Conservatives Win Again!!

Much of the Left today celebrates the latest in a string of special election victories by Democrats in conservative, formerly Republican districts. And, truth be told, the tidings are not great for the GOP. The country, at this juncture, remains monumentally unhappy with the Republican Party. They’re not happy about the economy; they’re not happy about Iraq. They see the price of gasoline skyrocketing and, more importantly, the price of food following suit. Couple that with the unremittingly negative drumbeat of the liberal media, the mood looks dark for the GOP.

But not, necessarily, for conservatives.

Consider the recent string of electoral losses in formerly Republican, solidly conservative districts. In the most recent races in Louisiana and Mississippi, the prevailing Democrats are both staunch pro-life, pro-Second Amendment conservatives. For conservatives, who care less about party affiliation than they do about the policies eventually adopted, it was a win-win situation. If the Democrats believe that they can win seats only nominating candidates to the right of Scott Garrett, great.

The new crop of Democrats are already driving policy, sometimes in good directions, sometimes otherwise. On the negative side, the Journal reports that the desire to protect the seats of 30 freshman Democrats from rural districts led to the creation of the egregious farm bill, which provides tens of billions in taxpayer handouts for wealthy agribusiness. So much for the so-called "Blue Dog" Democratic claims about fiscal responsibility. (President Bush promises a veto which should provoke some interesting local commentary from local "progressive" Democrats: "send me to Congress, instead of Scott Garrett, and I’ll support the Democratic Leadership position by providing corporate welfare to agribusiness millionaires"? Or, "I’ll go to DC and be even more vociferous that Scott Garrett in my support of President Bush in his fight against the irresponsible corporate welfare policies of Pelosi and the Congressional Democrats"?)

Consider, too, that Health Shuler, one of the stars of the Dem Freshman class, has proposed that all employers verify the immigration status of their employees through an expanded instant-verification system. Hardly the stuff likely to make it into a BlueJersey.com puff piece. Indeed, his REPUBLICAN colleagues have been pushing a discharge petition on that proposal, which has 185, mostly Republican signatures. Query whether the new Democratic Congressman from Mississippi will affix his name to that petition?

The lesson that liberal bigwigs learned over the course of the last few election cycles is that it’s more important to elect Democrats than it is to elect liberals. They harken back to the good old days of the 1960's, when an uneasy coalition of staunchly conservative, mostly Southern Democrats, and fringe-left, most coastal liberals, lorded over Congress. Back then, most of the ideological battles occurred within the Democratic Party – and the conservatives, with huge seniority, often won. If the Democrats wish to recast themselves as a party with room therein for pro-life, pro-gun, pro-freedom conservatives, God bless.

Conservatives, after all, don’t oppose Democrats; they oppose liberals. If the Left wishes to count new Congressman Childers as "one of them", great! Indeed, if the Democrats want to start running candidates in NJ just like him, wonderful! Conservatives care about policy, not the Party which advances it. If the Democrats choose to elect lots of folks who would be considered too right wing to win a Republican primary in NJ, who’s to complain?

Speaker Pelosi, indeed, may have said it best:

"As I tell every new Member of Congress, 'your title Representative is your job escription.' Travis Childers earned the votes of the people of Mississippi's First Congressional District because he reflects their values and shares their hopes and dreams for the future."

The fact that those "values" are 180 degrees separated from Pelosi’s don’t seem to matter to her. She will, for the time being, keep her job as Speaker with the votes of Democratic conservatives, but as they amass seniority, and in order to keep their seats, they will expect – and they will receive – concessions to those "values". Will Congress be supporting anti-freedom restrictions on firearms? T’aint likely. Advancing the leftist agenda on abortion? Not with Childer’s vote. Anyone think gay marriage will be high on Childers’ to-do list?

Childers website attacks Congress for "spending as the deficit and national debt hit all time highs". Does he sound like a reliable vote for Barack Obama’s platform to double federal spending on ... everything? (Indeed, he, and the other Democratic victors, vociferously denied that they had the support of, or wanted anything to do with, national Democrats). While his web-site is issues-lite, he clearly made every effort to avoid being seen as leftist. If Childer’s represents the future of Blue America, fantastic. He’s wrong on pork, Social Security, and SCHIP, but, then again, so are most Republicans.

Conservatives learned a baleful lesson here in NJ when they supported Democrat-lite Republican candidates for office due simply to the ‘R’ after their names, only to have them adopt policies which contributed to the bankruptcy of the State. If so-called progressives find comfort in the victory of pro-life, pro-gun conservatives, we’ve moved a long way toward solving the problems the state and the country face in the way conservatives always said they should be solved.

And there are traps aplenty waiting for these conservative Democrats as they try to explain to those at home, who do not share the San Francisco "values" of the Pelosi Democrats, why they support those folks. The Congressional Dems just proposed a (non-binding) budget resolution which calls for increasing spending at 4% per annum, would permit the largest tax increase in American history, and which – in a typical display of political courage – does precisely nothing to address exploding entitlement costs. In short, the same fiscal irresponsibility we’ve come to expect from non-conservatives, of either party. Will conservative Democrats be able to explain supporting such insanity to the folks back home?

Folks worried about rising gas prices? The only way to address that is to increase supplies, and "progressives" absolutely refuse to seek new domestic supplies. Folks worried about jobs? Unemployment’s up .5% since the Dems took control, and their protectionist proposals are worse than useless. Spending outrageous now? Just wait until Mr. Double Everything (except the military) takes office! Your taxes bad now? You ain’t seen nothing yet; wait til Obama gets to town. The proposed farm bill will actually increase food prices. Given that the policies of the national Democrats are wholly divorced from the values of the folks in the districts which elected conservative Democrats, their tenure may be very short.

That having been said, people get tired of single party rule, and there’s no particular rhyme or reason to their predilections in any given year. Germany and France just became more conservative; Australia moved the other way. Labour in Britain runs the risk of being reduced to holding their party caucuses in one of the fast disappearing red phone booths.

The Dems will likely benefit from the electorate’s Bush fatigue, although Obama may be simply too far out on the left-wing fringes for the people to stomach, even in a Democratic year. When virtually all of the local Dem victories came to pass by nominating staunch conservatives, will a presidential nominee to the left of George McGovern appeal to those constituencies?

To "progressives" celebrating the recent electoral victories, consider this thought: Speaker Childers. Who would likely be more upset by the resulting policies: Mike Carroll or Reed Gusciora? If he represents the new face of the Democratic Party, the Country will be a much better place.