Posted by
flagwaver on Wednesday, November 15, 2006 12:47:25 AM
A little while back I shared with you a line I got from my brother Pat, "Too many backs to scratch, not enough hands." Remember that one? Well, when I originally wrote it I was referring to the Democrat Party; however, it seems that it could also apply to the GOP.
If you look closely at the GOP, it is no real wonder that the Democrats won the recent midterms; what is a wonder is that the GOP ever won anything at all. As much as we point out the fractious nature of the Democrats and all of their competing subgroups, the same can honestly be said about the GOP.
Look around the GOP bigtop and you'll see all sorts of interesting characters. You have your blueblooded, country clubbers who seem only to care about their business interests, there are the libertarians that hold onto pipe dreams about shrinking the government to its lawful size, you have your Log Cabin (?) members that are conservative in many ways, but tend to trend towards identity politics, and you have your Christian/morals members that are very concerned with social issues.
The blueblooded hate the hayseed Christians and wish they would leave the Party, the Log Cabin members hate the hayseed Christians and wish they would leave the Party, and the libertarians hate the hayseed Christians and wish they would leave the Party. Anyone notice a trend there?
For some reason it has become almost unacceptable in the GOP to be both fiscally conservative and socially conservative. As a Christian myself, this trend has upset me somewhat and has at times made me question my commitment to the GOP. It is hard being the object of scorn coming from all sides of the spectrum, but harder still to accept being attacked by the members of your own Party; the very people that you thought you shared so much with.
For example, I have read articles and blog posts that have stated that the very social issues that are important to me as a Christian are somehow to blame for GOP setbacks. The issues of stem cell research, abortion, euthanasia, and same-sex "marriage" are being assailed as wedge issues that really don't amount to much on the political scene. But is that really so, and are the raising of these issues a loser for the GOP? The
polls seem to indicate otherwise.
But, I digress. The point is that the GOP is likely to flounder along until it finds some true common ground among the various factions under the big tent. Sure, we all say that we want smaller government, but what does that mean? Does it mean fewer social safety net programs, less funding for infrastructure projects, or a lessening of the military budget? Do you see the problem that the Party faces?
You see, the concepts that the GOP claims to hold dear are simply too broad and open to too much interpretation. When no one really knows what smaller government means, or what less government intrusion means, then it can mean anything. And if it can mean anything, then ultimately it means nothing...at least not to voters.
So the GOP faces the daunting task of actually defining itself and its goals really for the first time. The recent election results should have shown the GOP leadership, and I use that term very loosely, the necessity of having values and beliefs that can be easily transmitted to voters. The voters need to know what we mean by smaller government and the like, and the definition must be one that the voters can approve of.
If not, the the vaunted big tent of the GOP will become a Bigtop that houses a run down, dilapidated circus. And nobody will pay to see the GOP's sorry show.