Latest Post | Last 10 Posts | Archives
Previous Post: Gov. Stonewall strikes again, and again, and again
Next Post: No prisoners in Illinois’ “civil war”
Posted in:
* Charlie Johnston tries to sum up the situation of the hopeless Republicans in this state…
Here we have five identifiable corrosive factions of Republicans that, like roving bands of rival warlords, do little or no damage to the real opposition while engaging in incessant internecine destruction, giving any transcendent, unifying leaders little chance to emerge. We shoot survivors in their cradle.
First, there are the arsonists. You know that bunch: in 2006 they declared anyone who did not support Oberweis in the gubernatorial primary a heretic who should be burned at the stake. This year they declared that anyone who DID support Oberweis in the congressional primary was a heretic who should be burned at the stake. They don’t get excited about supporting someone and are only happy when they have someone they are committed to destroying. While priding themselves on their brutal honesty, one quickly realizes it is the brutality, not the honesty, that excites them.
Second we have the looters. They rise until they reach a point where they can use their position to enrich themselves. They consider it a successful political career if they make a mint regardless of how bad they damage the party.
Then there are the quislings, those who are busy selling out to save their hides, making ads for Obama, voting to raise taxes, always looking for a means to advance themselves at the expense of their party – the Vichy French, as it were.
Fourth we have the clueless, those lovely souls who mean well but think salvation is to be found in the next iteration of the 72-hour-program and never pause to think that maybe we ought to actually stand for something and mean it.
Finally there are what I call the diplomats of doom or the Scottish Lords. These are always looking to find a way to negotiate surrender to the Democrats before the battle begins in exchange for some crummy little perk. If the Democrats promise to take us over the cliff with taxes and spending, our GOP diplomats of doom promise to take us over that cliff only half as fast. And they wonder why the rank and file don’t rally to their flag.
Anything to add to this list?
posted by Rich Miller
Monday, Apr 14, 08 @ 8:36 am
Sorry, comments are closed at this time.
Previous Post: Gov. Stonewall strikes again, and again, and again
Next Post: No prisoners in Illinois’ “civil war”
WordPress Mobile Edition available at alexking.org.
powered by WordPress.
good stuff by Charlie.
Comment by Ravenswood Right Winger Monday, Apr 14, 08 @ 8:39 am
The Cut your nose to spite your facers: These are the republicans who will vote against their canidate who has the best chance to prevail because he/she does not stand for exactly the right things, is not open minded to the political process and willing to make deals to obtain advantages for the people he/she represents, and refuses to do anything proposed by a democrat because, it was from a democrat. They would rather a democrat win an election then a republican who does not fit their rigid standards of a republican.
Comment by Ghost Monday, Apr 14, 08 @ 8:43 am
In what category does one place the Republicans who spend most of their energy fighting with other Republicans to purify the party? These people seem to believe once the party is purged of the impure then they will be able to get to the business of defeating Democrats with candidates unsullied by… whatever makes Democrats icky.
And how do “movement conservatives” with strong ties to the national GOP (like Peter Roskam) fit into Johnston’s analysis.
BTW, what is the equivalent list of camps for the Democrats in Illinois?
Comment by Carl Nyberg Monday, Apr 14, 08 @ 8:45 am
Carl to answer your question I would toss them into either the first group, or argue that they are in fact not really republicans but sort of their own little sub-group.
I would argue that the fourth group also spends some time asking WTF every once in while and wonder if it is worth it.
Comment by OneMan Monday, Apr 14, 08 @ 8:53 am
And Johnson is in the second category, right? The cohsultants who keep losing but keep getting paid?
Comment by Skeeter Monday, Apr 14, 08 @ 8:56 am
The thing democrats are better at then republicans is voting for their party even if they do not completly like the canidate. There was an old TV series about Japan, where two chracters are discussig why outsiders have been unable to conquer japan when it has so many different warlords and factions within. The answer was the different factions are like fingers on a hand, they are independent, but when an outside threat appears they can come together into a fist. Same thing generally with the democrats, lots of different indepedent groups, but they generally come together to support the dem canidate despite differences, because they know the republican alternative is worse. Republicans do not seem to grasp this idea.
Comment by Ghost Monday, Apr 14, 08 @ 8:58 am
Skeeter, let’s try to avoid attacks on Charlie. Stick to the question I asked, please.
Comment by Rich Miller Monday, Apr 14, 08 @ 9:01 am
I like Charlie, but we in the Republican Party need to come together on the issues we can agree, pocket book issues. We do not need Charlie coming along and further trying to divide the party. How many tax increase issues can the Democrats pass (RTA), or put forth (tax swap, con amend)before the party wakes up and unifies. The Democrats in this state and at the federal level have taken a hard left turn to the tax and spend ways prior to the Clinton years. They cannot call themselves “New Democrats”. They should call themselves “Kennedy Old Democrats” or KODS.
Comment by Just Asking Monday, Apr 14, 08 @ 9:12 am
Pretty impressive analysis by Charlie Johnson.
The “clueless” should be renamed “The Once Tolerant Die Hards” for their once basic willingness to try anything to reverse the tide and increase the numbers under the tent. They recognized the problems, the losses, and the weak sisters in their party (the other four categories). They tried to navigate through the crap offered by the other four groups and watched the voters reject that crap over and over again. Their tolerance level to the other four groups is now at an all time low and that is where the true weakness of the Illinois Republican Party exists. Those “missing” GOP voters are the GOP versions of “Reagan Democrats,” and they are now busy searching for a home they will feel more comfortable in. They still support some GOP candidates but their message of not voting for GOP candidates they are confronted with is not resonating with the other groups still in denial. They are the suburban voters and collar county voters the GOP are losing.
Will the Illinois GOP listen to their Once Tolerant Die-Hards? The answer is “not yet.” That is the most astonishing behavior of the Republican party I belong to.
The Democrats have their “arsonists” and their “looters” and their “quislings.” Their success in recent years was to reunite their “tolerant die hards” with their party and make them tolerant of their weak sister members. They have also in the collar county created creatures called “fiscally conservative and social moderate Democrats who win where Republicans once won. The once tolerant die-hard republicans are willing to take chances on these types of candidates.
Charlie’s piece should be required reading for all in party leadership, from the State Central Committee to the county central committees.
Comment by Louis G. Atsaves Monday, Apr 14, 08 @ 9:14 am
I might add the Enablers. These poor souls are sent out to talk about how bad it is that Republicans are attacking other Republicans, as all the while they attack other Republicans. Charlie would be at home in this group and in probably 3 of the others he lists.
Comment by GOP'er Monday, Apr 14, 08 @ 9:21 am
Now that you mention it Ghost, that wasn’t Japan, it was Iraq, the one thing that the factions have always agreed upon, is to get the invaders (whether they be the Turks, British, French, or today, the USA) out.
The GOP hasn’t figured that 1 out yet either.
Comment by The Horse Monday, Apr 14, 08 @ 9:22 am
Those groups are too negative. They imply that almost all IL Republicans are greedy, selfish, and/or stupid, and only about 1/3 of Republicans, I know are in one of those groups. The rest of them are conservatives who work hard to help their party, their state, and their country.
Comment by PhilCollins Monday, Apr 14, 08 @ 9:32 am
And then there’s the rank and file conservative base who feels shut out of the process, ignored and unappreciated, who know the path to victory but party leaders don’t want to be associated with them yet expect their votes come election time. Every time one of the conservatives gets nominated for office the party writes it off as a loss before the campaign even starts and unless the candidate has a vast personal fortune to spend on his own race is left to whither away.
Comment by Crimefighter Monday, Apr 14, 08 @ 9:46 am
The Winners: Socially moderate, fiscal conservatives who are able to work with and appeal to constituencies across the political and geographic spectrum.
The Losers: Ideological and/or geographical zealots who are better suited to talk radio than governance.
Comment by wordslinger Monday, Apr 14, 08 @ 9:53 am
“First, there are the arsonists. You know that bunch: in 2006 they declared anyone who did not support Oberweis in the gubernatorial primary a heretic who should be burned at the stake. This year they declared that anyone who DID support Oberweis in the congressional primary was a heretic who should be burned at the stake.”
This example doesn’t match the category. Voters had different choices when Oberweis ran for governor and when he ran for congress. His opponents in 2006 and 2008 were different. The messages that Oberweis sold in 2006 and 2008 were different. Consequentially, it doesn’t surprise me that similar voters were attracted to him in 2006, but attracted to Lauzen in 2008. In each election, things change. To label this example as proof of an “arsonist” type of Republican would be reading too much into a complex situation and then simplifying it incorrectly.
“They don’t get excited about supporting someone and are only happy when they have someone they are committed to destroying. While priding themselves on their brutal honesty, one quickly realizes it is the brutality, not the honesty, that excites them.”
Nonsense. Not only is this a mean statement, it isn’t a true one either. When voters do not discover a candidate they find appealing, they criticize their choices. This is utterly normal and we all do it. We are not “arsonists”.
“Looters”, “Quislings”, “Clueless”, and “Diplomats of Doom” are all labels that should not have been used in Mr. Johnston’s analysis. Had he chosen different lables, he not only could have presented his thoughts more positively, he would have also presented them more completely. His attraction to calling some Republicans “Vichy Republicans” seemed to have been too self-satisfying to care if the label was correct.
The GOP in Illinois have many challenges if it wishes to regain enough voter support to lead the state. Like Chicago Democrats, Chicagoland Republicans do not communicate well south of I-80. What gives Democrats an edge is that Cook County dominates demographically, allowing them to run sloppy campaigns, but still win them. The GOP doesn’t have this. As a result, the GOP needs to unite Chicagoland with the rest of Illinois voters by finding common political beliefs and communicating effectively to all.
Illinois is a Blue state. The GOP won elections when it was a Purple Party. With deep-red candidates speaking deep-red political boilerplate, the GOP will not find electoral success.
Sorry you are burned out Charlie, but perhaps it is for the best for new guys and gals to pick up the pieces.
Comment by VanillaMan Monday, Apr 14, 08 @ 10:06 am
“Skeeter, let’s try to avoid attacks on Charlie. Stick to the question I asked, please.”
I really didn’t think it was an attack. It is interesting that people can look and see these categories, but nobody would admit belonging to one.
Which in a way says something important about the process — the problem for the ILGOP is always “other people.”
Let’s take the people on the far right who claim that they would stay home rather than for vor “Topinko”: Do you think those people put themselves in one of the cateogories, or do they believe that they are the heart and soul of the party?
Similiarly, how about the moderates who want to reach out across the aisle? Are they in one of these categories?
The entire categorization is interesting in that it does show this lack of insight by the GOP into the GOP. For the GOP, the problem is “everybody but us.” If Johnon’s diagnosis is correct, he would happily put himself into one of the categories.
Admittedly, I’m an advocate for one party, but I can honestly say things were better when there was a real functioning two party system, and until the GOP seriously looks at itself and figures out how to appeal to voters (as opposed to merely pointing the finger at bad Republicans, “RINOS”, or others) that is not going to happen.
Comment by Skeeter Monday, Apr 14, 08 @ 10:18 am
The IL GOP ran a statewide slate of mostly social moderates/liberals in 2006. They all got creamed. This idea that the GOP only runs hard right candidates in Illinois is absurd.
As John Kass noted recently, conservatives aren’t the problem. Corruption is the problem. No GOP candidate can win statewide in Illinois because Charlie’s friends don’t care about winning, they only care about keeping control of the apparatus which helps them cash in on deals with the Dems. All of the campaign stuff is just an afterthought. Keeping a title is job 1.
Comment by GOP'er Monday, Apr 14, 08 @ 10:20 am
Skeeter, some people have a tendency to tee off on Charlie when I quote him. All I was trying to do was head that off. Thanks for your last post.
Comment by Rich Miller Monday, Apr 14, 08 @ 10:20 am
The Spineless Statesmen — Although small in number and marginalized, there are actually Republicans in Springfield who want to help solve our state’s problems. Unfortunately, they lack the moxie to stand up and be counted, and want the Democrats to do all of the heavy lifting.
These are the folks that Lou Lang referred to last week in debate who are always whispering to him that they hope he can pass a gambling expansion bill to fund capital projects in his district, but they won’t vote for it.
They recognize the need to reform education funding and provide property tax relief, but they want the Democrats to walk down the tax hike plank alone.
They cheer Democrats for taking on Blagojevich, but sit mute while Tom Cross capitulates to him.
In short, they know what’s right, but they do what’s easy.
They know exactly who they are, and they’d all be much better off if they’d follow Paul Froehlich’s lead so they can finally do what they know is right and say what they think is true.
Comment by Yellow Dog Democrat Monday, Apr 14, 08 @ 10:48 am
Sounds like five versions of the Federalist/Whig Party, and just as dead.
Comment by Six Degrees of Separation Monday, Apr 14, 08 @ 10:59 am
Mascots for thes could be:
1. The Roesser types out of Carpentersvills
2. Froehlich
3. Dillard
4. Peracia/Oberwies-maybe
5. Cook COunty Board types?
Comment by Wumpus Monday, Apr 14, 08 @ 11:03 am
Am I missing it or couldn’t Mr. Johnson come up with on positive group within the GOP? Where do they begin building if these are the only groups.
Comment by Madison County Voter Monday, Apr 14, 08 @ 11:08 am
Skeeter hit the nail on the head. He left out the “Moderates” who are pragmatic, realize that they are in the minority, and pick their battles carefully, knowing that they don’t have the bullets to participate in 90% of the battles. They try to form a working relationship with the majority, so that at least a portion of the Republican agenda can be realized. These are generally mischaracterized as “RINO’s.”
Comment by Snidely Whiplash Monday, Apr 14, 08 @ 11:18 am
I just break my party down into two categories:
1. Those who want to win.
2. Those who could truly care less about winning.
That took one minute and very little thought. I would now like to be handsomely compensation for my ideas.
Comment by Team Sleep Monday, Apr 14, 08 @ 11:27 am
The analysis seems pretty simplistic to me.
I’m a socially moderate, fiscally semi-conservative Republican. I’ll always vote for a good Republican candidate over a good Democrat, an ok Republican over an ok Democrat, but I won’t vote for a bad Republican over a good Democrat.
I don’t know any mantras I can recite about who belongs where within and without the party. Polarizing has never seemed too productive to me. Campaigns are about politics, governance shouldn’t be, anymore than is absolutely necessary.
BTW, fiscally semi-conservative to me means I am not knee jerk against all taxes, I want to know what I am paying for, if it’s being accomplished as effectively as may be expected, and, above all, whatever we’re going to spend on government, we have to pay for it.
Comment by steve schnorf Monday, Apr 14, 08 @ 11:29 am
Steve,
My guess is that your type is the majority of Republicans in Illinois. Unfortunately, the self-described conservative (read, right-wing) of the party likes to believe that the majority are RINO’s because they won’t abide by the “conservateives’” all or nothing social-religious agenda. Unfortunately, they are the most vocal and well-financed wing of the party, so ALL Illinois Republicans tend to get painted with their brush, which is especially harmful during election cycles.
In short, Bush-Cheney “Republicanism” is not Illinois Republicanism, but it appears to be because the most covered and conspicuous wing of the party would do quite well in Cheney’s home state of Wyoming.
Comment by Snidely Whiplash Monday, Apr 14, 08 @ 11:41 am
The looters and the quislings appear to me to be essentially the same group of people. The selfish self-promoting type.
Another potential corrosive category would be the “legacymakers” group who put the interest and political aspirations of their relatives,close friends, etc. above the good of the party.
Comment by Jake from Elwood Monday, Apr 14, 08 @ 12:04 pm
I agree that looters and quislings are pretty much the same group and that you could pitch a lot of the Scottish Lords in with them. I think that most of the rank and file Republicans don’t fall into any of those three groups, but sadly a lot of the leadership does. The descriptions of the arsonists is pretty accurate, they have no real desire to rebuild the Republican party in Illinois, only to push their own agenda and punish those that do not fall in to lock step line with them, even if they agree on the vast majority of things.
The ILGOP needs to rid itself of all these groups and work on fielding candidates that are conservative and provide a clear alternative to the Democrats, but are electable too.
Comment by RMW Stanford Monday, Apr 14, 08 @ 12:25 pm
How about “won’t throw out the baby with the bathwater Conservatives”
I’m as conservative as Oberweis, Lauzen and Tim Schmitz in my neck of the woods. However, I’m not going to go nuclear on a moderate Republican just to prove to myself that I’m a true-blue Republican. Take Steve Sauerburg hiring the Log Cabin Republican person for his spokesman. So what!?!?! What do I do, run off and hide and let Durbin win again? Seems kind of crazy, but there are many conservatives that want to do just that. Not exactly all that helpful to “advancing the cause”.
The “won’t throw out the baby with the bathwater Conservatives” will campaign for a good conservative mightily, but then if they lose, will still support the Republican over the Democrat, even if they are the dreaded “moderate”.
Comment by Trafficmatt Monday, Apr 14, 08 @ 12:42 pm
The “clueless” I like to refer to as “emulators.” The fawning flatterers of predatory capitalism who don’t realize that those they support look down on them and see nothing but opportunities for plundering.
Comment by SPFLnet Monday, Apr 14, 08 @ 12:49 pm
Better than the one group most of the dem lawmakers belong in CRIMINALS
Comment by fed up Monday, Apr 14, 08 @ 12:53 pm
This guy’s not worth responding too, he should look in the mirror, he’ll see what ills the GOP.
Comment by Get real Monday, Apr 14, 08 @ 2:43 pm
i am pretty sure any phil collins made every point charlie was trying to make…waht about the “i have way to much money, but make a crappy candidate types” who always seem to run…i.e.-the current gop senate candidate, the dairy man, the current gop candidate in the 8th, the last candidate in the 8th, etc…
Comment by downstate GOP faithless Monday, Apr 14, 08 @ 3:03 pm
Extinct republicans: These former republicans now classify themselves as independent to avoid being implicated or assoctaed with the Hardline GOP members.
Comment by Ghost Monday, Apr 14, 08 @ 3:09 pm
Senator Obama has identified a 6th group: Cling-ons, small town and rural Republicrats who go hunting before their church bowling league meets.
Comment by Punley Dieter Finn Monday, Apr 14, 08 @ 4:15 pm
Isn’t “true-blue republican” an oxymoron?
Comment by Bill Monday, Apr 14, 08 @ 5:52 pm
Bill- I thought Rush Limbaugh was the oxymoron.
Comment by Arthur Andersen Monday, Apr 14, 08 @ 6:18 pm
lol
Mel-O-Cream?
Comment by Bill Monday, Apr 14, 08 @ 6:27 pm
What the GOP is going through had to be done. We had to restore faith and rid th party of it’s Jim Thompson effect the blurring of the lines between the parties (Combine). If JBT had been elected nothing would have changed. After this disaster of an election cycle, when nither side recruted or backed a viable candidate for Senate I think people will see that to win there will have to be bridges built. The only announced candidate so far is Senator Brady and he is NOT the guy to do that.
Charlie is wrong about the Oberweis Governor campaign. People got angry only at Brady and only because he took enough votes to give JBT the win. Nobody cares if it was a setup or not, the point was he had zero chance of winning and he went after Oberweis not JBT in the last two months of the campaign. Brady’s campaign also told anyone who would listen that he had poll numbers that showed he was @32% and Oberweis was @18% when it was exactly the opposite.
Now is the time for someone who wants to be a candidate for Governor to do some outreach, take advantage of the losses and lead. Thats what the GOP needs is a leader!
Comment by RAI Monday, Apr 14, 08 @ 6:59 pm
Very astute analysis by Charlie.
Everyone can nitpick Charlie’s leadership on diagnosing the components of the cancer in the GOP. But thanks to him for thinking this out and having the courage to express it. Charlie knows well that you can’t be kicked in the behind unless you are out front, like he admirably is on this.
We need to shed and ignore the damaging groups. As Reagan said, “Lead, follow or get out of the way.” Let’s proceed with a bold platform that unites most Republicans and leave the vichy Republicans and the arsonits behind, with spine transplants for many others.
Republicans have been through a major once-in-a-hundred years forrest fire. But soon, up through the ashes will grow new and healthy leaders. Older GOP veterans need to make sure the arsonists don’t stamp on the new growth as soon as it sprouts. If so we have a chance for a comeback.
Just think, in the mid-1970’s this same doom and gloom pervaded the GOP nationally. There was serious, high level discussion of renaming the party. We had the ruins of Watergate, losing the presidency to Jimmy Carter with a 2 to 1 majority in both the House and Senate. Only 6 years after Watergate, Reagan became President and we took the first majority in the US Senate in 30 years.
Other examples of how things can change fast, is first, the GOP in IL won all statewide offices in 1994 with majorities in the both the IL House and Senate, and 8 years later the party was in shambles. This past December, McCain was at 7% and falling and ready to drop out and six weeks later he had the Republican nomination wrapped up.
Sooner or later, the Democrats and their anti-business spending, borrowing and taxing will hurt Illinois so bad that voters will turn back to Republicans. Both the Illinois economy and the IL GOP probably have not bottomed out yet, but we will be back.
With Blago and the Dems in the Gen Assembly, continuing to raid state pensions, underfund essential services, and mistreat state employees, AFCSME may well become a branch of the GOP in time.
I can’t wait for the next Dem Governor to inherit the mess of a contracting economy when all the neighboring states start growing again. Then have to deal with the huge state debt and pension obligations. Medicaid debt so bad few providers in the state accept Medicaid patients. Payments to nursing homes dragged out to a year or more behind (from being at least 9 months behind now), with some well managed nursing homes bankrupted due to late state payments and their patients dumped in the State’s lap. Payments to state vendors delayed more than a year and no one wanting to do business with the state. An educational system that will be on the brink. Crumbling infrastructure. Regular prison riots from an appalling lack of prison guards. State cars that won’t run or have been canibalized. On paper everyone having health care access but in reality few will because the State will be so late in paying bills, no provider will treat people that the State is supposed to pay for.
U of I Extension Service will be totally defunded and other similar quality of life services will be snuffed out.
In 4 to 6 years Illinois will start to get international press attention from the rot. By that time Dems will no longer be able to blame everything on old George Ryan. They will OWN Illinois’ problems lock, stock and barrell.
With those accute problems, the suburbs will come back for the GOP and the burgeoning black and latino middle class will see the GOP representing their values and offering real economic opportunity and the only way out of the morass.
The answer to dysfunction in government is the old tried and true two-party system and restoring the checks and balances that go with it. Sooner or later the corrupt outgrowths, deadweight and arsonits will be shed. We will be back.
Comment by Sage Monday, Apr 14, 08 @ 7:32 pm
The most dangerous group is the 2nd one. Consultants like Charlie that take big bucks for backing candidates that have the cash to pay them, but who can not connect with regular voters (McKenna and McSweeney for example). These millionaires do not build grassroot armies, they just buy TV ads that reward the same consultants with 15% on top of their monthly checks (Jack Ryan and Jim Oberweis have bought some cars and vacations for their consultants on the way to losing races).
Comment by Conservative GOP Monday, Apr 14, 08 @ 8:33 pm
I have been active in the Republican Party for over 40 years. I don’t claim to know it all, but have seen a few things. There are political tides/ trends that rise and fall on a national level. To a large extent, they effect states and trickle down to the local areas. There are many Democrats in power/ Office whom proudly label themselves as WATERGATE BABYS. They were able to win in marginal Republican areas. This Trend was local and national. Reagan’s Revolution energized Republicans and set the tone for many years. The State party was controlled by Thompson for decades and the infrastructure remained moderate in Illinois while conservatism gained a foot hold nationally. In the late 80’s the United Republican Fund was energized by Stephen Bayer, who raised thousands $ by bringing in Pat Robertson to do fund raisers. The party lashed out and won the right to reduce them to their new name “(URF). The 80’s were the hey-day for the religious right. While the religious right was taking over state Rep. Organizations nationally- the also had much success in the Bible Belt- over running many traditional Democratic strong holds. Illinois (Rep. Party) was determined not to let that happened here- even at the risk of losing Illinois in a national election. Conservatives, (esp. Religious right) were shunned. The state party’s response was “wadda ya gonna do? Vote for a Dem.”! So there is historically a lot of bad blood here between the party and what remains of the ideological right wing. There has also been a lot of bad blood amongst the right wing. Jack Roeser is the ten ton gorilla. His seemingly unlimited $ allowed him to make a big splash. When he ran for Governor, most (politically active) activist groups boycotted his efforts. Many even cut secret deals with then Governor Edgar’s crew.
Mr. Roeser seems bitter with the party and from my observations in the past beyond ever having a rapaproachmonde with the party.
So where are we today? I see a little of all the 5 arch types in both party’s. The state continues to go left, but some speculate that there may be a “once in a generation” chance” if things don’t go well with the current Gov. Frankly I don’t have much hope. My more moderate friends say that although Topinka was much more liberal than Steve Bayer or Al Salvie, they should have supported her over some one Gov. Blag. Many were offended by the dirty tricks used in the general election by those who lost in the primary. And also the lies and half truths. Most moderates actually do respect the religious rights moral stand, but feel that based on the last round, most leaders in the conservative movement lack values with their “Uber Over The Top- win at all cost” attitude. It’s ok to accuse him of being a lesbian and a straight woman who is having an affair with a male Chief of staff in commercials only a matter of days apart. My friends on the Conservative end say the party will never change because the leadership is controlled by the Uber Liberals- ERGO- If they haven’t even given us a seat at the back of the bus- what’s wrong with throwing rocks at the bus as it passes by.
I will let you draw your own conclusions- but end with a scene from Lawrence of Arabia- He tell Omar Sheriff that the Arabs (Ottoman Empire) could be a great nation, able to control their own destiny- but as long as it is a land of tribes warring against tribes- THEY WILL FOREVER BE JUST A LAND OF SMALL AND SILLY PEOPLE- A little more Ron Reagan and Abe Lincoln would serve both tribes well!
Comment by Big Bob Monday, Apr 14, 08 @ 8:50 pm
Louis is right about “The Once Tolerant Die Hards”, and I’m going to guess that he’s also right about them being the group to which Charlie refers as the “clueless” because they MAY be perceived as NOT “standing for something and meaning it”–as many of them are not social Conservatives.
I also believe that they’re the group that Thompson said are concerned about the US (emphasis added) economy, economic opportunities for themselves and their children, and the standing of the US in the world.
They’re the people we used to call Conservative Republicans decades ago before this whole “oh-why-can’t-we-get-along-and/or-make-a-boatload-of-money-by-distributing-our wealth-across-the-globe”, while we “focus on nothing but social issues during elections” mentality struck.
On a positive note, they’re still a big group that spans all generations of former and current Republicans. Even though they may have lost their way, I think they’re on their way back and have the best chance of re-uniting the party based on principles we all should be able to share, that being the strength of our Nation.
And as to whether the IL GOP will listen to them, I think that’s becoming less and less important as they’re beginning to see that they simply need to step up to the plate…period.
Comment by Anonymous Monday, Apr 14, 08 @ 8:54 pm
Here are the true mascots/representatives of each of Charlie Johnston’s types of Republicans:
Arsonists. Family Taxpayers Network of Carpentersville (Jack Roeser, Doug Ibendahl, John Biver).
Looters: Most political consultants, including Bob Kjellander, Rod McColluch, members of Urquhardt Media, etc.
Quislings: Kirk Dillard, along with Du Page County Board Chairman Robert Schillerstrom, Dan Cronin, and any other Du Pager who voted for the RTA bailout/tax increase.
Clueless: Andy McKenna, Jr., Illinois Republican Party leadership.
Diplomats of Doom/Scottish Lords: Tom Cross, Ray LaHood, anyone pushing for Jim Oberweis to drop-out of November election.
Comment by Captain Jack Harkness Tuesday, Apr 15, 08 @ 8:34 am
dear all,
first i salute charlie and steve schnorf for writing in their own names, and the others above who have done so. the anonymous postings are borderline grafitti, cowardly and suspect.
second — more on rick’s q — where is the category for the stout loyalists, downtrodden faithful, dispirited idealists or dispossesed gentility?
the gop primary voters, in whose name — ultimately — many of us do our respective jobs, are owed actual statutory parties (state, county, township, ward, etc.) — ones that physically do things, as in, fulfill their respective obligations under the election code.
it is not my experience that ‘all of the primary voters,’ so to speak, fit into charlie’s categories. i think he refers to the leadership echelon, which includes the party officials, elected officials, fundraisers, hangers-on, favor-seekers, consultants, etc.
frankly, as benighted as we all are, i don’t think that charlie’s categories, notwithstanding their facile and illustrative shorthand descriptions, fully describe gop activists.
but — while one may acknowledge some people magazine type of fascination with describing the original sin and sinners that hold us back — my tiny point here is that none of this gets us — or our jurisdiction, the state of illinois, anywhere good.
here is a reagan example:
not one of us has ever withstood the hateful and sneering condescension that rwr faced between his 1964 speech for barry goldwater and memorial day 1980. all of us should periodically dip a toe of historical interest into the pot of calumny stoked and stirred against he who is now seen as having — with LW, MT, JPII, etc. — saved western civilization from soviet communism and in doing so reviving our dispirited colossus.
and here i am referring ONLY to that abuse which came from fellow goppers. for purposes of this example, let’s keep the demo-liberal attacks aside.
in light of that history, which we all know, can any one of us who reads rich’s blog point to a moment, or a letter, or a speech, or a memorandum of conversation, or a diary entry in which president reagan, or for that matter candidate reagan or governor reagan before that, said, “lyn, let me tell you how i categorize the s.o.b.’s who are stabbing me in the back and thus forestalling my success in american statecraft…” ?
i do not think so.
my learning from reagan on this is — and i say it with repect for charlie — we need to use today to build for tomorrow. we could waste the next twenty days, or twenty weeks, or twenty years debating categores of republican failure in the past. it has been and remains a constant theme of those of us who are not in control since 1981, when i first became active in this thing.
but such does not pay our debt to the gop primary voters. nor, in fact, does it pay our debt to the state of illinois generally, which, as the compiled statutes say, requires of us a real political party. it will not help hold jerry’s seat. it will not get jim elected in november. it will not win house seats or senate seats. it does nothing to clean up cook county.
i say this having spoken and written on these toipics and i am sick of the whole debate!
what each one of us should do instead is make some choice today for a better republican party.
take a step today that puts our past behind us.
expiate whatever share of collective guilt for this train wreck you may have by standing up for something republican. support someone. help someone. build something.
one has to believe that with the voters as disgusted with rod, mike and emil as they apparently are we have some kind of shot at something.
for instance: call for rod to resign
dig up more dirt on barack to help mccain get elected.
encourage someone honest to run for something
send someone honest a campaign contribution.
some great oriental tradition has a saying: there are only two days to plant a tree, twnty years ago and today.
if we hope for any return of illinois republicanism ever we all better head out and do our own planting.
N O W.
best,
chris robling
Comment by chris robling Tuesday, Apr 15, 08 @ 11:11 am
Chris, excellent comment, as were many others. This list was not designed to cover everything in the party…just the elements which are doing us such devastating harm. Even as I wrote this I had planned a later article covering some of the groups that are doing genuine yeoman work that is truly productive next week. They don’t get as much attention as they should, but these are groups that are working to persuade people rather than club them, build coalitions rather than splinter up, and work to find common messages and do the hard, unglamorous work required. I did not intend this to be a snapshot of the party as a whole…rather as something of an ultrasound of where the tumors are.
Comment by Charlie Johnston Tuesday, Apr 15, 08 @ 1:20 pm
IL GOP winners have one thing in common. It is not being socially moderate, nor conservative. It is good-government. In the 60’s we in the Ogilvie-Kucharski-Robinson-Woods movement carefully crafted that image for the GOP. Whether deserved or not, the IL GOP kept the goo-goo image until George Ryan destroyed it.
Yes, we need to stand for low taxes and against wasteful spending. Yes, we need to stand for the constitution. But absolutely nothing will bring back the IL GOP except a return to the goo-goo image.
And it must be done the Ogilvie way … by kicking the “westside bloc” of our day out of the IL GOP.
The only other alternative would be a Ahnold like celebrity. But we don’t really have any. Erika Herold would be our strongest celebrity candidate. And even she is not well enough known to be a statewide candidate.
So the IL GOP must either imitate Ogilvie in going totally against corruption or be relegated to a slot between the Constitution and Libertarian parties.
Comment by spintreebob Tuesday, Apr 15, 08 @ 7:37 pm