Disagree, Don't Destroy

In my most recent colunn at Townhall.com I urge those upset over issues such as spending and immigration, to disagree, not destroy.  Here is an excerpt:

Perhaps emboldened by the outcome of the Miers nomination, some conservatives that issued ultimatums and threats to never vote Republican again until Miers withdrew, are now going so far as to talk about impeachment in the current debate over immigration policy. Many argued both during the Miers debate and the current immigration debate, that it might be a good idea to just sit out the upcoming elections to teach the president and the squishy Republicans a lesson.

....

Voicing opposition to your president or party should not be discouraged. The fact that we have that freedom is one of the things that makes this country great. I was not opposed to those conservatives that split with the president over Miers vigorously fighting that battle. Most did so in a civil and fair manner. There were some, however, that used the dispute to call for the destruction of the Republican Party. I fear that some are now presently pursuing that course over the issue of illegal immigration.

Disagree, dissent, march, email, telephone the White House and the Congress, heck, even mail a brick, but it doesn’t make sense to completely destroy the man who will be leading the country for two more years, or to destroy the Republican Party unless you are ready to accept the agenda of Speaker Pelosi and Majority Leader Reid.

Unfortunately I forgot to include in my column the best way of all to effect change within the party and that is by recruiting and supporting conservative candidates in the primaries.  I have written on this many times in blog posts and somehow I left it out of the column. Captain Ed has a great post on this subject.

Comments

[denisej]

I look at it this way, it took FDR 12 years to get the liberal agenda started, it's going to take some time to dismantle it. Patience is a virtue.

...and sometimes you just don't get everything that you want

[Diane]

I am appealing to conservatives/Republicans who may/will not vote in the 2006/2008 elections to show "them". Please do not let your frustrations with various issues allow you to not think logically OR to think selfishly. America (not just the Republican candidates) needs your votes!

Surely, when thinking calmly, you can see a great difference between George Bush and company, compared to Pelosi, Reid, Kennedy, Gore, Clinton, Bayh, etc. With liberal Democrats in power, 1) America likely will leave the job in Iraq DEFINITELY unfinished--wasting the last 3 years of American lives & dollars. 2) Tax cuts will be eliminated, negatively affecting the growth of the economy, and thus your own back pocket 3) Future court appointments (Judge Kennedy)will go to persons of liberal social persuasion.

I was taught by my parents to vote in EVERY election. Abstaining rarely makes the statement you want, but will come back to bite you.

Follow Lori's advice of writing your Congressmen, especially your Senators. Find new candidates, if need be. However, please don't allow liberal Democrats to win over moderate or conservative candidates. Our country's safety (and thus mine) is dependent on you!

[Ned Topps]

The Republican party is a big tent party. We have everybody from Lincoln Chafee to Tom Coburn who call themselves Republicans. A little debate and disagreement is a good thing. The Democrats all look the same. They act the same. They all take their cues from their leader, Howard Dean. And they all share one trait: they have no agenda to lead this country.

[Ryan]

People need to remember that there are four possibilities.

1: Getting what you want totally.
2: Getting only some of what you want.
3: Getting none of what you want and retaining the status Quo
4: Getting the opposite of what you want.

The single issue monolithic "Take my ball and go home" group needs to remember that while option one is great, options two and three are infinitely better than option 4. ..

[Truzenzuzex]

USMC Pilot said:

"The number of times he has let us down has grown longer than pinocchio's nose, and just like his nose, grows longer with each speech. He is not just in favor of illegal immigration, he is unapologetically supportive of Mexicans. He is way too biased in this respect."

I support Mexicans, too - just not illegal immigrants.

Look, everyone has a different idea of what ideological conservatism aught to be. The right is famous for placing a single issue at the head of their ideolical agenda and making it an automatic disqualifier. For some people it is abortion, for others taxes, for others imigration, etc.

This president has delivered two fine Supreme Court picks, cut taxes, advanced the pro-life cause, successfully defended this country from terrorism, destroyed an oppressive and murderous regime and overseen a spectacular economic performace.

He has also refused to control government spending, made some errors in political judgment (Meirs, Dubai Ports among others) and is showing less than totally impressive leadership on immigration.

As with all presidents, it is a hodgepodge. If you are expecting ideological purity perfectly in line with yours, prepare to live with disappointment.

[Kevin]

No doubt the Republicans need our votes. But what do we get in return? No doubt the Democrats would scr*w us more, but only slightly more it seems. I typically vote Republican (typically=always in this case) because I can't stand the "touchy-feely, hug a criminal to make him stop it" ideal which defines Democrats these days.

But now our own friggin President is offering the same advice! To paraphrase him, "These foreign criminals who have invaded our land are really nice guys who work hard. Let's charge them a $2k admittance fee and be done with it all."

I'm not advocating voting for a Democrat. I'm just saying that if you live in a state where a Senate seat is up for grabs, vote for the non-incumbent in the primary. If it's too late for that, then don't vote. Otherwise, it will be business as usual in Washington. The rich will get richer, and the poor will continue to flow across the border, keeping our lower-class poor as well. As a Republican with libertarian leanings, I find that totally unacceptable.

So to summarize, I love having a Republican majority when they do what we voted them into power to do. But if they don't, why why why are we keeping them in power?

[Big Mo]

I'm amused by people who say the president "betrayed me" when he's said nothing different today than he's been saying since he came on the national scene in 1999.

Oh, a few things have changed (for example, pre-president Bush was no nation-builder whereas he most certainly is now). But as for immigration, I don't believe he's ever changed his tune.

So, either you never really listened to what the man has said all along, or you built this fantasy Bush in your mind and when the real one failed to meet your expectations, you felt "betrayed."

How many of us have been disappointed in Bush because he didn't say or do this or that? We've all been there. But "betrayed"? Please. Only in your minds.

[Ned Topps]

Kev said: I love having a Republican majority when they do what we voted them into power to do. But if they don't, why why why are we keeping them in power?

---------

To keep the Democrats out of power. As a libertarian leaning Republicans such as yourself, Speaker Pelosi is not going to offer you ANYTHING you want. Higher spending, tax hikes, non-stop investigations to hamper the war on terror. Why give her the satisfaction?

[DocNeaves]

So, Luke, the tone is better, no DUmpster language, you say? And then you tell me I'm not enlightened if I don't agree with you. You accuse anyone of NOT voting Republican of being a shill. How about I accuse YOU of being a shill? Doesn't work, does it? Not one person here has actually come out and said, hey, everyone does what they think is best, we feel this way, but you might disagree. All I've said is that I'M NOT FALLING FOR LUCY'S TRICKS anymore. I'm not trying to get YOU to vote this way or that. My message is for any Republican Senator or Congressman (or, God forbid, GW or some representative of his) who might read my word for any reason...I will not vote for someone who has consistently voted AGAINST conservative principles.

You want to know what's wrong with the drug plan? Wait a year or two, we'll see how much your parents are paying now. Tell me why I should be FORCED to get on the plan, if it's so good, why isn't it a choice? Tell me why they have eighty bazillion choices, when every other insurance company (including the one I've been on for years) only has one? Why do they feel the need to hide stuff if it's not so bad? I'll tell you why. Down the road, it will cost you more. And I say that with the confidence of all the other government programs in history, every single one of which cost more than was admitted, usually TONS more.

You do what you want, but I think it's you guys who are on the kool-aid. If we don't hold them accountable, they will take it as a mandate that we WANT this crap.

And tell me, list all the important issued the Republicans are in office for, if not for those four? They are most of the problems in America right now.

We pay high gas prices because of Democratic restrictions, stupid nonsensical laws that went into effect under Carter, Clinton, even under Reagan and Ford and Bush I. Dioxin? The scare that closed the refineries in San Francisco Bay? Ten times more dioxin in a serving of Ben and Jerry's vanilla, yet do you hear one single Republican calling for an end to junk science? No, because they make money off of it just like the Dems do. No drilling ANWR? WE ARE THE MAMORITY, HOW COME WE CAN'T EVEN GET THIS PASSED, WITH OIL ABOVE SEVENTY DOLLARS A BARREL??? I think it is YOU who are fooling yourself into believing just because they have an R after their name, they are conservative. They are not. My statement is this...Vote for the conservative in the race. If the R or the D is not a conservative, then vote something else. Vote them out in the primaries, and you might actually get a decent choice in the main, but if you don't get one in the main, don't vote for the alien anymore.

Everyone says, don't throw your vote away on a third party. I say, it's time to throw your vote away where it at least has a chance of success. At least, if your candidate gets into office, they might actually get something done. Remember, the Republican party was a third party, too. It only took one major issue to destroy the Whigs. It will only take one major issue, like selling out our country with the immigration thing, to destroy both of these parties.

[Ned Topps]

Big Mo said: for example, pre-president Bush was no nation-builder whereas he most certainly is now

---------

True. But I don't think he ever expected something along the lines of 9/11 where it would be necessary to remove two state sponsors of terrorism.

[Kevin]

Sure, Pelosi would cause some major damage to our nation. But is that what it has come to? Are our choices are down to either nothing beneficial, or something really bad? We control both houses and the presidency for God's sake! Ryan says our options are:

1: Getting what you want totally.
2: Getting only some of what you want.
3: Getting none of what you want and retaining the status Quo
4: Getting the opposite of what you want.

With a Republican controlled House, Senate, and White House, we can't expect to get option 1? We certainly could when Reagan was boss. And he didn't even have control of congress. The two Bushes have let us down, in about the same fashion imo. No, I will not accept option 2,3 or 4. Bush is in a position to give us option 1. To do less is an abrogation of the trust I put in him. Houw can I support him if he doesn't do what we need him to do?

Lorie, blockquote doesn't work in your comments. fyi

[Ned Topps]

Are our choices are down to either nothing beneficial, or something really bad?

---------

Isn't it the policy of the Democrats to support complete amnesty? I'm sure that's what Pelosi supports. They are looking for even more voters. Their illegal alien rallys are voter drives.

Bush said the other night that his administration is deporting 2,000 illegals per day, or 6 million since he came into office. That is something on which to build. 6,000 national guard troops is not enough, but it is a start, and it is something that a Democrat would never do.

[Ryan]

Ned. . . didn't we get an amnesty bill under Reagan? Are you saying you wanted that?

[Ryan]

Actually, to expand. . SUring Reagan, I wanted the budget to go down instead of up. . did it?

YOU honestly think with forty five democrats and a handful of squishy repulicans he is in a position to get anything he wants?
Step back and take a look at that argument. Remember how long it took just to get the judges confirmed?

[Republicanpundit]

Lorie,

Great article. I am in agreement with everything you say.

With Republicans we my only get 75% of what we want, but with Democrats we get 0% of what we want and 100% of what we don't want!!!

[Ned Topps]

Ryan, Reagan was the greatest president of the 20th century. No I don't support his amnesty proposal. But to be fair, it was supposed to end illegal immigration as we knew it. The only problem was that the enforcement measures were never implemented.

[Ned Topps]

"Actually, to expand. . SUring Reagan, I wanted the budget to go down instead of up. . did it?"

No, but we were fighting a cold war. There was tremendous defense spending at the time to build up our military that Jimmy Peanut Man Carter tore down.

Reagan's tax cuts were great. Revenue to the goverment actually doubled during his 8 years in office, just as they are at an all time high right now due to Bush's tax cuts.

[Ryan]

I agree that he was the greatest president. But the point is - even the greatest president didn't give us everything we wanted, nor could he.

THe problem is, in the AMerican two party system its a zero sum game - if you don't elect a republican, 99.9% of the time you ARE electing a Democrat, which means that instead of just having someone that may not be working adequately FOR you, you have someone working actively AGAINST you. YOu take the victories you are able to get and then try to build on them, not just throw the whole thing out because a home run wasn't hit in the first at bat./

[Ryan]

ANd again exanding. ..

right now we are fighting the terror war, trying to reconstruct our military, trying to reconstruct the state department. Tryign to reconstruct the CIA, trying to get a number of judges passed.

THe CIA is actively working to defeat him. ALso there is the Iran situation, the North KOrea situation, the Immigration situation. . .

I think BUsh can fairly say his own plate is rather overly full.

[Luke]

Hey DocNeaves,

I don't remember posting to you but ...... I do know if you shoot into a pack of dogs the one that gets hit yelps the loudest.

Just an old tale from yesteryear and probably not true. Right?