The party of NO

Sometimes called "The Stupid Party". Also known as the Republican Party. They still haven't found their way. They still think that the upcoming election is about Party, and not Ideas.

The public face of the party, Michael Steele, was chosen because he was inoffensive to the middle. The Base doesn't care for him because he is a party hack who lacks core values that were championed by the likes of Reagan. The Left doesn't care for him because he comes across as a shill chosen for token reasons, an empty suit. In consequence, the middle dislikes him because he doesn't represent anything of substance.

While it is just fine to oppose ideas that are anathema to Liberty, such as the current health-care monstrosity, the party MUST champion real alternatives and explain why LIBERTY is the better option. Otherwise, the collectivists and their media enablers will continue to (correctly) portray Brand R as the party that stands for nothing except opposition to "progressive social change". It is time for Brand R to stand for something again.

In 1994, Newt Gingrich came out with the Contract With America. A handful of items that polled well, were easy to campaign for by rookie politicians, and which resonated with the electorate. They won by significant margins. When they ran out of ideas and began to govern like Democrat-Lite, they got booted. Rightfully so.

In the upcoming election in 2010, Brand R (or any coherent party which can organize a resonating message) stands to gain significantly just because of voter disaffection with the Marxists currently in charge. It is not enough to just win, however. The Conservatives need to swing for the fences and not only stop the current socialist transformation, but repeal at least 80 years of social programs which have no place in our free country. We need to say not just NO, but Hell NO.

We can begin by stopping the current Health Care, Stimulus, and Cap and Trade agendas, while at the same time stating WHY the ideas are bad for the country. Just saying NO is not enough. We need to clearly explain WHY these things are going to destroy us, and in a way that empty suits like Steele are capable of coherently articulating. Otherwise, we just punt the issue downstream another couple of years while watching our liberty slowly erode.

"No" is a valuable choice. However, to make it a successful choice, we need to ALSO say WHY. Something to think about as you prepare to call your so-called representatives yet again.

Pax,

Newbius