What do Ronald Reagan, George H W Bush and George W Bush
have in common? Presidents? Yes. Republicans? Yes.
What do Bob Dole, John McCain, and Mitt Romney have in
common? Republican candidates? Yes. Losers? Yes.
What makes the difference? Therein lies the tale. Reagan
Bush Sr and Jr were all strong on national defense, but so were the unsuccessful
three. All Republicans have followed the example of that great man Reagan in
supporting tax cuts to spur economic growth, and had George H W Bush not went
back on his no new taxes pledge he probably wins a second term, but that has
not been the thing that separates winners and losers on the Republican side.
We are told that the only hope of winning in a modern
demographic is to get the Hispanic/Latino vote therefore we need a candidate
that supports amnesty. This argument fades
a bit when you consider that if Mitt Romney had won 70% of the Hispanic vote, a
lofty and nearly unattainable goal, he still would have lost to Barak Obama. As critical as I am of Trump he has done a
great service to the American people by blowing up this false amnesty
narrative. American citizens, born and nationalized don’t want anything to do
with amnesty and illegals don’t vote. (Unless their Democrats). Reagan did make a deal on amnesty that was
supposed to lead to border security but instead led to the loss of California,
Reagan’s home state to becoming a Democrat stronghold. The border security
measures Reagan demanded and the democrats agreed to were never implemented.
You recall the backlash when Bush/McCain tried to sneak an amnesty bill through
under cover of night? The Amnesty Kool-Aid is poison to the Republicans but if
not for Trump they probably would still be drinking it.
Then there are the moderates and independents, they are the
ones! Right? I have dealt with this in detail before http://advicenotaskedfor.blogspot.com/2011/03/oh-for-man-of-mushy-middle-how-my-heart.html
but for now let me just say, We are told every election that if only a moderate
can get the nomination without that old nasty tea party stopping them, they’ll
win the general election. Of course the opposite always happens; moderates get
the nomination then fail in the national election.
You think I’m going to say the Tea Party no doubt. Well, the problem is this: the tea party is a
protest movement they tend to vote against rather than for. They even vote in
midterms, and they are a powerful force. The tea party voter though is not
inclined to stay home because of a lackluster candidate and allow someone like
Obama to be reelected.
If it’s neither the Hispanics nor the tea party who decide
elections, then who? I take you back to August 21, 1980 when Ronald Reagan
seeking the presidency said to a gathering of Southern Baptist ministers “"I
know you can't endorse me … but I want you to know that I endorse you and what
you are doing." It was this moment
that solidified the relationship between the conservative political movement and
the “religious right”.
For what it’s worth, I identify more strongly with this
group then I do with the tea party for one reason: the tea party largely shuns
social issues. I do not. Life liberty and the pursuit of happiness that the
nation was founded on can only exist in what Adams called a moral and religious
people. Christian principles and moral
absolutes undergird every aspect of American society and every institution.
What did Reagan Bush and Bush have in common? They never shunned the social issues;
they never betrayed the Christian base.
The Republican establishment claims social issues are a
losing battle but history suggests that unless a candidate strongly supports
the Christian view on these issues they cannot win. You see an increasing
number of Christians have decided that the lesser of two evils is still evil
and they will stay home, or skip the top slot on the ballot. Romney claimed to
be pro-life now but once claimed to be more pro-choice then Ted Kennedy and
failed to make sufficient protection for pro-life doctors in Romney-care. John
McCain openly feuded with the pro-life leaders before seeking their
endorsement, just 8 years later, Dole though “personally pro-life” sought to
add a “tolerance clause” to the GOP platform and allowed no pro-life speeches
in prime time during the ’96 convention.
I have argued with my fellow believers about the quote the
best way for evil to triumph is for good men to do nothing, as a reason to plod
along and support the non-liberal candidates even if they’re not as
conservative as we would like, but more and more I see the Republican party
move further away from Reagan’s stance I begin to question, can I really
continue to support this party and be in good conscience to the Lord? The answer
is … I don’t know.
The truth is I will not support someone like Trump who has
always been a liberal on social issues, until he magically sees the light when
he runs for President, and now believes abortion should be banned sometimes at
some point in the pregnancy, or who supports universal health care like they
have in Canada.
No, if the Republican Party ever wants to regain the support
Reagan enjoyed they need to return to what Reagan believed in. not election
year catering but a history of commitment to real Judeo Christian values. Contrast
the wishy- washy stand of the modern Republican party with Reagan
“When Americans reach out for values of faith, family, and caring for the
needy, they're saying, "We want the Word of God. We want to face the
future with the Bible"...
I'm accused of being simplistic at times with some of the
problems that confront us. But I've often wondered: Within the covers of that
single Book are all the answers to all the problems that face us today, if
we'd only look there. "The grass withereth, the flower fadeth, but the
word of our God shall stand forever." It's my firm belief that the
enduring values...presented in its pages have a great meaning for each of us
and for our nation...
Now, I realize it's fashionable in some circles to
believe that no one in government should... encourage others to read the
Bible... that will violate the separation of church and state...Well...the
father of our country, George Washington, kissed the Bible at his
inauguration...
John Adams called it "the best book in the
world." and Ben Franklin said, "... the longer I live, the more
convincing proofs I see of this truth, that God governs in the affairs of
men... without His concurring aid, we shall succeed in this political building
no better than the builders of Babel... our projects will be confounded, and we
ourselves shall become a reproach, a bye-word down to future ages."......
This is but one of
Reagan’s many quotes that show why Christians supported him, his landslide
victories have seldom been duplicated (49 of 50 states supported his reelection,
and he narrowly lost Mondale’s home state of Minnesota by 3,761 votes.) it can happen
again, someone who unites all conservatives, social, fiscal, and economic, but
if the Republicans continue on the path of taking back that endorsement of the
Christian Community that Ronald Reagan offered over 30 years ago we will
withdraw our endorsement, and votes,
from you. After all fair is fair. I don’t
believe we have time to start a third party and build it in time to save the
country, but if things continue as they are we will have no choice with a good
conscience but to try.
No comments:
Post a Comment