The *real* problem of the Republican Party

I was reading a recent article off Reuters called "If McCain loses, what next for Conservatives?"
http://www.reuters.com/article/politicsNews/idUSTRE49P1SE20081026

The main argument was - as usual - against the social conservatives. "Focusing on social conservatism alienates moderate and mainstream voters and will consign us to 160 House seats in the South and the mid-west," said Patrick Sammon, president of the Log Cabin Republicans, a group of gay Republicans which stresses social tolerance and fiscal conservatism.

The problem is, I don't believe it. I'm liberal and pro-choice, but I'm old (38). I was in my teens during Reagan and the PTL years and in my 20s when Roe v Wade was at risk due to two court cases, Missouri v. Reproductive Board of Health, and Planned Parenthood v. Casey. My mail was dominated by letters from NARAL, NOW, Planned Parenthood. And my grandmother had PTL on alll day in my childhood. In short, socon = pro-life.

The point is, I believe we are nowhere near the SoCon Dominance of the Republican Party. Under Reagan and Bush 41, socons were part, but never sucessfully pushed for anything. The two abortion cases were actually individual cases dealing with state rights v. federal rights, a very commonplace issue in the courts. Bush 41 did not actively seek the overturn of RvW, unless you count all of his picks on the Supreme Court (Clarence Thomas and David Souter).

If only by a stretch can you put W in the socon court - Terry Schiavo and the HHS letter. And to me, both are tepid compared to Bush 41 years. The Schiavo case was bouncing around Florida for at least TEN YEARS. Eventually it was going to be a national case as both Terry's husband and parents refused the courts' decisions. And since the Supreme Court punked out of their responsiblities, Congress and W came in. In retrospect I agree with them; Michael Schiavo was not the dutiful husband the media invented - he had a common-law wife and kids by her while Terry was comatose, and Terry's "humane death" was far from - she was purposely withheld food and water until she physically died. People are sent to prison for treating dogs like that.

The one - and only one - connection between Republicans and Social Conservatives is a letter from HHS director Michael Leavitt supporting W's belief that doctors and medical personnel who do not believe in supporting abortion or abortifacents should lose their jobs. It sounds fair to the average schmoe, but this would also include people who believed that certain forms of birth control (such as IUDs) were abortifacents. This should have been a big toodoo but the press kept it so under the radar that one would have to be a poliblog geek like myself in order to find it. I thought this would be on the covers of Time and Newsweek (was it?)

The real problem of the Republican Party? FiCons. Yeah you heard me. Fiscal Conservatives. Of my 4+ years reading blogs I have come to the conclusion that ficons are the most hard nosed dissatified group of people. For one, ficons always blame the socons for the demise of the Republican Party, when they are no where in power compared to the 80s and 90s. I would be happy to argue that socons never had the power or influence that ficons claim they have. If W is the socon's represenative, they got ripped off. Apart from the Faith Based Initiatives, they don't have much to show for it.

(warning: I'm channelling my Berkeley hippie liberal thing...)
Ficons are also purists. It' s one thing to want a balanced budget, it's another to totally ignore the concerns of citizens and their needs when the market does not provide them or provide them at an affordable costs. Like schools and medicine, ie NCLB and Medicare Part D. The Dems constantly succeed in votes because they tap into the needs and concerns of the people. Yeah it costs. Yeah one gets deficits. But people need things. And Ficons seem to have a fit if you spend one dime over what they think is wrong. I'm not talking about earmarks; I'm talking about programs that Americans want.

Ficons also worship Reagan the way the Dems worship Obama. Ficons forget that Reaganomics was seen just as costly back then as W is now.


So at least for two years, Republicans will get a leave of absence for two years. And for those two years they will be blaming the smallest subset out of the group, the socons. While Ficon's own behavior in the Republican party may still keep it in the wildernes even after 2010.