The Long War and the Short War
By E Pluribus Unum Posted in Republicans — Comments (14) / Email this page » / Leave a comment »
IT'S BIGGER THAN 4 YEARS
File under: Conservative long-range plans | baby, bathwater, all that
Note: This is a large excerpt from my diary to the Fredheads. That diary had a specific purpose (to encourage Fredheads to come on board with the McCain election effort). But part of my argument involved describing the big picture -- well, according to me anyway. That diary was meant for a limited audience, but I thought the Long War / Short War thing was perhaps of interest to others.
Tell me what you think.
The Long War
What is it that conservatives want in the long haul, and by that I mean 15-30 years? We could go into details of all sorts, but let's stick to the most basic:
(1) American freedoms secured much like the Founding Fathers envisioned.
(2) The entire judiciary, from top to bottom -- out of the activism business.
(3) A moral compass in place in American life.
(4) Our national interests and borders secure and respected world-wide.
(5) Small government RADICALLY smaller (say 1/4 current size), most cabinet positions and bureaucracies - GONE. The entire onerous regulatory system – GONE, with only such exceptions as are prudent and constitutionally sound.
(6) Energy independence without surrendering to AGW fantasies, and whatever other alarmist nonsense the stupid commies think up next.
I've probably left out a couple of the basics, but you can easily see how these lead to things like Roe v Wade gone, SS privatized then phased out, other entitlements gone, fences up, military without peer, more drilling, taxes way down, and etc and etc. Let's not get bogged down in details.
So THOSE are what we want. The obvious way to get there is through this:
(1) The Republican Party is the vehicle. Period.
(2) That being the case, conservatives must take over the party, to be direct. There are two methods for that, and I recommend using them both.
(a) Purge the GOP elected ranks of RINOs and trough-sucking pigs. Purge it hard, bitter, and thorough. Primary them with conservatives, and don't think twice about nice manners, the buddy system, or seniority. And for Pete’s sake, quit choosing presumed electability over principles. Look where THAT has gotten us.
(b) Engage in an aggressive, long-term campaign of education and advocacy to sell conservative principles, Reagan- style, to the party faithful, and to the American people.
(3) Having taken over the party, and established that the Republican brand means core conservatism, now take our message -- the REAL message of hope and change-- to the American public and start winning elections. Build it from the grassroots up. Do it in city councils and school boards. (if we get our way, 30 years from now there will be no public school system, no school boards, but for now we gotta deal with ‘em).
Make no mistake, the long war is definitely war. The party of squishes (yes, that's us) will not easily give up it's spot at the trough. There will be blood spilt. Entrenched squishes must be primaried. Up-and-coming squishes must be stepped on. And impolite, bloody business, yes. So be it. My knives are already sharpened.
Not all of the benefits of conservative governance are immediately recognizable (kicking people off of welfare, deporting the crap out of illegal aliens, investing heavily in Iraq's liberation, e.g.), and so stupid people will frankly never get it. But because it's a slightly harder sale does NOT mean that most Americans can't get it. They WILL GET IT if we sell the vision with aplomb and verve, baby! The stupid people? Well, they've always got ACORN, ELF, Code Pink, ACLU, and the New York Times.
The Short War
The short war is NOT the time from now to Nov 5. It is the time from now until Jan 2013. We have minorities in both Houses that figure to get worse in January. We have both GOP and Democrat candidates in place, and largely they are known quantities.
The Short War for conservative Americans is this:
(1) Get McCain elected.
(2) Ensure that conservatives can go on record as saying we helped McCain get elected.
(3) Get as many Republican Senators and Congressmen elected as we can.
(4) Keep McCain from promising away the store before he gets elected.
(5) Once he gets elected, get conservatives a seat at the table, and get enough conservative muscle in Congress to keep his leftisms in check.
. We need a seat at the McCain table - which means, balancing our need to punish his mavericking with our need to be able to say that we did not undercut his campaign with excessive criticism.
So to coin a phrase, sometimes take the opportunity to stick a sock in it.
I'm absolutely delighted to have those squishes (or any others) voting for us. I'm somewhat less enthused about having them *represent* us.
In real practicalities though, I also recognize that in the New England states and other blue strongholds, we have to settle for what we can get.
Unfair. Unbalanced. Unmedicated. -- IMAO
How Lindsey Graham is politically still alive in SC is baffling. Here's a state with two rock ribbed conservatives in a red red state, and the Senator that called his own constituents bigots has been able to fly without a primary?? That to me, is completely unbelievable. Limp wrist Lindsey should have been shown the door a long time ago. Then on the other hand, we've got big porker with extra pork on the side Cochran getting ready to get re elected, and Wickers losing in Mississippi for god sakes. But my biggest question is, with McCain already determined to give away the store for his real friends, what makes you think that we'll get a seat at the table anyway. After all, conservatives certainly elected him in Arizona, and he certainly didn't pay his constituents there any respect. Why would he do anything different for conservatives across the country?
Agreed BR on Graham. As a practical matter for now, I think we got more urgent matters than Graham though. Specter, Ted Stevens.
Unfair. Unbalanced. Unmedicated. -- IMAO
Pennsylvanians are blue collar and pro-life. When the abortion issue was taken off the table in 2006, we got killed in PA. And Stevens corruption is got to be killing him in AK. The other thing I would say EPU, is to let the RINOS die and test the blue dogs. We've gota ll these alleged blue dog Democrats running to the Right, bu we don't press them on it. We don't bring up abortion or stem cell research now that they're elected, we barely are able to bring up Iraq, national security or the 2nd amendment. We need voted in Congress to eiher make them show up and vote with us, or reveal them as hypocrites voting against us. Look how Ben Nelson has to cave to the Right in the Senate-how often have we done the same in the House and call these Blue Dogs out of their kennels?
By most definitions, I'd be one of those "squishy" people you mention, mainly due to my views on social/sexual issues. That said, the only item on your most basic list for the Long Haul that I would disagree with is #3, and that only because I believe that a moral compass is something that each individual has to discover for themselves - it cannot possibly be imposed by a freedom loving government without destroying the very freedom that it claims to love. (IMHO). All the other items I'm fairly strongly in favor of.
But because of that one significant difference of opinion, I'm often lumped into the category RINO. Fine. Feel free to call me that if you like, even though it's incorrect. Feel free to try to purge others who think like me from the elected ranks.
BUT... If you're going to use that criteria, I suggest you also apply it to those who fail on the other areas, particularly the smaller government goal in #5. I can point to a whole lot more currently elected Republicans who, IMHO, are *far* more qualified for the "RINO" label due to their shortcomings on small government issues than there are those who fail due to their shortcomings on social/sexual issues. Yet oddly, nobody ever seems to use the term when referring to them.
Keep that in mind during your great purge. And good luck with that...
The moral compass is not something that EPU is advocating by government imposition. It is up to *us* to change the culture one person, one class room, one discussion at a time. We want to fight in the right places for the moral order.
You are right though, imposing moral order does not work. You can make something illegal, but you won't change the public's attitudes. In actuality, I think that you do more harm to your cause.
Now also found at The Minority Report
I choose the term 'moral compass' carefully, because it IS about people's internals, not government-imposed things.
When conservatives had succeeded in 'infecting' American culture with our principles, it would lead to more people with more deeply ingrained senses of right and wrong.
Unfair. Unbalanced. Unmedicated. -- IMAO
Have you ever considered why Rudy Giuliani, despite being well to the Left of most here is hardly ever labeled a "squish?"
Personally, I consider John Warner, who is significantly more socially conservative than Rudy to be far more of a squish than the former NYC Mayor.
Same goes when you replace "Warner" with "McCain."
As far as I'm concerned, the difference between a moderate a and "moderate" i.e. a "squish" is cojones - political cojones; the ability to stand fast for what you believe and take a hit for it.
Far too many of the Republicans in Congress can't find theirs with four hands and a flashlight when the Press turns up the heat, but now and then they pull through.
Squishes, on the other hand, are the itinerant compromisers as a matter or principle. They seek consensus at all costs, ceding battlefield after battlefield. In other words, their only political principle is a distinct lack of principles.
As Margaret Thatcher put it;
To me, consensus seems to be the process of abandoning all beliefs, principles, values and policies. So it is something in which no one believes and to which no one objects.
Squishes regularly put such nice-sounding but ultimately irrelevant notions like comity and bipartisanship ahead of good policy. And as such they ensure that the GOP is always the first to blink in a showdown - that's how we end up with 55-45 majority and are still unable to confirm judges or make tax cuts permanent. That's how we ended up with New Tone™.
It's not holding positions to the Left of the average Republican on social issues that makes a squish. It's the lack of a fighting spirit. Rudy is a fighter who didn't give a damn if the Press or the Democrats liked him - he did what he thought was best for the people of NYC and he refused to be influenced/cowed by threats or promises of negative coverage.
This is not to say that McCain does not do what he thinks is right as well. But the Press has a lot more control over him than Rudy.
"First you win the argument, then you win the vote." - MARGARET THATCHER.
So let's start winning the argument.
This post and the Thatcher quote are worth a week's worth of perusing the internet.
As usual, thanks Martin.
Unfair. Unbalanced. Unmedicated. -- IMAO
...is that until the Democratic Party purges itself of its Vietnam nostalgia addicts, the Republican Party is going to have to deal with at least one type of "squish": liberal/centrist natsec hawks.
The Fuzzy Puppy of the VRWC.I've been usurped!