May 21, 2009

Explaining my Anti-McCain outburst

While I wouldn't exactly call it an outburst, earlier I wrote that John McCain needs to step aside from the GOP. He's an impediment to the party and to conservatism in general.

I do not wish to recant that opinion. However, I think it requires a bit of explanation in light of the fact that I've expressly stated in the past, know your friends, know your enemies and pick your battles accordingly. So attacking McCain would seem to be incongruent with that position. Except that it isn't really.

No friend to conservatives

Firstly, I don't number McCain among the enemies of conservatism. However he isn't exactly numbered among the friends of conservatism either.

Here's what I said previously in an open letter to the GOP leadership;
Fifth – know your friends, know your enemies. As a corollary- pick your battles accordingly. It needs to be spelled out. Your enemies are the mainstream media. Your enemies are the weak Republicans who side with the Democrats when there needs to be a unified front – either you believe in conservative principles or you don’t. Your enemies are the Democrats. These people are working against your purpose. Be aware and act accordingly.

Conversely your friends are people to be defended and supported. Be forgiving of friends’ errors, and ruthless in taking advantage of the errors of enemies. Don’t be ashamed to be that way. The Democrats do it, and they often do it brazenly and shamelessly. Guess what, they’re winning the culture war.

For too long Republicans, conservatives have fought with one arm tied behind their back. You’ve tied it there yourselves with kow-towing to the media, with drifting away from conservative values. But you can maintain your principles and still fight. In fact, if you don’t maintain your principles, why bother fighting? And if you don’t fight for your principles, why bother having them in the first place? You have to ask yourselves if you still believe. And if you do still believe, then why aren’t you being fierce in your dedication to preserving and defending the Constitution and the free market?

If you can answer both of those questions positively – you still believe and you are still fighting then you deserve to be a leader in the party. If you can’t answer both questions positively, you need to retire. It’s that simple.

Subsequently, and much more recently, I suggested that John McCain become useful to conservatism or step aside. He's debated the right far more than the left. Call it running to the center for the general election, it's still unprincipled because he supposedly revelled in angering conservatives. That, is no friend.

My second point about my rant

He's not a true conservative and didn't deserve to be our standard-bearer. Not that he didn't make a good soldier - in Vietnam or even at times in the Senate. But he has done more harm than good to the GOP. I stand by the position that he is no friend to conservatism.

Some will still raise the argument that conservatives need every voice they can get at this point. That's not true if they are not only singing out of tune with the rest of the choir but are in fact singing an entirely different song and telling the choir they are the ones getting it wrong.

He has not defended conservatism. He has sided with liberals on numerous and substantive issues. A party that does not hold to it's principles but is fluid in it's beliefs to 'fit the times' is not a party of ideals, it is a party consumed with victory. A hollow victory isn't a victory worth winning. Given McCain's moderate stances it's easy to suggest he's simply carved out the moderate space and believes he is doing right. No problem there. However, it doesn't reflect conservatism. Given that he shared the same supposed space with Colin Powell and his daughter Meghan McCain, I'm surprised all three of them didn't vote for Obama.

If conservatives are destined to be the party of 40%, so be it if it's 40% of people who hold common values. Besides, that number is not carved in stone. The way to change that 40% to 60% is by communicating ideas and explaining your positions, clearly, effectively and with conviction. If liberals can do it with platitudes, we can do even more with substance.

2 comments:

  1. Well said:
    "If conservatives are destined to be the party of 40%, so be it if it's 40% of people who hold common values. Besides, that number is not carved in stone. The way to change that 40% to 60% is by communicating ideas and explaining your positions, clearly, effectively and with conviction. If liberals can do it with platitudes, we can do even more with substance. "

    That is ultimately the point.. educating why our principles are superior to the emotional, reactionary, brain freezes usually produced by the left...

    ReplyDelete
  2. Unfortunately we need better tools to do that. We don't have the schools, the MSM and the entertainment industry. We need to step up in those areas AND work that much harder at community outreach efforts in order to get the message through the clutter of liberal tripe.

    I'm annoyed that Michael Steele hasn't been more visible in his efforts to do that and to raise money. Speeches are alright but he should be leaving that to other people and focusing on the grassroots stuff and the money. (Oh, and recruiting quality candidates).

    ReplyDelete

Disagreement is always welcome. Please remain civil. Vulgar or disrespectful comments towards anyone will be removed.

Related Posts Plugin for WordPress, Blogger...

Share This