Terry, here's an article written just for you. :)
A CONSERVATIVE CHOICE
THE ANYBODY BUT GORE PARTY
By: Samuel L. Blumenfeld
etherzone.com
Despite the hoopla generated by Al Gore’s choice of Joe Lieberman as his running mate, it is the view of this writer that the Republican convention was really the main event of this political season. It was the long-awaited test for George W. Bush to see if he has what it takes to lead the Republicans to victory in November, and he came through with flying colors. His acceptance speech was so well crafted and so well delivered that any conservative who listened to it--and listened to it carefully--came away with the feeling that he was a man they could support and even trust. That’s saying an awful lot about a politician. But certainly, that was what the speech conveyed.
Yes, there is a difference between Republicans and Democrats. And the difference is significant enough for conservatives to know that they must vote for Bush or simply
waste their ballot. Buchanan’s brand of ideological conservatism has been relegated to the very fringe of the political debate, while The Constitution Party hovers over the political scene like a spiritual entity rather than a political party. Which means that Howard Phillips is more a prophet than a politician. As for the Libertarians, they will be cancelled out by the votes for Ralph Nader.
Thus, there is no reason for Constitutional conservatives not to vote for George W. Bush, even though they may believe that he isn’t conservative enough. For a politician, he is about as conservative as any politician can be under our present system and still get elected. That’s the reality we face: a voting public which is largely non-ideological in its response to politics. Which makes the choice pretty simple: Bush or Gore. I belong to the ABG Party-the Anyone But Gore Party. Besides, Vice Presidential candidate Cheney is a good conservative and will provide guidance to the new President. That’s a great plus.
That the convention was skillfully staged to give the TV viewer a series of positive images of the Republican Party indicates that Republicans have finally learned how to fashion a message that fits today’s media realities. The overwhelmingly liberal mass media are like sharks hungry for blood. That’s all that Rather, Jennings, Brokaw and the morning shows look for. So why give them blood? The Republican convention gave them oatmeal.
Meanwhile, we can expect lies and more lies from the junior master of lies, Al Gore. Poor Bill Bradley could no longer take it. Democrats in the primaries preferred Gore to Bradley because they can live with lies. It reminds me of what happened when Bill Clinton denied that he had had an affair with Monica Lewinsky. His cabinet and his staff believed him and went around America telling everyone that Clinton had spoken the truth. But then when Clinton finally admitted that he did indeed have an affair with Miss Lewinsky, and that he had lied to all of us, did anyone in his cabinet or on his staff resign in great indignation at having been used by Clinton to spread his lies? No, they did not. Why? Because they had learned to live very comfortably with lies, thus revealing their own moral corruption.
By the way, this does not mean that all Republican politicians wear haloes. I’m sure that if I had the opportunity to peruse those one thousand FBI files of Republicans, I’d find some shocking information. The Democrats regaled us with stories of infidelity, adultery, and other sins committed by some outstanding conservative Republicans. Which only proves that conservatives are also human beings and can make as many tragic mistakes as anyone else. I remember how disappointed and shocked I was when I found out that Solzhenitsyn had divorced his wife for another woman. He was my hero. But then I realized that Solzhenitsyn was not obliged to live a life without sin, perched on a moral pedestal to satisfy the adolescent needs of hero worshippers. What counts is that he did not lie to us.
Let’s get down to reality. The differences between Republicans and Democrats are significant enough to make our choice in November meaningful. The Democrats are the party of people who live off the taxpayer: unionized government employees, the organized teachers, bureaucrats in federal, state, and local governments, all of whom have a vested interest in higher taxes. They also include liberal millionaires who feel guilty about being rich and therefore want the government to take care of the poor. Their foundations don’t give money to the poor, but to other liberal wealthy tax-exempt institutions. Add to them the abortionists, pornographers and Hollywood degenerates and you have an idea of the moral corruption at the heart of the Democratic Party that fuels Al Gore’s campaign of lies.
Republicans, in general, are those who earn their own way without government help. They are individualists who don’t want government breathing down their necks. They are small business owners and entrepreneurs who work hard and take their chances in the marketplace. They take care of themselves and pay their own way. They employ millions of people and pay their taxes. They are usually religious, pro-life, pro-capitalist, pro-freedom. They are homeschoolers who pay for their children’s education while still paying taxes for the public schools.
Probably the most despicable act of the Clinton administration was the kidnapping of Elian Gonzalez and handing him over to Castro’s brutal communist regime. In what they did to that boy can be seen the treason, the cruelty, and the criminal mindset of the Clintonistas. Imagine what they would do to conservatives if they had the freedom and police power to do so. All of which indicates how successful the Founding Fathers were in creating a government with such amazingly effective checks and balances. If Clinton had had his way, conservatives would now be rotting away in Alaskan concentration camps with no one to liberate them.
And so, the Republican Party has at long last adapted itself to the political realities of today: a non-ideological public that is enormously affected by television images and sound bites. Few Americans today could explain what socialism is and why one should vote against it. The new immigrant voter, for example, expects government to be socially active. Why? Because that’s the way today’s world works, and American public schools affirm it. That’s why today’s politicians, if they want to win, must show how they will get government to do more for the people, not less. Here in Massachusetts, most candidates for local government positions or the state legislature rarely put their party affiliation on their campaign literature.
However, ideology is very important to individual activists. But we are learning that the conservative revolution cannot be openly conducted from the stage of a Republican national convention. These conventions have now become media events that must be carefully scripted and staged as any other major television commercial campaign. Conservatives must reconcile themselves to these media realities.
Yes, there is a conservative revolution taking place, but it is largely taking place underground, among homeschoolers, among internet journalists, among radio talk shows, among conservative think tanks that have gained enormously in prestige over the last two decades, and in fundamentalist churches. For example, when Michael Farris, head of the Home School Legal Defense Association, announced the founding of Patrick Henry College, which will train homeschooled youngsters to become effective Congressional aides, he was acting as one of the new Founding Fathers.
Much of what is happening underground will have its major political impact five or ten years from now when mature homeschoolers enter politics. Thus, conservatives have much to look forward to. The liberals are killing off their unborn, but homeschoolers are having large families. Michael Farris already has 10 children, and he and his wife are still young and vigorous. Thus, a Bush-Cheney administration should be considered a transition period during which a restrained federal government lets the American people decide their own future. |
