Wednesday, May 12, 2010

A RINO? Never Heard That Before.

As the feedback from Connie's column today continues to roll in, which has been positive and productive from many, some still feel the need to throw names and labels out and question my devotion to the GOP.

I'll say this much; never in my life did I ever expect to be considered a RINO, a "fake conservative" as penned by one on's comment section.

While I heed the concerns of all, I'm not sure those criticisms are based in fact. Some have not truly gotten the chance to understand where I stand in the political realm. So, let's run down through some recent candidates I have supported/campaigned for/"endorsed", and then reflect on my political stances.

  • Given I didn't live during the administration, I still regard Ronald Reagan as the gold standard of political policy of this nation.
  • If I'm handpicking a presidential candidate in 2012, it's Marco Rubio. I'll be the first to admit I've got a small man-crush on the guy.
  • Need a VP? Indiana governor Mitch Daniels. Indiana's fiscal sucess can translate to the rest of the nation.
  • Indiana Senate Race? Try State Senator Marlin Stutzman, a true conservative loyal to Hoosiers. As little as one week ago, I looked at the head of the local Democratic party and admitted that I wasn't overly inclined to support Dan Coats--because of his lack of commitment to Hoosiers and a left-leaning voting record. I now realize, despite my disappointment, Coats still aligns with the majority of my views and feelings.
I urge you to research the views of those candidates, as I'm nearly in lockstep with those four in many situations. You can call this a saving-face if you'd like, but I can provide you Daniels campaign gear, Stutzman newsletters, and phone numbers of conservative campaigns throughout the state.

The Republican party doesn't need to abandon our true guidelines and morals, but we do likely need to expand our reach. Maybe I'm championing this idea, as I saw a great conservative, Carlos May, have absolutely no chance to win his congressional district due to the image of the party. May ran in the primary in Indiana's 7th--inner-city Indianapolis, where he was defeated by Marvin Scott (I still ponder how that happened). Perception is reality, and Republicans are perceived by many in these areas as uncaring and the "party of the rich." That must change. As I've called for, comprehensive private-sector health insurance for every American. Let's attempt to provide similar results our opponents provide through big government by providing these folks every opportunity to grap success and follow the American dream. Like said, I don't have those answers yet. When I do, I'll be running for office.

Some of my message was lost in translation. I'm focused on uniting this country with civil discourse and discussion. We're not all going to agree on every darned policy implemented in this country, but we can discuss the pros and cons of said arguments with fact and civility. I shouldn't be wary of entering the political sphere for fear that my children would be told at school, by others, that their father is a "bad man." My political opinions shouldn't affect the relationships of my children, or even myself. That's what I'm tired of seeing in this nation.

Good night, and God Bless.


  1. Kyle you sound like a well intentioned up and commer, but you need to choose your words more carefully. You used the words that you believe "health care is a right". No one in America is denied health care. The issue is the governments involvement in providing health care insurance. As you know conservatives care about people as much as liberals do. You need to look at the liberal programs and ask yourself whether or not they really help people long term. Dependency on your government is no way to live.

  2. I enjoyed the Connie Schultz column, so as a result I visited your site. First I am a fiscal conservative, social moderate and former Republican (40 years) who finally left the Rebublican Party when I woke up. Two comments I would like to make based on your post today. You need to study Ronald Regan more closely if you are indeed a fiscal conservative. He was a massive over spender. In fact, if you are as you say a fiscal conservative, you should not be a Republican because in my lifetime with the exception of Eisenhower, all Republicans have piled up greater National Debt than their Democratic counterparts, with Regan and Bush II as the most agregious. My second comment is regarding Marco Rubio. I live in Florida and as such have access to much of what he says and does. You might want to study him more closely before you attach yourself to his "star." He is really more of a male Sarah Palin than someone of substance, but you need to study him and reach your own conclusions. Connie's article spoke well of you, but your May 12 post above did not deliver the same tempered perspective that she promised. It left me confused because of the two issues as stated above. I do not think they co-exist in the same political arena with fiscally conservative and politically inclusive. So who are you really?

  3. kgould,

    I'm glad you enjoyed the column, and welcome to the site. I hope to have valuable, reasonable discussion with you and others long into the future.

    I'm aware of the failure of the Reagan administration to combat the increase in public debt, but the climate of the nation was much different than that we have today. I won't deny the GOP's failure to limit spending in past terms, but much of that has been defense spending, which is another topic for another day. However, I still believe in the four pillars of Reagonomics.

    1. Reduce government spending.
    2. Reduce income and capital gains marginal tax rates.
    3. Reduce government regulation of the economy.
    4. Control the money supply to reduce inflation.

    My biggest fiscal sticking point comes with progressive tax policy. I was a strong supporter of Mike Huckabee's Fair Tax plan, and Reagan pursued change in the progressive tax plans of this nation. That's where I'm coming from.

    To your second point, I have done extensive research on Marco, and I've been impressed. We're very much alike, and you and I will have to agree to disagree on his substantiveness.

    Having said that, it's unlikely don't agree on every single item with any candidate. We are a nation of compromise, and our nation is much the same. PolitiFact has an interesting look at Marco's "change of heart" on the Arizona immigration laws. I'll place the link at the bottom. Statements like this I don't fully agree with, and require further examination and pondering.

    That's why I claim to be "politically inclusive." I'm willing to question my own beliefs and hold valuable, respectful conversation to promote understanding in democracy for a healthier state. Just because I hold right-of-center beliefs doesn't make me unwilling to work with those on the other side of the aisle to reach the best conclusions for our nation. (Wow, that sounded like campaign material.)

    "Who am I really," you ask? I am a person that holds certain viewpoints on how our nation should be run, but I realize that I'm not always right--and the right isn't always right. We can learn from others, work with others. This is a society of compromise. It's unrealistic that a single party can enact every single reform they'd like to see in society, but we can work with those from the "dark side" to achieve the best result for the largest majority of Americans.

    My point to make in my discussion with Connie wasn't about policy--I'm a 19-year-old college kid, I don't have all the answers. I have opinions and ideas, not foolproof answers. There's no speechwriter behind me, no thinktank ready to provide me with talking points. It's all off-the-cuff and from the heart.

    My sitting down with Connie was about returning unity, respect, and civil discussion to this great nation.

    Thanks for your input, and I look forward to more conversation in the future.

    God bless,


  4. I've decided to follow your blog because of Connie's mention. I've been reading her for years, so the mention was sorta like a friend telling me this is an interesting book, you ought to read it.
    I do the occasional book review on (The Doormouse Reader)- it's OMG, they let anybody do this, don't they!
    When I was your age the lies and deceit of Richard Nixon soured me so much to the political process that I ceased voting and became apolitical and more than a tad cynical.
    Local politics got me back into voting (a family friend was running for the school board, which was badly in need of reform), so I've gradually become a little more active in politics.
    I wish you great luck.

  5. I replied to Connie Schultz's immigration reform editorial and didn't receive a response from her.