Being "them lite."

I had an interesting conversation on the phone with Jambo last night. But, as it dovetails with what Titus just wrote, let me address his post first. He opened with: The "conservative" movement in America took a fairly big blow last night."

Utter nonsense. Primarily because "conservatism" wasn't on the ballot last night. In fact, by all traditional political definitions there was a "moderate Democrat" running last night, and his name is John McCain. Conservatism "took a big blow" between 2000 and 2008 when Republicans decided to abandon it.

I agree that in terms of highlighting their own brand name and fixing blame to the opposing Party the Republican PR for the last several years got out hustled, out played and generally out done. However, this is not the over arching reason that the GOP began suffering defeat starting in 2006. THAT reason is because they slowly but surely abandoned conservatism between 2000 thru right this second, and at the precise time they had the ability and power to implement it (2000-2006) unlike any opportunity since the post Civil War era.

Truman once quipped, "If you give the people a choice between a Republican and a Democrat that acts like a Republican, they'll pick the Republican every time." Just swap the titles around and you have my theory on precisely what ended in last nights overwhelming victory for the Democrat Party.

The size of government, spending, balanced budgets, unapologetic about "life" and cultural issues, ear marks, line item veto, term limits - all issues that brought either Reagan or Gingrich huge electoral successes, all abandoned by the GOP over the last 8 years. Every one. And yes, they ended partial-birth abortion, but President Bush was timid at best when it came to fighting for his judicial nominees up and down the federal circuit. Each of these issues turned off the base and had typically engaged voters scratching their heads as to what Republicans stood for. And that led to the complete inability (or desire) to behave "conservatively" on NEW hot button issues such as the southern border; school vouchers; education in general (Bush just threw more and more money at it); private stock market accounts as a sane solution to an insolvent social security debacle; constitutional protection of marriage (and someone tell me why that mayor in San Fransisco didn't have his federal dollars yanked the minute he broke the law and started handing out gay marriage licences?); the bail out. Hell, even free speech took a huge hit with McCain-Feingold, an abhorrent piece of legislation (and it did a bang up job of getting money out of campaigns ... right Mac?). And outside of fiscal conservatism the other most damning issue abandoned by Republicans was energy independence! They have simply conceded this farce of man-made global warming and hand cuffed themselves on an issue that is GROSSLY skewed in their favor - people love the idea of us using our own resources, period.

While I would consider President Bush, McCain and the Republicans in congress all "hawks", thus solid in terms of being national security "conservatives", this election cycle was about economics, and that's the front upon which they most blatantly abandoned their principles and the formula for past electoral victories. Even the Bush tax cuts have a sunset clause - you tell me how that's possible given the GOP controlled congress for 6 out of 8 years?

Think about this - McCain, Bush and the GOP members of congress, when faced with the September economic crisis, engaged in an argument with the Democrat Party on "how much" government was the solution. HOW MUCH! Not whether in principle government should step in, just "how much?" Throw in prescription drugs, McCain's comments on nationalizing $300 billion in bad mortgages and a laundry list of fiscally liberal policies embraced by the GOP and you get last night - the culmination of the GOP's conceding big versus limited government has driven them into congressional obscurity. SO HERE IS THE POINT: if as a Republican you have conceded the template that government is the nation's economic cure, then why would voters choose the guy offering just a little less of that cure? I mean holy hell! Once the template is established that we need a larger role for government, more federal spending, and a further intrusion into the lives of individual Americans to "make things all better", why not opt for the guy offering the most? I mean that's the answer, right? Then why pick a guy offering only "some" of that answer?

And THAT is the 800 lb gorilla in the room that the GOP must address as it begins its soul searching today: the abandonment of Reagan/Gingrich conservatism.

I still believe this is a center-right country. But the GOP became a center-left Party whose opposition was severely left, and guess what - if you run a Democrat against a Republican that sounds like a Democrat, people will choose a Democrat every time.

****

I want to add another point about what the GOP must do to regain its footing. Re embracing what I call Reagan/Gingrich conservatism is paramount. First and foremost they must do that. Also though, they must find an articulate, energetic spokesperson for those ideas. In my opinion Tip Oneal's sharp observation that, "all politics are local", is true no more. All politics are national now. In today's media age, with 24/7 access to news and information, the larger ticket items and subjects of the day is what will get more air, Internet and radio time. Contested congressional seats will live and die by the coat tails (or lack thereof) on how their national leadership addresses those big ticket items, especially during a presidential year. In short they must put together a coherent, conservative national message ... but as I said, that aspect of their offense is only relevant if they first re embrace conservative ideology.

****

Lastly I would like to congratulate our new president. I'll hear none of this "he's not my president", nonsense from any of my fellow Americans. He is, period. I wish him well because I wish America well. He is undoubtedly the most talented politician in America, and perhaps the world at this moment, and he earned his success.

I am more then a little worried though that his definition of what a "successful America" looks like, will take two or three generations of Americans to undo.