[Speed Gibson,
Monday October 15, 2007 at 10:11am]
Taking Charge
This is part three of my trilogy, following parts One and Two published earlier.
The majority of the MOB believes the stakes too high to be over-demanding of Republican candidates. The Chief of the Freedom Dogs calls anything else Russian Roulette. Frankly, I agree at the national level, given the clear and present danger from the Islamic terrorists.
But here in Minnesota, I think the reverse is true. Supporting "moderate" Republicans as practiced by our Governor Tim Pawlenty is actually the greater of the two evils in that he provides a false sense of security. What, you want Mike Hatch to be Governor? Of course not, but you have give Hatch credit for this: he would have truly been representing a significant portion of the state electorate, our liberal establishment. There would have been few surprises in a Hatch administration. His base would have been pleased, if not giddy.
Can the Pawlenty administration say that? No, there have been plenty of surprises, like stadium pork, health impact fees, light rail, and his fact-free obsession with bio-fuels. Whom does he represent, i.e., consistently represent? Certainly not the conservative base of the Republican party, just those Hugh Hewitt types that believe in victory at any cost. How can these people even say that Pawlenty represents them when Pawlenty's positions keep changing and his actions are unpredictable?
Pawlenty happens to be the best example of what I'm talking about, but there are many more, dozens in the Legislature. They're not fighting for limited goverment, the core principle of the GOP party. Their records suggest they believe in big government like the DFL, just on the installment plan. As good as we might feel seeing the DFL's huge tax increases go down in 2007, all it really means is that they were postponed. As it is, state spending shot up big again without this new money, over 8 percent this biennium.
This is ultimately a losing play. Soft Republicanism is enabling hard Liberalism, not thwarting it. It either gives them what they want, at worst delayed, or leads to "aren't you for clean air?" campaign attacks. I'm tired of playing defense.
The time has come to take charge, to go on offense. GOP candidates should be talking of shinking government, not slowing the growth, which still means in excess of inflation. Make the other side play defense: why shouldn't we eliminate MN-Care, like Tennessee did with their version?
Yes, this means the true conservatives will stand alone for a while, greatly outnumbered by the Triple Alliance (DFL, RINOs, and Education Minnesota). But now these liberals will now wholly own their failures, like in the City of Minneapolis. Mayor Rybak whines about LGA "cuts", but he's getting no real traction, even in the newspapers. The same with the imploding Minneapolis Public Schools, who have effectively lost those who by liberal thinking should be their biggest supporters - poor and minority families. It is from these ashes that vouchers or the equivalent will eventually rise, not some high level policy recommendation. Take charge, start proposing this next session.
Go on offense, like Sue Jeffers, Jason Lewis, and Phil Krinke. Publish the private vs charter vs public school test scores - and costs. Tell of the many success stories of kids who escaped the public schools and the plight of those left behind, unable to afford the choice that ironically would save the state money. Ask the DFL why they hate kids for a change.
The majority of the MOB believes the stakes too high to be over-demanding of Republican candidates. The Chief of the Freedom Dogs calls anything else Russian Roulette. Frankly, I agree at the national level, given the clear and present danger from the Islamic terrorists.
But here in Minnesota, I think the reverse is true. Supporting "moderate" Republicans as practiced by our Governor Tim Pawlenty is actually the greater of the two evils in that he provides a false sense of security. What, you want Mike Hatch to be Governor? Of course not, but you have give Hatch credit for this: he would have truly been representing a significant portion of the state electorate, our liberal establishment. There would have been few surprises in a Hatch administration. His base would have been pleased, if not giddy.
Can the Pawlenty administration say that? No, there have been plenty of surprises, like stadium pork, health impact fees, light rail, and his fact-free obsession with bio-fuels. Whom does he represent, i.e., consistently represent? Certainly not the conservative base of the Republican party, just those Hugh Hewitt types that believe in victory at any cost. How can these people even say that Pawlenty represents them when Pawlenty's positions keep changing and his actions are unpredictable?
Pawlenty happens to be the best example of what I'm talking about, but there are many more, dozens in the Legislature. They're not fighting for limited goverment, the core principle of the GOP party. Their records suggest they believe in big government like the DFL, just on the installment plan. As good as we might feel seeing the DFL's huge tax increases go down in 2007, all it really means is that they were postponed. As it is, state spending shot up big again without this new money, over 8 percent this biennium.
This is ultimately a losing play. Soft Republicanism is enabling hard Liberalism, not thwarting it. It either gives them what they want, at worst delayed, or leads to "aren't you for clean air?" campaign attacks. I'm tired of playing defense.
The time has come to take charge, to go on offense. GOP candidates should be talking of shinking government, not slowing the growth, which still means in excess of inflation. Make the other side play defense: why shouldn't we eliminate MN-Care, like Tennessee did with their version?
Yes, this means the true conservatives will stand alone for a while, greatly outnumbered by the Triple Alliance (DFL, RINOs, and Education Minnesota). But now these liberals will now wholly own their failures, like in the City of Minneapolis. Mayor Rybak whines about LGA "cuts", but he's getting no real traction, even in the newspapers. The same with the imploding Minneapolis Public Schools, who have effectively lost those who by liberal thinking should be their biggest supporters - poor and minority families. It is from these ashes that vouchers or the equivalent will eventually rise, not some high level policy recommendation. Take charge, start proposing this next session.
Go on offense, like Sue Jeffers, Jason Lewis, and Phil Krinke. Publish the private vs charter vs public school test scores - and costs. Tell of the many success stories of kids who escaped the public schools and the plight of those left behind, unable to afford the choice that ironically would save the state money. Ask the DFL why they hate kids for a change.