The Other McCain

"One should either write ruthlessly what one believes to be the truth, or else shut up." — Arthur Koestler

Sen. Rubio Weekly GOP Address

Posted on | December 9, 2012 | 66 Comments

by Smitty

Via American Freedom, truly an excellent personal story, excellent ideas, and excellent delivery:

Contrast Rubio’s don’t-scare-the-horses delivery with William Kristol at the Daily Standard

And the conservative movement?—?a bulwark of American strength for the last several decades?—?is in deep disarray. Reading about some conservative organizations and Republican campaigns these days, one is reminded of Eric Hoffer’s remark, “Every great cause begins as a movement, becomes a business, and eventually degenerates into a racket.” It may be that major parts of American conservatism have become such a racket that a kind of refounding of the movement as a cause is necessary. A reinvigoration of the Republican party also seems desirable, based on a new generation of leaders, perhaps coming?—?as did Ike and Reagan?—?from outside the normal channels.

What’s not in question are the basic principles of conservativism that go back to our founding documents: liberty, equality before the law, private property, free enterprise, &c.
What’s coming into question is whether the GOP elite has snorted so much Progressive cocaine as to make their heads ‘splode and forget those basic principles.

It’s not fair to rip Rubio over this weekly GOP address speech and call him a milquetoast. The weekly address is not CPAC, where Rubio can be expected to arrive with some sort of bacon gun and shoot pork product pellets into the sea of meat-craving conservatives. The weekly address is certainly an occasion for something short and vaguely positive that colors within the lines.

However, for 2014 and 2016, this blogger wants to see some recognition that those lines mark a Progressive pit into which the country has sunk, and correctly identifies the systemic issue for the problem: our government has shifted from being representative to redistributive over the last century. Both parties have been buying votes with entitlements and turning a country of opportunity into some sort of neo-feudalism.

Hopefully the GOP can glom onto the reality of 2012, which is that the Gradual Onslaught of Progressivism is not going to attract voters anymore. If the GOP is merely saying tom-ay-toe to the Democrat’s tom-ah-toe, then the losses will continue to mount. It’s time to put on the Big People Pants and talk hardcore reform.

Update: linked by Nathan J. Martin

Comments

66 Responses to “Sen. Rubio Weekly GOP Address”

  1. Quartermaster
    December 9th, 2012 @ 9:57 am

    The conservatives were overwhelmed by the Neocons, who CINOs to their core. Kristol is part of the problem, but he at least he realizes there is a problem. Part of the solution would find him on the outside railing against the same people he has been working to marginalize for years.

    The GOP, OTOH, has just been a manipulator and has become a racket. The Dims are there as well, and neither party cares a whit about the base they supposedly represent. All they want is power so they can hand out the goodies to their friends.

    Alas, for them, the gravy train is about to go off the tracks. Alas, for us, it will affect the middle class and poor in horrific ways. Both parties have betrayed the country and us.

  2. higgins
    December 9th, 2012 @ 11:01 am

    The only hope for America is for a truly conservative/libertarian third party to form and quickly become a majority. Alas, we are doomed.

  3. Change of Pace: Totally Awesome Speech Addition | Nathan Martin
    December 9th, 2012 @ 11:03 am

    […] HT Smitty […]

  4. Adobe_Walls
    December 9th, 2012 @ 11:41 am

    I concur with your assessment. The downfall of the conservative movement is due in large part to allowing the Neocons (aka: socialists for Nixon) to identify themselves as conservatives. Unfortunately they are representitive of the GOP which pretty much says it all.

    As for Rubio’s message; I suppose that the word reform comes in quite handy and is very popular maybe even effective when running for office. If by “reform” one means decimating (in the Roman fashion) all the personnel at EPA then investigating and trying the rest, well, in that case I’m for it. I suspect that’s not what Mr Rubio intends, mores the pity. The purpose of our government is to fulfill the dreams of our landscapers?!! Perhaps I’ll have to reread the federalist papers, I don’t remember seeing that.

  5. Dai Alanye
    December 9th, 2012 @ 12:52 pm

    A fairly good educational speech and a fair delivery, but I got no sense of intimacy or conviction from Rubio’s unstressed manner of orating, nor were critical points driven home by repetition. The speech, and especially the delivery, could qualify, I suppose, as “above average” but little more.

    As for Kristol, nearly every time I see his smarmy grin on Fox I get a sense of weakness and an all too great willingness to see the other side’s viewpoint. His Neocons initially reinvigorated the Republican Party, and the Tea Party did even more, but right now I’d say we need to invigorate them! Especially the Neocons, but the Tea Party to some degree as well.

    A serious problem has developed with doctrinaire libertarians, too. While many of their values mesh with those of true conservatives, their freely-expressed disdain for George Bush and the Republican Party is harmful, and had a negative impact on voter turnout. As allies, they have a great deal in common with the French.

    BTW, Ike was a RINO who beat out a true conservative for the nomination–Bob Taft, Mister Republican of the Senate. I’m not thrilled with Eisenhower being rolled out as an example for today’s cause.

  6. Dianna Deeley
    December 9th, 2012 @ 1:24 pm

    “Elites have”, not “has”.

  7. Adobe_Walls
    December 9th, 2012 @ 1:57 pm

    The Neocons are not our friends. They are big government statists and disagree with progressives only at the margins as to how far domestic government reach should be. They only disagree with progressives about the purpose of foreign intervention. Conservatives place great importance on National Security. Neocons think pounding the square peg of democracy into the round hole of barbarian societies is the foundation of our National Security.

  8. richard mcenroe
    December 9th, 2012 @ 2:20 pm

    So another talking head blames the comnservatives for the collapse of the conservative movement, as the RNC/GOP do everything in their power to keep them and the party base from exercising any real power. Should make a lovely talking point at the Georgetown cocktail parties.

  9. Finrod Felagund
    December 9th, 2012 @ 4:42 pm

    Why don’t we take (back) over the party we have, instead of the monster task of forming a new one?

  10. Finrod Felagund
    December 9th, 2012 @ 4:45 pm

    It’s easy to assign blame, it’s much harder to do the hard work that’s going to be necessary to take back our party and our country.

    If I had a dime for every time someone blamed the ‘neocons’ (on either side), I could retire now.

  11. smitty
    December 9th, 2012 @ 4:47 pm

    Thanks for the edit, but I went with ‘GOP elite has’.

  12. K-Bob
    December 9th, 2012 @ 5:22 pm

    Look, I get Rubio. I decided good guys like him, who are decent, basic, capitalist-loving, God-fearing, “regular” people are different from guys like Mark Levin, in one major respect:

    Levin is a Restoration conservative.

    Rubio is a “Values” conservative.

    We need values conservatives, and we must have values conservatives in order to keep this country from becoming China. But Rubio and all of the other values conservatives, are not going to be capable of understanding the importance of restoration.

    This is why Mitt was unable to give the electorate an actual choice. On the one hand, in Obama, we have a guy who wants to use government to produce “social justice,” and in Mitt, you have a guy who wants to manage things better and spend less money. The social justice guy wins that fight every time, as long as he can speak without tripping over his tongue.

    A Restoration candidate can explain why the Constitution worked to produce the greatest country on Earth. Mitt never even tried to use the Constitution as a platform. Neither does Rubio. If you don’t ever make study of the philosophy behind the framing of the Constitution, you can’t explain it. You also can’t explain the exceptionalism factor without it.

    So I can admire Rubio all day long. I love that he’s a Senator. I will fight to keep him away from the next Nomination. I did my duty and caved for Mitt this time, setting Restoration aside in a hope of slowing the crash.

    No more.

  13. section9
    December 9th, 2012 @ 5:23 pm

    Eisenhower kept budgets fairly well in line, kept us out of foreign conflicts, and didn’t start all those entitlement programs that conservatives worry about. We had an extremely robust military during Ike’s era, but didn’t lose a man in combat between the end of the Korean War and Kennedy’s Inaugural, when the roof fell in and the War Party took over. As for George Bush and the the Republican Party; they deserve scorn for what they have done to the Reagan Coalition and the notion of small government conservatism. Bush even duplicated Lyndon Johnson’s mistake of getting the U.S. bogged down in a protracted overseas war with no conceivable end in sight, until David Petraeus showed up to bail him out.

  14. K-Bob
    December 9th, 2012 @ 5:27 pm

    Vote West, and accomplish both goals at the same time. Building a third party in time to put up a candidate is wasted effort. Just vote West and be done with it.

  15. K-Bob
    December 9th, 2012 @ 5:31 pm

    Actual Neocons are a very small percentage of the Republican collective. The Rockerfeller Republicans so dwarf the neocons that any ire aimed at neocons is a waste of time.

    Even though Kristol should be told to just shut his piehole every chance you get.

  16. Adobe_Walls
    December 9th, 2012 @ 5:34 pm

    What Party would that be?
    I don’t blame the Neocons for fighting for what they believe in, I blame conservatives for thinking Neocons were on our side and that they shared our goals. They have more in common with progressives than Conservatives.

  17. Adobe_Walls
    December 9th, 2012 @ 5:37 pm

    True but most Conservatives don’t mistake Rockefeller Republicans as allies.

  18. Adobe_Walls
    December 9th, 2012 @ 5:49 pm

    Because we don’t have a party, Reagan’s ascension was a temporary coup. He lead the party to victory but failed in the end to transform it into a conservative party. The GOP’s platitudes about conservative values are merely the worm on the hook, the shapely fake leg in Loony Tunes used to lure Conservatives around the corner under the ludicrously large mallet.

  19. Bob Belvedere
    December 9th, 2012 @ 5:56 pm

    Sometimes an organism is so riddled with disease that it can’t be saved. This is the conclusion a small group of men reached in the 1850’s and out of which came the Republican Party.

  20. Adobe_Walls
    December 9th, 2012 @ 5:56 pm

    Quite.

  21. Bob Belvedere
    December 9th, 2012 @ 5:58 pm

    Ah, but it was Ike who said that we had to accept the New Deal as permanent [sound familiar?].

  22. Bob Belvedere
    December 9th, 2012 @ 6:00 pm

    Hear, hear!

  23. Bob Belvedere
    December 9th, 2012 @ 6:03 pm

    Smitty wrote: …our government has shifted from being representative to redistributive over the last century.

    And that is because the people have become redistributive in their thinking.

    The disease of Leftist Thinking has infected all of our minds and only some serious self-chemotherapy is going to kill it.

  24. Finrod Felagund
    December 9th, 2012 @ 6:36 pm

    Well, there are only two to choose from. If you want to try to retake the Democratic Party, good luck with that.

  25. Finrod Felagund
    December 9th, 2012 @ 6:38 pm

    Except that establishing a successful new party is about a hundred times harder than you think it is. You’d have better luck playing the lottery.

    Even if there’s only a small chance of saving the Republican Party, that’s still much better odds than the third-party route.

  26. Finrod Felagund
    December 9th, 2012 @ 6:39 pm

    Have you considered changing your username to Eeyore?

  27. Adobe_Walls
    December 9th, 2012 @ 7:50 pm

    So one of the two parties represents conservatives? One of them is “ours” to take back? Good luck with that.

  28. Adobe_Walls
    December 9th, 2012 @ 7:52 pm

    No, you? Wishful thinking is not a plan.

  29. Finrod Felagund
    December 9th, 2012 @ 8:00 pm

    I have no use for whiners and fatalists. Lead, follow, or get the hell out of the way.

  30. Finrod Felagund
    December 9th, 2012 @ 8:01 pm

    See what I said above about whiners and fatalists.

  31. Dai Alanye
    December 9th, 2012 @ 8:12 pm

    Ike was a non-political political general who received most of the credit for a war won by George Patton and others. This is the harsh but not inaccurate view of him. He played it safe in war (Don’t close that Falaise Gap, Georgie!) and as President. He continued the Truman strategy of playing for a draw in Korea, which I consider a mistake.

    Worst of all, he left the Republican Party weaker than he found it.

  32. Dai Alanye
    December 9th, 2012 @ 8:23 pm

    The Whigs foundered and the Republicans came to power on two issues, slavery and the maintenance of the federal union. I see no issues as large and stark available now for a new party.

    Those who want to replace the Republican Party tend to want most of the same things but moreso. Better to learn how to more effectively present the conservative message while dumping the worst of the RINOs. Accept allies like the Neocons, Libertarians, and even the better class of RINOs but make sure they don’t damage key party issues. In other words, take Christie because he’s the best substitute for a conservative New Jersey can offer, but don’t let him keynote any future conventions.

  33. Wombat_socho
    December 9th, 2012 @ 8:24 pm

    But the GOP wasn’t formed ex nihilo; there were former Whigs, Free Soilers, and radical abolitionist Northern Democrats helping to form the party that put Lincoln over the top in 1860. As Finrod correctly observes, we have to start somewhere, and it’s a lot easier to put the screws to the Establishment Republicans than it is to leave and start another stillborn Reform Party.

  34. Dai Alanye
    December 9th, 2012 @ 8:26 pm

    I would say Reagan accomplished quite a bit but made one key error… He kept GHW Bush as VP during his second term. Fix that little problem by choosing a solid conservative, and no Clinton or Obama in all probability.

  35. Dai Alanye
    December 9th, 2012 @ 8:27 pm

    Nor is endless pessimism a plan.

  36. Mike Tuggle
    December 9th, 2012 @ 9:03 pm

    Why, of course. Never mind the man would turn America into a Third World outpost. As long as he mouths the right words, why, what’s a little ol’ demographic catastrophe?

  37. K-Bob
    December 9th, 2012 @ 9:52 pm

    And he had to utter the phrase “military/industrial complex” in a major speech.

    We have to always watch for fraud, graft, and corruption. Sure. But pointing the finger at one major channel (among thousands) had the effect of needlessly tarring all those associated with defense. Simultaneously, it served as a rallying cry of the left that outlived any shred of understanding of what the intent behind Eisenhower’s warning ever was.

    Better to discuss something like that in a policy speech on defense, and not a farewell address.

  38. K-Bob
    December 9th, 2012 @ 10:03 pm

    This is kinda what I hoped was the case. Now I’m gonna have to read more about it.

    This is why I’m pressing for everyone just voting West, regardless of what the Republicans do. Just stick with that plan, and we can form a new party afterward.

    We’re already seeing folks planning on forcing Jeb on us next time. Or a RINO to be named later. That’s why I’ve already decided I’m voting West next time. (Write-in if necessary.) I caved to the Romney campaign in a pointless effort to fight the Stalinism coming out of the White House. I promise I will never do that again.

    To that end, I’ve made my decision, and the only thing that will stop me from following through is if either I or Allen West become room temperature first.

  39. K-Bob
    December 9th, 2012 @ 10:08 pm

    Hmmm. Well, maybe so. But the Neocons, Paulites, Libertarians and Tea Party types are all closer to being conservatives than the Rockerfellers ever will be. If we don’t mash them all together to make up a decent faction, then instead of two-party rule in America, it’ll be Democrats running the show forever, with the able assistance of many tiny, useless parties.

    So I get the anger at neocons from some factions, and I tire of specific versions of neocon, like Kristol and Krauthammer, I still think there’s more there for us to work with than we’re gonna get from the Rockerfeller folks or the not-terribly-interested folks.

    Ugh. Run-on sentences. Sorry.

  40. Adobe_Walls
    December 9th, 2012 @ 11:11 pm

    As I wrote many times nominating Romney would prove that the Republican party was irredeemable. It is not irredeemable because it chose Romney. It chose Romney because it is irredeemable. The notion that the GOP can be turned from the dark side is fantasy. All of the comments to the effect that it is far more difficult to start a new viable party are absolutely correct, except in one aspect.

  41. Adobe_Walls
    December 9th, 2012 @ 11:14 pm

    Indeed he did but it didn’t last, he did not fundementally change the GOP. The pagans were not converted.

  42. Adobe_Walls
    December 9th, 2012 @ 11:39 pm

    Neocons are merely another kind of Socialists. The Social Democrats can’t run the show forever at least not as an “elected” party. The current trajectory leads to catastrophic collapse.

  43. Adobe_Walls
    December 9th, 2012 @ 11:42 pm

    Who’s being pessimistic?

  44. Adobe_Walls
    December 9th, 2012 @ 11:53 pm

    Sorry, I know this is going to ruin your whole life but I don’t give a rat’s ass what you have use for.

  45. Adjoran
    December 9th, 2012 @ 11:54 pm

    I disagree completely. Compare the GOP in 1980, top to bottom, with the GOP today. We are a much more conservative party now than then. It isn’t even close, and Reagan was certainly the leader who turned it around.

  46. Adjoran
    December 9th, 2012 @ 11:56 pm

    Quite right – as evidenced by the fact that no new party has been successfully established in the United States since the GOP, in terms of being competitive in consecutive elections for federal offices in more than one region of the country.

  47. Adjoran
    December 10th, 2012 @ 12:05 am

    No, people have always been “redistributive” in the sense they wished to “redistribute” from others to themselves, which is precisely why our government was designed specifically to make it more difficult to accomplish.

  48. Finrod Felagund
    December 10th, 2012 @ 12:21 am

    Piss off, you sodding troll.

  49. K-Bob
    December 10th, 2012 @ 12:44 am

    That is the silver lining on this particular shit storm.

  50. Wombat_socho
    December 10th, 2012 @ 12:48 am

    Gentlemen! Gentlemen! No fighting in the War Room! Seriously, guys, let’s not get carried away here. Agree to disagree and move on; no need to make it all personal.