A Letter to the Republican Party

In the aftermath of the 2008 Presidential Election, through which Senator Obama was elected President, there is some discussion surrounding whether the Republican Party must become increasingly liberal in its ideology and political platform, in order to maintain compatibility with the electorate, and thereby position itself to achieve victory in future national elections.

In consideration of this strategic question, it must be observed that there are three pillars inherent in the Republican Party and its traditional voters; to wit: fiscal conservatives; national security conservatives; and religious conservatives, often referred to as social conservatives and/or values voters. Shifting the Republican platform essentially means transitioning away from morally upright positions on issues including abortion, embryonic stem cell research, homosexual marriage, and other pro-family issues of principal concern to religious conservatives.

As a Christian, and in political vernacular, often referred to by political commentators as an Evangelical, it is imperative that the Republican Party understand political support from a Christian perspective. First, it must be observed that Christians are those who have been born again through faith, that is, belief in and reliance upon Jesus Christ, the Son of God, for salvation in accordance with the Biblical commandment to believe in His name. Secondly, Christians are followers of Jesus Christ; and in this respect there is no higher priority than obeying His commandments. In this respect, it must be realized that Christians view all matters in life, including family, culture, and political matters from a Biblical perspective. The Scripture is the only prism employed to guide and direct attitudes among Christians; and there is no option to compromise on Biblical precept or principle, regardless of the repercussions. Christians obey God, and leave the consequences to Him.

Christians view themselves as Christians first; and secondly, as Americans; who love God, and country, in this respective order. Christians are not wedded to any political party, but rather abide by the timeless principles of God, as conveyed in the Bible, and strive to correctly apply these principles in all aspects of daily living, including in political affairs. It is Biblical precept and principle which guide political views and positions on issues. Please understand that this is not a matter for debate or negotiation, but rather a representation of truth and fact in the life of a Christian. Christians will not compromise on principle, because they cannot. Doing otherwise is sin. Hence, and there is no disrespect intended in the forthcoming comment, Christians will not under any circumstances abandon their positions on abortion, marriage, and other life issues. To suggest or believe otherwise is politically naïve and erroneous. Christians will not commit personal or collective sin for the sake of political gain or expediency. Hence, should the Republican Party pursue a course of diminishing or vitiating its pro-family platform, it will effectively abandon the Christian community in America, one of the three pillars of their national constituency, and their tens of millions of votes. Additionally, it should be recognized that Christians are not myopic, and hold strong, patriotic views on other important national issues. Christians support a muscular defense and security policy; the post 9/11 pre-emptive and offensive war policy to protect the nation; fiscal responsibility and low taxes; border security; protection of gun rights; and school choice.

From a political perspective, it is noteworthy to mention that according to polling by the Christian Coalition, only 50% of Christians are registered to vote, and only 50% of those registered voted in the national election. This is a tragedy, and an irresponsible act on the part of the Christian community. Bluntly stated, from a Biblical perspective, it is sin. Christians have responsibilities as citizens of this nation; and the failure to vote, and thereby, participate in the political process is inconsistent with the “good stewardship” Scriptural principle. Nonetheless, this circumstance presents a tremendous opportunity, for the Christian community, and the Republican Party; that being, to focus attention, resources, and effort toward registering millions of Christians to vote, and to motivate them to exercise their God-given civic duty. Republican Party leaders, and strategists, together with leaders of the Christian community, would be well-served to converge on the goal of dramatically increasing voter registration among believers. It is in the interest of Christians, who love this nation, and the Republican Party, which seeks restoration to national political leadership, to do so. Accordingly, there is no need for the Republican Party to abandon its traditional platform, or Christians, in its quest for political success.

Senator Thompson Departs the 2008 Presidential Race

Senator Fred Thompson announced his departure from the 2008 Presidential race today. This development will certainly effect the race, as remaining contenders will vie for Thompson’s conservative supporters.

Senator Thompson has been rightly attending to his ailing mother, and she, the Senator, and his entire family will certainly remain in our prayers. An extensive assessment of the political dimension of Senator Thompson’s bid for the Republican nomination for president is offered by Bob Krumm.

Should Senator Thompson Quit?

Should Senator Thompson quit after a third place finish in South Carolina, as some seem to be suggesting? This is very interesting. Why is it that Mayor Guiliani who has not won one primary or caucas, and is now in single digits according to the latest Rasmussen national poll, is not asked to leave the race; yet Thompson is?

Senator Thompson has finished ahead of Mayor Guiliani in Iowa; and in South Carolina he placed ahead of both Guiliani and Governor Romney! This is remarkable reasoning.

Thompson remains positioned to do well in coming primaries given that Governor Huckabee has been marginalized by losing to Senator McCain in South Carolina. Huckabee cannot attract fiscal or national security conservatives, the other two pillars of the Republican electorate. He only attracts religious/social conservatives, who will now be compelled to reassess their support of Huckabee, a candidate who demonstrably cannot attract fiscal and national security conservatives and unite Republicans.

For anyone thinking that Senator McCain can unite and galvanize conservatives in the Republican Party to turnout in large numbers in a general election to defeat the Democrats, you may want to read this article by Mark Levin dated today, 1/20/08.

http://article.nationalreview.com/?q=MzY0M2U3ZTExMGExM2Q4YTJhYzJkZDMzYzgwMDAzZmE=&w=MA==

Republican voters better start thinking seriously about who to nominate. Every single one of the Republican candidates, except Thompson, alienates enough Republican voters to give the general election to the Democrats. McCain cannot attract a large number of religious conservatives, fiscal conservatives, and even some national security conservatives, given his support last year for the compromise amnesty immigration agreement. Governor Romney cannot attract religious conservatives because of his recent conversion to pro-life and family positions. Does anyone think Romney can carry the South? Guiliani cannot attract religious conservatives; not to mention his personal scandals which the Democrats would undoubtedly re-surface in the general election. Huckabee’s problems have already been addressed above.

At present, Republicans have a major problem. They erroneously believed that Republican voters would support them in the end, in the last Congressional election, and lost both houses of Congress. They would do well to observe that there are enough Republican voters who will not compromise on their principles, and “hold their nose” and vote for a “RINO,” or more precisely, a “CINO” (I.e., conservative in name only) – even if it means allowing the Democratic nominee for president to prevail in the general election. There are enough conservative voters who will not compromise on moral principle today any more than President Abraham Lincoln would compromise on slavery, or President Ronald Reagan on communism.

Indeed, Republicans have a problem of monumental proportion requiring serious contemplation. The good news for Republicans is that although time is growing short, there is still time to reflect and act anew.

Senator Thompson and Conservatives in the “Clutch”

For Republican voters who want a “true” conservative at the top of the Republican presidential ticket, please understand that you now have 24 hours to your party’s and America’s destiny.

Senator Fred Thompson, as you know, is the sole bearer of the conservative mantle; more specifically, he is strong on national security and defense; for smaller government; and low taxes and reduced federal spending. He is 100% pro-life and family; stridently against illegal immigration; and a proponent of national sovereignty.

Now is the time for you to make a difference on the battlefield, namely, South Carolina. Senator Thompson has the campaign momentum, yet the time is short. You must sieze the initiative now and press the attack. How? Visit www.fred08.com , become a “Friend of Fred,” and use the free “Phone for Fred” system and phone list, to call Republicans in South Carolina.

The most recent polls indicate that 41% of the South Carolina Republican voters are either undecided or may change their vote. Senator Thompson is in a position to win this race, but the race will likely be decided by a few hundred votes. Your critical phone calls to South Carolina Republicans on Friday January 18th, can make the difference in determining whether the Republican Party, America’s only hope for the preservation of the nation, will have the one candidate who can unite the party’s three voting pillars, that is, the Reagan Coalition, of fiscal conservatives; national security conservatives; and religious/social conservatives.

Senator Thompson has been campaigning intensely in South Carolina on both the ground, through his 35 city bus tour, holding 5 or more events a day, talking directly to the voters in person, and in local live radio broadcast townhalls; and across the air waves with excellent media advertising, financed by hundreds of small donors.

Now, the Senator needs your timely and vital support. This is the proverbial “crunch time” or “clutch!” Will you, as a committed conservative, “step up” in the “clutch,” to save your country? The future of the Republican Party, and most importantly, America lies in your hands.

Too Late for Senator Thompson?

It is absolutely incredible that it is almost a year away from a presidential election, and for some reason so many supposedly conservative voters, people who purportedly think critically, have seemingly because of political pundits and news commentators, decided first that Senator Thompson was lazy, and upon this erroneous characterization being vitiated by his 50-city Iowa bus tour in 2-3 weeks, and better than predicted performance in Iowa, beating Senator McCain, not to mention his successful legal, polictical, and acting careers, that now, after his clearly winning debate performance in South Carolina, it is too late for his candidacy for the Republican nomination. This is remarkable reasoning. Why is it too late? Who says so? How many Americans have voted yet?

There have been 3 primaries to date: Iowa; New Hampshire; and Wyoming. Senator Thompson finished 3rd in Iowa; second in Wyoming; and made a strategic decision not to compete in the other, that is, New Hampshire.

Strategic decisions not to compete in certain states during primaries is most reasonable. Both Governor Romney and Mayor Guiliani made strategic decisions announced yesterday that they would essentially not compete in South Carolina. In fact, Mayor Guiliani made strategic decisions not to compete in Iowa or New Hampshire – and he was the Republican national frontrunner!

This morning, Human Events national magazine, announced their endorsement of Senator Thompson. This is a major conservative publication, a venue for the foremost conservatives in the country. For some reason, they apparently do not believe it is too late. The National Right to Life Organization also endorsed Senator Thompson. They do not believe it is too late either.

Indeed it is “crunch time” for Senator Thompson. Yet, how many winners in American history came through during “crunch time” or in the “clutch?” General George Washingtion came through in the “clutch.” President Abraham Lincoln came through in the “clutch.” General George Patton came through in the “clutch.” President John F. Kennedy came through in the “clutch.” The fact is, Americans love people who come through in the “clutch.” Have traditional conservative voters now become so saturated by a culture of “immediate gratification” that they can be so easily swayed by conclusions that have no basis in logic?

Democratic leaders by virtue of their words and policy actions will not defend America. Their party will not defend or stand for traditional American values, the very strength of the nation. As John Adams said, “Our constitution is only for a moral people. It is inadequate for any other.” The nation’s security and preservation rest on the Republican Party. It is assumed that conservatives desire to save this country, which is under grave threat from without, and a threat from moral malaise within. As Senator Thompson stated in the debate last night, “This is a battle for the heart and soul of the Republican Party and its future.”

Any member of the Republican constituency interested in the preservation and security interests of the United States is well-advised to carefully study and seriously contemplate the Human Events detailed assessment, leading to their endorsement of Senator Thompson. Their editors certainly engaged in critical analysis prior to making this endorsement. Which way Republican voters? Is it too late?

http://www.humanevents.com/article.php?id=24398

A House Divided Will Not Stand

In the aftermath of the Iowa Republican Presidential Caucus, there are some important lessons to be learned by the Republican establishment and conservative voters. First, it must be recognized that among the three blocks of Republican voters, specifically, fiscal conservatives; national security conservatives; and religious/social conservatives, no dimension of the conservative constituency can be taken for granted. Religious conservatives affirmed by their high voter turnout, and overwhelming support of Governor Huckabee, that their support for any Republican candidate in a general election is paramount. The nation is divided along party lines, and any Republican Presidential nominee cannot win a general election without the strong support of each block of the Republican constituency, voting in large numbers.

At this point in time, it is reasonable to conclude that religious/social conservatives, that is, evangelical Christians, as they are generally referred to in media parlance, will not be taken for granted; but quite the contrary, they will rather exercise their collective political power in support of their political viewpoints, which principally include, protection of the unborn; marriage solely defined as between one man and one woman; upholding the rule of law; and moral and ethical behavior among public officials and others in positions of power and influence. Most importantly, it must be recognized that these individuals will not compromise on faith-based convictions for any reason.

Evangelical Christians supported Governor Huckabee in the Iowa Caucus as a consequence of his identification with their interests and values, and wrongly or rightly, one can certainly make the case that Governor Huckabee directly appealed to this constituency on the basis of his religious commonality with them. Given his success in attracting these voters, and generating a large turnout among them, any Republican primary candidate is well-advised to understand and respond to their interests and values, and to never ignore or take this particular block of the Republican constituency for granted. They can and will have an impact on the success of Republican candidates.

Notwithstanding the foregoing assessment, there are other lessons in the wake of the Iowa Caucus to heed. Governor Huckabee, despite his tremendous victory is not at this time a formidable Republican candidate for President in the impending November 2008 Presidential election. This is due to his record as Governor of Arkansas, where he raised state taxes and spending to very high levels. In addition, during the course of recent weeks he has demonstrated a lack of prowess on matters of national security and foreign policy, particularly important issues given the state of war existent between the United States and Islamic terrorists. Accordingly, Governor Huckabee generates little confidence among either fiscal conservatives, or national security conservatives. Further, as religious/social conservatives increase their knowledge about his weaknesses in these areas, their support for him is likely to wane, given the strong commitment of evangelical Christians to sound fiscal policy, meaning low taxes and controlled federal spending; and to the security and defense of the United States and our way of life. Governor Huckabee, in view of the aforementioned policy characteristics, and the corresponding conflicts with two core constituencies, is not a strong national candidate as the Republican nominee. Most fortunately for Republican voters, there are other candidates seeking the nomination. All of these candidates, with one exception, present problems in attracting one of more blocks of the Republican constituency. More specifically, Governor Romney, while appealing to fiscal and national security conservatives, alienates religious/social conservatives in sufficient numbers to be problematic in generating their strong support during a general election for president. Mayor Giuliani is personally opposed to the interests and values of religious/social conservatives, and thus cannot engender their support. Senator McCain damaged his relationship with fiscal and national security conservatives, with his votes against the Bush tax cut legislation; his support for the compromise immigration bill; and his opposition to aggressive interrogation techniques which may be used on captured high value terrorists. Congressman Hunter sows fear among fiscal conservatives given his desire to renegotiate international trade agreements. He also lacks sufficient national name recognition and funding required for raising his national profile. Congressman Paul alienates national security conservatives, in view of his opposition to the war in Iraq, and his desire to pursue a fortress America defense policy. The remaining candidate is Senator Thompson.

Senator Thompson alienates none of the Republican Party’s three block constituencies. He has pleased fiscal conservatives with his proposed voluntary flat tax system consisting of two rates, one at 10% with no deductions; and the other a 25% maximum rate with current deductions maintained. His proposal also lowers the corporate tax rate to ensure US Corporations are operating at the same tax rates as foreign-based competitors. He pleases national security conservatives with his proposal to increase the size of the US military, and his commitment to aggressively defend the nation during a war for its survival. Moreover, Senator Thompson, as was recently stated during an interview on the Mark Levin radio program, upon being directly asked, among other matters concerning values, if he was a Christian, answered with a forthright, “yes.” Thus, he can certainly appeal to religious/social conservatives, given his personal profession of faith, and his strong pro-life voting record as a US Senator. The central complaint against Senator Thompson, specifically, that he lacks the “fire in the belly,” in pursuing the presidency, has now been vitiated by his intense 50-city bus tour campaign in Iowa over approximately two to three weeks, and his very credible third place finish in the Iowa Caucus.

In view of the foregoing assessment, Republicans must have unity to achieve victory in the general election against the Democratic nominee. Alienation of any of the three blocks of Republican voters, almost assures failure in the November 2008 general election. As President Abraham Lincoln astutely observed from the Scripture, “A house divided against itself will not stand;” and a divided Republican constituency cannot achieve a general election victory in 2008. In order to assure victory, the Republican Party must unify behind a candidate whom all of the principal constituencies can, and will support; and that candidate is Senator Thompson, who by virtue of his consistent and conservative policy positions, and personal characteristics, is best positioned to engender the support of, and thus appeal to, all of the Republican Party’s three blocks of voters, fiscal conservatives; national security conservatives; and religious/social conservatives. If Republican voters desire to pursue the best opportunity for victory in November, they must now begin to coalesce around Senator Thompson, the most broadly appealing candidate, who because of his capacity to manifest a large Republican voter turnout, can indeed win in the general election.

Pakistan on the Brink

In the aftermath of the assassination of former Pakistan Prime Minister Benazir Bhutto, Pakistan is a country on the brink of political and civil chaos, which could lead to anarchy, and an opening for a radical Muslim extremist takeover by al Qaeda; the Taliban; and/or elements supportive of these terrorists organizations. The prospect of any such takeover would be a national security disaster for the United States, the region, and the free world, given that Pakistan possess approximately 60-100 nuclear weapons, and intermediate range missiles to deliver them. The situation is rapidly deteriorating, with rioting having resulted in the destruction of 160 banks and 18 train stations, according to recent news reports, and the opportunity to regain stability is diminishing with every moment of continued civil unrest.

Pakistani President Musharraf, the former military leader who seized power by military coup, must act quickly and decisively to stop the chaos, and potential collapse into anarchy, with all of the attendant risk to security, including the grave risk of the country’s nuclear weapons being seized by the terrorist organizations, or their political allies operating within the nation’s current intelligence apparatus. The fundamental question centers on the measures Musharraf must implement to diminish further civil unrest and restore political stability. What action should the Pakistani leader pursue?

First, he must arrange to meet with moderate opposition political leaders, including former Prime Minister Sharif, who was also subjected to an assassination attempt. As an outcome of this effort, he must announce elections will be held within 30-45 days, with international observers present to establish credibility. Musharraf could simultaneously resign from office in deference to the best interests of his country. However, given his apparent predilection for power, a resignation is improbable. Secondly, he and the moderate political opposition elements must agree to aggressively pursue Al Qaeda and the Taliban, operating in the western tribal region of the country and destroy them. These organizations present the most dangerous threat to internal stability, and of course, to the civilized world as well. They will certainly attempt to sow additional civil uprising in their effort to further destabilize the country. Accordingly, the U.S. and its allies must pressure President Musharraf to act, and to do so immediately. 

The Best Republican Presidential Candidate for 2008

The Best Republican Presidential Candidate for 2008

Former Senator Fred Thompson is the only real conservative in the race for the Republican nomination, and the only candidate who can unite all three pillars of the Republican Party, namely, fiscal conservatives; national security and defense conservatives; and religious conservatives.

The Republican party, given that the nation is divided, cannot afford to alienate any of these pillars, or they will lose in the general election, as a sufficient number of the alienated pillar’s constituents will simply not cast a vote for president when they vote. This is not an attempt to intimidate Republican voters, but merely a recognition that there are certain conservative voters who simply will not violate their own principles and vote for someone they have fundamental disagreements with, or do not trust. For example, Governor Romney, has not provided a satisfactory answer in the minds of many religious conservatives in his efforts to explain the change from pro-choice to pro-life. They want to know the motivation, and need to be convinced that it was not political. This matter remains unresolved, and thus alienates a proportion of religious conservatives who would otherwise support him as the party’s nominee – regardless of his own religious persuasion. Mayor Guiliani also has a similar problem with religious conservatives, given his personal position on abortion; and promising to appoint strict constructionist judges will not vitiate the conflict with pro-life constituents. Religious conservatives will not vote for a pro-choice Republican nominee – even if it means electing Senator Clinton president. They will not violate a moral conviction. They will simply adopt the attitude – God’s will be done, and maintain their conviction. Governor Huckabee alienates fiscal conservatives as a result of his tax and spend policies during his tenure in Arkansas. Senator McCain, terminally severed his relationship with a proportion of national security conservatives through his aggressive support of the proposed comprehensive immigration agreement, which failed as a result of a citizens’ uprising against this legislation; his opposition to the tax cut policy of the Bush Administration; and his opposition to aggressive interrogation techniques on high value captured terrorists.

Senator Thompson has none of the foregoing problems. He is strong on defense of the nation during a time of war, and has already committed to a substantial increase in the size of our military to fight the enemy threatening our survival; will seal the border, and reverse illegal immigration through attrition; will maintain the current tax policy, and reduce taxes by instituting his proposed voluntary flat tax system with only two rates, one at 10% with no deductions; and the other 25% maximum with current deductions maintained. He will also lower the corporate tax rate to ensure US Corporations are operating at the same tax rates as foreign corporations. Moreover, Mr. Thompson is the only candidate to assemble a plan to address the impending social security system crisis – the “third rail” of American politics. The Senator is acceptable to religious conservatives as well, given his strong and long-standing pro-life position, which explains why he was endorsed by the National Right to Life organization, and many similar state organizations.

In respect to the “fire in the belly” complaint, which is preferable: “Fire in the belly?” or the following leadership characteristics? Personal integrity; moral conviction; courage; perseverance; boldness; humility; analytical intelligence; calm and deliberate disposition; decisiveness; understands historical context and timing; commitment; and vision. In short, the Senator will show more than adequate “fire in the belly” when he demonstrates to those attempting to destroy our beloved nation a backbone of iron and the fury of an adversary who will unleash a conflagration, if necessary, to preserve our sacred liberty. One must guard against being deceived by cliché terms such as “fire in the belly,” in the middle of a media driven political campaign, when there are substantially more important, and higher priority characteristics needed in the President of the United States, and leader of the free world.

For Republicans to win the White House, they must be united and have a large voter turnout among all three of their voting pillars, that is fiscal conservatives; national security conservatives; and religious conservatives. Senator Thompson, is the only candidate not alienating any of these voting pillars, and thus can galvanize their support. Accordingly, he is the best hope for Republicans in the 2008 national election. Indeed Senator Thompson can win the general election, and rest assured the other party knows it for the same reasons articulated herein; to wit: he unites the Republican constituencies and assures a large conservative voter turnout in the 2008 election.