Diary

2 solutions, neither of which will work.

PATRICK Buchanan makes a good case for the Republicans picking up a lot of seats in Congress in 2010:

What is also evident is that, without its new superstar in the lineup, the Democratic Party is a second-division ball club. Harry Reid and Nancy Pelosi are not terribly formidable. Last fall, the Congress they ran had an approval rating below Vice President Cheney.

Why then is the Republican Party agonizing publicly over what it is supposed to do? If history is any guide, the pendulum will swing back in 2010.

I do not want this. Follow me here.

We are at an interesting and I think unique juncture, pregnant with possibilities not relevant in previous years. We have 2 major political parties – the only show in town – which have skewed way toward tyranny on the truly relevant scale: the level of authority of the Federal government.

An argument, internal to the Republican party and always resident, has made its way to the fore of discussion – taking up quite a bit of bandwidth. This is the argument put forth by social liberals & “moderates” (a euphemism for people who shouldn’t be voting until they can form a cogent position) that social conservatives within the Republican party are driving away potential voters with their strident views on social policy. I agree with this argument. I say this as a social conservative.

What I’d like to see is social conservatives leave the Republican party. Keep reading, please.

I would like to see social conservatives form their own party, as I would fiscal conservatives, social statists and fiscal statists. Then form coalitions as need be – even if on each and every vote. Get rid of seniority perks, and all the trappings of elitism.

The principal argument against this is that Democrats would capitalize on this schism by unifying even further. I’m afraid I don’t have a reasonable argument against this position at this point, though I am ruminating.

Another argument is these groupings exist within existing parties as caucuses. My argument is that these are helpful, but the existing structure encourages party members to vote the party line far more than consider the merits of legislation.

On second thought, this really won’t work, as it presumes too much from humans. “Family” of whatever stripe runs just too thick in the blood of humans for reason to override. In this case, amend the Constitution to set term limits at 1 for all elected positions and increase the House terms to 3 years. And if we do legalize human cloning, please clone Ron Paul at least 546 times. Beginning in about 25 years, things should settle down.