No Runny Eggs

As I noted on this morning’s edition of The Morning Scramble, John Hawkins asked RNC Chair Mike Duncan about those conservatives who might sit out in November (Hawkins’ question in bold, Duncan’s answer in normal type):

Here’s an argument that I don’t agree with, but that I hear a lot: it goes something like this, “The GOP is doing a poor job of representing conservatives. So, what we need to do is deliberately lose in 2008 and then, after a few years of Hillary or Barack in charge, America will be sick of the Left, the GOP will be serious about conservative principles again, and the Party will come back stronger than ever and more representative of conservative views.” Again, I don’t agree with that, but I hear it a lot. What do you say to that?

Well, that is a fallacious argument. It’s also dangerous and let me paint a picture of why. Taken to the extreme, that would return us to 1964 when the Democrats controlled the government entirely.

Look at all the programs that were introduced during that period of time that we’ve had trouble managing, that were are expensive, that have caused us to raise taxes.

So, I think if people sit down and think about turning the entire government over to the Democrats and what that would do to them individually — it would take money away from their families, take jobs away from small businesses, and I think it would be disastrous for our economy. That would be a nightmare in my estimation.

I am not a Party guy, so I’m not overly-wedded to voting for the person with an “R” behind his or her name no matter what. At the same time, I recognize that this is a two-party country, and while the Republican Party mostly tolerates conservatives even as certain elements including its last few standard-bearers stabbed us in the back, the Democratic Party has no desire for anything approaching conservatism.

I also recognize that while conservatism is still the most-popular philosophy in America, it is shared by neither the majority of Americans nor the majority of those who care enough to vote. Indeed, the liberals’ two-pronged strategy of driving people out of the political arena and creating a sufficient number of teat-suckers wholly dependent on government has pretty much borne its fruit.

I personally believe it’s now or never for conservatives in the GOP. I say that knowing we’ve already lost the executive on paper, and knowing the NRCC and NRSC will do everything in its power to save the liberal incumbents. There is a reason I didn’t use “Democrats” in the previous paragraph; it’s a bipartisan rush to liberalism among those in government. Indeed, I’ve called them the bipartisan Party-In-Government.

I note that Duncan brought up the aftermath of 1964. It would have made a bigger impact on me had the out-of-control spending on items the federal government has no business spending a penny on, like health care and education, not repeated itself the last 6 years, mostly under effective Republican control. It would have made a bigger impact on me had the tax rate cuts reduced the government’s take of the economy instead of increased it; indeed, those cuts were sold as not reducing the government’s take.

The only reason I am willing to try one last attempt to turn the GOP to the right is I don’t believe the Democrats will make the same mistake they did in the 1820s and 1850s and allow another party to rise up to challenge it on anything beyond the local level.