Scott Allan's World

Thanks to Don at Doctor IQ for this:

Senator Tom Coburn of Oklahoma:

“Conservatives should be reassured that our president-elect did not seek an ideological mandate in this election, nor did he receive one. The failure of the Republican Party in this election does not represent the failure of conservatism, but of the big government Republicanism that took over our party in 1996. Had the Republican Party not governed as the party of socialism-lite for the past 12 years, our candidates’ concerns about the excessive spending on the other side would have had more relevance.

“Republican efforts to build a governing majority through spending and earmarks have ended in disgrace. The Republican Party can either restore its identity as the party of limited government or go the way of the Whigs. When Republicans decide to come home to the timeless conservatism present at our founding, the conservatism of Abraham Lincoln – which our president-elect graciously acknowledged last night – and the conservatism of Ronald Reagan that won the Cold War and led to unprecedented prosperity, they know where to find us.”

Dr. Coburn only scratches the surface about the troubles of the Republican Party. They didn’t lose the election because of their spending and earmarks although that didn’t help. The people voted for a party that promised even more spending and earmarks so that can’t be it. Republicans will never lose their base to the Democrats no matter how economically irresponsible they are because conservatives believe in more than balancing a budget. They lost the election because the “Big Tent” has shrunk.

They have lost their appeal to independent voters, minorities especially. Our platform is too narrow and rigid for new voters to feel welcome here. Sadly if you ask most of the country where they stand on specific issues, they are more conservative than liberal. Most people want a strong military, more freedom, low taxes, and controlled spending. So why did people leave the party after Reagan worked so hard to bring everyone in?

This is a huge marketing problem. We need a place where people can feel welcome to express differing views while agreeing on the basic principles of strong military and small government. It’s the social issues that smack of intolerance and self-righteousness.

The stance on illegals is probably the biggest problem facing the GOP right now. John McCain was so afraid he would lose his “base” that he did not mention his Amnesty Bill once during the general election campaign. They’d better do a solid 180 on this stance real quick. We need a practical solution, not a hardline ideological one.

Sure build a fence for security against terrorism, but create a path to citizenship. Stop all this “deport them all” attitude. Stop this “rule of law” crap. Change the law instead. The people are here in overwhelming numbers so you’d better embrace the largest minority in this country or as Coburn says, “Go the way of the Whigs”. Tell these people we want them here and we want them to be Republicans. We value their work and recognize they contribute to this country just as our immigrant forefathers have. Stop trying to mandate English as the national language and instead help these people learn English. Stop accusing them of stealing jobs that nobody else wants. Try to integrate them into society instead of isolating them. There is no wonder Hispanics don’t vote Republican.

Stop the prayer in school arguments. Stop demanding the Ten Commandments in court houses. These are not issues that are so overwhelmingly important that it is worth scaring off potential supporters. Most people believe religion should be taught in the home and the church. Quite frankly that’s where it belongs. The Republican Party is viewed as being controlled by the Evangelicals just as the Democrat Party is viewed as being controlled by MoveOn.org and Code Pink. This damages our brand just like the wacko liberals damage the Democratic brand. Although I’m sure there are conservative Democrats in this country, it sure doesn’t feel like it when you look at Congress and the media.

Many of our arguments need to change that have a religious tone. I am pro-life but this should not be a religious argument as it comes across now. Being pro-life should also be a secular belief, even a Constitutional argument, that innocent life needs to be protected. Almost everyone can agree whether pro-life or pro-choice that there should be less abortions. Most Americans would not approve of abortions for themselves either. We can appeal to most Americans on this issue if it is done the right way. People are turned off by those “holier than thou” no matter what the message. That’s one of the reasons we can’t stand liberals is because they are elitists who feel they know better than the average person and need to make decisions for them. Roe V. Wade will never be corrected as a state’s rights issue if Republicans cannot hold the Presidency and appoint strict constructionist judges. On gay rights, most people are not going to be swayed by the “Adam and Eve, Adam and Steve, it’s sinful” argument either. A small majority of Americans are not in favor of Gay Marriage either as shown in California. But if history tells us anything, the dike has sprung a leak and it is just a matter of time before something happens. Liberals are working hard to influence our children in school and through media and eventually this will prevail in some fashion. Look how attitudes have changed in just the last 20 years. Personally I’m in favor of the Defense of Marriage act, but also in favor of Civil Unions as a legal compromise. I have no problem extending health insurance or life and death decisions to gay couples. If they don’t like the term Civil Unions, come up with some other term such as “Gayrriage” or whatever. Many militant gays won’t be satisfied until they are considered indistinguishable from straight couples. I personally think it is important to separate marriage from gay unions since they are clearly not the same in terms of family dynamics, but again we can probably find a way to compromise on this issue too with most Americans. We also need to appeal to people about the misuse of judicial power making law instead of interpreting it. This is dangerous for any issue.

Change your stance of Global Warming. Even if it is not man made or if it doesn’t exist at all, there is nothing wrong with becoming less dependent on oil and reducing pollution. In the end we both will win. We won’t be sending trillions of dollars to our enemies and the tree huggers will be able to sleep at night. There is a compromise to be had here and everyone can be happy. It will also boost the economy through new technology and jobs. We should be a leader in producing alternative forms of energy, not just consumers. Carbon based forms of energy are finite and non-renewable. Surely we see the long term value in finding another way even if our reasons for doing so are different.

I believe many people want to vote Republican but are driven away for one reason or another. It’s time to get a new tent.