2008 Woodie Awards
Vote Absentee
Search the Archives
This primary season has no doubt been historical. We have a Mormon, woman, and an African-American all three as very viable candidates. That, however, has been a dead horse for six months and people are still committed to beating it. What I want to discuss is something that seems to have blossomed lately. It is the interesting dynamic playing out in the Republican primary. We are more or less down to three “viable” candidates left (sorry Ron Paul), and one could really make the argument that it is down to two, or even one. The main theme in their spar for the nomination seems to be who is the most “conservative”, and it is that point that I want to discuss.
Over the last few days we have all heard each of the big three accuse each other of raising taxes and committing other unforgivable sins in the eyes of the GOP primary faithful. McCain is getting slammed for voting against the Bush tax cuts, Romney has supposedly enacted taxes as a governor and called them “fees”, and Huckabee is getting nailed harder than the others for raising taxes some heinous amount of times in Arkansas. It seems that all three seem to be telling the truth about the other, yet all seem to be decent men. Herein lies the question, why do all of these “conservatives” all get caught raising taxes? Is it possible to govern without doing so? Do our leaders really get elected and give power back to the people?
George H.W. Bush’s downfall was over raising taxes when he promised not to. He looked us in the eyes and said those famous words, “READ MY LIPS”, and we all know how it ended. George W. Bush told us all that he was a conservative, yet what happened? He presided over the development of a multi-trillion dollar debt. All three potential frontrunners are all getting slammed by the others for raising taxes or voting against tax cuts with their own constituencies. Is it possible to have a conservative leader who matches the conservative grassroots movements we all see, or is it time for our leaders to be truthful in their campaigns and admit it might just not be that easy to do? And does the conservative electorate really even care? Ron Paul has the most fiscally conservative record being offered, yet he hasn’t been able to garner real support from the conservative establishment. He has been overlooked for men who have spotty fiscal records, all while preaching about their fiscally conservative superiority.
What is it that matters to conservatives now? Is it abortion? That issue, along with gun control, was a dagger in the heart of the Rudy campaign. Is it the War in Iraq? That seems to be the issue that separates the conservative electorate from Ron Paul. Are these issues more important than fiscal conservatism? Is it still social conservatism with the more acceptable cover up of fiscal conservatism? I won’t pretend to have the answers about any of these. I don’t know if it is possible to govern while reducing the size of government and taxes alike. I don’t know what it is that drives the conservative establishment or electorate. All I know is that looking at all of it at face value, it isn’t really adding up like it should.
You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.
RSS 2.0
