First of all I am no "Pollyanna" when it comes to politicians of any stripe.  When the Republicans finally rested complete control of all branches of the federal government in November 2002--for the first time since the 50's, they responded with a dismal performance, pulling defeat from the jaws of a mandate; losing Congress four years later.  That is what happens when you fall in love with earmarks, increase domestic spending instead of governing as "fiscal conservatives," and forgetting about conservative principles altogether.  It is the result of surrendering in the eyes of the Democrat's quick and willing use of the filibuster, a President who shied away from using his office as a "bully puppet" to support drilling in Alaska and other measures, or to simply defend himself.  It is what happens when WH cronyism gives us Harriet Miers and the worst White House spokesman in history, Scott McClellan who seemed to hold that post forever until Tony Snow rode in to the rescue.

Disenchantment with the Party of the Right is also the result of the whole nonsense that was "compassionate conservatism" highlighted by reaching across the aisle to Ted Kennedy and the immigration debacle in 2007.  The latter should have ended John McCain's quest to be President right then and there.  For years we had to deal with Arlen Specter and Lincoln Chafee with "R's" after their names, and it was good riddance when they showed their true colors.  We still have the Maine duo.  Republicans have this knack for falling into the trap of "bi-partisanship" which is in fact nothing more than supporting a progressive bill (see below).   Democrats have a knack for resisting this impulse, unless they are pressured by public opinion and the zeitgeist of the time to do so.

However, like Bill Bennett, Mark Levin, et al I part company with Glenn Beck when he flat-out states that the "Republicans are as bad as the Democrats."  I'm not 100% certain, but I also believe he has at times said "worse."  Before moving on I must say that I like Glenn Beck, Levin's criticisms aside.  All in all I believe he is fighting the good fight in his zany and disjointed way.  He has been criticized for being "simplistic" in much of his analysis, but it is clear he has done his homework very well on a number of subjects.  More important, he has the ability to spend an hour discussing a (normally) dry subject like Woodrow Wilson, and have millions tune in.  I hold a Poly Sci degree from the 80's which I have never really put to use, but the history about the progressive movement is not news to me.  However, it is news to the vast majority out there who have--until recently and understandably--not really had much interest in early 20th Century politics.  Beck has skillfully discussed that era and how it relates to where we are today, and for that he deserves great applause.  Also Beck is responsible for opening many eyes to the abuses of that criminal enterprise know as Acorn along with its spinoff, SEIU.  His documentary on totalitarianism, while elementary, was very well put together.

Beck's message becomes a bit disjointed and confusing when discussing the parties, causing many on the right to fear that he is, advertently or not, steering the folks to a third party.  Beck denies this, but the rhetoric has been there.  At the same time there is talk that the local Tea Party in Nevada is planning to field its own candidate for the Senate, troubling talk when the goal should be to rid the Senate of Harry Reid.  There is no Republican in that state who is as far to the left as Reid.  By the same token a national third party, when the goal needs to be stopping the road to statism and soft tyranny would be a huge disaster, all but guaranteeing 8 years of Obama and the left's hegemony in Congress.  It will mean losing that small, but critical majority on the Supreme Court.  It will mean European social democracy and many more years of stagflation--be prepared for 10% unemployment as the norm.  A third party of disaffected conservatives gave us Bill Clinton in 92, not to mention Al Franken last year. Norm Coleman wasn't perfect, but did we really want Franken in the Senate?

For all of their flaws the Republicans as a whole are not the same as the Democrats.  For the most part the Congressional Republicans of 2009 were a profile in courage, despite being a significant minority.  The Dems could have rammed anything they wanted through Congress, including Obama-care.  But it was a combination of the Tea Parties, talk radio, conservative blogs, organizations like this one, and yes Congressional Republicans who picked a very public fight.  As a result, the only significant pieces of legislation passed by the Obama/Reid/Pelosi triumvirate were the "porkulas" and the subsequent omnibus spending bill not long after.  We had some Republicans vote with the Democrats on those two bills, but since then they have basically held their ground; thanks in large part to the groups I mentioned.

After the House pulled a midnight/late week surprise and rammed through Cap and Trade, it remains a dead issue in the Senate.  I kept waiting for Olympia Snowe to vote for the Senate's version of Obama-care but even she stood firm against it.  Only one Republican in the House voted for that version of the bill.  And while a version passed both houses, it is unlikely to happen again short of the Dems using reconciliation as they threaten to do.  Yes many Republicans have stood pat, in large part because of those we who held their feet to the fire.  I really don't care what the reason is, the important thing is they are doing so.

Along with that we have seen some young conservative Turks emerge as current and future leaders like Paul Ryan and Jim DeMint, and Marco Rubio appears to be the likely Senator from Florida in November.  Along with those we have also seen the reemergence of other leaders who have rediscovered why they were elected in the first place-John Boehner, Mitch McConnell, Roy Blunt, etc.  Even McCain and Lindsay Graham have been sighted fighting the good fight, for now anyway.

Conversely, there has not been a true conservative Democrat in Congress or at the national level for well over thirty years.  Scoop Jackson and his ilk are long gone.  The fact is, had it not been for Republican victories in the 80's, 90's, and a few years ago is there any doubt we would already have had virtually everything the Obama Administration and the Reid/Pelosi Congress currently strive for?  Despite McCain's co-sponsorship, it was mainly the Republican minority who killed the immigration bill in 2007.

Today's headline that 13 Republicans supported the "Jobs Bill" is troubling, but a setback and not the end of the world.  It highlights that the work of fledgling activist groups like the Tea Parties is not done.  However, we need to support conservative Republicans next fall and in 2012 to wreck the Obama train to socialism, and next time keep a good eye on those Republicans by making it clear that they have been given (however undeserved in the eyes of many) a second chance to make things right.  After that, we can then evaluate the need for a new party or not.  Conservatives can disagree on many isolated issues, but certain fundamentals must remain rock solid.  The Mt. Vernon Statement is a good place to start.

Joe Allen

Here is a blast from the past.  This is for the current wimpy Republicans in Congress, trying to pass themselves off as Conservative.  Enjoy.