Based on the recently submitted and very likely to pass House Resolution 362, many on the extremist fringes of both the right and the left are announcing in dire (or hysterical) tones that we’re on the verge of war with Iran. They’re calling the resolution the “Iran War Resolution” and yammering about how it was authored by AIPAC (American Israeli Public Affairs Committee) and is all being done on behalf of the evil zionist oppressors in what ought to be a free, Islamosocialist Palestine. They claim that it’s going to be used as a secret authorization for military action against Iran to launch us into the ultimate Neocon-inspired war of international imperialism, or some such claptrap.
Among the most outspoken opponents of the bill is the increasingly shrill and irrational Representative Ron Paul who has apparently completely abandoned his Republican roots to become the voice of the anti-war left and the anti-Israeli John Birch Society. Paul announced on the floor of the House “”I cannot believe it, that we may well be on the verge of initiating the bombing of Iran,” and went on to ask:
“Where do we have this authority? Where do we get the moral authority? Where do we get the international legality for this? Where do we get the Constitutional authority for this?”
What Rep. Paul and other opponents of the resolution seem not to have done is to actually read the document. It is not a declaration of war or even an authorization for the use of military force. It’s basically just a list of bad things Iran has done, coupled with a very weak call for diplomatic and economic sanctions. It doesn’t even have the weight of legislative authority because it is only a ’sense of the house’ resolution which is rather like a public press release from Congress. It doesn’t say one word endorsing military action, deploying troops, bombing anyone or even flying over Iran and thumbing our noses at them from an F-15.
In fact, the bill clearly states that “nothing in this resolution shall be construed as an authorization of the use of force against Iran.” That seems like a pretty definitive indication that the bill isn’t authorizing anything resembling a war, even if it weren’t a powerless ’sense of the house’ resolution.
As for the bombing of Iran which Rep. Paul was ranting about and the massive “land, sea and air blockade” which the hysterical socialists at Just Foreign Policy are ranting about, not a word about any of that in the bill. I suppose that by extension you could argue that the proposed sanctions could require the use of naval forces to inspect ships, but that’s hardly an attack on Iran or a major new deployment given our current massive presence in the Persian Gulf. And bombing? Just pure insanity. There’s nothing even close to an endorsement of that kind of direct action.
As for the ‘moral authority’ Rep. Paul asks for, perhaps he should take that up with the tens of thousands killed by Iranian backed terrorists in Iraq and Lebanon and Israel and Sudan and Afghanistan and Pakistan and Russia and India and China and just about everywhere else in the world. As for the ‘international legality’ Rep. Paul is concerned about, perhaps he forgot about UN Resolutions 1696, 1737 and 1747 which attempted to curtail Iran’s nuclear program and then instituted sanctions in response. As for the ‘constitutional authority’ Dr. Paul makes an issue of, I’m positive that there’s nothing in the Constitution prohibiting a non-binding, non-appropriating resolution which amounts to nothing more than a public statement.
No one opposes the idea of war in Iran more than I do. It would be suicidally stupid, and if the President even began to suggest it the generals at the Pentagon ought to have the good sense to shout him down. We attacked Iraq in 2003 because we knew Iran was too much for us to take on then, and now that we’re so overcommitted in Iraq and Afghanistan substantial military action against Iran is literally inconceivable. We don’t have the men and we certainly don’t have the money to even contemplate such a boneheaded move, no matter what horrible things Iran is up to. Any kind of war with Iran is a logistical impossibility.
Yet it’s equally ridiculous to get hysterical over this pointless Congressional resolution. Calling it an “Iran War Resolution” is such blatant spinmongering that it insults the intelligence of every American. It doesn’t call for military action. It specifically prohibits it. Plus it has no legal authority to do anything at all. The only thing it really does is tell Iran that the Congress is serious about getting them to behave like a halfway civilized nation, rather than destabilizing every country in the region, deploying hundreds of thousands of covert troops in other countries and funding worldwide terrorism.
What the hysterics seem not to grasp is that this little resolution is not the problem. The problem is Iran and its oppressive government and belligerent policies. Forget about Israel and the evil Jews for a minute. Isn’t the harm Iran has done just to the people of Lebanon and Iraq sufficient to make them a rogue nation and justify some sort of statement in opposition to their behavior? And ultimately that’s all this is, a simple statement of disapproval with an endorsement of the use of non-violent “economic, diplomatic and political pressure” to get Iran to reign in their nuclear program and stop exporting terrorism. The hysterics who are so eager to make it look like the US is declaring war on Iran seem to have forgotten that Iran is already actively making war on its neighbors and threatens greater violence if given the opportunity.
Now that some time has passed since the Texas Republican Party Convention, copies of the platform have finally become available. It may be the longest party platform ever, and while it does have some good parts, it also has some glaring flaws when compared to past platforms of the Republican Party and to the ideals which I’d like to see the party continuing to embody today. It seems to be the result of a process where no restraint was applied at all and space was given to issues based on how loudly their advocates could shout. As a result it’s a mishmash of every kind of extreme position representing every outspoken faction in the party.
As those who’ve been reading my articles are aware, I was a delegate to the Texas GOP Convention. Resolutions which eventually made it into the platform were one of my special interests. I had a lot of success at my precinct and district conventions presenting arguments against certain proposed resolutions which I thought were intolerant and reflected badly on the party. In particular I was able to stop dead two proposed resolutions, one condemning homosexuality and one opposing any form of gay unions. But the way the resolution process works, resolutions from all the districts come to the state convention through the Resolutions Committee, and even though a resolution is defeated in one district, it’s quite likely to show up again from another district. Activist groups circulate resolutions they like to their agents all over the state, so the same resolution may get sent to the convention for consideration by dozens of different districts. So my success in SD25 meant relatively little in the face of all the other districts contributing to the process. Of course, all of this then gets sent on to the national Republican convention where all the state platforms are drawn on to create a national platform.
The primary characteristic of the 2008 Texas Republican Party Platform is that it’s insanely long. In small print it is 25 pages long with over 250 separate resolutions included in it. It’s like they took every district convention, edited out only the duplicate resolutions and mashed it all together into one huge and ridiculous compendium of the trivial and bizarre. As a result, I can’t even begin to address the content of the platform in a single article, so this is the first in what will probably be a three part series.
In the formation of the platform a number of special interest groups were competing to get their particular agendas represented as heavily as possible. These included the religious right, nationalistic warhawks, libertarian leaning republicans and through the Ron Paul movement a significant number of paranoid John Birch Society fanatics. My hope was that most of the crazier and more extreme ideas of all of these groups would get weeded out, but because the bar for inclusion was set so low, a surprising number of really unappealing ideas made it into the platform. In an ideal world the platform would represent primarily the views that all elements of the party hold in common, but as a result of what I can only conclude was laziness or fear on the part of the Resolutions Committee the platform instead tries to represent every possible viewpoint to some extent and the result isn’t pretty.
A Good Start
Before I get down to looking at some of the worst aspects of the platform, let me say that on some of the largest issues the thrust of the platform is relatively positive. There is a preamble and an initial statement of principles which are pretty reasonable. In fact, I’d take the statement of principles as the entire platform and be satisfied with that. The statement of principles makes a great start when it says:
“We respect and cherish the Declaration of Independence, the Constitution, and our Founders’ intent to restrict the power of the federal government over the states and the people. We believe self-government, based on personal integrity of a proper moral foundation, is the best government. This is best balanced with limited civil government, coupled with public trust, to provide collectively for the people those services not efficiently achieved individually.”
It also goes on to endorse school choice and smaller government and private enterprise. All great stuff. It also includes two very strong statements which represent a real victory for the religious right. One is the strongest statement possible on abortion, declaring that life begins at fertilization. The other is a fairly strong statement against gay marriage, though it comes up short of condemning civil unions or attacking homosexuality in general. I sort of suspect that they put the statement of principles out front in the hopes that people wouldn’t read any further and get a positive impression based on the statement and then never read some of the pure rat-brained craziness in the main body of the platform.
Section by Section
The platform addresses specific issues in a number of topical sections. Some of those sections were clearly dominated by certain interest groups. Basically it looks like each group with an agenda to push got a section for its agenda, with the result that these sections often read like a manifesto from the most extreme elements in the party. Some of them are very positive. Others are very specialized and of limited applicability. A few are truly troubling and offensive.
It’s clear that civil libertarians had some successes, especially where their interests dovetailed with those of some traditional republicans and conservatives, but what is even more clear is that where their interests are the strongest the religious right had a substantial victory. The sections of the platform which they were interested in influencing are among the most strongly worded and most extreme.
Preserving American Freedom
Under this heading we see some of the best stuff in the platform. Right up front there’s a moderately worded resolution suggesting that the Patriot Act should be reviewed and revised for constitutionality and in consideration of citizens rights. That’s a great thing to see in the platform. Another nice thing to see is a clear statement opposing a constitutional convention, something which the party had previously endorsed. The vocal opponents of toll roads had some victories, with strong statements opposing annexation, property forfeiture and eminent domain seizures and endorsing substantial property rights protections, calling property ownership an ‘inalienable right’. Also good to see was a resolution proposing that union members should have a say when their dues are used for political purposes. There’s also a strong and clear resolution explaining in detail which affirmative action is a bad idea. Some reasonable ideas on judicial reform are also proposed, many of them very specific to Texas law.
Of particular interest in this section are a couple of resolutions about how the platform is to be used, urging the State Republican Committee to require candidates to indicate where they stand on all 250+ items in the platform and then decide whether or not to give them money based on how they line up with the platform. I’d have to hope the standard of compliance would be set pretty low, because I can’t imagine a candidate in 100% agreement with the platform being electable even in a Republican dominated state like Texas. I’m tempted to run for office again just so I can see how the party leadership would react to my much marked up responses (with comments in red ink) to a platform compliance test.
At the end of this section there’s a nasty little sub-section called “Honoring the Symbols of Amerian Heritage” which basically endorses every unnecessary, uberpatriotic first-amendment violation they could think of. It’s got an endorsement for posting the ten commandments publicly, for keeping ‘god’ on the money and in the pledge of allegiance and prohibiting flag burning. It’s trivial stuff, but it’s stupid and uncalled for.
Strengthening Families, Protecting Life and Promoting Health
It’s hard to know where to start with this section. It’s like a wet dream (which they would probably like to ban) for the religious right. Imagine every possible extreme idea coming out of the craziest evangelical churches and then add a few ideas you didn’t think even the worst godflogger would be willing to sign off on in public. The presence of some of the stuff in this section makes me embarrassed to even live in the same state with these people, much less being in the same political party. In all seriousness, as I got to the end of the section I expected to see an endorsement of death camps for homosexuals. The only good news is that I suspect 90% of this crap will be gone when the national platform is written.
I’ll swallow my nausea and present some details.
First off, there’s an endorsement of the Defense of Marriage Amendment. Not only that, but it includes a statement urging that same sex unions be made illegal. But it gets better. They also want to make it a felony to issue a marriage license to a same-sex couple, restore the sodomy law which was struck down by the Supreme Court, they want to prohibit gay adoption, take away the parental rights of gay birth parents, and support statutory protection for anti-gay groups against criminal prosecution. Yes, it’s the protect Fred Phelps law. Every bigot’s dream come true. And it shouldn’t be a surprise that they also endorse covenant marriage. Why not. After all, Mike Huckabee was the featured speaker at the convention.
But wait, there’s more! They also want to ban all pornography and have the FCC shut down broadcasters who run certain types of programming and advertising. No more viagra adds for you, my morally upstanding fellow citizens. Just burn your copy of the Constitution and replace it with a Bible.
At this point, with the First and Fourth Amendments to the Constitution in shreds you’d think they were done, but we haven’t even gotten to the part about “Protecting Innocent Human Life.” Of course, I expect any Republican platform to be more or less pro-life and I’ve resigned myself to that fact, but in the ongoing celebration of religious fanaticism, they go on for almost two pages in an effort to redefine the ultimate expression of anti-abortion zealotry. The reason they go to such lengths is clearly that they don’t think calling for an outright ban on abortion is feasible. Instead their gaol is to sort of nibble it to death.
Along the way they want to ban any form of assisted suicide, as many forms of abortion as they can, any funding for abortion clinics, all forms of fetal tissue harvesting, stem cell research, human cloning, RU486, the ‘morning after’ pill and even surrogate motherhood and adoption of unborn embryos. The other main thrust of their strategy is to have the state propagandize abortion to death, by requiring parental notification, providing extensive information on abortion alternatives and fetal pain to abortion clinic customers, much of this supported with state funds. Then they want to make doctors who perform abortions liable to suit for malpractice by patients who have second thoughts and they want to make them potentially liable for criminal prosecution.
Some of the rest of this section isn’t so bad. The moralistic movement does at least go hand in hand with a strong belief in parental rights, and that’s represented in several resolutions protecting parental rights and privacy from the state. The section also seems to be informed by the recent egregious behavior of child welfare agents in dealing with the FLDS compound in West Texas, with a strong statement on accountability for those agencies. Some of it is a bit neanderthal, with an endorsement for corporal punishments of children not just in family homes, but also in foster care and schools. It looks like the civil libertarians and fiscal conservatives also got in some of their resolutions here, with an endorsement of widespread welfare reform and a gradual phase-out and privatization of social security. Unfortunately, one of the resolutions pushed by Governor Perry also made it in, with a proposal to not only ban any new forms of gambling in the state - while 80% of the cars in Louisiana casinos have Texas plates - but also to go even farther and repeal the state lottery and also prohibit the state from profiting from gambling. The voice of the Baptist womens quilting societies remains strong on this issue to the great fiscal detriment of the state and every taxpayer in it.
A Reality Check
The problem with a lot of these resolutions is that while they represent the hopes and dreams of certain very vocal factions, they don’t represent the mainstream of the nation or even the Republican Party terribly well, and they aren’t the kinds of positions which candidates who actually want to get elected can effectively run on.
Look at some of the specific issues raised here in context. 57-58% of the public supports civil unions or gay marriage and 40-46% of Republicans do. 81% of the public supports at least some form of abortion and 31% of Republicans consider themselves ‘pro-choice’ while almost half oppose any kind of ban on abortion. The situation is similar on Stem Cell Research. While support for federal funding is weak, support for the research itself is quite strong, with about 58% of the overall population in favor and 46% of Republicans supporting it. With all of these issues the numbers for independents who are key to any Republican victory run as high as or higher in the favorable column than the national average. Taking extremely conservative postions on these issues is a guaranteed election loser when you’re a minority party which needs to win votes outside of your loyal base. If you’ve got a negative position on an issue and almost 50% of your own party doesn’t agree with you, you’ve got a problem.
The content of the Texas Republican Platform is a telling reflection of how divided the party is and how potentially destructive the most extreme factions are. Yet consideration of political realities renders much of what’s in the platform essentially irrelevant. Most of these extreme positions absolutely cannot make it to the national platform, and local politicians who want to get elected are going to have to ignore many of these resolutions, no matter what provisions are in the platform to try to force them to comply with it. For most Republicans with any political involvement at all, this platform is going to get stuffed in a drawer while they pretend it doesn’t exist. It’s ridiculously indulgent of counterproductive extremism and an embarrassment to a party which wants to have any kind of meaningful political future.
In an effort to maximize his fundraising potential Barrack Obama has announced that he will finance his campaign entirely with private contributions. While his campaign presented this as a populist move based on his large number of small contributions from individual donors, it was no coincidence that he made the statement while sitting at a roundtable with leaders of Democratic PACs and the president of the AFL-CIO. Despite Obama’s considerable success in raising funds from individuals, it is these money-generating powerhouses which will ultimately bring in the bulk of the millions needed to run his campaign, money taken involuntarily from union workers — many of whom no longer even vote with the Democrats — and consolidated by extreme leftist organizations and wealthy individuals like George Soros working through faceless front groups.
John McCain has a history of believing in an egalitarian approach to political campaigns. He has a laudable yet naive faith in a level playing field and campaigns where ideas speak louder than money. To some degree McCain has staked his reputation as a populist reformer on these ideas, and it is about time for him to admit that he has been misguided. We’ve gone for eight years with a president whose effectiveness has been weakened by his chronic inability to own up to his mistakes. It’s time for McCain to show how different he is and acknowledge the fact that his attempts to level the political playing field, while well intentioned, have been a mistake. A good start would be to admit that his McCain-Feingold campaign finance reform bill has not worked and did not produce the intended results. The most effective way to show that he understands his past mistakes is to abandon the futile pretense of a federally funded campaign and do as Obama has done and run his campaign on private financing.
Right now, McCain is getting some mileage out of accusations that Obama agreed to a deal where both candidates would use public financing and has now reneged on it, but the short-term benefits of that argument are not going to last. McCain may be concerned that he cannot out-fundraise Obama, but even so he can certainly do better than the $84 million limit on public funding. McCain has vacillated on this issue throughout the election, but now it’s time to throw caution to the winds, declare that the gloves are off and go for all the money he can get from every source that will give it to him. He can now safely reject public funds, and blame the need to do so on Obama’s perfidious actions.
McCain is a Republican and he should take advantage of the traditional strengths of the Republican Party. One of those is the ability to raise a great deal of money from business interests. Yes, that makes him look like he’s working for the lobbyists and the corporate fat-cats, but contrary to the anti-corporate drumbeat of the left and in the media, Republicans and most independents understand that the political activities of the companies which employ them ultimately benefit them as employees, and that those companies and their lobbyists are often a more effective voice for their interests in Washington than any elected representative. McCain should embrace and even celebrate corporate funding and turn it into a positive rather than a negative.
From its inception, the Republican Party has been a party based on the idea of an alliance between those who believe in individual liberty and those who believe that capitalism is the firmest foundation of a free society. The abolition movement which the party grew out of was secretly underwritten by some of the most successful businessmen of the era, and the party has always been devoted to putting prosperity first and the idea that a rising tide lifts all boats. Even the least civic-minded Republican presidents have done less harm to the country and more good just by supporting business interests and economic growth which have brought better conditions and more opportunities for Americans at every level of society. It is because of this devotion to capitalism and prosperity that even the poorest Americans have a standard of living better than the middle classes of most other nations.
Obama deserves some praise for being willing to show us the true face of the Democratic Party. He is making less of an effort than any previous candidate to hide the fact that he is running as a populist and a socialist. He takes pride in endorsing programs which will expand the power and cost of government and do so at the expense of overburdened taxpayers. McCain should be equally honest. He should put aside and repudiate his past mistakes and embrace capitalism, liberty and smaller government. He should endorse the prosperity and opportunity which they will bring for the nation and every citizen. One way to do that is to proudly admit that he is a Republican and that he understands that businesses and political interest groups speak for the stockholders, employees and other constituencies which they represent. He can show that he hears their voice and acknowledges it by taking their money and running to represent their interests — which are the interests of all of us who work and want to prosper in this nation. Even if doing this leaves McCain underfunded relative to Obama it will reassure a lot of voters that he’s serious about winning and knows that the best interests of the people lie with capitalism and the private sector.
Saturday, 10:45am - Breakfast is Over
After spending $16 for a hotel breakfast which exactly matched what I’d have gotten at Denny’s for $4.25 I dined frugally at MacDonald’s today on my way to the convention. It was filling and tasty and made me feel like a real American, by gum!
This is the final day of the Texas State Republican Convention and it’s only a half day. I’m here for about 2 hours and hope to sit in on a couple of interviews and pursue my main goal for the day which is to get hold of a copy of the newly passed party platform and see if it’s really the monstrosity which rumor and the article I cited previously from the Dallas Morning News would lead me to believe. I went to the ultimate source of information - a 16 year old page - and they haven’t heard anything about copies being distributed, so I may have to be more resourceful. The rumors I’ve heard out of the convention elite are that officials outside of the platform committee are actively distancing themselves from the platform and trying to dismiss it as irrelevant, and that can’t be a good sign. Dubiously thought it may be regarded, to outsiders the platform speaks for and represents the party, and if it is as awful as rumors suggest, the party will suffer.
Read More »
Ron Paul’s decision to end his campaign last night was such an important turning point in the convention that I thought I’d stop there and start over again from scratch with a new article for the new day. The character of the coverage is also going to change a bit, since I’ve now moved to the exhibit hall, have faster access and can add photos to the presentation, while keeping it all as live as possible.
Friday, 10:10am - Ah, Breakfast!
I’ve temporarily ditched my responsibilities as an alternate, even knowing that my district is probably short a few votes. I saw enough yesterday to have a pretty good idea how those votes are going to go with or without me, so today I’ll probably concentrate on other things, particularly a study of the exhibit hall and a report on the goings on of the second general session this afternoon. Then tonight I’m going to the Republican Liberty Caucus of Texas convention. I feel a bit like a sybarite, but right now my body is telling me not to do anything else without paying it some eggs and sausage.
Read More »
Or how I passed up wet, topless biker chicks to go to the Texas State Republican Convention where a Ron Paul delegate has promised to punch me in the nuts.
Well, I’m off to the Texas State Republican Convention, about two hours behind schedule, hot and sweaty and under-dressed, having forgotten to bring the suit I had hung on the bathroom door so it wouldn’t get wrinkled. The convention is in hot and smelly Houston, and the GPS on my phone prints the street names so small I can’t read them even with my glasses, so what should normally be a two-hour trip may take the rest of the day.
I’m going to be reporting quasi-live from the convention, maybe throwing in some interviews, photos, video and other goodies. There’s a rumor that Chuck Norris may be there as a VIP, accompanying Governor Mike Huckabee, so I’ll be keeping my camera handy to see if his new chin lift is really as impressive as it looks on TV. I’m also going to be paying attention to the efforts of Ron Paul delegates to have an influence on the convention and get their message out.
Read More »
It's not breaking news that John McCain is far from the dream candidate of many Republicans. He may have a unique appeal to moderate Democrats and to some independent voters, but more conservative Republicans of various stripes find his history of compromise and his unorthodox positions troubling. A few hate McCain, but most just don't trust him and need some sign that they can expect him to be more than the lesser of two evils.
One of the neat things about the later phases of a presidential campaign is that the nominee has to pick a running mate, which gives McCain the opportunity to balance his ticket with someone who will appeal to the groups who don't much like him. It's an especially powerful choice, because McCain's recently released 1200 pages of medical records suggest that while he's healthy for someone with a frequent buyer card from the Mayo Clinic, expecting him to last 8 years may be unrealistic. There's a very real chance that whoever he picks as his Vice President will be much more than just a figurehead for the Senate and perennial garden society speechmaker. He might be the next Teddy Roosevelt.
Read More »
As those who have been following my articles about Ron Paul and the role his campaign is playing in the election may already be aware, I’ve been receiving a significant number of threats of physical violence in email and now even in direct public response to my articles. These are in addition to a variety of half-literate and repetitious personal attacks and various incoherent racist and ignorant ramblings from fanatics who are attracted to the Ron Paul campaign.
I want to make clear here that I understand that these people are not typical of the mainstream of Paul’s supporters and although they are very vocal on the internet they are also very small in number. It’s a waste of effort, but I suppose I ought to mention that they are the single largest force working to harm and discredit the pro-liberty movement within the Republican Party. They alienate potential supporters and their behavior works to discredit the movement they so revere.
Read More »
With reality beginning to dawn that Ron Paul is not going to get the Republican nomination despite the enthusiasm and hard work of his supporters, those supporters now face the difficult choice of what to do with their votes once November rolls around. A lot of them are young and have never been heavily involved in politics and now they're all wound up with no place to go.
McCain seems too moderate and too 'establishment' for them, even though he's the choice of the party to which Ron Paul attracted them. Many consider themselves libertarians, but the Libertarian Party did them a dirty trick and leapt towards the mainstream by nominating former Republican warmonger Bob Barr. And even Paul's most anti-war supporters realize that on almost every other issue Barack Obama is a raving socialist with whom they have nothing else in common.
Read More »
I believe that the many difficulties facing our nation come down to a single root problem - the unwillingness of people to take responsibility for their actions.
One of the things which the founders of this nation were accutely aware of and which we seem to have forgotten is that freedom isn’t really free. The price of freedom is responsibility.
Read More »
