quote: The Vital Republican Center By CHRISTIE WHITMAN
Published: January 12, 2004
LDWICK, N.J. — On May 5, 1996, when I was halfway through my first term as governor of New Jersey, there was a picture of me on the cover of this newspaper's Sunday magazine, accompanied by the headline, "It's My Party Too." I liked that message so much, I had it framed and hung it in my office in Trenton and, later, Washington. To moderate Republicans like me, that headline proclaimed our belief that there was still room for us in the party of Lincoln.
Now, almost eight years later, many moderate Republicans feel even less certain of their place in the party. When President Bush, arguably one of the more conservative presidents in recent history, is under attack from the right wing of the party for his proposal regarding immigration and migrant workers, is it any wonder moderates feel out of sync?
It doesn't seem to matter to conservatives that moderates share their views on the vast majority of those bedrock principles that have always been the foundation of Republicanism: smaller government, the power of free markets, a strong national defense. Because we disagree on a few issues, most notably a woman's right to choose, many conservatives act as if they wish we moderates would just disappear.
This phenomenon is not unique to Republicans. Many moderate Democrats also feel alienated from their party; Senator Zell Miller of Georgia has recently written a book about it. Party estrangement is, sadly, bipartisan, and it is destroying American politics.
Serious suggestion--maybe people like OSC and Whitman can get together and form a viable third party. "The Party for the rest of us." I wonder what the platform would be?
Are moderate voters a large block or a radical fringe of their own who must forever be alienated from the wishes of the centers in the country?
In some ways, I think that everyone feels like their party is controlled by extremists. Has there ever been anyone of any party that is happy with what their party is doing a majority of the time? I doubt it. I know that I have been dismayed many times with the direction of my party--the vote for Patriot Act I and the recent voice vote for Patriot Act 2 being prime examples.
So, are the parties more extremist, or are they just displaying politics as normal, and people like OSC and Whitman are really just lone voices in the wilderness who don't realize that nothing has really changed but the tactics their party is taking?
Posts: 13123 | Registered: Feb 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
I would absolutely love it if moderate Republicans would form a 3rd party. In fact, I think they could probably join with centrist Democrats and become the majority party practically overnight.
Then, we could leave the ultra-liberals and "let's legislate God into America" conservatives to battle each other without destroying the country in the bargain.
Posts: 22497 | Registered: Sep 2000
| IP: Logged |
posted
There is, frankly, nothing I hope for more. Of course, I think it'd all break down once you started trying to define "moderate."
Posts: 37449 | Registered: May 1999
| IP: Logged |
posted
I envision a party with the guiding principal that we do not all have to agree on everything, but we band together to ensure that the extremists don't get their way.
So, we are defined a bit in the negative, but that's okay.
Posts: 22497 | Registered: Sep 2000
| IP: Logged |
posted
This may be slightly off-topic, but I just had to mention the guy here locally who is running for the California State Assembly. Half his campaign signs proclaim that he is a "Conservative Republican". The other half of his signs call him a "Liberal Republican". Huh? Now, mind you, in at least one place these two signs are placed right next to each other.
It has to be the same candidate - same first name, same very unusual last name, running for the same office in the same district. Just how stupid does he think the voters are? My own observation, having worked on precinct boards for a long time - some of the voters are not very bright; but very, very few of them are that stupid.
Posts: 2454 | Registered: Jan 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
Ha ha - especially since I consider myself a moderate in the exact inverse of the statement above. I hate the republican view on small government and big business and foreign relations, yet I am morally very conservative.
This is mainly my problem with calling myself a moderate. I'm not into the water down of issues - I am simply extreme in very different areas Posts: 8504 | Registered: Aug 1999
| IP: Logged |
posted
Annie, there's nothing wrong with being morally conservative, of course, but do you choose your candidates based on those issues or do you choose them based on other factors?
And, by the way, the GOP is NOT for small government. It's for small government programs in areas that a) benefit the poor, or b) compete in any way with the private sector.
It is for VERY LARGE government in areas like: a) military, b) industry set-asides and protections, c) social engineering d) monitoring citizens' behavior...
posted
Careful.. don't let Han hear you talking about how our current two parties aren't working out so well. Posts: 3960 | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
Look, I ain't in this for your two parties, and I'm not in it for you, President. I expect to be well paid for my vote. I'm in it for the tax cut.
Posts: 9 | Registered: Apr 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
Don't worry, almost all of the tax cut that will be effected in future years doesn't apply to you at all. This is the wonder of the horrendously back loaded tax cut. All those people who are saying the current tax cuts are clearly doing good, and thus all the doom sayers were wrong? Those are people who didn't listen to the "doom sayers". Pretty much everyone anti Bush tax cut considered some tax cut worthwhile, and likely to stimulate the economy. So far we have only had some tax cut. The parts of the tax cut to be implemented over the next 6 to 8 years are much much larger, and what the "doom sayers" were criticizing.
Posts: 15770 | Registered: Dec 2001
| IP: Logged |
quote: but do you choose your candidates based on those issues or do you choose them based on other factors?
This, Bob, is why I've gotten so politically frustrated lately. If I vote Republican, I get the moral stances I want but then all kinds of horrendous things like the Patriot Act. If I vote Democrat, I agree with their foreign policy and their social programs, but then I get all kinds of scary moral trespasses. Really, I'm quite disillusioned at this point. And I really think there needs to be an "idealist" party.
Posts: 8504 | Registered: Aug 1999
| IP: Logged |
posted
Yeah, but my idealism differs from your idealism. What you need is a Misguided Idealist party
One of my friends once mused that he ought to start the "Smart Person Party" where he got 300 of the smartest people he knew together and formed a party based on the principle that "We aren't idiots like all those other people are." I was all for it until I found out that I wasn't going to be one of those 300 people Posts: 3243 | Registered: Apr 2002
| IP: Logged |
Printer-friendly view of this topic
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
![[Taunt]](graemlins/taunt.gif)
![[Wink]](wink.gif)
![[Razz]](tongue.gif)
