What Illinois Republican Party?

About a year and a half or so ago, I wrote a blog post about possible formation of a 3rd Party in Illinois. At the time, I was only agitating for some good policy on the part of the Republican Party, which I have more affinity with than the Democrats.

Little did I know how right I was.

First, last week's news gave us the stage-managed Andy McKenna Road Show, along with the revelation that McKenna himself donated to Democrats a few years ago. Today's news is even better.
Kirk Dillard is appearing in Iowa ads touting Barack Obama, while Paul Froelich is bolting the Republican Party for the Democrats.

Let me state right off the bat that there is nothing wrong per se with either of these three men engaging in acts that follow either their conscience or their politcal pragmatism. However, let them at least admit that none of them are following what one might call "republican principles." Whether they are rats or not, they certainly are deserting a sinking ship - and that ship is the Illinois Republican Party.

When talking to my radio audience, I've decided that the best thing to do is appeal to the best principles, and eschew the increasingly pointless party labels. Apparently some "party apparatchiks" feel differently. Some Illinois "republican" bloggers and have gone so far deleted my comments (agreeing with them, mind you) on their websites because I'm insufficiently doctrinaire in my "party loyalty." They may want to ask themselves why "republicans" are "deleting" themselves from the party instead of trying to enforce "loyalty" to an organization that deserves none.

Ladies and Gentlemen, the Republican Party may just be dead in Illinois. Make no mistake, the sentiments behind the party that went to war to end slavery is not dead. The sentiment that gave rise to Teddy Roosevelt's enlightend 'progressivism' is not dead. The sentiment that gave rise to fighting for citizen's rights over the rights of a privileged and insulated bureaucratic class is not dead. But who in Illinois Republican Party stands for these values. Who in today's Illinois Republican Party stands for ANY values at all?

If Andy McKenna had a pair, he'd drum Kirk Dillard out of the Party, and rebuild off of the few remaining decent people left in the IRP. Dillard is a coward of the highest proportions, holding on to a party label he cares nothing for while sucking up to an empty suit he thinks will get carried across the finish line by a faked media "love-fest." At least Froelich is honest enough to pay true obiescance to the people who have been electing him. (Paul, I hope that one day your fealty to Teacher's Unions is hung around your neck like a stone.)

____

Seriously folks!! Dump this party. Dump this label. Take it's deepest and best principles away from the low class apparatchiks that have been sullying them and start something new. If a new party isn't your flavor (it isn't really mine), then at least fight for a delegate seat in a convention that might disempower the corrupt in both "corporate parties."

In the 1850s, a ragtag anti-immigrant party destroyed itself, and took the declining Whigs with them. In the ensuing chaos, the Republican Party was born, and held sway over the nation for about 60 years. It's time for that to happen again. You can't fix this. Leave it and start anew, keeping faith with the Principles, not the party hacks who have destroyed a good name.

Comments

[Drew Veeneman]

3rd party's ehh... the Green Party is looking strong.

[Gary Karlin]

When is Topinka, Kjellander and the rest going to move over to the Democrats?

[Ralph Powell]

Bruno, thanks again for reminding us how right you were so long ago. NOT!

OK, I'll give you that you're about a third right. The Illinois Republican Party is dead. But so is the national GOP.

Republicans, Democrats, Greens, etc. all represent (surely you understand the concept) voters. If voters choose an idiot for public or party office, the voters are to blame. If you don't change the electorate, you will get the same result no matter what the party label. Establish a new "Constitutional Republic" party or whatever, and it's just a matter of time before you have the same problems afflicting the "conservative" GOP.

I couldn't agree with you more re partisanship. But not only irrational partisan loyalty needs to be examined. Partisan hate also needs to be ditched. And (gasp) this includes antipathy towards Republicans.

Last, it is not a culture of corruption that is killing the Republican brand label. It is the big elephant in the room that no one wants to talk about. Iraq.

War, the biggest government program, always carries with it government program baggage--unintended consequences, twenty times the cost, ruined lives, etc. And political realignment.

Face it, the war is the antithesis of everything conservative. Pro-life? Limited government? Shrink federal power? Bill of Rights? Congressional declaration of war? Ditch them all in wartime, especially this one.

You can rant about ideological purity, consistency, principles, RINOs, etc. It's all window dressing because of what we see on the national news.

[Bruno]

Drew,

For all we know,the Green Party is stronger than the Republicans right now. At the very least, the aren't covered in slime.

Ralph,

You make some good points, but I don't think ALL of this is due to Iraq, particularly in the case of Illinois.

[Louis G. Atsaves]

The refusal to be loyal to your party, in good times and in bad, is RINO behavior.

The end result of non-stop civil war within the GOP? People get tired of it and start walking away from the party. And when they walk away, the graffitti artists who destroy property criticize the property owners who get fed up and leave for greener and safer locales.

So keep on filing lawsuits against the party and picking on the scabs on the wounds while it tries to heal itself. If McKenna allowed questions from the floor (long winded diatribes, policy statements and speeches instead of questions) instead of making you think about them and writing them down, would Bruno and the gang would have been giddy with joy with the GOP?

No.

Charles Selle of the Waukegan News-Sun said it best last January when writing about the RALC v. GOP lawsuit. It showed who the true RINO's are.

[Bill Baar]

Froelich can now tell us who's side he's on among the Dems in Springfield. All those Dems who see no solution but an income tax hike and all too cowardly to ask for it.

Dillard can explain Obama's hijack of faith when it's really a liberal Church that's withered from within; siding with Hezboallah against Israel http://baarswestside.blogspot.com/2006/07/liberal-churches-slam-israel.html ; or Jim Wallis's demonizing Clinton's bipartisan welfare reform back in 1997 (who's divisive?)

What's happened to the Illinois GOP is uniquely it's own doing but all is not lost.

[Bruno]

Lou,

I'm sorry, but you are just wrong on this one. I'm going to be "loyal" to the candidate of any party that comes closest to my views on things.

Even in this awful state, that may turn out to be a Republican.

Look at your own behavior. Froelich and Dillard bolt for more power and prestige with Democrats, and you attack the RALC and people like me.

Blind party loyalty is not a good trait.

[Louis G. Atsaves]

Bruno,

Froelich and Dillard have been harshly criticized by so-called fellow GOP members for quite a while. I disagree with their actions. But let's keep this in perspective.

They are criticized by folks like you for no longer being loyal to the party and yet the same people critical of Froelich and Dillard criticize folks like me for remaining loyal to the party. You can't have it both ways. Blind loyalty or blind partisanship causes this bipolar type of behavior?

I don't think I'm the one who has to sit down and think things through here.

[Fran]

Voting based on issues and not party affiliation is admirable and idealistic, but our legislature's structure is based on majority party rule.

[Bill Baar]

Either McCain or Giuliai's campaigns offered Froelich a chance to wage a fight to reclaim a progressive GOP heritage along the lines of his earlier column. A heritage I don't think inconsistent with many issues dear to social conservatives either.

The problem with Illinois politics is its all about power to the extent when a party gets it, a lot of it as Dems have today; they don't have a clue what to do with it in terms of policy.

That's not going to last for ever and at some point the problems are going to demand some new ideas to solve things.

Right now the only idea the party in power has is a raw income tax hike and they lack the courage to come out for it.

If that's the kind of power Froelich admirers, well he should go join that pack... that won't last.

[Bruno]

Lou,

I'm not really criticizing you for 'loyalty?' What are your issues? Do you have ANY stands on ANY issues? If so, what are they? That a person has an "R" after their name. Is that a "policy?"

Do you ONLY vote for the candidate that "might win" (like Topinka ever stood a chance).

I specifically stated that I didn't think people like Dillard and Froelich shouldn't do what they think is politically expedient. They are politicians, after all.

But if they do NOTHING that I support, and support nearly everything that I disagree with, why should I vote for them?

Fran,

I've said it before, and will say it again. IF a pro-life, pro-education choice, anti/low-tax Democrat comes along, and offers an alternative to someone like your typical Suburban Republican (usually a drone from the Public Ed. Establishiment), they will have my vote.

Sorry. Here is the definition of "apsotate"

a·pos·tate –noun 1. a person who forsakes his religion, cause, party, etc.

Who deserted whom?

[PhilCollins]

Lou, there's no RALC vs. GOP lawsuit. I know about the lawsuit because I'm one of the plaintiffs. The RALC isn't a plaintiff. If the party doesn't want to be sued, all of the leaders should obey state laws.

[Lisa]

As a republican voter, I would feel that I had been deceived at the ballot box if my representative switched parties. Any reaction/feedback yet from voters in that township?

[Fran]

I understand your point, Bruno. Nevertheless, helping a conservative Democrat only strengthens the muscle of the Democrat liberal leadership.

We need to concentrate our efforts to electing good conservatives in one party, increasing their number and strength, which will push out the non-effective, wishy-washy leaders.

Our differences are political strategy, that's all. We're in full agreement as to the eventual goal.

[PhilCollins]

Lisa, I'd like to see the same feedback, from voters of Paul's district.

If those voters are mad at him, voters should be more mad at elected officials who are elected, as Republicans and vote as liberally as Democrats, including Reps. Mark Kirk and Judy Biggert. Paul is more honest, if he becomes as liberal as Democrats and announces that he's a Democrat. Mark and Judy are elected as Republicans and usually vote with Democrats.

[Bob Schmidt]

My loyalty is first to God, then Bible and its teachings, then Constitution, Delcaration of Independence, etc.

My loyalty to a political party or any politician ranks well below my loyalty to my used car salesman.

We make a mistake if we fail to understand the nature of political ogranizations. They are coalitions of convenience. Some low tax people are more low tax than others. Some pro-life people are more pro-life than others. etc. 51% of us agree on nothing.

In Illinois, pro-lifers, pro-2d amendment types, low tax types, education choice types, Motor-Cycle Helmet types, etc need an alliance of convenience. It we see that its nature is an alliance of convenience, and not an idol to be worshipped like God, then we can win.

As long as we focus on what divides us, and on how much more pure I am than you ... either becuae of my pure loyalty to party ... or my pure loyalty to issues ... then we will continue to lose.

We are like a suicide support group arguing over whether slitting our wrists or blowing our brains out is best.

Is it pro-life to commit suicide? .... political suicide?

[rightwinger]

"We are like a suicide support group arguing over whether slitting our wrists or blowing our brains out is best."

I prefer running the car in the garage option. Maybe sleeping pill OD.

[pete speer]

The formation of a new political party is successful when the dissenters from the old Party have issues (principles) which cross the lines of other existing political parties and cause a breakdown of discipline withing that (those) other politicial organization(s). The resulting defections may not have immediate political benefit for the new party.

Otherwise, as Bruno points out, the tent door on the other existing party opens wider and makes room for new voters.

Historically, the break up of the Whig Party and the formation of the Republican Party had much to do with certain economic issue and one practical moral issue -- the expansion of slavery into the states seeking admission to the Union. It was not, at the time, the abolition of slavery in all states, although many of the new republicans at the edge were working towards that goal. The basic 1856 platform did atract certain elements of the then Democrat Party.

The question for a new Party in Illinois is its ability to attract elements of similar size. It might be possible, but it depends, in my view, on the ability of some of the hard shell elements to accept compromise, as the abolitionists did in 1856.

Interestingly, there are two issues -- education and immigration -- which when properly framed might attract support from elements in the democrat party who are being shortchanged by their existing party.

The core principle underlying each issue is the lack of equal opportunity for the families stuck in the morass of the existing educational system and being pushed back in queue by the illegal aliens.

Over time, each issue can have a galvanizing effect on those who believe that re-enfranchisement in the Amrican dream is necessary.

But just as the nascent Republicans in 1856 did not achieve immediate success, so to will any new party have to work its way upward.

[NPS]

Part of the reason we are in this mess is by putting party over principle. Liberal Republicans (RINOs) have done far more to hurt our culture and values in this state than conservative Democrats have.

[PhilCollins]

NPS, who are the conservtive Democrats, in Illinois, to whom you referred? I can only think of one. Rep. Jerry Costello is a Democrat who is more conservative than Reps. Kirk and Biggert.

[Louis G. Atsaves]

Sorry for posting my responses so late folks, some of us had to work today! :-)

Bruno,

Don't sweat where I stand on issues. You will find my stance on issues to be remarkably similar to the stance the RALC takes. Where you and I part is I believe reform and rebuilding is accomplished from working within. If you dynamite the building/tent then it will rain on you some more. Fix the roof! Instead of fixing of the roof, you prefer to get rained on to give you a pretext to complain about being rained on.

Forming a third party is a cute idea. Third parties get slaughtered in elections all of the time. What I still can't get over is how many "conservative" republicans stampeded over to early vote for the Green Party candidate for Governor before discovering his Socialist background. Again, the GOP needs more practical realists in its ranks to try to keep all you lemmings from running over another cliff!

Phil,

All the plaintiffs to the RALC v. GOP suit are RALC members, including the RALC chairman. It is disingenuous to claim the RALC is not involved. I have not seen the RALC issue a press release disavowing the lawsuit. Your constant attacks on Mark Kirk is part of my general complaints here. Would you prefer to be represented by Dan Seals in Washington or Mark Kirk? If your answer is none of the above, then that makes you a RINO.

Party over Principle.

The Whigs disintigrated because they were no longer relevant to the American voters. How quickly they vanished in just a few short years is legendary.

I see nothing on the horizon to "replace" the GOP. If you guys want to continue blowing up what is left of the GOP, then go for it. Just don't complain when your "good work" is completed.

Right now folks, you need to put the party first and start working towards fixing it. If you like the current state of affairs, then don't!

[NPS]

Phil,

I wasn't just talking about Congressional members. But I would also add Congressman Dan Lipinski to the conservative D list.

In the General Assembly there are just about a dozen conservative House Dems, and another 6 conservative Senate Dems.

[Marriage Defender]

The Republican Party in Illinois needs to stand for Reagan Conservatism. Low taxes, strong national defense, smaller government, free markets, good fiscal management, rule of law, and social conservative values that help build stronger families that would help our country as a whole.

The party needs to shift it's focus from DuPage and Lake counties to faster growing counties like Will, Kendall, Kane, McHenry, and downstate where most of their base is.
Delegates should be based on number of votes are produced in General Elections not by population.

Illinois needs a straw poll for the Presidential race during Republican Day at the State Fair.

[Marriage Defender]

If they won't change send your money to individual candidates of any party that stand with you. Or the Constitution Party http://www.constitutionpartyillinois.org/ and http://www.constitutionparty.com/

[PhilCollins]

Lou, I didn't say that the RALC isn't involved in the lawsuit. I said that the lawsuit isn't between the RALC & the party.

Dan Seals and Mark Kirk are equally liberal, so it didn't matter who won that election. I want to be represented by a conservative. Kirk is a RINO. I'm not one. I agree with the principles of the republican platform, but he doesn't. He agrees with the democrat platform more often than he agrees with the republican platform. Three times, within the past five months, I e-mailed Kirk and asked why he's a Republican, but I haven't received a response. Why do you think someone who is pro-tax increases, pro-spending increases, pro-choice, pro-gun control, pro-illegal immigrant, and pro-gay marriage would be a Republican?