Conservative Strife

"Do not use a hatchet to remove a fly from your friend's forehead."
- Chinese Proverb

A friend of mine sent me a message a while back lamenting the sometimes rancorous rhetoric among conservatives in this contentious primary season. I haven't replied yet, as I wanted to give some thought to it first, and I've decided to address those concerns here, because I believe this can be a helpful discussion for conservatives in general. I'll start with this:

The one true conservative in the race is Fred Thompson, but his campaign is struggling. Are we allowed to actually think and analyze WHY he is struggling? - No, that shows some kind of disloyalty. The only acceptable manta is "Fred Thompson for President."

Now do these same Fred Thompson supporters actually campaign for the guy in their home areas? I could be wrong, but I don't think I read of anyone saying that they have.

Have these passionate Fredheads financially contributed to Fred08? I doubt most of them have.

It would help if I could provide some context for this, but to do so would likely be a breach of confidence.

My friend has a point inasmuch as some of us Fredheads tend to get snippy when we hear/read the first part of the first paragraph above followed by but...because it smacks of the mantra of the DBM since nearly day one. Lazy, fire-in-the-belly, tired, lackluster-all BS. To criticize the efforts of the campaign, however, is fair; I think it's safe to say that all of us who truly hope to see Fred win the nomination are disappointed in that regard. (My friend at one point referred to the campaign's failure to make the primary ballot in Delaware, which is a fair criticism.)

I for one expected Fred to hit the ground running once he made it official, but in hindsight that wasn't a realistic expectation. It does take time to put together a national campaign organization, and under FEC rules Fred was strictly limited as to the extent that he could go about that prior to his official announcement. Keep in mind that at the dawn of '07 he had no plan to run for President; he had a TV role and a contract to do radio commentary. I don't know whether or not those two gigs paid better than $400k a year, but they were safe-and they almost certainly paid more than he needed to earn, at age 64, after a long, successful, eclectic career.

But I for one don't think it's 'disloyalty' to point out shortcomings in the campaign strategy of Team Fred. My thinking is, rather, that Fred and his campaign are learning from day to day. Also-for me, at least-my friend's second paragraph makes an even better point. Because of my work schedule and other factors, I myself can do little in terms of donating time to the campaign. As to the third paragraph, now that I'm in a better position to do so I will contribute financially. I would've done so already if it were possible to do a transfer from checking...I don't have a credit card.

So in other words you've got a group of folks that insist that others agree on this monolithic political orthodoxy but really aren't doing much to make it happen. They rather spend time talking to one another and policing others than actually trying to do something practical to make their stated goals a reality.

Things have reached a tipping point with me and this subject. What’s more frustrating to me than Fred's campaign are the nitwits...(who) say that they are supporting his campaign. They are so self-assured of their own "rightness" that they refuse to do any serious analysis themselves and are threatened when someone suggests they do.

Well, I'm more like Rush when it comes to groupthink and convention; I have precious little patience for it. If these guys believe what they say then they would be more serious about it than merely bashing Huckabee and saying to one another "Thompson for President." Thompson is losing and probably will be unsuccessful in his bid. That is the unpleasant reality at this moment. What Fred Thompson needs now are activists, not apologists.

My friend makes some good points here-the first and last sentences of the third paragraph in particular-but makes a few statements based on assumptions about us Fredheads. To this Fredhead, it's quite telling that none of his opponents on the GOP side can credibly criticize Fred on his record as a public servant-except in one instance: voting for McCain-Feingold. Certainly a considerable misjudgment on his part, and I believe he's acknowledged it to be such-rather than running away from it, perhaps doing a Hillary-like 'I voted for it to discourage corporate donations-I didn't mean for it to be enforced!' The DBM has nothing on Fred-no scorned exes, no other non-conservative votes, nothing! So they take his remarks out of context, miscast his record, invent 'stories' (the 'dropping out' rumor by politico) or ignore him outright. Huckabee has nothing-none of them do, except wise-cracks, which Huck seems especially fond of employing when substance fails him. He may well be a decent man-GW Bush is a good man, I believe, but he's wrong in some fundamental ways, and Huck isn't nearly as conservative as the man he hopes to replace.

At any rate...it would be unfair of me to reference facts which have emerged since I first received that message, except to point out that there have now been three states decided. At this point, Romney has 30 delegates, and Fred has 8. 47 states to go yet. Losing? Behind, yes, but hardly losing. To my friend I will say this...it is the untoward negativism that we Fredheads find frustrating, when this contest has barely begun. We have no delusions about the odds of success, either-Fred has an uphill battle here, no question. South Carolina may or may not change that.

What it comes down to is this, at least to me...this is the single most critical election in our history; the future of America as we know it and live it is in the balance come November 4. Fred is the one true conservative in the game, and as such he's the single best choice.