Yvonne Dewey writes:
1) So long as it's in the opposition, where should the Republican Party focus its energy?
Speaking out against the bad policies of the administration . One of the things driving tea party demonstrations is that we have no leadership in D. C. representing us and speaking out.
2) What is the most worrisome part of Barack Obama's presidency?
His hurry to gain total control of every aspect of American life. So many decisions have been made under the cloak of darkness, overnight. We feel we are marching toward the end of our liberties without having a chance to catch our breath.
3) There's been a lot of debate about the role that talk radio and cable news hosts should play on the right. Particularly controversial are Rush Limbaugh, Glenn Beck, Sean Hannity, Bill O'Reilly and Mark Levin. What do you think about these folks? Do they help the right or hurt it (or is it more complicated than that?) How should Republicans interact with them?
Conservative talk show hosts help the right, I can’t see that any of them have done any harm to the right. They keep us informed, and that is very helpful. Republicans should and do pay them the respect they are due, and support them as they are under fire.
4) One particularly fraught controversy pertains to race in America -- with the first black president in the White House, some conservatives have been criticized as racists for opposing him, and some on the right have accused the Obama Administration or its allies of racism or anti-white sentiments (for example, Sonja Sottomayor's "wise Latina" comment drew fire, as did the Skip Gates incident). As the right thinks about political strategy and policy, how should it approach matters of race?
RACE does not enter into this at all, until the left inserts it. It’s an issue they manufactured. They know that people really do not want to be called racist, so when the right threatens them in some way, leftists yell racism. Sometimes it works, and people back off. The right should not back down. Obama should be treated as a man who was elected President, with no regard to his race.
5) Is there anything you observe locally, or that Republicans in your area of the country care about, that doesn't get sufficient attention in the national media conversation? If so tell me a bit about the issue, and the approach you think the right ought to take.
Texas passed sweeping tort reform in 2003, and it has made a huge difference here. Doctors can practice without too much stress, their malpractice insurance is greatly reduced, and I know of hospitals that have been able to use their malpractice insurance savings for new life-saving equipment or expansions. Keep in mind, though, that all we did was to cap punitive damages. Patients’ rights are still intact. Nobody in DC wants to talk about tort reform, but nationwide tort reform would make health care affordable. Obama’s sympathies are with the trial lawyers, however. And people on the right are not talking about it nearly enough.
6) Traditionally the Republican Party has been a coalition of religious conservatives, libertarians, fiscal conservatives, and national security conservatives. Is that alliance viable going forward? If so, what must be done to hold it together? If not, what alliance should the GOP try to build?
The alliance is viable going forward, we need to concentrate on our conservative roots from this point forward, and ignore suggestions from liberals and moderates that we need to move to the left or center. We need no new alliance.
7) Is there anything I didn't ask about that you'd like the media or the country as a whole to know?
My personal feeling is that Republicans should be allowed to nominate their candidates, Democrats should be allowed to nominate their own, etc. etc. Republicans did not choose John McCain as a presidential nominee. Moderates, independents and Democrats chose John McCain for us, with a lot of help from the liberal media.
TO WHICH I REPLIED...
Thanks so much for taking the time to respond.
And if I may, one followup question. When asked about the most worrisome aspect of Barack Obama's presidency, you wrote, "His hurry to gain total control of every aspect of American life. So many decisions have been made under the cloak of darkness, overnight. We e feel we are marching toward the end of our liberties without having a chance to catch our breath."
I want to be sure that your position is understood, and I fear that this is vague enough that different people might interpret it in ways you don't intend. So if you don't mind, would you give a more specific account of your position? That is to say, what are the particular decisions you're worried by that were made under the cloak of darkness? And which liberties specifically do you regard as under threat?
Thanks again for writing, and have a wonderful Friday.
MS. DEWEY THEN WROTE BACK...
Yes, many people have trouble with my cryptic messages.
I am facing two serious deadlines, no time to do research, but I will try to be a little clearer, then again… Barack Hussein Obama’s decision to send $200 million to Hamas, to relocate those people in this country. Hamas is a terrorist group, their only goals are to destroy everyone who does not agree with them. i.e. Israel. Why bring them here? Has he not been watching Britain and France, their Muslim immigrants are creating real havoc. Despite what he said, this is not a Muslim Country, we do not need a Muslim majority ruling America. This is one decision that was made under the cloak of darkness.
The enormous success of Cash for Clunkers. What success? Car dealers have still not been paid for the $4,500 discounts, we did not reduce the need for gasoline by enough MPGs to make a difference, and the cars that were disabled were still drivable, perfect for the low income worker who is struggling to find a way to get to work.
His health care plan. I am sure you read the so-called Waxman 1018 page report. While parts were ambiguous, there were some definite “shalls” that were disturbing. There shall be periodic end-of-life counseling sessions. Bureaucrats will determine whether or not a procedure will be allowed depending on the value of the patient’s contributions to society, including estimated life span.
Obama wanted it passed right away, without giving anyone a chance to read it, even the Congressmen charged with voting. Why? The only reason Obama wanted it rushed through quickly before anyone could read it was that once it was in the sunlight, there would be too much opposition. What would the bill do if it were to be implemented? Eventually drive all insurance companies out of business to get to Obama’s “preferred single payer plan.” He admitted that to save money he would reduce payments to doctors for Medicare patients. Medicare is already paying too small a portion of the costs. He has said that Doctors would all be paid the same. That is not his call. His plan would drive the good doctors into some other profession and we would be left with mediocrity. His only argument has been that we are spreading misinformation, that the plan has not actually been written. If it has not been written, why are we rushing a vote?
What about the Constitution? Czars are unconstitutional, as are government takeover of car manufacturers or other businesses.
Obama has tried to intimidate the tea party attendees into silence. We are Nazis (odd choice of words for the Pelosi-Obamas); radicals, terrorists,
Cap and Trade we’ll save for another day. Another fiasco.
Obama administration has created a crisis here and there…. And need to act quickly to save the country. The bailout money….TARP funds, the list goes on.
\I have probably done nothing but muddy the waters….. but Obama is rushing to make changes that are unconstitutional, and will weaken our rights and freedoms.
Tuesday, October 6, 2009
#5
Nelson Baird writes:
1) So long as it's in the opposition, where should the Republican Party focus its energy?
Whether in opposition or majority the GOP should focus on principle. Little things like the founding documents of our country.
2) What is the most worrisome part of Barack Obama's presidency?
He seems to assume the invalidation of everything this country is build on, has done, and the very condepts of fredom and individual rights on which it is based.
I seem to remember a similar charismatic socialist somewhere in middle Europe about a third of the way through the last century. In BO's case we see he and his party ignoring the rules (1st ammendment, 2nd, 10th, 14th, etc) procedure (see reconciliation). We see the Federal govenment attempting to own the means of production. Eliminate personal property. The Federal government as expressed by BO and his own is attempting to control our very bodies and our tright to life. Just a few minor little things like that. This is much worse than why we threw off King George.
3) There's been a lot of debate about the role that talk radio and cable news hosts should play on the right. Particularly controversial are Rush Limbaugh, Glenn Beck, Sean Hannity, Bill O'Reilly and Mark Levin. What do you think about these folks? Do they help the right or hurt it (or is it more complicated than that?) How should Republicans interact with them?
First tell the truth. Second commit to priciples. Third take committed action in alignment with those priciples. If the chatterring class has a problem with it then THE Chatering Class has a problem--let them keep it.
4) One particularly fraught controversy pertains to race in America -- with the first black president in the White House, some conservatives have been criticized as racists for opposing him, and some on the right have accused the Obama Administration or its allies of racism or anti-white sentiments (for example, Sonja Sottomayor's "wise Latina" comment drew fire, as did the Skip Gates incident). As the right thinks about political strategy and policy, how should it approach matters of race?
In general these race is only an issue among racists of whatever color or ethnic background. This is the very thing that Martin Luther King was attempting to avoid. Honoring such claims with a polite response is a self defeating excercise--it legitimizes the claim of the unsatisfiable.
5) Is there anything you observe locally, or that Republicans in your area of the country care about, that doesn't get sufficient attention in the national media conversation? If so tell me a bit about the issue, and the approach you think the right ought to take.
Teaparty. rule of law. Actually being conservative in approach, and deeds.
6) Traditionally the Republican Party has been a coalition of religious conservatives, libertarians, fiscal conservatives, and national security conservatives. Is that alliance viable going forward? If so, what must be done to hold it together? If not, what alliance should the GOP try to build?
That alliance is about 80% in my county. Looks pretty good from here.
7) Is there anything I didn't ask about that you'd like the media or the country as a whole to know?
Many pundits have the grass roots conservative groups upside down. They seem to take the Democrat model that things are always driven from the top. The pundits seem to think that the leaders in the conservative groups are using the members to do something. In each of the groups I have seen in person, it is exactly the other way arround. The members are using the organization and it leaders to accomplish something of importance to them. The leaders are merely attempting to stay ahead of the parade.
1) So long as it's in the opposition, where should the Republican Party focus its energy?
Whether in opposition or majority the GOP should focus on principle. Little things like the founding documents of our country.
2) What is the most worrisome part of Barack Obama's presidency?
He seems to assume the invalidation of everything this country is build on, has done, and the very condepts of fredom and individual rights on which it is based.
I seem to remember a similar charismatic socialist somewhere in middle Europe about a third of the way through the last century. In BO's case we see he and his party ignoring the rules (1st ammendment, 2nd, 10th, 14th, etc) procedure (see reconciliation). We see the Federal govenment attempting to own the means of production. Eliminate personal property. The Federal government as expressed by BO and his own is attempting to control our very bodies and our tright to life. Just a few minor little things like that. This is much worse than why we threw off King George.
3) There's been a lot of debate about the role that talk radio and cable news hosts should play on the right. Particularly controversial are Rush Limbaugh, Glenn Beck, Sean Hannity, Bill O'Reilly and Mark Levin. What do you think about these folks? Do they help the right or hurt it (or is it more complicated than that?) How should Republicans interact with them?
First tell the truth. Second commit to priciples. Third take committed action in alignment with those priciples. If the chatterring class has a problem with it then THE Chatering Class has a problem--let them keep it.
4) One particularly fraught controversy pertains to race in America -- with the first black president in the White House, some conservatives have been criticized as racists for opposing him, and some on the right have accused the Obama Administration or its allies of racism or anti-white sentiments (for example, Sonja Sottomayor's "wise Latina" comment drew fire, as did the Skip Gates incident). As the right thinks about political strategy and policy, how should it approach matters of race?
In general these race is only an issue among racists of whatever color or ethnic background. This is the very thing that Martin Luther King was attempting to avoid. Honoring such claims with a polite response is a self defeating excercise--it legitimizes the claim of the unsatisfiable.
5) Is there anything you observe locally, or that Republicans in your area of the country care about, that doesn't get sufficient attention in the national media conversation? If so tell me a bit about the issue, and the approach you think the right ought to take.
Teaparty. rule of law. Actually being conservative in approach, and deeds.
6) Traditionally the Republican Party has been a coalition of religious conservatives, libertarians, fiscal conservatives, and national security conservatives. Is that alliance viable going forward? If so, what must be done to hold it together? If not, what alliance should the GOP try to build?
That alliance is about 80% in my county. Looks pretty good from here.
7) Is there anything I didn't ask about that you'd like the media or the country as a whole to know?
Many pundits have the grass roots conservative groups upside down. They seem to take the Democrat model that things are always driven from the top. The pundits seem to think that the leaders in the conservative groups are using the members to do something. In each of the groups I have seen in person, it is exactly the other way arround. The members are using the organization and it leaders to accomplish something of importance to them. The leaders are merely attempting to stay ahead of the parade.
#4
Henry Glasheen writes:
1) So long as it's in the opposition, where should the Republican Party focus its energy?
The Republican minority needs to work on new ideas. Simply obstructing Obama will not be enough. I am not sure that Contract with America ( a la 1994) will work because we just lost control in 2006. We have to ignore the fact that we do not have a voting majority and keep on making proposals. Otherwise green energy jobs will start to make a lot of sense. I think a lot of the leadership gets frustrated because nothing we propose has a chance at passage. That should not stop the Republicans from making proposals to counter the environmental and economic policy issues. Not just opposition, but proposals that would work without some of the undesirable side affects.
2) What is the most worrisome part of Barack Obama's presidency?
He has the Clinton economic staff in place that brought us the .com debacle and allowed hundreds of banks to merge and create 5-6 super banks. That set the stage for the problems we are currently in, and I am afraid they will make another mistake that will not be easy to fix. Now we have Wells-Wachovia, Bank America-Merril-Countrywide, and JP Morgan-WAMU. They have continued to allow banks to merge, and we are getting close to a point where the federal government will be completely in charge of the banking system. The part that bothers me the most about his presidency is that I believe he intimidates the media to run only favorable information on his administration. I look at the situation with Rick Santelli, and I think the media moves even farther away from objectivity. Also, I don’t think he has a clue of what he is doing.
3) There's been a lot of debate about the role that talk radio and cable news hosts should play on the right. Particularly controversial are Rush Limbaugh, Glenn Beck, Sean Hannity, Bill O'Reilly and Mark Levin. What do you think about these folks? Do they help the right or hurt it (or is it more complicated than that?) How should Republicans interact with them?
I have never watched any of them, so I cant comment on specific content. I think they helped in 1994 because it was a new phenomenon, and the American public mistook it for alternative news. In 2009, it just frustrates the conservatives more to hear it. I don’t think berating the President is proper under any circumstances, but I also think that the American people are becoming very cynical about politics. I don’t think they (Rush, Hannity etc) make that any better, but I have never seen them so I don’t know. I think we have to be careful not to push the conservatives away from politics because they are frustrated and feel the game is rigged. We need to send the message that participation can help to oppose those things you do not agree with, not simply point out how soft the media is on him. I am sending invitations out to a fund raiser for our county party, and apathy is a problem right now. I think conservative talk radio has a lot to do with that.
4) One particularly fraught controversy pertains to race in America -- with the first black president in the White House, some conservatives have been criticized as racists for opposing him, and some on the right have accused the Obama Administration or its allies of racism or anti-white sentiments (for example, Sonja Sottomayor's "wise Latina" comment drew fire, as did the Skip Gates incident). As the right thinks about political strategy and policy, how should it approach matters of race?
I think the right needs to take the high road on the whole topic. Enough Americans see it for what it is. It would seem to me that you are not going to win over the people who think it is racism, but you make points with the people that are smart enough to see it for what it is if you don’t enter the fray. Leave the entire topic alone. It might make sense to have Republicans say something like this. Race relations in America have been improved in a hard fought struggle by people like MLK, and we do not want to set those relations back in the name of partisan bickering. I think the media draws conservatives into that fight, but they should take the high road.
5) Is there anything you observe locally, or that Republicans in your area of the country care about, that doesn't get sufficient attention in the national media conversation? If so tell me a bit about the issue, and the approach you think the right ought to take.
If the Federal Reserve takes over control of banks in this country and crowds out the FDIC, we will lose about 85,000 jobs in Utah. It is a typical retaliation shot against the red states because those jobs go back to Ill, NY, NJ, and NC. All blue states. This and many of the environmental rules have really hurt our state.
6) Traditionally the Republican Party has been a coalition of religious conservatives, libertarians, fiscal conservatives, and national security conservatives. Is that alliance viable going forward? If so, what must be done to hold it together? If not, what alliance should the GOP try to build?
We have seen many elections where the various fringe elements of the Democratic Party had to just shut up and vote for a candidate because the party supported their cause. If the religious right cannot do the same from time to time, the party is in deep trouble.
7) Is there anything I didn't ask about that you'd like the media or the country as a whole to know?
No. Not much sense trying to say anything to the media. They never listen.
Thanks so much for taking the time to respond to this.
Best,
Conor Friedersdorf
1) So long as it's in the opposition, where should the Republican Party focus its energy?
The Republican minority needs to work on new ideas. Simply obstructing Obama will not be enough. I am not sure that Contract with America ( a la 1994) will work because we just lost control in 2006. We have to ignore the fact that we do not have a voting majority and keep on making proposals. Otherwise green energy jobs will start to make a lot of sense. I think a lot of the leadership gets frustrated because nothing we propose has a chance at passage. That should not stop the Republicans from making proposals to counter the environmental and economic policy issues. Not just opposition, but proposals that would work without some of the undesirable side affects.
2) What is the most worrisome part of Barack Obama's presidency?
He has the Clinton economic staff in place that brought us the .com debacle and allowed hundreds of banks to merge and create 5-6 super banks. That set the stage for the problems we are currently in, and I am afraid they will make another mistake that will not be easy to fix. Now we have Wells-Wachovia, Bank America-Merril-Countrywide, and JP Morgan-WAMU. They have continued to allow banks to merge, and we are getting close to a point where the federal government will be completely in charge of the banking system. The part that bothers me the most about his presidency is that I believe he intimidates the media to run only favorable information on his administration. I look at the situation with Rick Santelli, and I think the media moves even farther away from objectivity. Also, I don’t think he has a clue of what he is doing.
3) There's been a lot of debate about the role that talk radio and cable news hosts should play on the right. Particularly controversial are Rush Limbaugh, Glenn Beck, Sean Hannity, Bill O'Reilly and Mark Levin. What do you think about these folks? Do they help the right or hurt it (or is it more complicated than that?) How should Republicans interact with them?
I have never watched any of them, so I cant comment on specific content. I think they helped in 1994 because it was a new phenomenon, and the American public mistook it for alternative news. In 2009, it just frustrates the conservatives more to hear it. I don’t think berating the President is proper under any circumstances, but I also think that the American people are becoming very cynical about politics. I don’t think they (Rush, Hannity etc) make that any better, but I have never seen them so I don’t know. I think we have to be careful not to push the conservatives away from politics because they are frustrated and feel the game is rigged. We need to send the message that participation can help to oppose those things you do not agree with, not simply point out how soft the media is on him. I am sending invitations out to a fund raiser for our county party, and apathy is a problem right now. I think conservative talk radio has a lot to do with that.
4) One particularly fraught controversy pertains to race in America -- with the first black president in the White House, some conservatives have been criticized as racists for opposing him, and some on the right have accused the Obama Administration or its allies of racism or anti-white sentiments (for example, Sonja Sottomayor's "wise Latina" comment drew fire, as did the Skip Gates incident). As the right thinks about political strategy and policy, how should it approach matters of race?
I think the right needs to take the high road on the whole topic. Enough Americans see it for what it is. It would seem to me that you are not going to win over the people who think it is racism, but you make points with the people that are smart enough to see it for what it is if you don’t enter the fray. Leave the entire topic alone. It might make sense to have Republicans say something like this. Race relations in America have been improved in a hard fought struggle by people like MLK, and we do not want to set those relations back in the name of partisan bickering. I think the media draws conservatives into that fight, but they should take the high road.
5) Is there anything you observe locally, or that Republicans in your area of the country care about, that doesn't get sufficient attention in the national media conversation? If so tell me a bit about the issue, and the approach you think the right ought to take.
If the Federal Reserve takes over control of banks in this country and crowds out the FDIC, we will lose about 85,000 jobs in Utah. It is a typical retaliation shot against the red states because those jobs go back to Ill, NY, NJ, and NC. All blue states. This and many of the environmental rules have really hurt our state.
6) Traditionally the Republican Party has been a coalition of religious conservatives, libertarians, fiscal conservatives, and national security conservatives. Is that alliance viable going forward? If so, what must be done to hold it together? If not, what alliance should the GOP try to build?
We have seen many elections where the various fringe elements of the Democratic Party had to just shut up and vote for a candidate because the party supported their cause. If the religious right cannot do the same from time to time, the party is in deep trouble.
7) Is there anything I didn't ask about that you'd like the media or the country as a whole to know?
No. Not much sense trying to say anything to the media. They never listen.
Thanks so much for taking the time to respond to this.
Best,
Conor Friedersdorf
#3
Yes Sir,
Thank you for asking such a thoughtful questions.
As it pertains to question 1 the Party should focus its energy on retaking personal liberties. There has been a slow and steady erosion of our liberties since the Roosevelt administration. Our objective should be to retake those liberties, and in doing so, increase the entrepreneurial spirit that has made America great. Einstein did not arrive at his theories of general and special relativity on the mandate of a government bureaucrat. Henry Ford did not revolutionize the auto industry as a result of a government mandate. These were arrived at through individuals taking responsibility for their own destinies.
As it pertains to question 2, I think the most worrisome part of the Obama presidency is the blatant adherence to the socialist doctrine. Everything is a crisis. Everything is so important that there isn't even time for thoughtful consideration of stimulus packages, health-care bills, and the like. When in a crisis mentality, one cannot make rational decisions. Everything about Obama's presidency has been a crisis. It's disturbing.
As it pertains to question 3, these talkshow hosts (and I noticed that you did not include Michael Savage) bring up important dialogs. The party has to move to the right. We must be the party that embraces individual liberties, individual freedoms, and to the extent that these talk show hosts bring us to the right, that's perfect.
As it pertains to question 4, Republicans must reassert themselves as the party of racial equality. After all, we are the party who gave a moral dimension to the civil war. Up until 1934, every single African-American elected to Congress was a Republican. We have to capitalize on this. Liberty knows no color. We are the party of individual rights. We are also the party of women's rights. Of the 9 states that did not ratify the 19th amendment (allowing women to vote) 8 of them had Democrat legislatures. Even before the passage of the 19th amendment there were 26 states, all of them having Republican legislatures, that had state laws allowing women to vote. We have to reassert ourselves in this regard. We are the party of racial equality, sexual equality, and so forth.
As it pertains to question 5, I think Republicans need to reassert ourselves not so much as the party of "no", but as the party of "know". We are the rational voice. We are grown ups.
As it pertains to question 6, my own feeling is that the Republican Party has been little too dogmatic as it pertains to religion. I was personally raised Catholic, but I don't identify with that doctrine.
As it pertains to question 7, my own feeling is that it's OK for Republicans to address the race issue. When people think of "civil rights", they think the Democrats. This is totally incorrect. The 13th amendment (banning slavery), the 14th amendment (guaranteeing equal rights to all citizens regardless of color), and the 15th amendment (conferring the vote on the African-American) were milestones whose importance cannot be underestimated. When it came to the 14th amendment, every single Republican voted for that amendment, and every single Democrat voted against it. We have to understand that we are the party of civil rights. We are the party of women's rights, and we are the party of individual liberties.
Thank you for asking
Jeff Limón
Chairman
Benton County Republican Party (Oregon)
Thank you for asking such a thoughtful questions.
As it pertains to question 1 the Party should focus its energy on retaking personal liberties. There has been a slow and steady erosion of our liberties since the Roosevelt administration. Our objective should be to retake those liberties, and in doing so, increase the entrepreneurial spirit that has made America great. Einstein did not arrive at his theories of general and special relativity on the mandate of a government bureaucrat. Henry Ford did not revolutionize the auto industry as a result of a government mandate. These were arrived at through individuals taking responsibility for their own destinies.
As it pertains to question 2, I think the most worrisome part of the Obama presidency is the blatant adherence to the socialist doctrine. Everything is a crisis. Everything is so important that there isn't even time for thoughtful consideration of stimulus packages, health-care bills, and the like. When in a crisis mentality, one cannot make rational decisions. Everything about Obama's presidency has been a crisis. It's disturbing.
As it pertains to question 3, these talkshow hosts (and I noticed that you did not include Michael Savage) bring up important dialogs. The party has to move to the right. We must be the party that embraces individual liberties, individual freedoms, and to the extent that these talk show hosts bring us to the right, that's perfect.
As it pertains to question 4, Republicans must reassert themselves as the party of racial equality. After all, we are the party who gave a moral dimension to the civil war. Up until 1934, every single African-American elected to Congress was a Republican. We have to capitalize on this. Liberty knows no color. We are the party of individual rights. We are also the party of women's rights. Of the 9 states that did not ratify the 19th amendment (allowing women to vote) 8 of them had Democrat legislatures. Even before the passage of the 19th amendment there were 26 states, all of them having Republican legislatures, that had state laws allowing women to vote. We have to reassert ourselves in this regard. We are the party of racial equality, sexual equality, and so forth.
As it pertains to question 5, I think Republicans need to reassert ourselves not so much as the party of "no", but as the party of "know". We are the rational voice. We are grown ups.
As it pertains to question 6, my own feeling is that the Republican Party has been little too dogmatic as it pertains to religion. I was personally raised Catholic, but I don't identify with that doctrine.
As it pertains to question 7, my own feeling is that it's OK for Republicans to address the race issue. When people think of "civil rights", they think the Democrats. This is totally incorrect. The 13th amendment (banning slavery), the 14th amendment (guaranteeing equal rights to all citizens regardless of color), and the 15th amendment (conferring the vote on the African-American) were milestones whose importance cannot be underestimated. When it came to the 14th amendment, every single Republican voted for that amendment, and every single Democrat voted against it. We have to understand that we are the party of civil rights. We are the party of women's rights, and we are the party of individual liberties.
Thank you for asking
Jeff Limón
Chairman
Benton County Republican Party (Oregon)
#2
Wayne Brady responds:
1) So long as it's in the opposition, where should the Republican Party focus its energy?
Education of the electorate is always very important. When the Party is in the minority, education is more important than ever. We have to explain why conservative principals are better for the country and provide specific solutions to the problems we face. We also have to point out the hazards of allowing government to have more control of our lives.
2) What is the most worrisome part of Barack Obama's presidency?
The most worrisome part is that the Obama administration my put us on an irreversible course toward socialism. The health care proposals coming from the Democrats could, if implemented, make it impossible to roll back. That would mean a loss of the country we were given by our founders and a terrible loss of freedom
3) There's been a lot of debate about the role that talk radio and cable news hosts should play on the right. Particularly controversial are Rush Limbaugh, Glenn Beck, Sean Hannity, Bill O'Reilly and Mark Levin. What do you think about these folks? Do they help the right or hurt it (or is it more complicated than that?) How should Republicans interact with them?
It is constructive to get conservative ideas expressed in a public medium. I would not include Bill O'Reilly in this group. He is not conservative and doesn't spend much time on serious issues. Hugh Hewitt and Dennis Prager are good conservative commentators. These programs can provide a forum for Republicans to debate how to deal with current issues by calling in.
4) One particularly fraught controversy pertains to race in America -- with the first black president in the White House, some conservatives have been criticized as racists for opposing him, and some on the right have accused the Obama Administration or its allies of racism or anti-white sentiments (for example, Sonja Sottomayor's "wise Latina" comment drew fire, as did the Skip Gates incident). As the right thinks about political strategy and policy, how should it approach matters of race?
Conservative have to do a better job of explaining why welfare reform is good for the poor, why keeping taxes low benefits everyone, why quotas harm minorities, and why big government hurts everyone (except for the government class). Conservatives are accused of not caring about the poor and minorities. We need to explain our positions better.
5) Is there anything you observe locally, or that Republicans in your area of the country care about, that doesn't get sufficient attention in the national media conversation? If so tell me a bit about the issue, and the approach you think the right ought to take.
I don't know if this is unique to our state or not. Voters in Oregon vote conservative on ballot measures and liberal when voting for elected officials. I don't know if this is a lack of understanding of conservative principals or simply a tendency to vote for personalities rather than issues.
6) Traditionally the Republican Party has been a coalition of religious conservatives, libertarians, fiscal conservatives, and national security conservatives. Is that alliance viable going forward? If so, what must be done to hold it together? If not, what alliance should the GOP try to build?
This coalition still makes sense. We have to make sure we don't ask for perfection in our candidates. Some people tend to be one issue voters and will not vote for a candidate who is not perfect on their issue even though he is good on everything else.
7) Is there anything I didn't ask about that you'd like the media or the country as a whole to know?
We must fight against people like John McCain who want to make the Republican Party more liberal. We must run as conservatives. Republicans have lost a lot respect among the electorate because they have strayed from conservativism.
1) So long as it's in the opposition, where should the Republican Party focus its energy?
Education of the electorate is always very important. When the Party is in the minority, education is more important than ever. We have to explain why conservative principals are better for the country and provide specific solutions to the problems we face. We also have to point out the hazards of allowing government to have more control of our lives.
2) What is the most worrisome part of Barack Obama's presidency?
The most worrisome part is that the Obama administration my put us on an irreversible course toward socialism. The health care proposals coming from the Democrats could, if implemented, make it impossible to roll back. That would mean a loss of the country we were given by our founders and a terrible loss of freedom
3) There's been a lot of debate about the role that talk radio and cable news hosts should play on the right. Particularly controversial are Rush Limbaugh, Glenn Beck, Sean Hannity, Bill O'Reilly and Mark Levin. What do you think about these folks? Do they help the right or hurt it (or is it more complicated than that?) How should Republicans interact with them?
It is constructive to get conservative ideas expressed in a public medium. I would not include Bill O'Reilly in this group. He is not conservative and doesn't spend much time on serious issues. Hugh Hewitt and Dennis Prager are good conservative commentators. These programs can provide a forum for Republicans to debate how to deal with current issues by calling in.
4) One particularly fraught controversy pertains to race in America -- with the first black president in the White House, some conservatives have been criticized as racists for opposing him, and some on the right have accused the Obama Administration or its allies of racism or anti-white sentiments (for example, Sonja Sottomayor's "wise Latina" comment drew fire, as did the Skip Gates incident). As the right thinks about political strategy and policy, how should it approach matters of race?
Conservative have to do a better job of explaining why welfare reform is good for the poor, why keeping taxes low benefits everyone, why quotas harm minorities, and why big government hurts everyone (except for the government class). Conservatives are accused of not caring about the poor and minorities. We need to explain our positions better.
5) Is there anything you observe locally, or that Republicans in your area of the country care about, that doesn't get sufficient attention in the national media conversation? If so tell me a bit about the issue, and the approach you think the right ought to take.
I don't know if this is unique to our state or not. Voters in Oregon vote conservative on ballot measures and liberal when voting for elected officials. I don't know if this is a lack of understanding of conservative principals or simply a tendency to vote for personalities rather than issues.
6) Traditionally the Republican Party has been a coalition of religious conservatives, libertarians, fiscal conservatives, and national security conservatives. Is that alliance viable going forward? If so, what must be done to hold it together? If not, what alliance should the GOP try to build?
This coalition still makes sense. We have to make sure we don't ask for perfection in our candidates. Some people tend to be one issue voters and will not vote for a candidate who is not perfect on their issue even though he is good on everything else.
7) Is there anything I didn't ask about that you'd like the media or the country as a whole to know?
We must fight against people like John McCain who want to make the Republican Party more liberal. We must run as conservatives. Republicans have lost a lot respect among the electorate because they have strayed from conservativism.
#1
Project description here. If you find this worthwhile please donate on the right sidebar.
Conor,
This was forwarded to me by a Texas county chairman. I am the former chairman of Lubbock County’s GOP and still actively involved in party leadership. I now own and host a top rated political talk show called Pratt on Texas (www.prattontexas.com). Call on me if you need help. My answers are below.
The Questions
1) So long as it's in the opposition, where should the Republican Party focus its energy?
The GOP needs to work on defining what “conservative” means by looking through state platforms and making sure its public positions keep true to those which are adopted by the Party members.
2) What is the most worrisome part of Barack Obama's presidency?
That such large increases in government, dependency, spending, overall size, will be almost impossible to roll back. Also, Obama’s internationalist-leftist foreign policy stands to invite all bad actors to begin taking aggressive steps to destabilize our interests around the world.
3) There's been a lot of debate about the role that talk radio and cable news hosts should play on the right. Particularly controversial are Rush Limbaugh, Glenn Beck, Sean Hannity, Bill O'Reilly and Mark Levin. What do you think about these folks? Do they help the right or hurt it (or is it more complicated than that?) How should Republicans interact with them?
Levin, Limbaugh and Hannity are genuine and fine leaders of conservatism in their own ways. O’Reilly and Beck are not genuine, both have moved their positions to attempt to be popular over the years. Interestingly as well, both O’Reilly and Beck are clearly lacking a depth of understanding of conservative political philosophy. Hannity rarely shows depth on his radio show but seems to have it. The GOP should deal with them just as any candidate or party does with an old fashioned editorial board – attempt to persuade when possible, to win over when needed, and recognize that at times the Party will be at odds with them.
4) One particularly fraught controversy pertains to race in America -- with the first black president in the White House, some conservatives have been criticized as racists for opposing him, and some on the right have accused the Obama Administration or its allies of racism or anti-white sentiments (for example, Sonja Sottomayor's "wise Latina" comment drew fire, as did the Skip Gates incident). As the right thinks about political strategy and policy, how should it approach matters of race?
The GOP should start an almost radically loud drum beat demanding we have a color blind society as Dr. King recommended. We should stop all measurements of race and actively fight the race-pimps who live off of division. An aggressive stance against institutionalized ethnic favoritism should be part of that move.
5) Is there anything you observe locally, or that Republicans in your area of the country care about, that doesn't get sufficient attention in the national media conversation? If so tell me a bit about the issue, and the approach you think the right ought to take.
“Leave us alone” is the constant drum beat about Washington, the state legislature, city council and county government. Those who always “want something” from government are a small but vocal minority on everything from traffic laws to soccer fields and free healthcare to food stamps. Yet, they are always treated as an important majority politically. Most citizens respond well to government remaining “in the background” keeping the streets paved and water running. They want to be left alone in all other areas.
6) Traditionally the Republican Party has been a coalition of religious conservatives, libertarians, fiscal conservatives, and national security conservatives. Is that alliance viable going forward? If so, what must be done to hold it together? If not, what alliance should the GOP try to build?
Yes but there needs to be a pulling together of those interests. For example, Libertarians are big on Liberty and Property but want to ignore Life part of the great three. Some religious conservatives are big on Life but ignore how it is intertwined with Property and Liberty. We need a movement built around the big three: Life, Liberty and the use of Property for one’s own ends. It is almost the same as teaching about the Christian Trinity except that there is much less argument as to the hierarchy of the three .
7) Is there anything I didn't ask about that you'd like the media or the country as a whole to know?
In Texas, outside of the autonomous county party organizations where work is actually done (elections run, candidates recruited, etc.) the other levels of the Party (state and national) are essentially unimportant and usually a pain the ass and not liked. The Party, as it is organized, works this way to the detriment of its real workers: State and National chairmen and board members get all the glory and do none of the work. Local people put in hundreds of hours of work, get no glory, and are looked upon as unimportant (until they need something) by state and national party folk. In Texas, county parties have all the statutory power and raise their own money – they get nothing from the state and RNC except those bodies coming in and raiding the donor pool with fundraising letters which outright lie to party members (saying they are the Local Lubbock Fundraising Drive for example when all funds go elsewhere). This type of thing drives those who do the work, and local party members crazy.
A re-ordering of how the Party is structured is sorely needed. New technology makes the centralized boards unnecessary. For example, big issues before the state party or even the RNC could be decided by Internet polling of elected county chairman or the like – that is the type of governance which was not possible even 20 years ago but is very possible now. I can vote in some national corporate shareholder elections online, we can surely run the party this way and we’d get a much more true picture of what the base thinks. And it would make it far more difficult for powerful Washington interests to sway things “their” way.
No editing here, just off the cuff.
Robert Pratt
Conor,
This was forwarded to me by a Texas county chairman. I am the former chairman of Lubbock County’s GOP and still actively involved in party leadership. I now own and host a top rated political talk show called Pratt on Texas (www.prattontexas.com). Call on me if you need help. My answers are below.
The Questions
1) So long as it's in the opposition, where should the Republican Party focus its energy?
The GOP needs to work on defining what “conservative” means by looking through state platforms and making sure its public positions keep true to those which are adopted by the Party members.
2) What is the most worrisome part of Barack Obama's presidency?
That such large increases in government, dependency, spending, overall size, will be almost impossible to roll back. Also, Obama’s internationalist-leftist foreign policy stands to invite all bad actors to begin taking aggressive steps to destabilize our interests around the world.
3) There's been a lot of debate about the role that talk radio and cable news hosts should play on the right. Particularly controversial are Rush Limbaugh, Glenn Beck, Sean Hannity, Bill O'Reilly and Mark Levin. What do you think about these folks? Do they help the right or hurt it (or is it more complicated than that?) How should Republicans interact with them?
Levin, Limbaugh and Hannity are genuine and fine leaders of conservatism in their own ways. O’Reilly and Beck are not genuine, both have moved their positions to attempt to be popular over the years. Interestingly as well, both O’Reilly and Beck are clearly lacking a depth of understanding of conservative political philosophy. Hannity rarely shows depth on his radio show but seems to have it. The GOP should deal with them just as any candidate or party does with an old fashioned editorial board – attempt to persuade when possible, to win over when needed, and recognize that at times the Party will be at odds with them.
4) One particularly fraught controversy pertains to race in America -- with the first black president in the White House, some conservatives have been criticized as racists for opposing him, and some on the right have accused the Obama Administration or its allies of racism or anti-white sentiments (for example, Sonja Sottomayor's "wise Latina" comment drew fire, as did the Skip Gates incident). As the right thinks about political strategy and policy, how should it approach matters of race?
The GOP should start an almost radically loud drum beat demanding we have a color blind society as Dr. King recommended. We should stop all measurements of race and actively fight the race-pimps who live off of division. An aggressive stance against institutionalized ethnic favoritism should be part of that move.
5) Is there anything you observe locally, or that Republicans in your area of the country care about, that doesn't get sufficient attention in the national media conversation? If so tell me a bit about the issue, and the approach you think the right ought to take.
“Leave us alone” is the constant drum beat about Washington, the state legislature, city council and county government. Those who always “want something” from government are a small but vocal minority on everything from traffic laws to soccer fields and free healthcare to food stamps. Yet, they are always treated as an important majority politically. Most citizens respond well to government remaining “in the background” keeping the streets paved and water running. They want to be left alone in all other areas.
6) Traditionally the Republican Party has been a coalition of religious conservatives, libertarians, fiscal conservatives, and national security conservatives. Is that alliance viable going forward? If so, what must be done to hold it together? If not, what alliance should the GOP try to build?
Yes but there needs to be a pulling together of those interests. For example, Libertarians are big on Liberty and Property but want to ignore Life part of the great three. Some religious conservatives are big on Life but ignore how it is intertwined with Property and Liberty. We need a movement built around the big three: Life, Liberty and the use of Property for one’s own ends. It is almost the same as teaching about the Christian Trinity except that there is much less argument as to the hierarchy of the three .
7) Is there anything I didn't ask about that you'd like the media or the country as a whole to know?
In Texas, outside of the autonomous county party organizations where work is actually done (elections run, candidates recruited, etc.) the other levels of the Party (state and national) are essentially unimportant and usually a pain the ass and not liked. The Party, as it is organized, works this way to the detriment of its real workers: State and National chairmen and board members get all the glory and do none of the work. Local people put in hundreds of hours of work, get no glory, and are looked upon as unimportant (until they need something) by state and national party folk. In Texas, county parties have all the statutory power and raise their own money – they get nothing from the state and RNC except those bodies coming in and raiding the donor pool with fundraising letters which outright lie to party members (saying they are the Local Lubbock Fundraising Drive for example when all funds go elsewhere). This type of thing drives those who do the work, and local party members crazy.
A re-ordering of how the Party is structured is sorely needed. New technology makes the centralized boards unnecessary. For example, big issues before the state party or even the RNC could be decided by Internet polling of elected county chairman or the like – that is the type of governance which was not possible even 20 years ago but is very possible now. I can vote in some national corporate shareholder elections online, we can surely run the party this way and we’d get a much more true picture of what the base thinks. And it would make it far more difficult for powerful Washington interests to sway things “their” way.
No editing here, just off the cuff.
Robert Pratt
Introducing GOP Speaks
You've followed the national debate within the Republican Party about the political tactics it ought to use in an effort to better the country, retake Congress and challenge President Obama for the White House in 2012. But what do Republicans at the local level think?
To find out, I've started e-mailing a questionnaire to various Republican Party County Chairmen -- ultimately I hope to reach them all. This is quite time consuming, so if you find the information on this site useful, or think this is a worthwhile project, please hit the donate button on the side of the page. I'll consider doing other stuff like this in the future if I end up being compensated for it.
I've only sent e-mails to folks listed on an official GOP home page as a state chairman, a county chairman, a county vice-chairman, or a member of the county executive committee.
The responses are reprinted exactly as they arrived in my In-box.
The questions I posed:
1) So long as it's in the opposition, where should the Republican Party focus its energy?
2) What is the most worrisome part of Barack Obama's presidency?
3) There's been a lot of debate about the role that talk radio and cable news hosts should play on the right. Particularly controversial are Rush Limbaugh, Glenn Beck, Sean Hannity, Bill O'Reilly and Mark Levin. What do you think about these folks? Do they help the right or hurt it (or is it more complicated than that?) How should Republicans interact with them?
4) One particularly fraught controversy pertains to race in America -- with the first black president in the White House, some conservatives have been criticized as racists for opposing him, and some on the right have accused the Obama Administration or its allies of racism or anti-white sentiments (for example, Sonja Sottomayor's "wise Latina" comment drew fire, as did the Skip Gates incident). As the right thinks about political strategy and policy, how should it approach matters of race?
5) Is there anything you observe locally, or that Republicans in your area of the country care about, that doesn't get sufficient attention in the national media conversation? If so tell me a bit about the issue, and the approach you think the right ought to take.
6) Traditionally the Republican Party has been a coalition of religious conservatives, libertarians, fiscal conservatives, and national security conservatives. Is that alliance viable going forward? If so, what must be done to hold it together? If not, what alliance should the GOP try to build?
7) Is there anything I didn't ask about that you'd like the media or the country as a whole to know?
To find out, I've started e-mailing a questionnaire to various Republican Party County Chairmen -- ultimately I hope to reach them all. This is quite time consuming, so if you find the information on this site useful, or think this is a worthwhile project, please hit the donate button on the side of the page. I'll consider doing other stuff like this in the future if I end up being compensated for it.
I've only sent e-mails to folks listed on an official GOP home page as a state chairman, a county chairman, a county vice-chairman, or a member of the county executive committee.
The responses are reprinted exactly as they arrived in my In-box.
The questions I posed:
1) So long as it's in the opposition, where should the Republican Party focus its energy?
2) What is the most worrisome part of Barack Obama's presidency?
3) There's been a lot of debate about the role that talk radio and cable news hosts should play on the right. Particularly controversial are Rush Limbaugh, Glenn Beck, Sean Hannity, Bill O'Reilly and Mark Levin. What do you think about these folks? Do they help the right or hurt it (or is it more complicated than that?) How should Republicans interact with them?
4) One particularly fraught controversy pertains to race in America -- with the first black president in the White House, some conservatives have been criticized as racists for opposing him, and some on the right have accused the Obama Administration or its allies of racism or anti-white sentiments (for example, Sonja Sottomayor's "wise Latina" comment drew fire, as did the Skip Gates incident). As the right thinks about political strategy and policy, how should it approach matters of race?
5) Is there anything you observe locally, or that Republicans in your area of the country care about, that doesn't get sufficient attention in the national media conversation? If so tell me a bit about the issue, and the approach you think the right ought to take.
6) Traditionally the Republican Party has been a coalition of religious conservatives, libertarians, fiscal conservatives, and national security conservatives. Is that alliance viable going forward? If so, what must be done to hold it together? If not, what alliance should the GOP try to build?
7) Is there anything I didn't ask about that you'd like the media or the country as a whole to know?
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)