Fred Thompson, Ronald Reagan, and the Goldilocks Republicans
The following excerpts are from “The Campaign Spot” on NRO wherein Jim Geraghty advocates that lying be a plank on the Republican Platform:
How Skeptical on Climate Change Can the GOP Be In 2008?
“I don’t buy into the global warming hype. But that doesn’t mean I want Republican candidates fighting an uphill battle, trying to convince the public that it’s all a hoax.”
“To paraphrase Rumsfeld, you go into an election with the electorate you have, not the electorate you would like to have.”
“The independents and the centrists and the soccer moms and everybody whose vote is needed in the general election is already convinced that it’s happening.”
“Why are Republicans taking a more skeptical line on global warming than corporate America?”
“You can either try to win over the feelers, the emotion-centric folks who make up their minds in the final days before Election Day. Or you can concede them, by refusing to play that game, and by holding fast to principle and making your arguments in a manner that these voters tune out.”
So, Geraghty, and The Anchoress, think that elections aren’t about issues or principles. Elections are strictly about winning. Imagine, not wanting to educate the public about the issues that are the most important issues of the day. Simply tell the voters what they want to hear and then do whatever-the-hell you want once in office. Yeah boy, I’d follow that advice. Get your GOP 2008 Bumper Sticker -> “Losing…. It’s what Losers Do”
How can I vote for ANY Republican now that I know that their official policy is to tell me whatever it takes to get elected? Romney ran as a liberal Republican and won, he governed as a liberal Republican, he now claims to have seen the “right”. How can I believe Romney isn’t Arnold II, since Arnold has now “recanted” his conservative views? Clearly, National Review, who endorsed Romney, has an official policy of “anything to win the election” so what good is their recommendation?
