Blue Collar Muse

That’s the title of a thoughtful post at American Thinker. Read it and decide for yourself.

Blue

Popularity: 28% [?]

It is said that imitation is the sincerest form of flattery. If that’s true, I don’t understand the handwringing and pleading coming out of Campaign McCain and the GOP directed to the Right concerning the election of the GOP nominee, Arizona Senator John McCain.

McCain has, because of specific decisions, created for himself a reputation as a maverick. He has shown himself completely willing to break with the GOP and Conservatives, even on important issues, to follow the dictates of his conscience. This was true when wandering off the reservation put him in direct opposition to his constituents as in his support for the Immigration Reform bills recently crafted. It was also true when his choices impacted an issue often touted by the GOP and Conservatives as the most important facing our country, that of judicial appointments.

Far from being a drag on his candidacy, John McCain’s willingness to go his own way, braving and encouraging Republican criticism, appears to be a strong selling point for him. His independence and adherence to principle, even if it meant breaking with his party and peers, seem to be seen as a positive characteristic. It means McCain is his own man, not beholding to the GOP. It means he’s attractive to Moderates and Democrats since he’s willing to embrace their ideologies and work with them. It means, in short, he’s more electable than other Republican candidates. It pretty much has to be that way, doesn’t it? If all of that, and more, ISN’T true, why is he the nominee? Why has the GOP consistently praised his accomplishments, lauded his experience and tolerated his independence if they really don’t like it? It is inconceivable to me that McCain could have secured the nomination without the support and acceptance of the party elite. Those folks are anything but stupid. They vetted McCain carefully and decided his actions, past and present, represented positions and an attitude they could enthusiastically support at best or live with at worst. They found nothing wrong with McCain’s insistence on having and following his principles. In fact, they found it a valuable enough trait they wanted it in their nominee.

That being the case, you would think they really perceive that characteristic as valuable; in the political arena if nowhere else. You’d be wrong. One simply needs to look at the reaction to Conservative voters responding to McCain in the same way McCain responded to them. On any number of key issues, John McCain broke with a significant segment of the Republican Party. He believed his views on the matters were sufficiently correct and his GOP opponents’ sufficiently incorrect that he must, as a matter of principle, not merely disagree with them privately but break with them publicly. He was rewarded with the GOP nomination. If Conservatives do the same, if they reject McCain based on principle, they’re castigated for leading the country down the road to perdition.

John McCain isn’t the only person with strongly held principles. Americans are not only able to passionately hold specific values, they are encouraged to do so. So, if it is OK for John McCain to hold his principles so dear that his public breaks with the party mean the party and the country pay the price, why is suddenly wrong for voters to do the same? Why must Conservatives hold their collective nose, pull the lever for McCain and then scurry off to shower after the deed? Why isn’t the GOP as proud of independent thinking voters as they are of independent thinking candidates?

Publicly we’re told the stakes are high and the danger is real. Privately we’re told that, as bad as McCain may be, Obama is worse. We’re told the country and Conservatism might not survive a McCain defeat. As I recall, John McCain heard and disregarded those same arguments when he was following his principles. Now he and his surrogates are the ones making the argument and it rings just a little bit hollow. It sounds like that flawed parental argument, “Do as I say, not as I do!” It sounds as if McCain likes prescribing tough decisions for the country but objects when they might be prescribed for him.

Conservatives voting their principles and not their party are behaving just like John McCain. That behavior garnered him the GOP Presidential nomination. It garners those unwilling to drink the McCain Kool-Aid scorn and anger. The GOP should have known better. They should have seen this coming. Now, they need to be willing to live with their choice instead of demanding we live with it. Their nomination of a maverick shows they think a maverick can win. Evidently they didn’t think about what happens if you have a party full of mavericks and not just a ticket headed by one. It’s a bit late now to bemoan the choice. The GOP wanted John McCain and that’s who they got. If Conservatives step into the voting booth and reject McCain based on the very trait the GOP thought was his strength, the party will have no one but itself to blame. Putting principle before party is what John did to win. So why shouldn’t the rest of us ask, “WWJD?”.

Blue Collar Muse

Popularity: 38% [?]

I read a post the other day which said we no longer needed political Conservatives because the issues they care about and which the people also care about have already been addressed, making them outdated. The issues Conservatives care about which the people oppose make them unpopular. The author even listed a few examples of what he meant.

The approval rating for prescription drugs under Medicare is in the 80%-90% range. The Bush tax cut, which conservatives think needs to be made permanent, is considered as not worth it by a majority of citizens who would prefer balancing the budget. The one area where conservatives and the President are most aligned, foreign policy, is also the one area where people believe less in what’s happening. Only 32% believe military action can reduce the risk of terrorism. Belief in whether we are winning or losing the war on terror is dead even, dropping substantially in the last two years. …

Conservatism arose in a time when the marginal tax rate went as high as 70%, the economy was stagnant and the government regulated the price of gasoline, airlines, natural gas, TV and a host of other things. Over the last 30 years a lot has changed. Reagan became President, tax rates were cut and cut again and many things no longer regulated, but at the same time, the world went and changed on us.

His final conclusion was that with important issues addressed and with Conservatives on the unpopular side of other issues, Conservatives are simply barking at the moon. We are merely making noise about nothing much in particular and the country would be better off if we would simply be quiet and accept our inevitable slide into even deeper irrelevance. My first response as I read his piece was a quiet chuckle to myself. Amused, I kept reading. I was waiting for the other shoe to drop revealing the writer was spinning a humorous and elaborate tale. It wasn’t long before I realized that shoe wasn’t falling - the author was deadly serious.

My second response was disbelief. What sane person in 2008 could actually hold such a position? Not that one cannot disagree with Conservative ideology and practices. It happens all the time. Sincere people are truly convinced that big government, high taxes, lax security and curtailed freedom are a better solution to the country’s ills than the proven solutions of smaller government, lower taxes, stronger defense and increased liberty. However, sincerity is a poor measure of effectiveness when it comes to ideology. It is entirely possible to be sincerely wrong.

But this gentleman wasn’t even making that argument. He was arguing that Conservatism was now irrelevant precisely because it was and remains successful. It was Conservative tax cuts which reduced the tax burdens on individuals making possible the economic prosperity we enjoy. Those cuts were fought for and enacted over the objections of sincere Liberals. This gentleman’s conclusion appears to be that once a problem is defeated, it is gone for good and will never need addressing again. The emptiness of that reasoning is evidenced in the arena of taxes by paying even cursory attention to the rhetoric emanating from both the Obama and Clinton camps. Anyone believing the Democrats running for President will keep income tax rates low or that they won’t raise other taxes to pay for the programs they propose has successfully and willingly suspended belief in reality. With threats clearly visible on the near horizon and unknown dangers potentially around any corner and under any rock, the author could not be more wrong. We need strong Conservative principles and values in evidence now more than ever!

Unfortunately, his position and conclusions are not new. The same faulty reasoning is applied to many equally important issues. Military success is usually met with the same foolish proposal to downsize. America remains a free nation only due to the successful efforts of her warriors. Time and time again we go though the familiar cycle. Our military is unprepared for the conflicts which develop because their ranks have been scaled back or cut or downsized after an earlier victory. Attacked or challenged, we frantically work to renew our ability to equip our forces and engage our enemies. This vulnerability costs us tremendously as we pay premium prices to ramp up and thereby squander any “peace” dividend which accrued to our account from shortsighted downsizing of our armed forces. There is no reason to expect the same thing will not happen after our work is finished in the War on Terror. Our Liberal author is openly arguing for the same tactic in the ideological struggle which correctly continues to be waged in our nation.

Militarily speaking, the price of peace is, as my friend John McJunkin recently reminded me, nothing short of eternal vigilance. As a popular bumper sticker question phrases it, which of the wars America fought came about because America was too strong? Beyond our need for a strong military, when it comes to our general social wars; when the discussion is the size of government, the rates of taxation and the extent of our liberty, we should be no less attentive to the probing actions and skirmishes that swirl around and presage an all out attack on the principles and values that founded this country. Only eternal vigilance, abroad and at home, will keep America atop the list of mankind’s best and brightest governmental experiments.

It is unlikely that America will ever be defeated from without unless we are first defeated from within. People who argue that the our Republic should be a governmental vending machine where a few taxpayers put in the quarters and the rest of the country gets the gumballs inexplicably fail to see that such an arrangement cannot last. It may take years, but it cannot help but kill the goose laying those pretty eggs. Conservatives argue for the strength and power of the individual knowing that the chain is only as strong as its weakest link. Liberals argue for the strength and power of the government and fail to see that eventually, even the strongest individual will be unable to bear the weight of the chains they have bound him with.

Conservatism isn’t dead. It isn’t even sick. But it can be squeezed so tightly that it is shut out of the debate and its wisdom goes unheard. That’s the argument our Liberal friend is making. We leave it uncontested at our peril.

Blue Collar Muse

Popularity: 55% [?]

My post from yesterday has occasioned a great deal of passion. Mostly in favor but there are some dissenters. In its incarnation at RedState, it has garnered the most passion. It’s been in the top 5 recommended posts for over 30 hours now.

There are a number of other folks that have written about the same issues from their own perspectives. I’m finding them fascinating and want to share some of them with you.

Joshua Trevino’s ‘Men of Quality’ (H/T to Media Lizzy for this one)

Phil Mella’s ‘Exploiting the McCain Factor’ at Clear Commentary.

Rossputin’s ‘Post details: Colorado Caucuses today; I can’t support McCain’ at Rossputin.com

Charles Bird’s ‘I used to be Strongly Anti-McCain’ at RedState.

I’ll be adding more as I find them.

Blue

Popularity: 30% [?]