Clarion-Ledger asks if Republicans should "soften"
Natalie Chandler, a Clarion-Ledger reporter, asks Brad White, the Chairman of the Mississippi Republican Party, if his party should adopt a "softer stance". Mr. White made a strong defense: "the national party "has the right platform, the right principles."
"We need to begin to communicate that effectively to people, and we need to have the guts to stand behind it. And we need to start acting like Republicans," added White, who in January will help decide the Republican National Committee's next leader."
The right principles? Would that include doubling the federal budget under Bush's tenure? More federal control of education thanks to Mr. Bush's No Child Left Behind Act? The socialism of Paulson's bailout and his taking over a significant part of the American economy? The plans by the Pentagon to train the military for domestic security purposes?
At some point Conservatives have to start repudiating the policy mistakes that got them into this mess in the first place. Republicans didn't lose just because of Katrina, Iraq, the economy, and a bad candidate. They lost because they became the party of big and inefficient government, while becoming more and more out of touch with average voters. Mentioning Ronald Reagan only works for those who are over the age of 40, as there are nearly two generations of voters who grew up without Ronaldus Magnus just as JFK's magic wore off on my generation.
Then there is this statement by Mr. White:
"None of us had to hold our nose and vote for (GOP presidential nominee John McCain), because we believe in his leadership, believe he was the best candidate of the choices we had ... but at the same time, he didn't inspire the way a Ronald Reagan did," White said."
He was the best candidate? Considering the financial meltdown and looting of the treasury by Paulson and his buddies at Citi and Goldman Sachs, it's quite clear there were not one, but two candidates who were much better candidates: Romney and Rudi. Either one of them would have torched Obama in the debates on economic issues ,and Romney has shown some steel in coming out against the bailouts recently. I understand being a good soldier and think that is all Mr. White was doing, but the election is over and it's ok to be candid. The problem with Mr. McCain was he didn't show any leadership. When he had his one chance to do so (the bailout bill debate) he bungled it rather badly, as it was clear he had no plan and really didn't understand what was going on with the bill itself.
Ms. Chandler also interviews the Chairman of the Democratic Party, but oddly enough doesn't ask him if his party should moderate its message to win more votes in Mississippi. Ms. Chandler's piece even has a comedic moment as she asks leading Jackson Democrat Leslie McLemore what Republicans can do to attract more votes in the Black community, as if someone is going to tell her how his opponent can beat him. Anyone want to guess what Ms. Chandler's political leanings might be?
2 comments:
Judging from the Eaves, Franks, and Musgrove campaigns, I don't know what the Mississippi Democratic Party could possibly to do to further "soften" its image. It's already perceived as a party that has no ideas. If Natalie asked that question of Franks, who himself based his entire campaign on bashing gays and immigrants, it would have come across as Daily Show-style humor. The two parties don't have identical problems; she shouldn't ask them identical questions.
As for her political leanings, she's been criticized by progressives for being too conservative and she's been criticized by conservatives for being too progressive. I don't think it's possible for anyone to "call it straight down the middle," but a reporter who is regularly criticized for alleged bias by folks on both sides is obviously doing something right.
Post a Comment