In the coming days, as they have in the last moments of the campaign to elect someone to fill Daniel Webster’s Senate seat, many Democrats will dismiss the election of a Republican in a state which hasn’t elected a Republican to federal office since before the president won his first election as an aberration, the consequence of a weak candidate running a poor campaign.

But, before they dismiss this good woman, they should recall that, in a Democratic state not normally friendly to women statewide, she rose to political power rather quickly and easily secured her party’s nomination to succeed Ted Kennedy. She was running a smart campaign until she, like everyone, including most right-of-center pundits, became aware of the power of the Brown juggernaut.

We all give Barack Obama’s for running a great presidential campaign back in ‘08, but even he was caught off-guard by McCain’s choice of Sarah Palin. It took an economic crisis for that Democrat to right the listing vessel his campaign had become in early September. Had it not been for the mortgage meltdown, Obama may have limped his way to November, handing the White House to the GOP for another four years.

There were 17 days between McCain’s announcement of his running mate and the collapse of Lehman Brothers and 15 between the first sign that Democrats should not take the Massachusetts race for granted and Election Day.  And, in some ways, fewer than that; it took the Democrats a few days to realize the significance of the January 4 Rasmussen poll showing Brown within striking distance.  Perhaps, their delay in realizing the survey’s significance was due to their party’s prejudice against that pollster (as Politico reported just days before the release of that milestone survey). (more…)

UPDATE: AllahPundit notes that this level of conservative self-identification is “back to same level as post-9/11.”  Interesting.  Perhaps a one-night stand with Obama was enough to give America The Hangover Of The Century?

STILL. From Gallup today:

PRINCETON, NJ — The increased conservatism that Gallup first identified among Americans last June persisted throughout the year, so that the final year-end political ideology figures confirm Gallup’s initial reporting: conservatives (40%) outnumbered both moderates (36%) and liberals (21%) across the nation in 2009.

More broadly, the percentage of Americans calling themselves either conservative or liberal has increased over the last decade, while the percentage of moderates has declined.  [GP Ed. Note: So much for Obama being "post-partisan" and a "uniter", eh?]

<..>

Thus far in 2009, Gallup has found an average of 36% of Americans considering themselves Democratic, 28% Republican, and 37% independent. When independents are pressed to say which party they lean toward, 51% of Americans identify as Democrats, 39% as Republicans, and only 9% as pure independents.

Ideological tendencies by leaned party affiliation are very similar to those of straight partisan groups.  However, it is worth noting the views of pure independents — a group usually too small to analyze in individual surveys but potentially important in deciding elections. Exactly half of pure independents describe their views as moderate, 30% say they are conservative, and 17% liberal.

Conservative Republicans hold the mainstream views in America.  The governing coalition in the US has been, since 1980, Conservative Republicans, Conservative Democrats, Conservative-Leaning Independents.  That all adds up to the magic 40% Conservative.  Then all you need is two swing 11% moderate Independents and you have your governing coalition.

Liberals had their wad shot in 2008.  Now the Conservative Governing Coalition of America is coming back and uniting around our Founding Principles.  Obama had better wake up and realize he ain’t the Premier of the United Soviet States of America anymore.

The problem of course is that liberals have infested the academic and media worlds and they whine, shriek and holler louder than the other 79% of America.  We need to change that.  NOW.

-Bruce (GayPatriot)

I’m writing this on my iPhone with a new WordPress app. If it works, I’ll be blogging more!!

Yesterday, Human Events declared Dick Cheney to be the “Conservative of the Year.” (read the whole thing!)

In Washingtonian “inside the Beltway” terms, the most amazing aspect of former Vice President Dick Cheney’s new clout is that he is achieving it the old-fashioned way: talking about public policy. He is not running for President or any other office. He has not formed a PAC or a D.C. lobbying firm. He is not dishing on former colleagues, not spreading gossip, not settling scores. He is, instead, writing a memoir about his extensive career in public service, and giving occasional speeches and interviews, mostly on national and homeland security policy, long his central focus.

How is it, therefore, that someone who has no political ambitions can cause so much angst at the White House and in the mainstream news media? The irrefutable answer is that what Cheney is saying, primarily on foreign policy, defense and anti-terrorism, makes sense to more and more American citizens growing increasingly worried by the Obama Administration’s insouciance when U.S. national interests are threatened, both at home and abroad.

I’ll go one further. Cheney is without doubt The Conservative of The Decade and perhaps the most important and influential true American Conservative since Ronald Reagan.

Cheney proves again and again that he has core values and principles that are TRULY conservative and mirror the Founding Principles of this nation.

His devotion to individual American freedom and liberty is so pure that he becomes a progressive on the issue of gay marriage.

History will judge Cheney well. He helped make decisions that needed to be made to save the Republic. And I am confident that by 2012, a majority of Americans will only wish that Dick Cheney was our President or Vice President.

- Bruce (GayPatriot)

UPDATE (from Dan):  The former Vice President is not only, as Bruce noted above, devoted to his country, but also to his family, including his lesbian daughter.  He has treated Mary as we wish all parents to treat their gay children, loving her for who she is, welcoming Heather, her partner, into the family as he has her elder sister’s husband, including that same-sex couple in official events, including three inaugurations.

It is unfortunate that more gay Americans, including the heads of various gay organizations, don’t give this good man his due.  They may not share his politics, but they should at least appreciate his example.

As many of our readers know, CPAC (the Conservative Political Action Conference) is one of the premier, if not the premier, annual conservative gathering.  Slated to begin on February 18, 2010, it will draw leading conservative intellectuals and activists from around the country.  Among the group’s many sponsors with be our friends at GOProud.

Announced that his organization will be “a cosponsor of the single most important conservative gathering in the country”  Jimmy La Salvia, the group’s Executive Director pointed out that the “gathering of the nation’s most influential conservatives gives us an incredible opportunity to deliver our message.”  When the various conservatives assembled for this shindig see gay Americans speaking out against Obama’s statist policies while calling for smaller government and more personal freedom, some may reconsider how they view gay people.

At the same time, by allowing this gay group to cosponsor their marquee event, the American Conservative Union (the leading sponsor of CPAC) shows that it welcomes gay people.  Left-wing misconceptions notwithstanding, most mainstream American conservative organizations don’t discriminate against gay people.  And while there remain many in the conservative movement who continue to harbor unwarranted prejudices against gay people, their attitude is not–and never has been–central to American conservatism.

As gay individuals becoming increasingly visible on the right, we can help correct those prejudices still present in pockets of our movement.  Indeed, some groups, as one of our readers points out, who continue to promote such prejudices are also cosponsoring the conference.  Let us hope the presence of GOProud alongside them at the conference helps wean them of their prejudice.

By cosponsoring CPAC, GOProud is doing something other gay organizations refuse to do:   establish a gay presence an environment where prejudice persists.  If we really want to change attitudes toward gays, we need to work in environments where attitudes need to be changed.

Observing the “a trace of a hint of a shadow of a smile” on the normally taciturn face of Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell’s face as President Obama spoke to the nation about health care, George Will quipped that “the president’s rhetoric was becoming CPR for the Republican Party.“  (H/t:  Instapundit.)  Just as CPR helps restore the heart’s normal rhythm, the president’s rhetoric has helped bring the GOP back from the brink.

It hasn’t, however, given the party the strength it needs to become America’s majority party once again.  Dan Riehl reminds us that to regain that status, it’s not enough to oppose the President’s statist proposals, we must also come up with new ideas on how we want to govern the country:

We need to start thinking seriously about what it is we would propose and push, not only tear down whatever opposition we realize we are up against. I watched the Left go a very long time seemingly without that mission. Even when Bush was in his second term, one it was always clear he would get to serve out – they continued to attack in ways that actually hurt them in the eyes of many moderates and centrists that exist. It wasn’t until Obama captured that energy and put it to positive use that they actually found themselves getting anywhere.

I’ve no desire to sink into the pit of anger and unhinged attacks they found themselves sinking and looking so ugly in for so long a time.

To prevent us from becoming like the angry left, Dan wants us to consider this question

So, how can we turn ourselves toward a more constructive direction, beginning to support and push the positive ideas, agendas and people that can deliver us the actual results we want and America needs?

(more…)

Go get ‘em, Glenn.  The wolves are in the henhouse!

The American people stood up and demanded answers. Instead of providing them, the Administration had Jones resign under cover of darkness. I continue to be amazed by the power of everyday Americans to initiate change in our government through honest questioning, and judging by the other radicals in the administration, I expect that questioning to continue for the foreseeable future.

We must keep fighting against the statist aims of those in Washington — Republican and Democrat alike.

Remember folks, it is WE, THE PEOPLE who are our government.  That is the essence and the difference of the idea of America.

-Bruce (GayPatriot)

With a recent Gallup poll showing that conservatives outnumber liberals in every state, even the President’s Illinois and socialist Bernie Sanders’ Vermont, it is clear, to paraphrase Mark Twain, that reports of the death of the conservative movement are premature.

And while some may say we need a leader to begin anew, the signs of the revitalization of conservatism are everywhere.  Many (if not most) of those gathering in public squares and congressional town halls to take issue with the Democrats’ proposed health care overhaul may not identify as conservatives.  But, by the very questions they raise, they stand up for a basic tenet of American conservatism:  distrust of big government.

Poll after poll show the American people continue to oppose ever increasing government spending, with a July Gallup survey showing that the primary reason for “disapproval of the president’s economic policies was, literally, ’spending too much.’“  In short, conservative ideas continue to resonate.  We don’t need a leader to galvanize our base (but we will need leaders to defeat increasingly unpopular spendthrift Democratic politicians).

That the issues continue to rally the right (that Gallup survey showed that 65% of those who disapproved of Obama did so because of issues*) shows the contrast between the revitalized conservative movement and the fading appeal of the movement which propelled the President to power.  Obama’s movement was little more than a personality cult built on his image.  The “Tea Parties” and the spontaneous expressions of opposition to Obamacare grow out of an idea, the same one that motivated patriots in thirteen British colonies to take first to the streets and harbors, then to arms, in the 1770s:  freedom.

In recent years, the left was first united in opposition to George W. Bush, then in support of his successor.  We conservatives (and libertarians) have long been drawn to an idea.  Had George W. Bush and congressional Republicans understood the importance of small-government principles to their conservative base, the former may have left office with higher approval ratings and many of the latter might still be in office.

———-

*Whereas only 17% of those who approved his performance cited “issues” as the reason for their support.

The anti-Second Amendment hysteria by Chuck Schumer was bad enough, but Sen. Claire McCaskill takes the cake:

Today, GOProud, the nation’s only organization representing gay conservatives and their allies, condemns U.S. Senator Claire McCaskill (D-MO) for comments she made after voting against the conceal carry amendment offered yesterday by U.S. Senator John Thune (R-SD). “Claire McCaskill should be ashamed of herself for using baseless, anti-gay scare tactics to justify her vote against the conceal carry amendment,” said Jimmy LaSalvia, Executive Director of GOProud.

In comments made after her vote against the 2nd amendment provision, McCaskill said, “this is a foot in the door that would require, for example, the laws in Vermont on gay marriage to be enforced in Missouri.” (Audio of the McCaskill comments can be FOUND HERE.)

“McCaskill’s anti-gay rhetoric is not only shameful, it’s also a complete and total fallacy,” continued LaSalvia. “The conceal carry amendment wouldn’t have forced a single state to change its laws. Indeed, the amendment specifically spelled out that reciprocity would only be granted to individuals who met the requirements of the state they were traveling to.”

“We hope other gay groups will join us in condemning Senator McCaskill’s baseless, anti-gay scare tactics,” concluded LaSalvia.

We won’t hold our breath, will we GayPatriots?

UPDATE: Missouri gay-rights group blasts McCaskill…

In a statement defending her opposition to this bill, she [Sen. McCaskill] stated: “This is a foot in the door that would require, for example, the laws in Vermont on gay marriage to be enforced in Missouri.”

This is a problem. A state’s rights argument is valid in this situation, however it is inconceivable that an ally can support Hate Crimes legislation- which recognizes the LGBT community is a target of increased abuse, intolerance and aggressive force- but uses a touchstone issue for the community as a shield rather than stand alone on an anti-gun sentiment.

In a time when we have seen incredible strides on a state by state basis, we have turned a corner and will not tolerate being used as a shield.

…but the HRC and NGLTF have been silent to this anti-gay language from a leading Democrat US Senator.  Come to think of it, have any gay bloggers besides GayPatriot condemned McCaskill?

-Bruce (GayPatriot)

Hot off the wire:

GOProud Applauds Introduction of the Domestic Partnership Benefits and Obligations Bill
Senator Susan Collins (R-ME) lead co-sponsor in the Senate
and Rep. Ileana Ros-Lehtinen (R-FL) lead co-sponsor in the House.

(Washington, D.C.) – Today, the bipartisan Domestic Partnership Benefits and Obligations (DPBO) bill will be introduced in both the House and Senate. Senator Susan Collins (R-ME) is the lead co-sponsor in the Senate and Rep. Ileana Ros-Lehtinen (R-FL) is the lead co-sponsor in the House.

“GOProud applauds the bipartisan, bicameral introduction of the DPBO bill,” said Jimmy LaSalvia, Executive Director of GOProud. “GOProud strongly supports this common sense legislation.”

Senator Joe Lieberman (I-CT) and Rep. Tammy Baldwin (D-WI) join Collins and Ros-Lehtinen as original co-sponsors.

“Passage of the DPBO bill would make retirement benefits, healthcare benefits and life insurance benefits available to domestic partners,” continued LaSalvia.

“As conservatives, we believe that the federal government should take its cues from the successful practices of private enterprise. With more than half of Fortune 500 companies offer domestic partner benefits, it is clear that the time has come for the federal government to do the same.”

“GOProud looks forward to building conservative support for the passage of this legislation,” said LaSalvia.

Major kudos to Senator Collins and Rep. Ros-Lehtinen — she is one of my favorite Members of the US House, I might add.

And I would also note that it seems to me (and I am certainly biased as the Treasurer) that GOProud is doing a lot more to advance gay conservative causes in the past few weeks than Log Cabin Republicans did for the past few years.

I’m just sayin’.

There is a LOT more to come.  Thanks to Jimmy & Chris, GOProud is on Capitol Hill talking with leading GOP lawmakers on a regular basis.  It is a great time.

-Bruce (GayPatriot)

It it with great sorrow that I read the news this evening of the passing of former Congressman, Cabinet Secretary and VP Candidate Jack Kemp.  He was one of the good guys in politics.

Rest In Peace.  I’m sure there is a touch football game in Heaven tonight.

UPDATE: Kemp’s last syndicated column was in honor of his great hero, Abraham Lincoln.  Here’s a key passage which sums up Kemp’s philosophy as well:

For Abraham Lincoln, true welfare meant not dependency, but well-being; not equality of reward, but equality of opportunity; not reliance on the state, but reliance on oneself and one’s family. He wrote, prophetically, “The progress by which the poor, honest, industrious and resolute man raises himself, that he may work on this own account and hire somebody else … is the great principle for which this government was really formed.”

Nick (ColoradoPatriot) is right.  America has lost a great defender of liberty in Jack Kemp.

-Bruce (GayPatriot)

For those of you who don’t remember after eight years, this is what loyal opposition looks like.

And it also draws a very stark line between what it means to be on the political Left in America and on the Political Right. Witness:

THEN
A Republican president leads two broad international coalitions to liberate 50,000,000 Muslims in a far-away place from tyranny and despotism. In so doing, he works diligently to thwart terrorism on our own shores and in our own homeland. The Left’s reaction? To call him a war criminal, to demean him, to mock him, to call him a liar and a murderer and a torturer, too insular to consider any other type than simple cowboy diplomacy. To level the completely insensible incongruity of describing him simultaneously an evil genius and a world-class ignoramus.

NOW
A Democrat president, without the consultation of any allies, authorizes unilateral shots fired on citizens of a foreign country to save the life of a brave captain whose peril represents equal parts bravery (to even attempt escape) and selflessness (to offer himself to free his ship, crew, and cargo of charity food for starving Africans). The Right’s reaction? Praise and applause (albeit, from many quarters qualified and muted).

After eight years of continual vilification of a personality rather than policies, it is tremendously gratifying to see, for a change (YES! CHANGE!) a loyal opposition whose politics actually DO end at the water’s edge (and on it, too).

I join with my freedom and America loving conservatives today in congratulating President Obama on a cool hand and a job well done.

-Nick (ColoradoPatriot) from HQ

Only if Republicans hold firm in standing for the principles of fiscal responsiblity which helped us win elections in 1980, 1984, 1988 and 1994, principles with which Barack Obama made a rhetorical end run around the GOP in 2008, racking up the highest popular vote percentage of any non-incumbent Democat in 75 years.

Let me remind you once again that in the third debate, then-candidate Obama said “what I’ve done throughout this campaign is to propose a net spending cut.“  Instead, he’s given us the exact opposite.

No wonder when Democrats talk to the media, they remind us of the congressional Republicans sorry spending record over the past decade.  They seek to compromise the credibility of Republicans so as to reduce the impact of their criticism of their own spending spree.  But, just because Republicans overspent in the first few years of this century doesn’t excuse Democrats from their current profligacy.

Especially given the presidential campaign of the nation’s leading Democrat.

The contrast between Obama’s campaign rhetoric and his budget, now approved in slightly amendedd form by the Democratic Congress, has made it a lot easier for Republicans.  Jennifer Rubin think it’s “given Republicans plenty of running room” and quotes Bill Kristol’s explanation:

And the Republican Party is united in a principled way. I don’t think people can look at it — independent voters can’t look at the Republicans now and say they’re just being opportunistic or, you know, knee-jerk anti-Obama.

They object in principle to this massive expansion of government’s role in the economy, taking over the health care system, et cetera. And I think it allows — I think he’s allowed the Republican Party to recover more quickly than one would have expected and conservatives, actually, to recover more quickly than one might have expected after the 2008 elections.

In the Senate vote on the President’s budget, even the recent Republican renegades (Collins, Snowe, Specter) returned to the fold, keeping the caucus united.

By overreaching on spending, the President has made it easier for Republicans to regroup and recover. The longer Republicans remain united against the president’s spendthrift policies, the more ready our party will show that they’ve learned the lesson of the last two elections, the more quickly our party will restore its good name.

Obama who, in his campaign, recognized that Republicans were vulnerable on the spending issue hasn’t learn the lesson from his own electoral success.  Which might make it quite difficult for him to repeat it.

Like many Republicans, I was heartened to learn that Governor Bobby Jindal of Louisiana had been tapped to deliver the GOP response to the President’s address to a joint session of Congress. In tapping Jindal, “GOP leaders are acknowledging that without a majority in Congress, the big ideas necessary to rebuild their party are likely to come from state capitols.“

Even when we had a majority in Washington, it was Republican Governors (and even a Democrat or two) pushing reform consistent with conservative principles.  Elected in 2007 and having barely served a year, Jindal has joined their ranks.  He has taken on the corrupt establishment of one of the most broken-down state governments in the country.

Not just that, less than a month after the party elects an African-American man to chair our national committee, it is showcasing this the “first American governor of Indian descent” as an emerging leader of our party.  This will make it increasingly clear that ours is not just a white man’s party.

Jindal is more than just a reformer with an immigrant background.  A Rhodes Scholar, he is one of our party’s big thinkers.  Unlike the man to whom he’ll be responding tonight, accomplishments not rhetoric have marked his rise to national prominence.  He actually had executive responsibility before taking the helm of the Bayou State.  He was the youngest president of the University of Louisiana system.

He also headed headed Louisiana’s Department of Health and Hospitals and has served as Assistant Secretary of the Department of Health and Human Services.  In short, he’s the ideal man to respond to a president who wishes to make health care reform a national priority.

While those focusing on the nation’s capital for the better part of the past eight years might think the GOP is bereft of new ideas, those who turned to the states would now that most of the new policy ideas being offered came from Republican governors.  Bobby Jindal is chief among them.  Thus, I am delighted that he’ll be responding to a Democratic president who signature achievement in office has been enacting a “stimulus” which is little more than a warmed over wish-list from the files of frustrated Democrats these past forty years.

In a recent comment, bob, one of our most regular critics, chimes in with some good advice for conservatives:

rather than spending so much energy on criticizing your political opponents, perhaps you should begin developing more nuanced and thoughtful ideas on how to solve the nation’s problems. in case you haven’t noticed, we’re in quite the predicament these days.

if you want conservatives to remain relevant in our country’s discussion (i, as a liberal, want conservatives to remain relevant to our country’s discussion), you would be well advised to think about how to make things better instead of about how to find a way to put liberals down. i’m not saying you shouldn’t criticize the opposition; it’s just that the criticism should not overwhelm the discussion of ideas and your ideals.

Perhaps, I was particularly sensitive to this criticism because while I sketched out my plan for a needed economic stimulus, I have neglected to turn it into a post.

But, I wonder, as does one of our defenders if the:

implication of bob’s comment is that conservatives – and classical liberals – and you/us on the GP blog – somehow haven’t been making a good case on how to improve things. We/they have. It’s just that bob, and Democrats generally, choose to stay in ignorance of it.

I do hope bob is aware that many Republicans have put forward alternatives to the “stimulus.” And conservatives have articulated how they would improve things if they were in charge.

That said, I particularly appreciated bob’s last sentence, acknowledging that criticism has it’s place so long as it doesn’t overwhelm the discussion of ideas.  But, as Camus wisely noted, sometimes opposition affirms a deeply held value or principle.

It’s important that we Republicans recall what we’re affirming when we oppose Obama’s initiatives, articulating those principles along with the opposition.  And that we put forward alternatives to the president’s plans as many Republicans did during the “stimulus” debate.

With recent polls showing that Republican opposition to the “stimulus” has helped make the party more competitive, the GOP has a chance to repeat the gains it made in the 1994 mid-term elections, quite possibly winning back the House and with an outside (okay, very outside) chance of recapturing the Senate.

But, if Republicans want to win, they have to do more than just run against the spendthrift policies of the Obama-Reid-Pelosi Democrats, they also, like their forebears in Clinton’s first term, need to run on a reform platform. To that end, they would be wise to put together an updated version of the Contract with America.

In this Contract, however, unlike the 1994 version, they must acknowledge that they made mistakes while in the majority. Back then, almost no one could remember when Republicans had controlled two consecutive Congresses. Now, many can. So, Republicans must make clear that they have learned from their mistakes in the majority.

This time, just as they did fifteen years ago, they can run against a Democratic leadership determined to centralize power, making it difficult for the minority to contribute. At the start of the current Congress, Nancy Pelosi’s Democrats rewrote House Rules, reversing Republican reforms and returning to old runs which made it all but impossible for the minority to offer alternative legislation or amendments to bills.

Republicans can once again campaign on being the party of open government, borrowing a page from Barack Obama’s successful presidential campaign. As he is reneging on his commitment to transparency, the Republicans can promise to hold his feet to the fire.

The first plank in a new Contract with America would be to do something with all legislation that Democrats promised (& failed) to do with the “stimulus”–post it online for a full 48 hours before voting.

We need to become more like Milton Friedman in the clip below, defending capitalism coolly with confidence and humor. And not giving in to the assumptions of our intellectual adversaries.

(H/t Instapundit).

It seems my friend Rick Sincere was the first in the blogosphere to wish Americans a Happy Reagan Day on this, the ninety-eighth anniversary of the birth of the greatest American president of the second half of the twentieth century, the chief executive with the most successful economic policy of that entire century.

In a nice summary of Reagan’s reputation and political philosophy, Rick also references Reagan’s outspoken opposition to the Briggs Initiative. That pernicious proposal would have banned gays from teaching at California public schools. Indeed, the eponymous Senator Briggs attributed the Gipper’s opposition to the measure’s “ignominious defeat”. And the Gipper did this in 1978, at a time when, as Rick reminds us, such opposition “would not help him politically. He did it because it was the right thing to do.“

Indeed, such opposition could hurt him, it risked alienating the Gipper from the Christian Right, then an emerging “faction” of his party.

As we celebrate Reagan’s birthday during the Administration of the first of his successors trying to repudiate his ideas, it’s important that we remember what those ideas were.  He provided a nice summary in his 1964 speech on behalf of then-GOP presidential nominee Barry Goldwater. Those ideas would not just explain his support for that principled Arizonan, but also come to define his own basic political philosophy for his subsequent political career.

So, today, as we remember the Gipper on the anniversary of his birth, let us not just recall Ronald Reagan the man. Not just the successful president and charismatic leader. Let us also remember Ronald Reagan, man of ideas.

As we recall his ideas — and affirm them ourselves — we will be better equipped to debate the issues of the day. When others call our party’s attempt to block a spendthrift “stimulus” as obstructionist or rejectionist, tell them that in opposing this boondoggle, we are not merely rejecting a proposal which, we believe, will be harmful over the long term, we are affirming the vision of Ronald Wilson Reagan.

Let us always remember the Gipper’s guiding idea: freedom. Freedom. Freedom.

And the less government intrudes on our freedom, the better off we are. And the stronger our economy is. And will be.

The more I think about the election of Michael Steele as chairman of the Republican National Committee, the more hope I have for the future of my party.

Not only is the former Maryland Lieutenant Governor a bright man with a natural charisma and personal warmth, but he also conveys an image of a broader-based party than one to which the media has made us accustomed in recent years. And it’s not just his race. It’s the way he communicates conservative ideas.

Like Ronald Reagan, he can communicate conservatism to a diverse audience rather than satisfying himself by only offering up red meat for the party faithful.

As Thomas Sowell put it in heralding Steele’s election, “One of the huge and perennial handicaps of the Republicans is that they seldom have anybody who can articulate their case to the public“

Too many Republicans don’t even seem to understand the need to talk. They seem to think it is something you have to go through the motions of doing but, really, they would rather be somewhere else, doing something else.

. . . .

Steele not only knows how to talk, he seems to understand the need to talk. In his appearances on television over the years, he has been assertive rather than apologetic. When attacked, he has counter-attacked, not whined defensively, like too many other Republicans. And when criticizing the current administration, Steele won’t have to pull his punches when going after Barack Obama, for fear of being called a racist.

Assertive rather than apologetic indicates he understands and appreciates our party’s principles. Like Ronald Reagan, he doesn’t whine about the failure of the media to convey our message.  He just figures out a way to convey it with confidence.

As we prepare to celebrate the Great Communicator’s ninety-eigth birthday tomorrow, it is fitting that we now have a good communicator at the helm of our great party.

In an excellent piece, which, to some degree at least addresses a point some readers have been debating in the comments sections to other posts, Michael Barone suggests that the GOP go upscale by “downplaying the cultural issues that were an important reason for Republican victories from 1980 to 2004.“

Instead, they should target younger voters by pointing out that Democratic policies limit our choices. “Republicans,” he contends, “can argue that their policies will let you choose your future.” Seems like he favors pushing a freedom agenda, adapting Ronald Reagan’s ideas to the world today. Good plan.

Not only does Barone offer the right approach to Republican rebuilding, he also understands the qualities of a woman likely to be one of those at the helm of our party for years to come. Noting the appeal Alaska Governor Sarah Palin has to “downscale voters,” he observes:

Despite the scorn the media heaped on her, she has excellent political instincts and seems capable of developing the knowledge base that would make her a credible presidential candidate in the future.

Numerous people, included this Democrat, who have worked with (or otherwise come into contact with) the 2008 Republican Vice-presidential nominee have called her a “quick study.“

The more Palin familiarizes herself with national policy at the federal level, the more she’ll overcome the image created during the campaign by awkward moments in interviews with aggressive reporters that hurt her image. Note how her detractors all focus on interviews she conducted before the Vice-Presidential debate. They all but ignored her performance after that.

Once Sarah Palin gained a greater command of the issues, got accustomed to the style and format of these exchanges, as well as the agenda of the national news media, she came across much better in such settings.

I mean, if Sarah Palin kept doing poorly in such exchanges, wouldn’t her detractors focus on more than just the Couric and Gibson interviews?  Barone has it right.  Once she develops that knowledge base, she will become a credible presidential candidate.

Oh, and with anything my Michael Barone, just read the whole thing.

I see this as good news even as it prevents one of our most gifted candidates in the Free State from running for Senate in 2010.

The best news about this good man’s election is Steele’s demeanor.  He’s knows the issues and he’s right within the mainstream of the GOP.  Not just that, he was the first African-American elected statewide in Maryland.  In 2006, a very Democratic year in a very Democratic state, he ran better than his party’s presidential candidate in a year more favorable to our party.

He knows how to reach out beyond the base.

I met Steele briefly at the Republican National Convention and we chatted for about a minute before he had to go on Sean Hannity’s show.  He didn’t seem taken aback when I handed him my card (with the name of this blog) and told him about us.  I also said I wished he were RNC chair. Well, fewer than six months later, I got my wish.

While he knows how to handle the media and looks good on TV, I do have some concerns about his organizational skills.  Let’s hope he finds a good manager to help up reorganize the party apparatus.  I’m delighted that he outlined a tech plan to “compete with Democrats in the online arena of social networking, fundraising and communication.“

With the election of Steele as party chairman, the nomination of Sarah Palin as our party’s Vice-Presidential candidate last year, he election of Bobby Jindal as Governor of Louisiana just over a year ago, the elevation of Eric Cantor to House Republican Whip and the runoff victory of An “Joseph” Cao as Congressman for New Orleans, we now have a whole crop of articulate Republican leaders who do not fit the media image of us as a party of white male Christians.

If the Republican Party is to rebuild its majority, we need to reach out to all Americans.  With an increasingly diverse crop of party leaders, with Steele at our helm, it looks like we’re doing just that.

UPDATE:  Jim Geraghty sums up the Steele’s strength and expresses concerns similar to mine about his organizational skills:

What will Republicans be getting in Steele? Maybe the ideal television presence, a dynamic and energetic speaker who cheerfully brings a Republican message to communities that aren’t always initially receptive. The contrast with Duncan’s seemingly invisible media presence will be clear. But Steele’s bid was hindered by questions about whether he would excel as much at the parts of the job that aren’t in front of the cameras—the day-to-day management and fundraising.

UP-UPDATE: Log Cabin President Patrick Sammon praises the selection: “Michael Steele is the right man at the right time to lead the GOP. . . . It’s a great day for our Party. Steele is an inclusive leader who will bring a new energy and a new vision to the GOP at a critical time.”

UP-UP-UPDATE: I am heartened by Steele’s reference to the Contract with America in remarks made after his election as party chief:

The bottom line was the American people had lost faith in our leadership. . . . We entered into a contract with them in 1994 and they expected us to honor it. In the way we would lead, in the way we would serve, in the way we would protect their interests. And we abrogated that contract. And that’s why that scarlet letter at that time was placed their by the people.”