I finished Newt Gingrich's To Save America: Stopping Obama's Secular-Socialist Machine. In this post, I'd like to highlight something that Newt says on page 316:
Tea Party movement "is not a movement of any one party. While the
recent GOP victories are good for the movement, success will also
require moderate, small-government Democrats to beat the
secular-socialist machine's candidates in Democratic districts."
quote stood out to me because it reminded me of a time when I was
reading about Christian Coalition people who were making inroads into
the Democratic Party. The Democratic Party! Sure, you'd expect for all
of them to be Republicans, but that's not the case. A few are
Democrats. My question is this: Is there a difference between your
typical Christian Coalition person who is a Democrat, and your typical
Christian Coalition person who is a Republican?
I'm curious as to
what Newt means by "moderate, small-government Democrats". There are
Democrats who are deficit-hawks, such as Leon Panetta and (I think) the
Democratic Leadership Council. Bill Clinton governed as a
deficit-hawk. My impression (and I am open to correction) is that these
types of Democrats are not adverse to raising taxes, for that's what
supposedly keeps the deficit from spiraling out of control. And the Tea
Party doesn't care for raising taxes!
But then there are
Democrats who (ideology-wise) are practically Republicans. In
Massachusetts, a left-leaning lady once told me that politicians in
parts of Massachusetts could not be elected as Republicans, and so they
ran as Democrats. But they govern as Republicans in the sense that they
cut programs for the needy.
I'm the sort of person who would like
for the government to help people and to make a positive difference,
but to do so in a fiscally-responsible way. What I wonder is this: Do
the deficit-hawk Democrats fit the bill? Bill Clinton had his critics
from the Left, and so there was a feeling that his deficit-hawk,
end-of-big-government ways hurt the needy. But did these critics from
the Left have their own program for fiscal responsibility? Maybe tax
the rich and end foreign wars, but how politically feasible is that?