GOP Conservatism, Libertarianism and Progressivism
If the GOP wants a truly robust future, it must reject the progressivism of John McCain and embrace the rising libertarian tide in America. In reality, it is that, and not the inclusion of McCain's so-called progressivism, that best mirrors the core of the winning Reagan coalition now decades old.
A few quick thoughts in follow up to an off-line discussion of GOP politics with Melissa Clouthier. The GOP establishment and even some conservative leaders are making a mistake by tolerating the alleged progressive Republican agenda of John McCain, as well as like-minded candidates, think Crist, Fiorina, and others.
McCain's progressivism does not represent any future for the GOP. What it is is an act of appeasement, or contrition to the statism of today's Democrats. If Obama is losing the youth vote, as Socialist Bernie Sanders submits, he is losing them because his agenda, and the agenda of progressive Republicans, is statist. The youth are first and foremost among us in thowing off authority. Statism will never appeal to the silent majority of America's youth. In fact, libertarianism can. And the large presence of young political guns at CPAC demonstrated it.
"What is very sad is we had hopes that [the] election was transformational in the sense of bringing people into the political process who have never been in it before," Sanders said. "I tried very hard in Vermont to bring young people into the political process. It is very hard to do. Obama did it. But you know where those young people are now? They are not in the political process. They really aren't. We have lost them.
McCain's brand of progressivism is but a half-power grab in order to share the spoils with an increasingly Leftist, Big Government Democrat Party. Neither ideology is liberty based. Both conservatism and libertarianism are. Together, they can represent a bright future for the GOP. Nothing John McCain is selling fits the bill.
The most succinct and accurate critique of McCainism ever articulated.
Well put Dan- although I respect him greatly on defense issues -my hot button- McCain’s election loss in 08 may be -as many have noted- the best possible outcome for true conservatives, if we can just contain the damage from Chairman Zero, anyway.
The good times of the 90s reduced the contrast between Left and Right, pols just went along to get along, “splitting the spoils” as you note. With no crises, there was no need for heroes who take brave stands- so why stick it out when everybody’s OK with moderates? The country also felt rich and safe… that made them intellectually lazy and spendthrift, tending towards consensus, and avoiding confrontation- John McCain’s current thinking is a product of this chummy “co-op”.
But the sharp Obama-induced political divide in this country -and subsequent TEA party battles with the GOP- are bringing to the fore the kind of Reaganites we never thought we’d be seeing again. The country is begging for GOP heroes to stand in front of Obama’s steamroller like Tienanmen 1989- and those who wish to remain in politics past Nov 2010 will need to step up to the plate now.
Reaganite principles just happen to be the ideal cure for Obama’s damage, too… quite similar to the mess in 1980 that woke people up and drove them towards the “dangerous” Gipper.
Never waste a good crisis, right Rahm?
I can assure you that WE won’t-
I just do not understand the name-calling. It lowers the discourse, and proves that your argument is hyperbole and is fact less. I keep hearing that Pres. Obama is a socialist /Marxist. Those who call him that have no idea what a socialist /Marxist is. They definitely have not read Karl Marx, nor lived in a socialist country. If so, they would not make such baseless and silly comparisons. No politician or person is perfect, just like Reagan (Iran-Contra), Limbaugh, (traveling internationally with someone’s else’s Viagra RX), etc. Reagan, in his autobiography, recognizes his shortcomings. I did not vote for Reagan but I respected him. He had a difficult personal life, a stormy relationship with his children, but he would not have campaigned like Palin, nor would he engage in personal attacks, and definitely would not have compared a person who lost both his legs and one of arms in military action to Hussein and Bin Laden.
O-bah-muhh/McCain policies have lead to the current levels of unemployment that effect the 18-29 year old eligible voters most. Ron Paul libertarianism appeals to the ‘F— Off, Gov’t.’ attitude that a lot of youth have. When they find out how much government f—s with their lives in the ‘real’(after leaving mom’s apron strings) world, suddenly ‘Hope & Change’ is a sucker’s reward. Bon Appetit kids. Hope the GOP don’t get too confident about 2012, if they do well in 2010, they’ll have 2 years to prove they are not O-bah-muhh/McCain.
As a life-long American conservative, I cannot support your suggestion for an embrace of Libertarianism. See http://www.americanconservativesthink.blogspot.com/ for my take on why American Conservatism is self-sufficient for Constitution-loving Americans.
Dan,
You don’t sound any different than Glenn Beck! I know you don’t like him but you and him sound no different in this post. I’m still thinking about that “angry” post. It should be framed and put in every school, barracks and government offices especially the oval one.
The libertatian right hums with the all American yearning for fiscal conservatisim. Kids who are now paying taxes and looking at the disappearing Soc. Security tab have their ears pricked to this massage.
Dan Riehl: There needs to be outrage
Dan Riehl and Melissa Clouthier caught on Fox News camera during CPAC 2010 last month. “The youth are first and foremost among us in throwing off authority,” writes Riehl. We agree with him that “McCain’s progressivism does not represent any…
Any fact facing us is not as important as our attitude toward it, for that determines our success
nelaeagennyg99811
very informational… educative as well, i read and felt like reading over and over again….good job!