Thursday, May 21, 2009

The future of the Republican Party

I have been mulling this over since the Republican's crushing defeat last November. I consider myself pretty conservative. I believe in less government, I am pro life, I am pro-marriage. I believe in a strong national defense. I even believe in State Rights. I also think that at times the government of the US must step in and govern. There is a fine line in governance.

For the Republican party to rebuild ourselves and win back the seats that we lost we must begin to understand that the Republican Tent is large. There are those that are more moderate conservatives (believing for instance that the federal government does need to step in at times and implement programs on a national level versus allowing the states to make all the decisions). There are also those who want to confine themselves to the written letter of the law of the Constitution. But the two groups can agree on the basic beliefs, it is how those beliefs get implemented that discussion and contention often arises.

I get frustrated when one wing or the other wants to hijack the whole process. Governing needs to happen through discussion of all groups. It is this discussion that truly exemplifies a democracy. If we as a Republican party cannot look past our own conservative noses and truly try to understand where the Moderates lie on the issues (or vice versa) then we will not lead this nation. We need to get rid of terms like "Rhinos" or extreme right fanatics. We need to come together as Republicans, debate the issues, compromise when there needs to be one and take back Washington. We do this by getting along with another, recognizing our common beliefs and then getting down and working together to change America. We need to do what all great leaders have done, look at all sides and do what is right for all and not just for some. We can do that without compromising our standards, and in reality we will truly govern.

Read this great commentary stating what I just said ..just more eloquently! http://online.wsj.com/article/SB124112865488674761.html

No comments: