Only Rick Santorum Can Save Us Now!

By Dennis Sanders | Related entries in 2008 Election, News

Robert Novak opines in his latest column that there is a feeling among the Republican base that the three leading candidates for the 2008 GOP nomination, Mitt Romney, John McCain and Rudy Giuliani are not conservative enough for the GOP.

A “push poll” that was done for former governor of Virginia James Gilmore, shows that the “big three” might be considered too liberal to be nominated. In the push poll (which of course had Gilmore at the top) participants were told things that might alienate conservative voters: such as Giuliani’s support for gay rights, McCain opposing tax cuts and Romney not making abortion illegal when he was governor.

What’s interesting about this all to me is the defination of “conservative.” According to the push poll and probably in the minds of many a Bush Republican, a true conservative, will always support a tax cut, will ban gay marriage and not give gays any rights, will ban abortion and will ship illegal immigrants back to Mexico.

But what Novak and probably a lot of Republians forget, is that there are many kinds of conservatism and not just their own (bigoted and narrow-minded, IMHO) viewpoint.

Fellow blogger Michael van der Galien links to an article about Rudy Giuliani, that presents a conservatism that I line up with:

Mayor Giuliani is calling on the Republican Party to redefine itself as “the party of freedom,” focusing on lower taxes, school choice, and a health care system rooted in free market principles.

Delivering a policy-driven overview of his presidential platform yesterday, Mr. Giuliani outlined the agenda in a Washington speech before a conservative think tank that sought to make clear distinctions between his vision and that of the Democrats, if not his rivals for the Republican nomination in 2008. The former New York mayor’s proposed redefinition of the Republican platform would signal a shift away from any focus on social issues, on which Mr. Giuliani is much less ideologically aligned with the party.

Mr. Giuliani talked about taxes, education, and health care, saying they are areas where Republican ideas trump those of Democrats.

Democrats, he said, would want to raise taxes to pay the higher costs of a war. “That shows a dividing line, and to me, a misunderstanding of how our economy works,” Mr. Giuliani said. He said that while Republicans believe that the American economy is “essentially a private economy,” Democrats “really believe, honest, that it is essentially a government economy.”

Citing the tax cuts of President Kennedy, Mr. Giuliani said the Democrats’ move away from a low-tax policy was one reason he left the party to become an independent and later a Republican.

On education, Mr. Giuliani acknowledged that he had more success overhauling the New York City welfare system than its public schools, but he lauded “school choice” programs that allow parents to use government money to send their children to private schools. Those initiatives have long drawn criticism from some who contend they amount to an abandonment of public schools.

Mr. Giuliani promised to take on the nation’s public school system, but he said would not seek to dismantle it. “I would not destroy it,” he said. “I would revive it, reform it, and change it.”

While saying the government needed to “find ways” to expand access to health insurance, Mr. Giuliani criticized Democratic proposals for universal health care that he said would threaten a “socialization” of the American medical system. “That would be a terrible, terrible mistake,” he said. The solutions, he said, “have to be free market solutions. They have to be a competitive system.”

Notice that he doesn’t talk much about gays or abortion. He seems more concerned about things that most Americans are concerned about: health care, education, taxes. Giuliani is showing a different kind of conservatism that isn’t obessed with social issues, which the government should not be so involved in, and more focused on “bread and butter” issues from a conservative standpoint. Rudy’s conservatism is more of the traditional “classical liberal” stripe than the social conservative style and if the GOP is smart they will latch on to this form of conservatism than waiting for a “Social Conservative Moses” that will lead them to the promise land.

There is no “conservative void.” There is void of imagination among the Republican base, who only seems to want someone like a Rick Santorum as their nominee.


This entry was posted on Thursday, March 1st, 2007 and is filed under 2008 Election, News. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.

6 Responses to “Only Rick Santorum Can Save Us Now!”

  1. Rene Guerra Says:

    Without unrestricted, absolute respect for innocent life, a tenet that is the most basic foundation of society, “health care, education, and taxes� are totally insignificant.

    And the epitome of all innocent lives is the life of the most innocent of all humans: defenseless, voiceless babies in gestation.

    With the availability of all preventive devices, substances and sex practices, abortion on demand, which Giuliani supports under the masquerade of “choice� (the “choice� to first-degree-murder a baby in gestation, that is), is not only completely murderous and anti-social, but also completely inexcusable as a way to prevent unwanted procreation.

    The first degree murder of a baby in gestation is not just “a social issue�, it is a cancer that is corroding the marrow of the American ethos by making Americans not only insensitive to the premeditated assassination of most innocent human beings, but complicit in the genocide that abortion on demand is.

  2. -shannon- Says:

    What about Ron Paul !?!

  3. Tookie Says:

    Society means nothing if we don’t protect the weakest and most innocent among us.

    There is no “Freedom” in murdering a pre-born child. What “freedom” does that child have, what “choice” does that child have, when her brains are vacuumed out of her head?

    And saying that we should enforce our immigration laws is not bigoted, it’s common sense. Every day, 12 American citizens (remember them?) are killed by illegal aliens.

    http://wnd.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=53103

    That’s worse than the death toll in Iraq, worse than the number we’ve lost to terrorism, worse than anything we’ve ever faced. To ignore that, because the murderers happen to be mostly hispanic, THAT is what’s bigoted.

  4. New Harper's Mews Says:

    The Future Direction of Conservatism?

    Michael van der Galiën rolls out some interesting thoughts at his own blog [1] about the Republican Party’s needs for its next election cycle: a general statement of actual, true conservative beliefs; the kind of conservatism that made your mom…

  5. Matthew Says:

    Let me start by saying that I traditionally vote Republican. While I am against abortion, I am also extremely confused as to why so many seemingly good people fighting the same fight are not fighting for the issues surrounding what happens to defenseless humans after they are born.

    The mortality rate for black infants remains almost twice as high as that for white infants. In the early 1980’s President Reagan’s economic policies – most notably the budget cuts in welfare programs were harming the health of many people, especially poor women and children. Infant mortality increased in several states and cities. In fact, in Detroit, where I grew up, the death rates of infants were comparable to that of 3rd world nations. The infant mortality rate is often considered to be a reflection of overall health conditions and the quality of health care. (Let me note here that the United States is one of only two industrialized nations on the planet that do not provide health care for its citizens – the other being South Africa).

    This is the silver bullet that so many liberals use to shoot holes in our cause. I have come to understand that we can be very hypocritical. Why aren’t the compassion issues that Jesus preached about (i.e. helping the poor) fought for with the same urgency?

    We should be ashamed.

    Those of us who are only concerened about the unborn should be called pro-birth. Those of us who realize how essential it is to take care of the precious gifts that children are once they are brought into this world (like our wonderfully unselfish, family-centric Christain friends in Scandinavia) are the ones that are in fact pro-life.

  6. New Harper’s Mews » Blog Archive » The Future Direction of Conservatism? Says:

    [...] to Dennis Sanders at Donklephant, whose own piece in this chain is worth [...]

Leave a Reply


NOTE TO COMMENTERS:


You must ALWAYS fill in the two word CAPTCHA below to submit a comment. And if this is your first time commenting on Donklephant, it will be held in a moderation queue for approval. Please don't resubmit the same comment a couple times. We'll get around to moderating it soon enough.


Also, sometimes even if you've commented before, it may still get placed in a moderation queue and/or sent to the spam folder. If it's just in moderation queue, it'll be published, but it may be deleted if it lands in the spam folder. My apologies if this happens but there are some keywords that push it into the spam folder.


One last note, we will not tolerate comments that disparage people based on age, sex, handicap, race, color, sexual orientation, national origin or ancestry. We reserve the right to delete these comments and ban the people who make them from ever commenting here again.


Thanks for understanding and have a pleasurable commenting experience.


Related Posts: