[img]1640|right|Arthur Christopher Schaper||no_popup[/img]The Massachusetts Senate election yesterday, pitting longtime U.S. Rep. Edward Markey against newcomer Gabriel Gomez for the last 17 months of John Kerry’s term, attracted political heat, but voters were cool about the whole thing.
Mr. Markey breezed with a 10-point victory in a race never in doubt.
The heads-up between the two was lukewarm. Like most Democratic legislators in Massachusetts, Markey was predictably loose and embarrassingly liberal. At least retired Rep. Barney Frank was fragrantly offensive enough to institute massive banking rules before crossing the aisle occasionally so that internet gambling would face no further legal sanctions. Of course, a Congressman whose boyfriend allegedly was running a brothel out of the Congressman’s office can be pretty heated. Massachusetts is so blue that it is sad. To compete statewide, Republicans must attract not just independents but Democratic votes, too. A tall order, when you are running under a label differing from the person whose vote you are soliciting – not soliciting Barney Frank-style.
Liberal Republicans do not have to be a walking contradiction, just consistent whether they agree or not with the national platform. If they stay truly conservative on fiscal issues –low, fair tax rates, keeping the government out of your head and your home – Republicans should be a welcome branch of the family..
Two Sides of an Issue
You can be liberal and libertarian. Former Rep. Dennis Kucinich’s (D-OH) libertarian streak shined late in his career. The lifelong progressive decried Big Government, saying it was at the heart of our nation’s troubles. Liberals can be libertarian, too. Massachusetts state legislator Ryan Fattman stresses fiscal conservatism. He won office even though the voter rolls skew against him. Then there is the Republican former Sen. Scott Brown. He stayed on message with the fiscal issues in 2010 to win in a major upset. Once elected, he moved to the center on social issues.
Leave me alone/live and let live/libertarian – sounds like the perfect philosophy for the Republican party in the Northeast. To their credit, the Massachusetts GOP last year rejected aspects of the national GOP platform, and so should other states. On abortions, many conservatives believe it is not only tolerable but necessary in cases of rape and incest, not only when the mother’s life is in danger. The national GOP platform excludes those exceptions. They are not listening to the grassroots, the Tea Party affiliates, nor the concerns of conservative-leaning independents and libertarians. Many of them are alarmed by the aggressive growth of government at the expense of the individual, including the assault on religious liberties and time-honored traditions.
There are perils lurking for Republicans in an inherently liberal setting. Two examples illustrate the fallout for failing to follow through on one’s values you are seeking to be fiscally conservative, socially liberal. Former state senator Richard Tisei, an openly gay real estate agent, had a fighting chance against Democrat John (My Wife Is Corrupt, Not Me) Tierney last year in a Congressional race. Republican Tisei was not so different from the other guy. Pro-choice, pro-gay marriage, he supported tax increases. Where is the Live and Let Live in that? Mr. Tisei lost by one point. Had he been more clearly conservative on fiscal issues, would he have won? Perhaps. . .
The Gomez Dilemma
Then there is Gabriel Gomez of Cohasset, yesterday’s Republican loser. He won his party’s nomination because he clearly was more liberal than his two primary challengers. He was not just liberal on key issues. Ultimately, his liberalism muddied his conservative values. Mr. Gomez donated to Barack Obama’s Presidential campaign in 2008. In a letter to Deval Patrick, the Democratic governor, he even sought to be selected for the seat Mr. Kerry vacated last February when he was appointed Secretary of State. Mr. Gomez reminded the governor he was an Obama supporter. To muddy the waters, he backs the controversial Keystone XL pipeline. He maintains that climate change is a serious condition the government must address or else. Pro-life, he won’t touch Roe v. Wade. He favors gay marriage. How about getting government out of marriage altogether? He wants to maintain lower taxes, yet he supported a $10 minimum wage that would all but ensure higher unemployment. Where is the consistent fiscal conservatism? Mr. Gomez’s double-dealing – liberal while trying to appear conservative – was disconcerting.
It’s one thing to back a candidate, knowing where he stands. For a candidate who holds conflicting views, no voter can reconcile his vote without harboring heavy reservations. Mr. Gomez supported President Obama. How does he validate the (R) next to his name? His views on gun control were on target, but the fiscal issues still were cloudy.
Simply put, Mr. Gomez was not Republican enough on the Live and Let Live issues. The Northeast needs more of that brand of Republican.
Arthur Christopher Schaper is a writer on issues eternal and unchanging, timeless and timely. A life-long SoCal resident, Arthur lives in Torrance.
Twitter – @ArthurCSchaper
arthurschaper@hotmail.com
asheisministries.blogspot.com
