What should we look for?

You are probably a friend of the family or a Republican if you are reading this blog. My deepest hope is that this series of essays starts a wider circulation and I can shape public opinion. But I will save those fevered dreams for my less modest moments. I said that I would discuss the qualities needed in a new conservative Senator from Texas. Make no mistake, I do not want a liberal Republican representing our state. To borrow a phrase from a former President, we do not want pastels. We need bold colors in the august chamber of the Senate.
I stated in a former post that we do not need to send politicians to the Senate. We must send leaders. The collegial atmosphere of the Senate is an invitation to sell one's ideals at an incremental rate. Unlike the volatile House, the Senate serves as a cooling dish to the heated rhetoric that typically escalates between the parties. If the senator is not on close guard, that genial style will be mistaken for bipartisanship, and compromise on core values will soon follow. We must send someone who knows what the typical constituent goes through on a daily basis. The Framers decided on a representative democracy, and we have forgotten the "representative" part. It is not just enough to speak on behalf of those they represent, they must also have been OF their constituency. How many millionaires can you count in the Senate? How long has it been since they have had a job other than the Senate? How many were House members or state legislators before? I do not mean to engage is class warfare, but why are wealthy government officials lecturing you on what "regular" Americans want?
The quality of the leader means nothing if that leader does not have good moral character. Living a good life and doing the right thing goes a long way in proving to people that they can ultimately trust you with their money and the lives of their children. And make no mistake about how much the Congress controls your life. They are constitutionally empowered to levy taxes and declare war. And in case you haven't seen the news lately, the Congress is now legislating morality. From taxes on cigarettes to welfare payments for the never-employed, they are spending your money according to their values. Do you want a senator that drives drunk, doesn't pay taxes, cheats on his wife? These are very important questions that should play a large factor in your selection.
I would also encourage you to vote for a candidate who has put service above self. One of the disappointing aspects of most of our representatives is that they have never served in the armed forces of the United States. I want you to think hard about the leadership and the moral character of those who have not served. They are the ones that are making the decisions that affect the men and women in the armed forces on a daily basis. And if our profession is so noble and our service so critical, why have they not chosen to serve? Do some research on the candidates. Did the candidate finish college, go to graduate school, and then immediately run for office? Or did the candidate first choose to serve the United States to become a more well-rounded citizen? I am not arguing that military service should be the defining character of a good candidate, but I do think that each candidate should explain why they chose not to serve.
Our senator must also have the ability to decide, communicate, and act. One hundred men and women are primarily responsible for all the legislation. Yes, the House does a lot of drafting, but the Senate gives the go-ahead to every bill. If our next senator cannot be decisive (and have the will to stand athwart the spending spree and yell "STOP") then we will have made a mistake. Our next senator must also have the ability to clearly articulate to us why the decision was made. It is not enough to read some boilerplate statement or to say "trust me." We must be looked in the eye and convinced that each choice was made to the betterment of the Republic and the people of Texas. That senator must also act to protect the liberty and freedom of the people. Those acts might not always be positive, and a spine of steel would be a welcome relief to me, at least.
Finally, our new senator must be anchored in the conservative ideology. I will spend more time in a following post arguing why this is a good thing, but I will leave you with this. I have heard a lot about the benefits of pragmatism in the last few weeks. Pundits say that people do not worry about ideology, but what works. I say this is dangerous. Fascism "worked." National Socialism (ie Nazi) "worked." These pragmatic approaches to government proved very effective in some instances. But in fact they were also fantastically destructive to life and liberty. We should not be ashamed to elect someone who is dedicated to limiting the federal government, maximizing personal liberty and individual rights, and protecting the lives of all citizens.
If you like what you are reading, send it to a friend. If you really like what you are reading, send it to the county GOP. Demand a good candidate, you deserve no less.

Growing Maturity

For those of you reading the whole blog, I ask you to look for my arguments to mature. It has been several years since I wrote anything, and I think you will be pleased with the change of perspective.

A great opportunity

The citizens of Texas can seize a grand opportunity in the following year. The gubernatorial ambitions of Senator Kay Bailey Hutchinson will open the possibility to install a new senator in Washington that could have immediate and long lasting impact on your daily lives. If you have any doubt about the old maxim that "elections have consequences," then you have no further to look than the $800 billion legislative bill that is about to be enacted into law. The momentum of the Republican party began to slide during the 2006 election cycle, and the momentum swung to the Democratic side during 2008. The next few years will prove to be crucial, and you must be completely aware of the character and voting preferences of the (possible) next representative in the senior house of Congress. I am writing a series of essays to make my case that the time has come for some revolutionary thinking when picking your next Senator.
I cannot begin to describe how important this possible senatorial election will be. The democratic party currently has a 59 vote majority caucus in the Senate. As you have seen, they are able to persuade certain republican senators to cross party lines and vote with them to enable a cloture vote. Some of you reading this piece may think that 59 is close enough to 60, so why bother? The answer is that to legislate is to compromise, and to compromise is to persuade. Like it or not, the majority party persuaded enough minority votes to enable the passage of an enormous bill. If the next senator from Texas decides to caucus with the current majority, then the majority will have 60 guaranteed votes. This will mean that every bill sponsored by the majority will be able to pass with no real opposition. Most of you will remember the news of the last several years (while the democrats were in the minority) filled with the minority party slowing, and even stopping, the passage of legislation and presidential appointments. When I was young and naive, I thought that the minority was blocking what the people wanted. As I have grown wiser, I understand that it is the responsibility of the majority to legislate, but to also consider the arguments of the minority. With a majority caucus of 60 in the Senate, the minority will not have the ability to debate, slow, and possibly filibuster legislation. It is critical that Texas not be the final vote to enable every cloture for the next several years.
The first question is, how do we slow the momentum of the democratic party? We must field a candidate that can defeat the current advantage of the democratic party. Although Texas was still red after the 2008 presidential election, it could possibly slip to a very deep purple if we do not field an exciting candidate for the special election. We must also not forget that the winner of this special election will be an incumbent in 2012. Barring a complete reformation of the Congress in 2010 during the mid-term elections, the Senate will really be in play at the same time as the presidential election. We must also retake the "change" theme from the democrats. This is best done with a certain amount of political judo. If change does not come from Washington, but to Washington, then perhaps we should strive to look outside of the traditional candidates. Republican party members will complain about a lack of experience of a fresh candidate. But the senate is not the executive branch; it is legislating and not governing. The Framers of the Constitution thought that a person that had reached 30 years had enough judgment to be a senator. Why do republicans and conservatives artificially confuse age with reliability and judgment?
Hopefully you agree with what I have written. I will be writing more in the coming weeks on other topics. Other themes that I will be addressing include: qualities you should look for in your next senator, being wary of pragmatism and embracing "evil" ideology, the compatibility of conservative ideology with populist results, hero worship of public servants as antithetical to the democratic republic, federal spending, and the necessary pain of paying taxes. Thanks for your time and consideration.