Not your father’s elephant

By Mychal Massie

Am I the only conservative unimpressed with Arnold Schwarzenegger’s performance at the Republican National Convention? Am I the only conservative who questions exactly what Rudolph Giuliani, John McCain, R-Ariz., and Arnold have in common with conservatism?

It can be argued Rudy did a masterful job in curbing crime in New York City as mayor. He was resolute in New York’s time of need immediately following 9-11. But he is pro-abortion, pro-homosexuality and antagonistic toward true conservatives. At the very least, he is a hardcore moderate with his own idea of what is best for my party.

John McCain’s assault on the First Amendment under the guise of campaign finance reform – i.e., “McCain-Feingold” – is an affront to the Constitution and our founding fathers. It does however ensure strategic relief from public scrutiny of those who need it most – those running for public office. McCain denied Americans that right, while opening the Texas-sized Internal Revenue Service tax loophole that gave rise to what are commonly referred to as “527” groups.

Arnold’s speech was as masterful a performance as one will ever see. And do not misunderstand my point here: I believe he spoke right from his heart. I believe he meant every word he uttered. But I also remember undercurrents leading up to the convention questioning how much political capital he was willing to spend helping the president.

Which causes me to cynically question: Was there a quid pro quo? These are politicians – in their world nothing comes without a price. How much will Arnold’s speech cost the taxpayers of America in federal aid to California?

It’s not that I don’t admire Rudy, Arnold and, on some elementary level, John McCain, but having them and their ilk influence the supposed conservative party is akin to having a distant cousin come into my home and start telling my family and me they are going to change things.

We are the conservative party – not the moderate party. We are the party that is pro-family, pro-life and pro-marriage between one man and one woman. We are the party that is for smaller, less intrusive government. Ours is the party that does not see color-coded racial groups – rather, we see “One nation under God” of Americans.

We are the party that believes it is qualified teachers who should teach – not those who cannot pass their certification exams, who in many cases exemplify aberrant lifestyles and send their children to private schools. It is conservatives who believe in strict constructionism – not the constitutional interpretations of lawyers and activist judges. We believe in growing people who are independent of programs

President Bush in his acceptance speech said; “Generations will know if we kept our faith and kept our word.” But how will they know unless we preserve conservatism for them?

Zell Miller, D-Ga., contends that he “didn’t leave the Democrat Party, the Democrat Party left him.” By cozying up to moderates, the Republican Party may be the next to leave both him and conservatives.

It’s worth noting that 4 million evangelical voters stayed home in the 2000 election. As the party boasts a moderate image, it is not unreasonable to believe they will stay home again. More importantly, they will not walk the precincts and get out the vote.

D.C. City Councilman David Catania is the homosexual Republican elected as a delegate who endorsed John Kerry over the homosexual marriage issue and was stripped of his ability to attend the convention. Now, because of Catania, GOP homosexual groups are pressuring the administration to soften its standing on homosexual marriage. Yet in order to retain office, the party continues to court those with conflicting agendas and ideologies.

If the Republicans cannot break the Democrat obstructionism in the Senate over the judicial nominees – while having majorities in both houses and the White House – how can they be expected to prevent the party takeover by moderates and those even more liberal?