out to the needs of individuals, the lost dreams, lack of satisfaction, desire to reach out to something better.  To those that are struggling because of disasters whether natural or self-inflicted.   Especially to children.

And the challenge is to keep one’s heart and the real needs of others in front of ourselves as we make decisions, but recognize that the conclusion we reach may be hard to swallow.  Either because of the cost (financial or in lives) or because meeting everyone’s needs becomes clearly not the right answer for the Government.  Our temptation is to create programs that take hard decision making, especially if on a case-by-case basis, away and makes the process easy. The answer that feels right isn’t always the answer we know is right.

Life is full of hard decisions.  Life is full of hard times, and hard work.  LIfe is full of realizing that things we think we need are really things we want.  Sometimes, what seems like suffering is really just inconvenience.

That’s my approach, and I don’t expect it to be yours.

I really want to encourage people to think for themselves, and not to simply let the current talking head manipulate their choices.  Check into the candidates running for President, US Senate, US House, State Legislators, Governor, City Council, and even Dog Catcher.  Find places on the Internet where people are talking about the issues.  If you don’t know where to start, shoot me an email and I’ll do what I can to help.

Talk to people you know about the issues.  And reach your own conclusions.  And decide how best to vote based on your conclusions.  Your opinion matters, and your vote matters.  Don’t let anyone convince you otherwise.

And, feel free to use The Conservative Reader as a place for discussing these issues.  I’d be very interested in knowing how you make these kind of decisions.  Leave a comment on this post.

So, are we all paying attention?  I hope so.

Tags: Candidates, Decide, discuss, Election, Federalist Papers, Government, Knowledgeable, Listen, Paying Attention, Principals, Principles, Research, Resources, Sound-bites, Talking Head, The Conservative Reader, Thinking, Thoughtful

• 2008 Congressional Election , 2008 Local Elections , 2008 Presidential Election , Constitution , Fred Thompson , Political Philosophy
• Comments(0)

Art Smith July 10th, 2008

Steve Deace had probably the best group of people on his show today for talking about local Republican politics and why we are struggling as a party to make an impact in the Iowa Statehouse, and on the national scene. The group included outgoing Polk County (Iowa) Republican Party Chair and State Central Committee member Ted Sporer, National Committee Woman Candidate and Iowa Right To Life President Kim Lehman, Steve Scheffler President of Iowa Christian Alliance and National Committee Man Candidate, and Stew Iverson who is chairman of the Republican Party of Iowa.

Quite an interesting banter. I have not had time to listen to the entire broadcast (podcast page here) but am listening to it now.

The big item from all I’ve heard so far that I think is worth talking about is the work that is done to produce a party platform, and the fact that so many candidates seem to totally ignore key parts of the platform.

Certainly, it’s understandable that some candidates are not going to completely agree with the entire platform. While I certainly want representatives to provide adequate representation for their constituents, and that sometimes they need to vote their conscience.

However, it seems that representatives (and party leadership) should be very aware of the platform and really seek to understand where their constituents stand on the issues. Republican lawmakers should be seeking to support and promote the platform that the grassroots have developed. The composite planks, as they are worked through the precincts, counties, districts and finally the state conventions, reflect the convictions of the people that care passionately about society and the party. Ignoring the platform is dangerous, and those of us in the grassroots are watching much more closely.

Disappointing is the fact that Stew Iverson publicly admitted in this broadcast that he has not read the entire state platform that is up for discussion this weekend at that Iowa Republican Convention. I’m amazed. This is something I had done with a day of receiving it in June. His only comment was “I haven’t gotten to it yet”, as if it can wait until the last minute.

We all know it. The Republican Party Leadership in Iowa is out of touch. Ted (as mentioned after the District 3 Republican Convention) is a proponent of the need to get the leadership back in touch. The same problem exists on a national level, and somehow there is a need to shake it up. This weekend’s convention is going to be real interesting.

Give the podcast a listen… it’s worth it.

Tags: 2008 Congressional Election, 2008 Local Elections, 2008 Presidential Election, Iowa State Republican Convention, Kim Lehman, Republican Party of Iowa, Steve Scheffler, Stew Iverson, Ted Sporer

• 2008 Congressional Election , 2008 Iowa Republican Party Convention , 2008 Local Elections , 2008 Presidential Election , Conservatism , Iowa Caucus , Iowa General Assembly , Iowa Politics , Leadership , Political Philosophy , Republican Party , US Congress
• Comments(0)

Art Smith May 12th, 2008

We’ve kept it pretty loose here at TCR with regard to the continued havoc being wrought by Hillary Clinton against her party. Every day, the lack of her stepping down extends further and further the demise of Democrats and Obama’s chance to manipulate his way into high office.

Amazingly enough, however, the party faithful are undeterred and completely convinced that their nominee is the right person for this job. It is odd to see serious grownup people behave at a level of maturity that doesn’t seem to align with how those people deal with everything else in their lives.

I wish I were talking only about Democrats.

I would contend that Barack Obama and John McCain are not the best representatives of their parties.

Democrats have been on a romantic tour for months now thanks to the hope that “history” will be made (and already has been within their party, but they still look for the big emotional hit) as either the first woman or first African American President of the United States may be elected in 2008. Watching the throngs of supporters and their comments has convinced me that most, if asked why they support their candidate, would gush as they proclaim “I’ve been waiting for years and had hoped to see a [choice of non-white or female] become President, and finally it’s becoming a reality!” What is truly amazing is that for years we have (on both sides of the aisle) promoted a mindset that skin color and gender do not make one better than someone else, and yet today the party that traditionally panders to both demographics is saying it matters.

Hillary actually seems to better represent her party than Obama, but she has gotten so far off message that one cannot hear the tax and spend policies coming through the roar of what’s wrong with Obama and what’s wrong with the Democratic Party because she’s being left out in the cold.

I have no problem with a woman or any minority as President. I could make a list of people who fit that description that I would vigorously support if they ran for office. But that fact would not compel me to vote for them. Having the right policies and positions (truly, more important is the principles that they use for decision making) drives me to a candidate. Unfortunately, Obama’s supporters (and to a large part, Clinton’s as well) really don’t study the issues and seek to understand their candidates.

This generation of voters doesn’t have the attention span to own a real position. And again, I speak not just about Democrats.

Today’s news brought a story of a second-hand conversation that sounds like McCain’s camp is raising a trial balloon to see how Mike Huckabee’s name sits with voters as a running mate. Not well it seems. I’m not a fan of Huckabee, but having him on the ticket would allow us to get the FairTax pushed back into the national debate. But it won’t happen. Not this year. Romney would an even worse choice, I think. My dream is still Fred Thompson. Not likely either, but a possibility. I’d support Mitch McConnell, but I’d rather have him in the Senate right now. Along with any other Republican Senator or Congressmen, despite the less than stellar positions some have taken in recent months.

But the reaction of people to the Huckabee idea (the trial balloon is lead-filled) has been almost as distasteful as the initial shock about McCain being the Republican candidate. Far too many within the party are promoting a “stay home, let Obama win, watch the country fall apart for 4 years, and clean up the mess in 2012″. There are multiple problems with that idea, not the least of which is this: if we sit back and let things fall apart, we’ll have a nation that is not convinced there is a problem 4 years from now because the message from the Right is consistently “we don’t care enough to fight for what we believe in, this is okay with us and we’ll just try again later”. This is not a game. An unopposed Obama Presidency is not okay.

But we’re just too lazy and too soft to put up a real fight for what we believe in. Or it really isn’t all that important to us… sure, we don’t mind pushing our position as hard as we can, making personal attacks on people who disagree with us and shouting “I told you so” every time something bad happens. But when the work gets hard, yes that means when we have to work with something less than ideal like John McCain, we just throw up our hands and say it’s okay that all the bad stuff happens. We say we want Obama as President. We want open borders for the Terrorists to walk through. We want taxes to shoot up, the economy to totally tank, add 4 and maybe 8 years to the things that we need to start now just to be where we need to be in 10 years (ANWR), continuing down the road of Socialism, Pacification and decline of civilized society. And 5 brand spanking new Liberal Activist Judges on the Supreme Court. Nice. All because we want to prove we’re right.

Except, no one will care that we were right. Bush will get blamed for the bad economy. Most won’t even notice how badly we’re being fleeced by Congress. And the silent conservatives simply stand by and watch it happen with approval. Like Saul.

Not I.

If we really care about these things, if we want to see others care in 4 years (yes, even if Obama does win, or McCain for that matter), we have to engage, and beyond just the blogosphere. We have to carry the message about what’s right and what’s wrong into the public square (including the blogs) into our local politics, into the National Convention. The Party needs a unified face, not a torn up left and right, but a merging of minds to show that while we may not agree on everything, we can work together to bring America closer to its best. I’ve been very impressed with the party caucuses and conventions I’ve attended so far at the precinct, the county and district levels this year. Our party in Iowa is not perfect and not 100% unified, but we engaged and worked together to reach a reasonable consensus that some did not like (I did not agree completely with all the decisions) but I saw none of the bitterness that I’ve seen elsewhere, and I pray we avoid that. Further, we have significant challenges for Congressional seats and a lack of real effort to keep and reclaim lost seats. We have a solid message, but we’re seem to have lost our voice.

The point is, disengaging when the ideal is not reached, will only allow things to slip further into the opposite direction. Once that’s done, ground is lost that may never be recovered. Staying engaged helps keep the truth and a reasonable message in front of people. We’ll never educate everyone to the point we’d like them to be, but we can get them further and closer to understanding truth. Most importantly closer to making decisions on their own instead of letting others (myself included) make those decisions for them.

My dream is to see the Democrats keep themselves distracted with the infighting long enough that more and more people can see how selfish and emotionally charged they are in making decisions and working out “solutions” (to the point of knee-jerking their way through legislating). For Conservative Republicans to give up is not strategic. It’s giving up and over, perhaps permanently.

Tags: 2008 Presidential Election, 2012 Presidential Election, Barack Obama, Democratic Party, Economy, Educating Voters, Fred Thompson, Giving Up, Hillary Clinton, John McCain, Lazy, Mike Huckabee, Republican Party, Saul, The FairTax, US Congress, Working Together

• 2008 Congressional Election , 2008 Presidential Election , Barack Obama , Blogging , Democratic Party , Economy , FairTax , Fred Thompson , Hillary Clinton , John McCain , Mike Huckabee , Political Philosophy , Republican Party , TAXES , US Congress
• Comments(0)

Art Smith April 3rd, 2008

But Senator Tom Harkin (D-Iowa) thinks it can. Living in Iowa, we occasionally receive a nice email from the Senator letting us know how he is scr- uh, helping us with his work. Here’s his latest missive, arriving just this afternoon…

Dear Friends,
Many working families are being saddled with higher costs at the grocery store and the gas pump at a time when incomes remain stagnant. People across our state are starting to have real anxiety caused by the steady drumbeat of bad news about the state of our economy, especially in the housing sector.

More than 11,000 Iowans are expected to have their home foreclosed this year. And when that “Foreclosure - For Sale” sign goes up, it can create a domino effect that brings down the value of every house in the neighborhood. This year, an estimated 180,000 homes in Iowa will experience price declines simply because they are near houses in foreclosure.

In recent years, irresponsible, predatory lenders hooked millions of Americans into mortgages that they didn’t understand and couldn’t afford. We should not bail out abusive lenders or people who bought houses to speculate. But millions of other homeowners who are in over their heads deserve help.

We all have an interest in keeping people in their homes - and keeping those homes off an already oversaturated market. That’s why my Senate colleagues and I are working on bipartisan legislation aimed at boosting demand for housing and helping distressed homeowners avoid foreclosure. This bill is a good starting point.

Unfortunately, a key provision that would have allowed homeowners to re-negotiate the terms of their mortgage in bankruptcy court, was blocked by the minority party. We already allow people to go to bankruptcy court to rework mortgages on vacation homes, yachts and family farms - why should primary homes be treated differently?

Nonetheless, the new bill includes an array of measures that will help millions of homeowners - including those who are not facing foreclosure but are worried about declining property values.

We all have a stake in addressing the foreclosure crisis and mitigating against falling home prices, which is a clear and present danger to our entire economy. Iowans can rest assured that I am focused on finding ways to chart a new direction for our economy while helping working families weather this economic downturn.
Your Senator,

Tom Harkin

Reading this tells me a few things about the Iowa Senator:

1. He is a whiz at making things sound worse than they are. I don’t buy the numbers, and I especially don’t like the implication that all banks are predatory. Homeowners who are in over their heads aren’t there because someone bilked them. Have you ever bought a house? Have you ever signed all of the documents (forced on us by an ever vigilant Congress)? Among those documents are items that say “I have read and understand what I’m signing”. People need to be accountable for their choices.
2. He is good at making a difficult situation work as a political wedge. There’s nothing “bipartisan” about the statement “…blocked by the minority party.”
3. He is good at making other people’s mistakes my problem. His last paragraph says “We all have a stake…”. I don’t have a stake in this. Gas prices are going up because of a weak housing market. Granted, my 401K and savings are being impacted because of all the swirl over this, but I’m still paying my bills on time, I still have what I need, and yes some prices are going up because of the price of gasoline, but the housing market is not really hurting me.

And the last thing I need is Tom Harkin charting a new direction for our economy. Because he and the Democratic majority in Congress have one thing in mind: socialism. Whether they know it or not, they are leading us by the nose into becoming what is wrong with Russia, China, and every other Communist country in the world… human stagnation. I won’t stand for it, and we need to push back and make it clear we don’t need a mellow society where everyone is average and that isn’t motivated to get up in the morning because the Government makes sure we have food, clothing and shelter. I’m not up for that… I need to be free to work as hard as I want and enjoy the fruits of my labor. I’m more than happy to share my wealth with those that truly need it, and I do, but I’m not going to stand by and let the Government take what it wants from me to give to those that refuse to work. This has been going on far too long, and the malaise of the poor grows year after year as each generation figures out they don’t need to work, they can just wait for the handouts.

It’s gotta stop NOW.

The fact is that Socialism not only provides for those that don’t excel, it causes those that would excel to not perform as well as they would have… everyone starts to live at about the same level, and the best of the best end up no better than everyone else. It’s not only leveling the playing field, it’s leveling the players. And that’s how those in power can tighten their grip with little resistance.

The specter of foreclosed houses driving down home values is ridiculous. Home prices are going down for the reason stated elsewhere by the Senator… market glut. And Realtors are probably most responsible for this problem. Convincing people to move into bigger and newer homes, that many cannot afford, if’t the Realtor that works that one, not the mortgage companies. And the left-over homes end up vacant. Then the prices start to drop because there’s more homes than people looking for them. All this just to drive the home building market and put more money into Realtors’ pockets. Realtors are like stock brokers… good deal or bad, they still make their commission.

But more importantly, why do we care? It’s not my fault that people have bought into the lie that you should be able to buy a house, and never have to really earn any equity in it. Instead, they are convinced they can keep borrowing against it for their pleasures and then when they want to or need to move, they should have enough equity to cover realtor’s commission and closing costs … oh wait, I need equity? Oh wait, home prices have dropped… I have no equity???? Owning a house with low equity is not for the squeamish… if your likelihood of moving is high, it’s a gamble. But low equity loans have been the Government’s answer for decades now to get more people to own their own homes (to artificially fuel the housing industry, of course). And now, this new wonderful legislation, among other things, is going to lower the down payment requirements on FHA loans, so now home buyers will have even less equity, or be more upside-down after 6 months.

Apartment living is not bad. We did it for 11 years and never regretted it. Why does everyone think it the ultimate abomination of life? I’m not trying to say we should keep people from the dream of owning a home… I want to see people enjoy that. But people should enjoy the things THEY have worked for, not what OTHERS have worked for. Until they can, there are suitable options. And Government housing, for the truly needy, is fine. But let’s make sure the system provides a helping hand and not handout.

This bill stinks, and will do nothing but make an already overly dependent society despondent and more ripe for tyranny. We need conservatives in Congress who are smart enough to see the big picture and willing to stand up for the rights of Americans to earn what they have, not get it for free.

Wait until they start talking again about whether individuals need to own guns. Just wait.

Tags: Communism, Foreclosure, freedom, Handouts, Home ownership, Housing Market, Mortgages, Socialism, Tom Harkin, US Congress

• 2008 Congressional Election , Economy , Housing , Political Philosophy , Tom Harkin , US Congress
• Comments(0)

Art Smith March 22nd, 2008

My dad hates labels. We’ve had this conversation numerous times in the past regarding how bad it is to put a label on yourself or others as if that label defines who you are.

I understand where he’s coming from in many respects, and yet I also maintain a need to use short expressions clarify my position in areas that could take an hour to describe in depth, but can communicate much in two or three words, such as “constitutional constructionist”. Granted, expressions (or labels) like that can be broadly interpreted or useless to those without any context regarding what it means.

And so in this Presidential election year we struggle with what it means to be “conservative” or “Republican” or “liberal”, or “libertarian”, or whatever. We struggle with the definition, scope, breadth of what these terms mean to different people. Some say McCain is not a Conservative, or he’s a RINO (Republican In Name Only), and others that say he is more conservative than we know, and some who say Obama is really going to meet the needs of Conservatives. And the labels become ambiguous.

We have some number of “conservatives” who are unwilling to support McCain or the Republican Party because the Party (and/or McCain, or because of McCain’s nomination) is not conservative enough for them. The Party does not “meet their needs”. And some have suggested forming a new party to meet those needs.

That concerns me.

It’s tough building “bipartisan” consensus between Democrats and Republicans. Often, it requires either an issue that truly transcends what each party stands for to reach that kind of consensus, or an issue so critical to the country that one or both parties simply have to compromise to accomplish what is needed. But typically the two parties, or two ideologies (at least the core of them) are so divergent that there are strong philosophical and emotional conflicts that keep the two parties from working to reach a solution together.

It’s not quite as difficult (usually) to build consensus within a party because the positions within a party are usually not as divergent as they are between the parties. Within the Republican Party this year we seem to be entertaining much more divergence (some would say because the more moderate part of the party is swinging too far to the left). Now it’s unclear to some what the “Republican” label means.

I happen to think that bipartisanship is overrated. We will always have shouts of “bipartisan” when the party “in power” is not in power enough to truly control the government (like now). We could be at a standstill in this situation. Maybe that’s just too bad. Maybe the electorate need to do something about it.

If we expect voters to get serious, then the Republican Party needs to as well. And by serious, I mean we need to be the advocates for a better informed electorate. We need to make an intelligent case for what we stand for instead of using 15-second sound bites to coerce the public into believing Democrats are evil. People generally like to feel well-informed, and we should do what we can to ensure they really are.

But the Party also needs to be running on all cylinders, meaning the entire party needs to stand together, even when we have differences and a variety of opinions. We do not serve our country by simply giving up and letting it go to the Left, although we may serve ourselves (or so we think). As Patriots, as citizens, as Americans, as people that want to see our rights and our children’s freedoms maintained, I believe we must always push on and work together for what we believe in, even if we work together with others who don’t line up exactly with our beliefs.

And splitting into separate parties will be a painful solution. To do so at the level of difference I hear many espousing (and frankly, there is already one major party that could be included with Republicans… they are called Libertarians), we could end up with at least 5 different parties on the right: Republican, Libertarian, Conservative, Neo-Conservative, and White Nationalist (and, I’m fine with the White Nationalists staying out of the Republican Party, thank you very much). I’m sure there would be others. And if Republicans did this to themselves, eventually the Democrats would too, and you could have a huge mess.

Why would this be bad, you may ask? Because if you think it’s hard to get anything done in Congress today, wait until you have to build coalitions between several different parties to pass any legislation. Just ask Belgium if they like the current situation there, where the new Prime Minister (Yves Leterme) has spent months building a coalition amongst 5 parties to ensure there was a majority to get someone (okay, him, but…) into the role of Prime Minister. His party is the “Flemish Christian Democratic Party”. We might have trouble with a name like that in US politics.

We’ve watched France, Germany, Isreal, Belgium, Pakistan, and nation upon nation struggle with building cross-party coalitions just to build a majority to get work done. Granted, our Congress sometimes looks as bad or worse in comparison, but the financial burden, the loss in time, and additional work associated with having more than 2 significantly influential parties is just an undesireable way for us to operate.

But even as I write this, I have to wonder, could it be good? Could a multi-party system serve our country? It seems disingenuous to postulate just the negatives, and in preparing these thoughts I’ve hit a statement (in Wikipedia, of all places) that causes me to pause. “A multi-party system is essential for representative democracies, because it prevents the leadership of a single party from setting policy without challenge.” That’s something to think about. And now I wonder, would a multi-party system lead to improvements in areas that both the Left and the Right agree on (or, at least, agree on by the public that is supposed to be represented) such as earmarks, term limits, true balanced budgets, enforceable laws, fair taxation? Could a multi-party system provide a better forum for each party to present its perspective and perhaps better inform and influence the electorate? I actually think this is worth further debate and pursuit.

But I am convinced that building and running a real multi-party system requires an overhaul of our system of government and politics, including restructuring the legislative body, and perhaps considering the election of the President by the legislature instead of the people (maybe give the office a different name as well… I think you get my drift). Honestly, I think for the multi-party concept to be successful here, we need a system that is ready to engage it, and our current system does not play well with the idea, unfortunately. But the more I think about it, the more I think it could help ensure people are better informed and are better at reaching well-reasoned opinions about government policy. And maybe the labels won’t be as important as what we discuss together.

But in the meantime, we need to make sure the two-party system can continue to be as effective as possible… there is too much at stake to treat it with contempt and walk away without using it to its full extent. We need to continue to petition the Party with our opinions, concerns, questions, and provide as much input and feedback as possible. We need to continue to dialog with our representatives and ensure our voices are heard, or we do a disservice to our country, imperfect as she may be.

In essence, the Republican and Democratic parties are both coalitions, and each will suffer if there is too much in-fighting. I strongly suggest we all do what we can to maintain these coalitions for the sake of our country.

Update: Fixing a link.

Tags: Coalition, Congress, Democrat, Labels, Leaders, Multi-party, Republican, Two-Party System

• 2008 Congressional Election , 2008 Presidential Election , Bipartisanship , Conservatism , Democratic Party , John McCain , Multi-Party System , Political Philosophy , Republican Party , Two-Party System , US Congress , US Politics
• Comments(0)

Art Smith February 20th, 2008

Hat Tip to BitHead for this, who aptly asks  “Anyone want proof there’s a God?” while referencing this article by Roger L. Simon at PajamasMedia on the potential demise of Ron Paul’s seat in Congress.  Evidently,  Chris Pedena, newcomer to national politics (a city councilman and CPA) is running against Ron in the March 4th primary.

I’ve previously said that Ron needs to exit the campaign so he can serve his constituents, and I alluded to the fact that the more he campaigns for President, the more his district learns about his views and character that they (perhaps) did not know before, or at least did not understand how extreme they were.  Frankly, I’m surprised the polling numbers aren’t worse from the sheer embarrassment of seeing who Ron really is, but then again, that may be the kind of people in his district too.

I’ve also offered my appreciation for Ron’s statement that he would go to the National Convention and ensure that his message is heard there.  I appreciate it because it reinforces my opinion that all of us should work hard to ensure our message is heard and not abandon the party and the platform it provides us to get our views on the table for discussion.  Many of us are disappointed that we don’t have the right candidate as the nominee, and have made that the litmus test for supporting or rejecting the Party.  The more thoughtful and interested we are in the success of our nation, however, the more we are needed to provide leading voices within the party that has the closest set of values to our own, and should work within that party to succeed.  Granted, Ron is likely doing this more to ensure he maintains national visibility for the future (starting his 2012 bid essentially), but I support the face-value of what he states.

But I disagree strongly with much of his politics, and as Simon says (no pun intended), his continued efforts toward the convention have probably cost him his House seat.  I do hope it doesn’t cost us a Republican vote in the House as well.  From what little I’ve heard about Pedena, however, I think he may not only win, but has the potential to provide great leadership in the House.

Tags: Bithead, BitsBlog, House of Representatives, National Convention, Presidential Race, Republican Party, Ron Paul, The Conservative Reader, US Congress

• 2008 Congressional Election , 2008 Presidential Election , Chris Pedena , Political Philosophy , Republican Party , Ron Paul , US Congress , US Politics
• Comments(0)

Art Smith February 10th, 2008

I do not support the candidacy of John McCain. But I plan to vote for my party even if he is the nominee. I plan to attend my county convention in March (I was selected as a delegate to that event), and voice my position on the issues, on the candidates, and do my best to represent my neighbors who asked me to do that. Even if I do not continue to any other conventions after that, I will continue to voice these opinions, support the delegates that do go on, provide them input, and discuss the same issues here at The Conservative Reader as well.

+++++++++++++++++++++++++

Captain Ed and I see this the same way. With regard to McCain’s comments at CPAC (particularly the line “But even in disagreement, especially in disagreement, I will seek the counsel of my fellow conservatives.”, which I know some of my conservative friends looked at cynically):

If conservatives hear that carefully, that is an invitation to the table. They should accept that invitation and start seeking to fill the seats. McCain will eventually have a need for advisers on a myriad of public policy issues, and we can test the offer by pushing for more conservative voices in that inner circle. McCain already got a head start in this regard by bringing Ted Olson and Steve Forbes onto his team, but especially on energy and immigration, we can press for more influence.

It seems that some conservatives are content to push away from the table before the main course. I know it’s not pleasant to accept that our primary agenda was not fully successful (that is, seating a “real” conservative in the Republican Presidential nomination, or more accurately, preventing a RINO from being nominated), but with every disappointment like this can come an opportunity to chart a new course as a party. And we can sit back and watch that course get charted by others, or we can be a part of it. I prefer to be a part of it. Is conservatism such a failure that it cannot influence a party that has a moderate as a leader? Is what we stand for so unimportant that we won’t fight for it when the battle is up hill? It seems to me that with a moderate at the helm, our party and country are in greater need of our help… why won’t we participate?

What I find ironic is that those whom I know care deeply about our country and want it to be successful are yet at this moment contemplating a course of sitting on the sidelines anticipating, even hoping for failure, and for what? A chance to say “I told you so”? What does that solve?

What then happens in 4 or 8 years? We start back where we were a few months ago. Shall we then happily point out how we were right and everyone else was wrong? Whom is that going to impress? Not too many. Mostly, we will end up building that much more contempt for conservatism, the ideology that just wants to prove a point.

We have a country that needs us, a party that needs us, and a leader asking us to come help. That sounds like a call worth answering.

+++++++++++++++++++++++++

And yet there stands one amongst us that we also do not call our own who sees the value in pressing on. Despite being the most behind in the polls and behind in delegates (of those still in the race), Ron Paul remains. I do not support this man. But I admire this about him, his tenacity to ensure that his message is heard, that his supporters have a voice, that he has the maximum impact on the party that he can have.

He also made a commitment to not pursue a third party candidacy, but to instead remain with the party and engage. There may be a lot of things I don’t like about Ron Paul, but he won’t stop trying to deliver his own message. He is cutting back on his staff, but he plans to finish the race. I’m glad he isn’t going to win, but I hope I can maintain the same level of commitment to my ideals as he has.

And if Ron’s at the table, he’s in a position to appear to represent conservative values… but he does not.  We should be there to point that out.

+++++++++++++++++++++++++

I also appreciated Michelle Malkin’s thoughts…

Some on the Right advise their readers and listeners to vote Democrat or sit home. My advice is exactly the opposite: Get off the couch and walk the walk for conservative candidates and officeholders who need all the help they can get defending free markets, free minds, and secure borders-no matter who takes the White House in November.

Dissatisfied with the flawed crop of GOP candidates who lacked the energy, organizational skills, and ideological strength to carry the conservative banner and ignite your passions? Then pay attention to the next generation of Republican state legislators who do vote consistently to lower your taxes, uphold the sanctity of life, defend marriage, and cut government spending. Support their re-election bids. Reward them for standing with you instead of their Democrat opponents and the liberal media.

As I’ve said before, this is about more than just the Presidential election. The Republican Party is in difficult straits… I know this story is happening across the country. Democratic office holders are not being challenged. Republicans are retiring (some are just giving up, in my opinion), and leaving the door wide open for the Democrats to take more seats in the US House and Senate. Frankly, the country is listing to port and needs help. We need to do what we can to stimulate, support, encourage potential candidates to consider running. This is one of the key ways that our message can get in front of people… and we have a message not just of hope, but opportunity, growth, success, and our energies should be focused on bringing the maximum success to the process.

The current office holders will become more demoralized if we don’t work with them, work for them, help them see we care and support what they are doing.As Michelle says, let them know we’re here. Call them, write them, publicly endorse them. Support their campaigns. Even if a Republican is unopposed, be vocal and show your support.

+++++++++++++++++++++++++

Hat tip regarding Ed and Michelle’s comments: The Des Moines Register (Sunday print edition). Ron’s statement HT to Memeorandum.

Tags: Captain's Quarters, Congressional Election, Conservative Reader, Des Moines Register, Ed Morrissey, John McCain, Michelle Malkin, Presidential Election, Republican Party, Ron Paul, US House, US Senate

• 2008 Congressional Election , 2008 Presidential Election , Des Moines Register , John McCain , Political Philosophy , Republican Party , Ron Paul , US Congress , US Politics
• Comments(0)

Art Smith February 7th, 2008

I’m impressed with Mitt’s decision. According to Fox News, he said:

“If I fight on in my campaign, all the way to the convention, I would forestall the launch of a national campaign and make it more likely that Senator (Hillary) Clinton or (Barack) Obama would win. And in this time of war, I simply cannot let my campaign, be a part of aiding a surrender to terror.”

I’m not as torn up about this as I was with Fred’s departure, but it has definitely put us in the position of facing the inevitable starting to have the necessary discussions.

The questions now are:

1. When will Huckabee step aside?
2. Can the Republican Party actually succeed with McCain as the candidate?
3. When can I stop having to remember to include Ron Paul in the list of candidates still technically in the running? Ron, yo, we’re done! Go back to serving your constituents. The longer you stay in, the less representation they get, and the more embarrassed they are, too. Unless you’re not really concerned about their interests. (did I write that out loud?)

Based on the feedback I continue to see from other conservatives, with whom I share similar points of view on the issues, we could have some amount of fracturing of the Party. The Party is never going to be able to serve any one person’s or one group of people’s point of view… although I definitely agree we’re dealing with some major issue concerns.

I read with some satisfaction today an opinion piece that articulated many of my thoughts much better than I have been able to. Daniel Henninger, WSJ Columnist and Editorial Page Deputy Editor, on the Wall Street Journal’s Opinion Page (I caught it in the print edition this morning, also available here - I entreat you to read it thoroughly) made a case similar to mine but more eloquently and with more substance (of course, he gets paid more than I do). Daniel raises a point similar to others that have pointed to the fact that both the war in Iraq and the retirement/appointment of several SCOTUS judges will be at stake and under the direct influence of the next president. I reject the unfortunate reference (by Henninger in the title of the accompanying video at the WSJ web site) to conservatives who are not satisfied with McCain as needing to “grow up”… this kind of attack on people’s opinions is unjustified. I may disagree with the idea of ignoring the election, but I don’t consider it productive to use name-calling as an inducement encourage people to change their opinions, and I prefer to respect those opinions. However, Dan and I seem to agree that working together within the Party is essential for long-term success.

That said, I will make, and will continue to make, this call to all Republicans: let’s continue talking about the issues. Don’t stop. Continue sharing your opinions, reinforcing what is right, attacking what is wrong, and seeking to influence the Party. We can do that. We really can make a difference together. This country, and this party, are great and will continue to make themselves great by talking about what’s important, by listening to each other, by sharing each other’s visions for the future.

Hat tip to BitHead for the Fox lead.

Update: Others blogging include: Sister Toldjah, Blue Crab Boulevard, Stop the ACLU, Gateway Pundit, Outside the Beltway, Politico, Captain Ed, and Michelle Malkin.

Tags: , Barack Obama, Bithead, BitsBlog, Conservative Reader, Daniel Henninger, Hillary Clinton, John McCain, Mike Huckabee, Mitt Romney, Presidential Election, Republican Party, Ron Paul, Wall Street Journal, Wonderland, WSJ

• 2008 Presidential Election , Barack Obama , Hillary Clinton , Iraq , John McCain , Mike Huckabee , Mitt Romney , Political Philosophy , Republican Party , Ron Paul , SCOTUS , US Politics , WAR
• Comments(1)

Art Smith February 4th, 2008

I’ve read and heard a number of conservatives (and I myself have struggled with this) who appear to be giving up on this year’s elections already. I’m disappointed. Ann Coulter certainly exuded an extreme version of the conservative angst (although she’s definitely on the wrong track by suggesting Hillary is a viable alternative to McCain). However just as effective as Coulter’s idea of supporting Clinton are the following ideas:

1. Vote for any candidate on the ballot other than McCain
2. Don’t vote for any candidate for President
3. Skip the election altogether

A man named Rick Warren penned these words in the book The Purpose Driven Life:

It’s not about you.

I think this applies here, with a few more words: “It’s not about the President, either”.

Theory of voting 101: Although we all want to vote for a winner, the best use of your vote is to vote for the candidate that most closely aligns with your principles. This is pretty basic, ignores all of the intricacies of politics (such as, “politicians lie”), and for most of the population would be a better course than what they end up doing (which is truly a popularity contest).

The biggest problem with your basic “vote for the best candidate” idea, and the one that galls most conservatives today, is what amounts to a hypothetical question of “If your options for President were Adolf Hitler, Osama Bin Ladan, and Saddam Hussein, who would you vote for?”. Such a question would cause most normal (Ron Paul’s supporters notwithstanding) people to run screaming from the room. Despite the obvious hyperbole, many conservatives believe they have already been left with a comparable scenario with the remaining candidates for President.

The bulk of the angst is this: the Republican Party appears to have been taken over by Centrists. This is frustrating, but has been going on for a while now. GW Bush is not a conservative. I believe he is a sincere and Godly man, but he leans moderately, and has frankly been in a position since 9/11 that has required compromise in order to achieve some level of security for the country. Many politicians within the party across the country struggle with the challenge an increasingly left leaning electorate.

So, we have a largely Centrist, somewhat moderate-conservative, and still a substantial conservative set of voices within our own party. If the party were made up only of conservatives, it would likely be less than half the size it is right now. I sincerely believe that those that lean toward a Centrist position are experiencing, to some degree, the siren song that beats through the Left. This is not an ignoble song, but a misguided one. It is a song that pulls deeply at the emotions and expresses itself in passionate love and kindness that has a tactical view… solve for the moment. Those that are Centrist may have been Conservatives but have grown a fear that they lack compassion and seek to solve that by looking for immediate answers to life’s problems. Centrists and Moderate-Conservatives need more education and mentoring, and need to be shown that while our emotions are valuable, and that love and kindness need to be at the core of our world-view, we need to work from the big picture. We need to be strategic. We need to help people find ways to help themselves instead of being dependent on others.

None of that will happen if we disengage, and stating that we won’t vote is going to communicate to everyone that we’re only interested in participating if we have our way.

Now, I do understand the idea proposed by some of stepping back and allowing events to transpire on the course that has essentially been set. We can all agree that there will NOT be a conservative player in the Oval Office from 2009-2012. Some would say this is an opportunity for people to see what happens when you allow the Left to run the country. We’re all pretty convinced it will be a disaster, or at least a miserable time for the country.

I’m not a big fan of co-dependent behavior, but I think our responsibility runs deeper. I don’t think we need to nor can we really prove the superiority of the conservative mindset by simply allowing what appears to be the “worst-case” scenario just play itself out. It should not be about whether we are right or not, it should be about doing our best to ensure the best happens, and doing our best to preserve in every way possible, this nation we so thoroughly call our own.

Getting back to what it’s about, we have become convinced that politics is about what happens in November. Nothing can be further from the truth. November is a blip, it’s a building of the landscape upon which the work of our government will be done for the next 2 years. Yes, I’m not even talking about the election of the President, but the election of the members of the US House Of Representatives and 1/3 of the US Senate. But it’s the other 24 months (minus the campaigning time) when Congress is in session, when our voices can be heard daily and conveyed to our representatives, it’s the grassroots party meetings that set the agenda for each election cycle, it’s the letters to the editors, the blogging, the public speaking, the assemblies to protest the wrongs in Darfur and the abortionist’s offices, the personal contact that each of us can have with those in different levels of power that make a difference.

However, when we treat any part of the process with contempt, and I would propose that declining to vote, and further persuading others to do the same, we trifle the entire political process. When we consider that the most precious right we hold (and yes, many would consider a duty) continues to set us apart from billions of others on our planet, we should consider it worth pursuing, promoting, and placing above our personal disappointments.

We also undermine our core effort (helping the party moving back to its conservative roots) when we treat the process in this manner. If we think the Party is important enough to participate in, we should also accept the voice of the party even when we disagree. There may be times (and for some, that time may be now) when the need to leave the party altogether and start anew is necessary, but if we believe the party can grow, change, and be led back to its conservative roots, then we should actively do everything possible to help make that happen. True, we lack the strength of influence that a leading conservative candidate would bring to our voices, but our voices can still be heard. If not at the national level, at least at the local level. Maybe this year, more voices around the country can start influencing those they have contact with in the party so that better ideas can be brought to the state and even national halls of legislation. If we work hard to show our respect to the party, more in the party will listen. And if they listen, we can influence.

This is a never ending effort. We, and those that follow us, will need to do the same work every year… we never “get there”, we must carry on the work generation after generation. The failings of our current generation are tied deeply in the same failings that have impacted our education system, our moral integrity as a society, and our entitlement mentality. If we give up and step back, we perpetuate this already destructive cycle. We need to make it stop.

I’m going to suggest that none of the options at the top are appropriate. Whomever is the Republican Nominee, we should support them. Be vocal about the issues… be vocal about the character flaws… be honest, but support the Republican Party. It’s the only place I can see where Conservatives have a serious voice and a chance to make a real difference, even this year.

Finally, encourage others to vote, and to vote as they think best. Encourage them to participate in the whole process. Everyone’s voice matters.

(Author’s note: Although reading the views and struggles of a number of different bloggers over the past few weeks has motivated me to write this, I prefer not to point any of them out in particular. I would prefer that none perceive this as a reaction to any specific comments, but rather to all of us that are struggling with the disappointment in the current state of the Republican Party and questioning ourselves about how best to react.)

Tags: Adolf Hitler, Congressional Election, Conservative Reader, Democrat, House of Representatives, John McCain, President, Presidential Election, Republican, Rick Warren, Senate, US Congress, Vote

• 2008 Congressional Election , 2008 Presidential Election , Ann Coulter , Blogging , George W. Bush , Hillary Clinton , John McCain , Mitt Romney , Political Philosophy , Republican Party , Rights , US Congress , US Politics
• Comments(0)

Art Smith January 23rd, 2008

I’ve already read a number of strong and thought provoking comments around various blogs as people have anticipated (prior to yesterday’s announcement) and reacted to Fred’s departure from the race. There is significant support for Fred’s message, disappointment (and some outrage) over his announcement, and frustration that the remaining lot of Republican candidates leave much to be desired. What is a conservative voter to do?

Some have suggested other candidates. Those that would be happy to have anyone other than Hillary or Obama in office lean heavily toward one of the front runners, who I think are in the position they are in because of one of three things:

1. Their elect-ability (I despise this reason)
2. Their message appeals to many who are toward the middle or left side of the party
3. Nothin. I just hate lists of 2, and had to have a list of three to feel like a list was valid here.

Some have suggested not voting. I do not oppose this option assuming one thing… you still go to the polls in November. I don’t know if I can say it enough, but voting is an incredible right and opportunity that should be never taken for granted. I know a lot of people treat it carelessly, or with disdain, or dishonor it by casting an uninformed ballot, but if we treat it as something so lacking in value that we avoid it, we are making the wrong statement. Cast a blank ballot and let yourself be counted before you make your voice go unheard.

Some have suggested voting for the Democrat. Or another party. I suspect that a conservative or extremist third-party candidate will make a strong showing this year, even if it’s Ron Paul. In any case, I don’t see any value in these options with one possible exception… if Fred Thompson or someone that held his values setup a third-party run, I think I could support that. I don’t see Fred doing that as I think he is too strong a supporter of the party. There could be some interesting possibilities.  As I always say, you should vote for who you think best reflects your values.

I don’t have a candidate I can support for President at this point. If the election were today, I’d probably either write-in a candidate or skip that part of the ballot.

As big a deal as we make about the election of the next President (and it is a fairly big deal), and as disappointed as I may be about Fred’s decision, I am quite anxious to see how our mix of Representative and Senatorial candidates come out. Tom Harkin is up for reelection in Iowa (I would love to see a strong conservative candidate run against him… if only Fred lived in Iowa). 1/3 of the Senate and all of the House are up for elections… there is a consensus that the makeup of the new Congress will lean to the left, but we have a an opportunity still to see a shift in the right direction. The President provides leadership, represents us to the world, sets foreign policy, oversees the military and appoints various officials. Congress passes the laws and spends our money. I think it’s reasonable to start focusing our sights on Congress and see how we can help influence their work for the next couple of years. We desperately need to stop the crazy spending frenzy that is putting us further in debt, eating away at out income and creating a larger burden for future generations. We need a tax policy that is fair, makes sense, and helps us hold Congress more accountable. We need laws that protect our rights, our freedoms, and helps build up our country and people. We need a strong military and internal defense. We need sensible immigration policy. We need tools to allow for reasonable enforcement of all of our laws. We need a stable economy. We need a smaller government.

In the next week, look for a statement on what we need from a President and Congress.  It will be here in place of the “Why Fred?” page (which will still be available on the site, don’t worry).

Tags: Congress, Conservative Reader, Democrat, Fred Thompson, House, President, Presidential Election, Republican, Rights, Ron Paul, Senate, Tax, Tom Harkin

• 2008 Presidential Election , Democratic Party , Economy , Fred Thompson , Immigration , Iowa Politics , Military , Political Philosophy , Rights , Ron Paul , TAXES , Tax Relief , US Congress , US Politics
• Comments(0)