Michael Steele Releases GOP Tech Plan
(FROM: Townhall) This morning, RNC chair hopeful Michael Steele will release, to RNC members, his plan to compete with the Democrats in terms of using technology to better disseminate the GOP’s message. While I haven’t seen the report, he gave the folks at Townhall an exclusive sneak peek — and, so far, I like it.
I’ve told the story several times now about how, as I was at home preparing to watch the returns come in on this past November 4, I received a perfect crash course on just how behind the GOP is in technology-based outreach. There I was, playing with my sister-in-law’s iPhone, when I found a free application entitled “Obama ’08″ which essentially turned her phone into a mobile campaign office telephone bank, replete with downloadable contact numbers. For Obama supporters, gone were the days of asking people to go to the local campaign office to man the phones. A few minutes later, my telephone rang; on the other end was the recorded voice of Rudy Giuliani, stressing how important Pennsylvania was and asking me to get out and vote. The problem? The telephone call came at 7:50 p.m., ten minutes before polls closed in the Keystone State.
We ARE far behind in the way we disseminate the message. I wrote about it extensively in the links on the right side of the page, under “Conservatism in the Age of Obama.” Combine the better use of technology with a reversion to conservative principles, and I think the GOP could turn this ship around quicker than most on the left can imagine.
Blaming Rush Limbaugh and Conservatives for Republican Woes
(FROM: Human Events) Another day, another McCain flunkie who looks for blame everywhere else but in the mirror. Now, it’s former McCain honcho Rick Davis who blame conservatives for his candidate’s loss. Could it be, Mr. Davis, that your candidate just didn’t provide the yang to Obama’s yin, didn’t fill out the broad spectrum decision needed in a presidential election? McCain, as columnist AWR Hawkins notes, was essentially “Obama Light.” I agree, and you’ve seen it as a recurring theme over and over again on these pages. In order to have a chance at making up ground in 2010 and having a shot at the White House in 2012, the GOP must come to grips with the reality that conservative Republicans win elections, while moderate Republicans do not. In the meantime, it might be beneficial for McCain and his left-leaning, blame-shifting comrades to either look to themselves when searching for answers … or simply go away.
- Conservatism’s Dilemma: To be or not to be in the GOP (American Thinker)
Ann Coulter: More Boos than Balls
(FROM: Human Events) I like this piece for a couple of reasons. First, it provides a bit of historical perspective with regard to the response to the showiness of Tuesday’s inauguration. i don’t know about you, but I can take support of a political candidate I don’t particularly like — but the chants of “Oh-bah-mah! Oh-bah-mah!” seemed like something out of the underground scene in Indiana Jones and the Temple of Doom. The second reason I like Coulter’s piece is because it kind of goes to the distinction between general success of Barack Obama’s presidency versus success of individual programs and policies:
It is a liberal trope to insult conservatives by asking them meaningless questions, such as the one repeatedly asked of Bush throughout his presidency about whether he had made any mistakes. All humans make mistakes — what is the point of that question other than to give insult?
When will the first reporter ask President Obama to admit that he has made mistakes? Try: Never.
No, that question will disappear for the next four years. It will be replaced by the new question for conservatives on every liberal’s lips these days: Do you want Obama to succeed as president?
Answer: Of course we do. We live here, too.
But merely to ask the question is to imply that the 60 million Americans who did not vote for Obama are being unpatriotic if they do not wholeheartedly endorse his liberal agenda.
I guess it depends on the meaning of “succeed.” If Obama “succeeds” in pushing through big-government, terrorist-appeasing policies, he will not have “succeeded” at being a good president. If we didn’t think conservative principles of small government and strong national defense weren’t better for the country, we wouldn’t be conservatives.
Jonah Goldberg: What Obama Brings to Conservatives
(FROM: National Review) Goldberg’s book, Liberal Fascism, should be read by everybody, everywhere, and I look at his commentaries in much the same fashion. This one is no different and, much like the aforementioned Coulter piece, expands upon the effect that the overall success or failure of the Obama presidency could have on America:
More important, opponents of racial quotas and other champions of colorblindness on the right should be popping champagne nearly as much as racial liberals are. Yes, yes, Obama’s a passionate defender of affirmative action and the like, but the symbolism of his presidency cannot be contained within narrow liberal agendas.
“There is an entire generation that will grow up taking for granted that the highest office in the land is filled by an African American,” he told the Washington Post last week. “I mean, that’s a radical thing. It changes how black children look at themselves. It also changes how white children look at black children. And I wouldn’t underestimate the force of that.”
Neither would I. The media understandably, if tediously, focus on how Obama’s presidency is a deathblow to the legacy of official discrimination and racism. True enough. But the fact that a black man can become president of the United States may also be transgressive to all sorts of more relevant racial orthodoxies on the left and in the black community.
- Juan Williams: Judge Obama on Performance Alone (The Wall Street Journal)
Victor Davis Hanson: Bush Considered
(FROM: National Review) Even a self-proclaimed liberal Democrat in my Real Estate Transactions class told me during a five-minute break last night that she cannot believe how many who share her beliefs can honestly blame former President George W. Bush for the mortgage crisis. She even cited the Community Reinvestment Act and insinuated that, in terms of U.S. presidents, if any one in particular was to blame, it would be former President Clinton. I was blown away — I wish all Democrats had such common sense! Nevertheless, I think that history will be kind on “Dubya” in a number of ways, not the least of which stems from his proactive, effective stance on the Global War on Terror, calling evil by name and acting from principles rather than polls. For more, read Hanson’s piece — in the context of the introspection and retrospection which usually follows presidential inaugurations, this is one of the better ones. That being said, Bush himself has noted that historians are still weighing the presidency of George Washington and therefore a truly disinterested appraisal of his own tenure in the White House is still far off, so any assessment should be looked at with skepticism and sensitivity to agenda.