How many times have we heard those on the left describe the Republicans as the party of hate? Or the party of intolerance? Or maybe the party of the "angry white man"? It has become almost conventional wisdom on the left, and even among some independents, that the Republicans are the angry, hateful party while the Democrats are the well-meaning, kindly party.

But that description really makes no sense.

First, we need to look at what passes for "hatred" in this description. For example, when the Republicans opposed enhanced sentencing in so-called "hate crimes", this was often described as a sign of Republican hatred, the implication being that Republicans so hated minorities that they secretly relished seeing them killed. Of course, nothing could be farther from the truth. Speaking as one who opposed hate crime legislation, I can explain why, and why it had nothing to do with hating minorities. I opposed hate crime enhancements for two reasons. First, it should not matter if one committed murder because of racial hatred or hatred for just that individual, murder should be murder, regardless of whether it was inspired by race, religion, or just personal animosity. Second, I opposed it because it created special categories of protected individuals. In other words it would be worse for a white to kill a black than another white, or
 for a heterosexual to kill a homosexual than another heterosexual. That just made no sense to me then or now.

But that does highlight the way that the debate is twisted. When the Republicans oppose Democrat proposals, whether hate crime laws or increased hand outs, the Republicans are painted as "angry" or "hateful".

It shouldn't work. The Republicans should not let the Democrats set the terms of the debate. Instead of allowing themselves to be painted as stingy, hateful, angry men who oppose kindly Democrats, they should turn it around and paint the Democrats as patronizing snobs who think minorities can't succeed without a handout, who want to dole out voter money to buy votes and to keep minorities subjugated to the state. But, sadly, most elected Republicans cannot, as they have bought into the same big government welfare state ideals, and so they cannot really fight the Democrats. In their minds, they really are being hateful, because they should be doling out money the way the Democrats suggest. Which is what makes the modern Republican party such a wreck, a few proponents of reduced government and personal freedom are sunk in a mass of welfare statists whose position on any Democrat proposal seems to be "OK, but can we spend a little less?"

Which leaves it to the grass roots Republicans to fight the good fight. If our elected representative have bought into the welfare state, many of us have not. And it is up to us to say that asking people to support themselves is not hatred. We should explain that asking that we treat people with dignity rather than patronizingly hand them scraps in exchange for votes in November is not hatred. We should point out that a party that bases its appeal on class envy, racial animosity, the war between the sexes and the support of trial lawyers is hardly in a position to call anyone angry. And we should argue that trying to get the government out of everyone's way, so we can all make the best of our lot in life is hardly a position of "angry white males", it is a human position, of benefit to everyone. Well, except for professional activists, race baiters, trial lawyers, and politicians, the biggest beneficiaries of the Democrat's policies.

POSTSCRIPT

Having said all that, I am sure some of my long time readers are wondering how I can reconcile my generally negative view of the Republicans with my repeated calls to support the party and vote for McCain in Novembers. The answer is easy. The Republican party may be riddled with welfare state big government types, but there are still a number of limited government supporters among both the elected officials and the party membership. In fact, if anything, the membership is a bit right of the elected officials. On the other hand, the Democrats are entirely filled with big government welfare state types.

In other words, there is still some hope for the Republicans. Given time, and a lot of effort, the party can be moved back toward the limited government, free enterprise party it tried to become in the 1980's and early 1990's. The only other option is for the free market types to abandon the Republican party to the "me too" welfare statists. Doing so will leave America with only two big government parties for the decade or two or three it takes to form a third party.

As I don't think it will be easy to recover from several decades of nothing but big government officials, I think the third party option amounts to suicide. So, no matter how hard it may be, I am left thinking that the only realistic option is to start now on the long hard labor required to bring the Republican party back to where it should be. And the first step is to be a loyal Republican, which means supporting them, whether I agree or not with their current course. I will fight during the primaries, try to bring the party back to the right track, but, come the general election, I will be as loyal as I can. Any other course will mean having less influence in the party and having less chance to make it right once more.

It is not an easy position, and some seem to think it is the wrong approach, but for me I see no other option. At least none which do not do more harm than good.