Wanted: an entirely new political party of the right? 10

At PJ Media, Andrew C. McCarthy makes a well-reasoned, well-substantiated case that it is “time to move on from the GOP”. He argues that the Republican Party “is not remotely serious about implementing limited government policies or dealing with the two central challenges of our age, existentially threatening deficit spending and Islamic supremacism.” The Republicans, since they dominate the House of Representatives, have the power to solve the debt crisis but lack the will. And when it comes to opposing Obama’s pro-Islam policies, “the current crop of Republican leaders has shown no stomach for the fight”. (The whole article needs to be read.)

His description of what is happening in the Middle East and why is admirably robust. He holds the Republicans co-responsible for the disasters.

The Middle East … is aflame. A heavy contributing factor is the American policy of embracing and empowering the Muslim Brotherhood and its Islamists allies, very much including al Qaeda. The Brotherhood is a committed enemy of the United States. … It considers the destruction of Western civilization from within to be its principal mission in the United States.

In 2011, President Obama launched an unprovoked war in Libya against the Qaddafi regime, which Republicans had been telling us for eight years had mended its ways and become an American ally – such that Republicans in Congress supported transfers of U.S. taxpayer dollars to Tripoli. Obama’s Libya war was guaranteed to put Islamists in power and put Qaddafi’s arsenal at the disposal of violent jihadists. By refusing to foot the bill, congressional Republicans could have aborted this counter-productive aggression – in the conduct of which the administration consulted the U.N. and the Arab League but not the branch of the U.S. government vested by the Constitution with the power to declare and pay for war. Instead, Republicans lined up behind their transnational progressive wing, led by Senator John McCain, which champions the chimera of sharia-democracy – McCain called the Islamists of Benghazi his “heroes.”

That pro-Islamist policy is directly responsible for the heedlessness of establishing an American consulate in Benghazi. It led to the attacks on our consulate and the British consulate, and ultimately to the terrorist murder of four Americans, including the U.S. ambassador to Libya (weeks after British diplomats had the good sense to leave town).

The scandal brings into sharp relief an alarming fact that has long been obvious: notwithstanding their abhorrence of America and the West, Islamists are exerting profound influence on our government. Known Islamists and officials with undeniable Islamist connections have infiltrated the government’s policy councils; simultaneously, American policy has moved steadily in favor of Islamists – such that the government supports and funds Muslim Brotherhood affiliates that are hostile to us; colludes with these Islamists in purging from agent-training materials information demonstrating the undeniable nexus between Islamic doctrine and jihadist terror; collaborates with these Islamists in the effort to impose repressive sharia blasphemy restrictions on our free speech rights; and, we now learn, knowingly misleads the American people on the cause of murderous Islamist tirades, of which the atrocity in Benghazi is only the most recent example.

A few months back, long before these policies resulted in the killing of our American officials in Libya, and even before these policies abetted the Muslim Brotherhood takeover of Egypt … five conservative Republicans called for an investigation of Islamist influence on our government. Five members of the House – i.e., less than one percent of the Congress – was willing to stand up and confront a profound threat to American national security. The Republican establishment had the opportunity to back them, to prove that the GOP could at least be serious about a profound threat to our national security. Instead, senior Republicans – the Islamist-friendly transnational progressives to whom the party disastrously looks for foreign policy leadership – castigated the five. Speaker Boehner followed suit.

As the weeks went on, and event after event proved the five conservatives right and the apologists for Islamists wrong, the Republican establishment went mum. When the Islamist empowerment strategy coupled with the Obama administration’s shocking failure to defend Americans under siege resulted in the Benghazi massacre, the Republican establishment was given a rare gift: an opportunity, in the decisive stretch-run of a close presidential contest, to exhibit national security seriousness and distinguish themselves from Obama’s dereliction of duty. To the contrary, Gov. Romney and his top advisors decided to go mum on Benghazi; and congressional Republicans essentially delegated their response to Senators McCain and Lindsey Graham – the very “Islamic democracy” enthusiasts who had championed U.S. intervention on the side of Libyan jihadists in the first place (only after having championed the American embrace of Qaddafi).

This has to stop. The current crop of Republican leaders has shown no stomach for the fight. In fact, notwithstanding that President Obama lost a remarkable ten million votes from 2008 in his narrow reelection last week (i.e., 13 percent of his support), House Speaker John Boehner is treating him as if he has a mandate to continue his failed policies – as if the country and its representatives have no choice but to roll over on the immensely unpopular Obamacare law and concede on feeding Leviathan even more revenue and borrowing authority without deep cuts in spending … ; as if the country shares Boehner’s insouciance about the Islamist threat.

By reappointing Boehner and his leadership colleagues today, Republicans are telling us that their answer to failure is more of the same. They have a right to make that choice, but there is no reason why Americans who are serious about our challenges should follow along. The Republican establishment is content with more government, more debt, and more entanglement with our enemies. When called on it, they tell us they are powerless to stem the tide. But the problem is the lack of will and a sense of urgency, not lack of power. It is time to find a new vehicle to lead the cause of limited, fiscally responsible, constitutional government. The Republicans are telling us they are unwilling to be that vehicle. If that is the case, it is time to move on.

Can the “new vehicle” be anything but a new political party? And what could be its nucleus? The Tea Party? Not if it includes the same enfeebling component of Christians as the Republican Party does. We, of course, would like it to be secular constitutionalist, as dedicated to the cause of individual freedom as the Republican Party was dedicated at its foundation to the cause of freeing the slaves, and as willing to fight for it.

  • rogerinflorida

    A couple of other thoughts: It is too late now for political action to stave off the economic tsunami that is coming. The US had a chance to elect an economically literate president but decided not to. The direct federal Govt. debt in terms of bonds issued is now approximately $16T, to get an understanding of the enormity of that figure consider that if the federal govt. decided right now to live within it’s annual tax revenue of approx. $3T and retire long term debt at the rate of $100M a year, it would take 160,000 years to be debt free. We all know that such a plan is impossible for the political elite to enact, so much for the “We are saddling our grandchildren with debt” crowd, if only. All of us see inflation in our grocery bills, this is just getting started. The real problem will arise when trading partners become reluctant to hold dollars, this is already happening, China is quietly shedding it’s dollar holdings but the catastrophe will come not when another currency fills the dollar’s role, although that will be bad enough, but that there will be no international currency at all, so the whole system of trade will come unglued.

    There is no time left to build a third party, all of us should concentrate now on a survival plan. If you would like to get a sense of what is coming read “When Money Dies” by Adam Fergusson, it is available as a free download on the web.

    Personally I do not see a redemption, we are screwed demographically, what the US will become is not the US of the first two centuries but the Mexico and Latin America of today.

    • And don’t forget that as bond ratings go down, and the US becomes a riskier bet, bond yields will necessarily rise. This means we are paying even more in service of our debt. This is what Greece and Spain are battling now… and what we will face in the future unless congress miraculously wakes up and listens to what “Wall Street” is telling them… forgets about pissing off the ignorant masses… and does the responsible adult thing.

      • rogerinflorida

        We are past that already. The Federal Reserve is financing the federal govt. at 0%, as existing bonds come up for redemption the money to do so will be provided. As long as lenders are willing to accept dollars there will be no shortage of currency to pay them, neither will there ever be any shortage of currency to pay the federal govt. domestic obligations. Problems will arise when external lenders (or trading partners) refuse to accept dollars, instead insisting on hard assets or a more trustworthy currency, then things will get very sticky indeed.

        • Well thats it isn’t? currency value is ultimately based on the relative value of other currencies in our global market. A weakening dollar will be good for exports, but not so great for the average taxpayer when inflation finally hits, and lenders of all stripes demand higher return for increased risk.

  • GTChristie

    I think the core of a reinvigorated Republican party (or replacement for it) already exists in the libertarians, pretty much as exemplified by Ron Paul.

  • WmarkW

    No one’s going to launch a serious third party challenge any time soon. Since Ralph Nader split the Florida vote in 2000, no third party candidate has gotten 1% of the vote, even though the incumbent was unpopular going into all three, which usually motivates a third-party attempt.

    Conservatism’s problem is defining what it doesn’t want to be about anymore — personally, I would like to drop culture war issues (like abortion) and cut defense spending; but to a very solid core of conservatives, those are the essence of the party.

    A re-make attempt can’t start with political strategy, but with changing minds in the culture. Too many people accept the dogmas of the left educational establishment that America stands for oppression, imperialism and white male privilege. We need to re-establish the centrality of politically incorrect ideas — free minds, free speech, free markets, free society.

  • rogerinflorida

    I read and commented on the McCarthy piece and was roundly condemned as a socialist fruit cake. The problem is that the political system in the US does not now even remotely serve the interests of the American people. To support this thesis I mention just two things; first, uncontrolled mass third world immigration and second, the evisceration of the US industrial economy. In addition there are a lot of people who see events and politics through a prism of self delusion, this is particularly true of the religious bigots and constitutionalist dreamers who seem to be the base of the Tea Party. Practical and realistic analysis of the problems facing the US seems to be impossible, so solutions can never be found. Take the medical care system; the employer based system we have now is a disaster for our business competitiveness, the only way out of this is to go to a single payer system, I don’t know why Medicare isn’t just opened up for everybody. Before you bleat please be aware that the US has had a universal health care system since the EMTALA legislation was passed in 1986, nobody can be refused care therefore care is universal, be honest and face it.
    If we are ever to regain an industrial base we have to implement import tariffs of some sort in order to counter the trade practices of our competitors, I favor the introduction of a 20% VAT at the very least.

    The truth is that both republican and democratic parties are completely beholden to the vested interests who finance them, even when a wave of co-called Tea Party republicans is elected as in 2010 they are soon rendered powerless. Is there a base that a third party could build on? Possibly as Ross Perot showed, but it will be useless if it is hijacked by the religious right.

    • The key imo is election reform. as long as the two major league teams are free to spend as much money as they wish on campaigns, a third party has little chance. Congress would have to vote in such a self-defeating reform…. what is their motivation?

  • liz

    I agree that we need a third party, but I’m afraid all that would be accomplished in the attempt to make one would be to fragment the opposition to the Left even further. I’m not sure how Obama won – whether it was more voter fraud or maybe the Right being already too fragmented, with many casting protest votes for other candidates, or not voting at all, etc.
    If we want to go third party, why not just throw in with the Libertarians? They gained alot of momentum in the last 4 years with Ron Paul. I actually think, in spite of iffy foreign policy, he would have made the best President. But I knew voting for him would just guarantee a win for Obama.
    So how would forming still ANOTHER party help matters?

  • 4th and probably successful attempt to be dismissed by the “Secular Right”:

    Kinda funny how Romney himself tried to stick to talking about the economy, yet still got accused by the left and some of their conservative apologist allies on the right of over-playing the Benghazi issue.

    “It is depressing to see Fox News so desperately flogging the Benghazi attack in the last moments of the election. Is that really the best that Romney and the Republicans have at this point?”

    Lets face it, the left succeeded in unifying themselves, and dividing the right (apparently not a difficult task). Voices on the right were busy slamming the “Romney/Republican/Fox News” monolith as if they were coordinating on one continuous conference call


    …being contemptuous of any suggestion that there was a coordinated coverup of the Benghazi issue, and saying “well Bush did it too”!! And through incorrecly comparing the failure to protect a consolate where previous attacks had taken place that very summer, and AL QAEDA UNITS WERE KNOWN TO BE OPERATING IN THE AREA, with relatively unpredictable attacks elsewhere.

    To all those who spent their time during the election run-up sowing seeds of disunity and feelings of hopelessness amongst peers on the right… those who spent more time slamming conservatives than liberals (who outsmarted the Conservative “intellectuals” apparently), thanks.

    Those who might have aided their own “more important Issues” by contributing to, rather than undermining, the efforts to provide someone else a chance to forge compromise within Congress where Obama has failed and will continue to fail miserably.

    Those who might have used their visibility and erudition to persuade others to get behind just getting someone else elected… but elected instead to continuously flog their own issues which have already been thoroughly and more cleverly flogged by other Atheist thinkers…
    …You got the president you deserve. Maybe next election you might consider doing conservatives a favor and switch to the “Secular Left” which might be more “intellectually” honest anyways.
    At least THIS clumsy, unsophisticated, and unlettered “pundit” spent all his time within his relatively limited sphere argueing to anyone who listen, to not give up and persuade others of the same. I allowed myself a few hours of despair “after” the election, then shook myself off and am now advocating others do the same.
    I will probably now put forth efforts to contribute to an emerging third party. We had a chance for a free-market capitalist who has experience in forging compromise to get into the White House. Unfortunately some of us claiming to be conservatives were unable to hold their collective noses for the good of the economy. Therefore our divisive president will continue to make a solution that much harder to reach… the Liberals are having a grand old time laughing at us.