Transforming the Republican Party — Thoughts from a Moderate

2C59C097-68E3-4407-AFDA-2A7E2DD3D444.jpg

I feel like a man without a political party. This is personally very disconcerting considering that I have thought of myself as a Republican since the 1984 reelection of Ronald Reagan. Granted, at age 7, I had no idea what the substantive issues during the campaign were all about but what I did know was that Grandma liked Reagan – a lot – and something about Mondale just kind of bugged me.

Of course, over the years I became more politically aware and, at least in my own mind, politically savvy. I’ve never been terribly wonkish but have found myself attracted to the sentiments encapsulated in the sound-bites of the Republican party: government should stay out of people’s lives, be limited in its powers, support a strong national defense, and be fiscally responsible.

Of course, I have come to realize that these are things the Republican Party simply enunciates; very rarely have they actually put these very basic principles into actual practice. True, Reagan – much like Thatcher — went a long way in eliminating counter-productive government bureaucracy and his significant tax cuts did contribute to a period of incredible economic prosperity. He was also no slouch on defense – although I’m troubled at how much of that defense spending was fiscally questionable.

In any case, here are some brief thoughts on transforming the Republican Party into what it is supposed to be:

The neo-conservatives have to go. Making war and then cleaning up the mess we’ve made is absurd foreign policy. Invading Iraq was a mistake – a mistake I freely admit I was absolutely, 100% wrong on at the time. This whole idea of pre-emption is absurd and if maintained under the guise of maintaining a strong national defense, is an affront to Republican principles.

It’s time to say goodbye to the radical Christian right. Pat Robertson and James Dobson, abortion is here to stay whether its legal or not. Women will continue to seek them out. I for one, would rather that they have access to abortion procedures in clean, regulated environments. I’m not saying we shouldn’t have continued discussions about how, when, where, and under what conditions should be performed. I don’t think any reasonable person advocates abortion as an acceptable alternative to contraception. And of course, that’s another thing. Radical Christians don’t want safe sex taught in school. They push for abstinence-only programs. I have no problem teaching abstinence to teenagers. Frankly, it’s the best route for a plethora of reasons. However, we live in a world where kids are having sex, getting pregnant, and catching STDs. I wish the kids weren’t, but they are. As Republicans, we can’t oppose abortion on the one hand, and then also oppose supporting education programs that would negate the very need for those abortions. This isn’t rocket science.

If the Christians right wants to live in a fantasy world then let them form their own party. As for our Republican party, let’s deal with real issues in the real world.

B40BAB67-D994-4CA1-9C07-5433C9650190.jpg

Get out of the gay-marriage debate. Dick Cheney is right. This is a state issue. Let’s not turn it into national political ploy to garner support from the above-mentioned Christians, whom we don’t really want in the party anyway. Republicanism is about limiting the intrusion of government into personal lives – it is no concern of ours who can or cannot get married.

We really need to get back to our roots by supporting healthy markets, economic growth, and promoting equality of opportunity. For the past 9 years, we’ve done a pretty poor job at upholding the principles we claim to hold dear.

5 Comments

  1. Let me just speak to one aspect of you article here, as a former solider. The real purpose behind the war in IRAQ was to position ourselves on both sides of the real enemy IRAN. If you play chess, it is all about “positioning your pieces”. The time (God forbid) will come when IRAN will have to be dealt with…lets just hope that their own people do it so “we” (US) nor Israel will have too. Either way, it is all a lead up to Armageddon.

  2. sethpayne says:

    Hi Bill,

    Thanks for your comments. I completely agree with your assessment on Iran — at some point the crap is going to hit the proverbial fan and we’ll very much have to deal with it.

    Having said that, I am beginning to grow weary of our self-imposed role of policing the world. Iran absolutely threatens Israel, so shouldn’t Israel be allowed to deal with Iran in any way it deems necessary? I’m not saying that we should not be involved in world affairs, but I just don’t know that we can afford — literally — to get dragged in to these global issues. Take North Korea, for example. Their nuclear posturing clearly threatens Japan, China and Russia — so why in the world are we involved as the primary negotiator?? It seems really backwards to me. Again, I’m not saying that we should not be involved but I really hope we can shift some of the responsibility for these issues to other countries who have a vested interest in the outcome.

    I try not to be naive. I know we need to protect our oil interests etc… and our involvement in Iraq was part of that effort. But, where the hell is the oil output and why isn’t it paying for reconstruction?

  3. “I try not to be naive. I know we need to protect our oil interests etc… and our involvement in Iraq was part of that effort. But, where the hell is the oil output and why isn’t it paying for reconstruction?”

    Your comment is exactly in line with my thinking.

  4. Your comment is exactly in line with my thinking.

  5. Sorry for the double post. BTW, that is the most distubing picture I have ever seen of Jesus holding an M-16.

Leave a Reply