Written by Audrie Zettick on November 13, 2008
As much as I prefer to stick to issues, it’s impossible to observe the attempts at “remaking” the Republican Party and not chime in.
Pre-election, I commented with disgust to close friends that I didn’t know what it meant to be Republican anymore. An old adage comes to mind: practice what you preach. For the most part, the GOP talked the talk but didn’t walk the walk of smaller government, personal responsibility, etc. A U.S. News and World Report pre-election article by Tom DeLay validated my feeling. It just didn’t resonate, in spite of all the “code” phrases (”liberals run amok,” smaller federal budget, and the like). Yes, I agreed with the issues raised in his article but still it didn’t resonate. Why? Except for a few “sound bite” phrases at the beginning of the article, it lacked meaningful focus. Also, the deliverer of the message–a Washington insider, ex-congressman with his own baggage–made me cynical about what I was reading.
As a college instructor of marketing, my first thought was: what the heck IS the Republican ”brand” anymore? If we knew that, then we’d know (we hope) how the party would respond given any particular issue: how they would select judges or respond to an economic crisis.
Michelle Malkin’s dislike of “rebranding” is justified, but a discussion about the damage the outgoing administration, Congress and others have done to the “brand” is valid.
RNC’s new “Republican for a Reason” is on target for creating an online engaged community, but NOT as a vehicle for “voting” for what comprises all things GOP. In marketing, the RNC online initiative would be classified as “promotion” or customer relationship building; to be successful, it must be built on their organization’s mission and objectives–their guiding light. Surely, other than the 2008 platform, there must be a mission statement or principles somewhere to guide Republicans. Surely the RNC would promote such principles.
In other words, buried.
While many within the GOP will continue to disagree where all the i’s are dotted and t’s are crossed, let’s haul out that list and see what we agree on. Apply them to current issues and begin the debate. Let me start: which applies to the financial bailout? 1) “I believe that the proper role of government is to provide for the people only those critical functions that cannot be performed by individuals or private organizations” or perhaps 2) “I believe free enterprise and encouraging individual initiative have brought this nation opportunity, economic growth and prosperity. ”
Or maybe we need to add some principles to the list. Here’s a start:
I believe no one is above the law and all elected and appointed officials have a duty to abide by local, state and federal laws and regulations.
I believe the best way to national prosperity and a free country is to stick to these principles and not rush like lemmings to the sea in an attempt to imitate democrats.
Just a thought.