Conservatism at a Crossroads
Written by Mark Harris on October 9th, 2005I haven’t been posting much as I am running for State Representative, working part-time, and finishing up school, but after reading these boards and a lot of the discussion on the internet, I think something needs to be said. I believe conservatism in America is at a crossroads. It can go two ways, one is the way of a caretaker of government. This is the Bush vision, making government more compassionate, more effective, and more prevalent in our lives to help us live better. This is clearly the meaning of his compassionate conservatism. Conversely, there is the vision of conservatism of smaller government, ordered liberty, and a return to a world where the federal government was not the be all end all.
My reason for my opposition to some Bush iniatives stems from the same reason I am running for State Representative, I do not believe a bigger government will help any of us. I believe we must work at all levels to restore the cosntitutional order to the system. States need to be returned to their rightful place as the primary government, and local control must be maintained.
A battle is brewing right now of which the Miers confirmation is but a convenient proxy war. This is the battle of who will lead the party post-Bush. Will it be a Bush-style leader, a Giulani or a Rice maybe, or will it be a small government advocate? This fight isn’t really about Miers, though that is an important aspect, rather it is about the heart and soul of our party. We need to be the party that consistently stands for the principles of smaller government, lower taxes, local control, federalism, and traditional values. Bush has done many things to help out the party, but conversely the prescription drug bill, his immigration policies, No Child Left Behind, and now his unwillingness to have a true discussion about judicial philosophy has undermined the small government principles of our party. Bush is a good man who no doubt has done a great job leading our country on foreign policy, but on domestic issues he has been far from perfect.
In the end the battle is on, and I will choose the hard road, the one of principle and smaller government. Others can choose the Bush road, but as for me and I believe the folks here at Save The GOP we choose the other.
9
PM
George Will’s interview with WFB on This Week briefly touched on some of the same thoughts. It can be viewed at : http://abcnews.go.com/ThisWeek/
9
PM
“Bush is a good man who no doubt has done a great job leading our country on foreign policy, but on domestic issues he has been far from perfect.”
I beg to differ on foreign policy, he has botched trade issues with China, imposed steel tariffs, failed in restraining a nuclear North Korea and a soon to be nuclear Iran, sent needed troops to Haiti on a nation-building mission, kept troops in the Balkans for no pressing reason, doled out way to much foreign aid to nations that will squander it, and mismanaged our international currency situation (and by that I am not complaining that the dollar has dropped it goes beyond that). All that being said he was 1000% better than President Clinton, his father, and was better than Reagan when it came to confronting Islamic terror. I would give him a C+, not bad given US history but he had the potential to be better.
9
PM
“I believe we must work at all levels to restore the cosntitutional order to the system. States need to be returned to their rightful place as the primary government, and local control must be maintained.” Well said Mark, well said.
10
AM
Now is truly “A Time for Choosing”
10
PM
I think he has had an honest discussion about judicial philosophy - look at the long list of conservatives he has nominated to lower federal courts.
Needless to say, the verdict is still out regarding his Supreme Court nominations.
10
PM
Mike,
Clinton failed to restrain a nuclear North Korea and Iran. Bush simply inherited the problem. We can only do one regime change at a time, give us some time…
10
PM
“Clinton failed to restrain a nuclear North Korea and Iran. Bush simply inherited the problem. We can only do one regime change at a time, give us some time…”
Clinton failed miserably and Bush has done no better on this issue. He has had 5 years and done what . . .? Stop making excuses for him, if dealing with more than one country at a time was too much for him he shouldn’t have been president in the first place. His approach to both Iran and North Korea was flawed from the very beginning.
10
PM
Mike,
You’ve got to admit that confronting a nation that already has nuclear weapons is a bit of a different bird than a nation attempting to acquire nuclear weapons.
And as to Iran, sources say that we cannot nail all of their nuclear facilities with airstrikes. Absent a full-scall invasion, we really aren’t going to stop them from going nuclear.
12
AM
Who said I was talking about military strikes or an invasion. There are many other tools at our disposal.
17
PM
Enter through the narrow gate. For wide is the gate and broad is the road that leads to destruction and many enter through it. But small is the gate and narrow is the road that leads to life, and only a few find it.
-Jesus Christ (Matthew 7:13-14)