Time For Split In Republican Ranks

Republicans who prioritize national security above all other policies must place national security above party loyalty.

Since I served in Vietnam, I’ve been a national security Republican. That’s meant supporting the building of Republican majorities in order to have a more capable defense capacity, to use it when necessary, and not desert our pledged obligations to the freedom of allies.

Many of my domestic political positions are the centrist liberalism in which I was raised, and which provided opportunities up from poverty for which I am grateful to America’s caring and openness. That, to me, was worth fighting for then, and even moreso now that enemies of our way of life can and do launch attacks here.

Last year, I argued with conservatives that the Harriet Miers nomination was not sufficient cause to deny the president’s prerogative and weaken his presidency. Last year, I argued that some conservatives suffered “battle fatigue,” taking it out on the president. My priority was unity in order to retain Republican control of the Congress, so the Democrats could not again do what they promised in a repeat retreat from responsibilities in Iraq as they did in Vietnam.

Insularity and relaxation upon official comforts among Republican leaders, instead, contributed to the Democrat controlled Congress we now have that is following through on their plan to undermine the Iraq effort. Some Republican congressmen and senators – who Hugh Hewitt has aptly named “White Flag Republicans” – have joined with the Democrats. It matters not whether they have gone soft or are just playing to their local bleachers. The result is the same.

It’s not just me, but probably a majority of self-described Republicans and many other Americans place national security above all other policies. Being ill in bed this week, I exhausted my book pile. So, today I visited the used book store I’ve patronized for years in my beach town that is full of aging hippies. Aside from pleasantries, I’ve never had a serious discussion with the middle-aged proprietress. I’d presumed from appearances and other liberal comments she’d made that she was one of those aging hippies. Today she started a discussion, while I was looking at a WWII history book. “I heard you were in Vietnam. What do you think is similar now?” I replied that both presidents Johnson and Bush failed to follow tried and true military advice to apply overwhelming forces and deny the enemy sanctuaries, leading to enfeebled results, but other presidents made grave errors in our other wars. What was different in Vietnam and today is that those opposed to American values exploited public wariness and weariness so they could grasp political power for its privileges and for their own domestic Leftist agendas, and they placed that objective above national security. She teared up, saying she would find it difficult to again have confidence in Republicans, since she read that some are going along with such undermining.

Despite earlier errors, General Abrams and President Nixon succeeded in achieving victory in Vietnam, only to have it frittered away by Democrats cutting off promised aid and air support. In 1968, few would have predicted either the successful turnaround or its abandonment. Today, General Petreus may have such skill, and President Bush has the gumption to support him. Only, the Democrats and "White Flag Republicans" are determined to deny them, and Iraqis, the opportunity.

A number of conservative luminaries have started The Victory Caucus. This isn’t hard conservatives ranting about RINO’s, a posture which I personally think is both needlessly insulting and stupid. This is responsible figures who place national security above party.

So the House vote is over , and the Democrats have had their day and their defeatist, non-binding resolution. So what do we do now?

We begin organizing in earnest to ensure that in November 2008, voters will have a slate of strong candidates who believe in Victory.

This will be a long and serious effort, but it starts now. We have established a team within the site that will focus on identifying strong candidates -- veterans, ideally --- as well as teams devoted to identifying White Flag Republicans and their antimatter opposites, the Blue Dog Democrats. These three groups will be at the forefront of our efforts to identify the districts where we can do the most good: whether that is to replace a defeatist Democrat with a new Republican victory candidate --- or to help a Blue Dog Democrat who is strong on the war take down a White Flag Republican. Here, party comes second: victory --- and country --- come first.

If this sounds appealing to you, be sure to register, and then you can join the teams you feel you can best contribute to….

If national security is primary to you, you must register, now. American first.