McCain and Busting the Republican Brand
A seemingly tone-deaf Republican White House and RNC fiddle while the GOP’s Rome burns. We’ve had three election cycles resulting in stunning losses each time, losing much of the ground that had been gained since 1994 and Newt Gingrich’s Contract with America.
The Answer is being shouted out, like the AFLAC duck, without being heard: RINO’s (Republicans in Name Only) , stealth-Leftists, or false Republicans have ruined the party Brand by promising Conservative policy during elections and voting like Leftists once sent to Washington.
Conservative voters, after being kicked in the teeth by a succession of betrayals (runaway spending, cancerous governmental growth, Dubai Ports, Harriet Miers and of course, the Amnesty for Illegal Aliens fiasco, have been staying home in droves.
In Rob’s earlier post Mark Levin To Conservative Politicians: Cut Ties To RNC, McCain And Run On Your Own we discussed the damage to the Republican Brand and how this vacuum in leadership promises to keep Conservatives out of office in the foreseeable future.
Lynn Woolley, of HUMAN EVENTS, takes this issue dead on in his unsurprisingly-named Busting the Republican Brand:
(Bush) busted the Republican brand by expanding the Education Department and creating an entire new department (Homeland Security). He lost the battle to fix entitlements and responded by creating a new one, the pharmaceutical benefit, and by expanding middle-class welfare through CHIP insurance. For six years, he failed to wield his veto pen as the Republican Congress spent the country silly and tacked on billions of dollars in earmarks. 9/11 exposed the deterioration of our military prowess that occurred under the watch of his father and Bill Clinton.
Now here’s the really strange part of all this:The more leftward Bush has turned, the more the Democrats and the media have branded him an archconservative. So Bush’s failures have been ascribed to conservative policies when they have been nothing of the kind.
This is exactly the point I have been making with some mixed results in penetration.
The election of someone such as Barack Obama would ensure that most of the Bush policies (with the notable exception of the war) would be retained and expanded. Where Bush gave us a new entitlement, Obama would give us nationalized healthcare. Where Bush spent big, Obama would spend bigger.
Obama would give us a third Bush term.
McCain would give us open borders, amnesty for illegal aliens and just slightly less climate-change socialism than we would get from Obama. What’s the difference? Only that Obama will be true to his brand. He will faithfully provide higher taxes and bigger government. McCain, as Bush has done, will bust the brand and give us pretty much the same thing.
Woolley leads us up to the point without having to spell it out for us—yet for some it still needs to be spelled out.
McCain would destroy the distinction between being a Republican and a Leftist. Like him, they would become one and the same and the only difference between him and Hillary and Obama would be the degree to how far Left America would be dragged.
The key difference in the damage, however, is that under, McCain, the damage would be ascribed to the Republican Party, no matter how much they were really caused by the likes of Reid and Pelosi.
Noone would have any reason to vote Republican in the foreseeable future, and after the new crushing brown wave of legalized Mexican voters, noone would be able to.
That is the not-so-obvious danger of a McCain presidency.
Oswaldo
Proof
realitybasedbob
Bat One
LoadTheMule
HG
Bike Bubba
likwidshoe