Although this is more political than I normally like to discuss here, I am wondering what in the world is Matt Lewis talking about. First, if you are a Conservative I suggest reading his post at Town Hall.com. His entire post is so pragmatic I am left standing on the sidelines befuddled. I feel as though I am on a high school football team waiting for the coach to call in a play only to have a delay of game penalty charged, and somehow it is my fault.
First Matt makes the point that the Republicans are divided. One side has "ceded the war, and, in essence, are hoping to negotiate the best deal possible." Agreed! While the other side chooses "to bury their heads in the sand." He's lost me.
The McCains have joined the pragmatism of the Country Club Republicans. If you watched Republican Sam Brownback run for President he sounded like Newt Gingrich accepting Global Warming as he cozied up to Hillary on health care. So many Republicans like McCain have ceded the war.
Yet what is it about those on the other side? Is he saying there are no ideas or strategies? For instance he writes,
- The GOP must become the Party of science and math. This might include new energy ideas, a major investment in educating our children to compete with China in science and math, space exploration, etc.I say great. Many of us would love this. But what does he mean? Uh oh, the play clock has run out. I guess we'll have to back up four years to find out. The fact is, the Democrats control education. Is he saying Conservatives all need to pull out of the Public School system, and Conservative leaders will now start calling on Big Corporations to fund real education? Somehow I doubt that. So again, I am left on the sideline wondering how in the world will internet access save the day without a real Conservative plan that is founded on Conservative Ideology.
But then Matt says the rest of us need to modernize. We need to use technology. I am not exactly sure what he means. I would not even know about Matt Lewis if it were not for the internet. Should I be making Conservative video games to win libs over to our side?
Michael Medved also criticizes Conservatives in another post at TownHall.com saying,
"Frankly, I can't find any example to prove that "running on principle" and ignoring independents and moderates actually brought political success this year. "He claims in the post that McCain lost because he didn't win the moderates. I am puzzled even more now. McCain was the only guy that supposedly could win the moderates. So what gives? He doesn't say it, but he is saying McCain was not liberal enough? Is he saying that McCain wasn't reaching out to both sides? Is he blaming Palin like the rest of the Conservative snots? He says no but then he writes,
As I made abundantly clear at the end of my previous piece, what needs to change isn't substance, it's style. You can't reach the American majority (which is a center-right majority, not a right-right majority) with anger, nastiness, smugness, or fratricidal warfare.Where was the nastiness? It was on the Left, not the Right. McCain spent more time demoralizing members of his own party than his political enemies (if they are his enemies). Also, McCain is principled and idealistic? I must have been zapped to Mars. McCain is anything but a Conservative idealist.
Why is it these guys just can't see the obvious? If you try to make friends with your enemies, they always let you on to their turf only to slaughter you. McCain hasn't learned a thing and neither has this guy (assuming I have understood him correctly).
But it's no less hateful and stupid to turn on McCain -- who freely admitted his own mistakes (and yes, there were plenty of 'em) but still ran a strong and energetic race in the midst of overwhelmingly unfavorable circumstances.McCain ran a race? I must have missed it.
I am truly thankful that I am a citizen of another Kingdom whose King is perfectly righteous. The two shall never meet.
No comments:
Post a Comment