City Journal Winter 2016

Current Issue:

Winter 2016
Table of Contents
Tablet Editions
Click to visit City Journal California

Readers’ Comments

Tevi Troy
A Twenty-First-Century GOP « Back to Story

View Comments (57)

Add New Comment:

To send your message, please enter the words you see in the distorted image below, in order and separated by a space, and click "Submit." If you cannot read the words below, please click here to receive a new challenge.

Comments will appear online. Please do not submit comments containing advertising or obscene language. Comments containing certain content, such as URLs, may not appear online until they have been reviewed by a moderator.

Showing 57 Comment(s) Subscribe by RSS
Any one who justifies supporting the imposition of all the failed Marxist/socialist policies of the past and statist/collectivist bases for governing because they don’t want to be identified with social conservatives is hopeless. Claiming economic conservatism of libertarianism but social liberalism and letting the latter trump the other two demonstrates a failure understand the supreme morality of capitalism, and the inextricable connection between social and economic conservatism, or individual liberty.
Fleet Management
There is one glaring omission in this article. If the republicans want to re-franchise the educated then climate change denial needs to be abandoned. The republican attack on science is offensive to those who value scientific data in order to properly assess risk. This same strategy of denial of scientific data was used for decades to obfuscate the link between tobacco and cancer. That position is now seen in hindsight as wrong and immoral. Anthropogenic climate change needs to be accepted by the republicans but refocus the debate on what is a realistic free enterprise solution. Until that happens, republicans will not see the highly educated rejoin
I hate to belabor the obvious, but until the GOP is wrested from the hands of the anti-gay marriage, anti-abortion hayseeds, educated voters will still disdain the Republicans in droves.
Dear Mr. Troy,
your ambition of a "broad church" of classical liberal technophiles and the "evangelical base" is, I suspect, impracticable. The voters whom you hope to win to the Republican party are, by and large, unlikely to be won over by a doctrine which supports a state less intrusive in the commercial sphere which nevertheless asserts the justness of intrusion into other private matters.
The academic classes, whatever their views on the moral issues which drive socially conservative politicians to accesses of passion, generally believe that these issues are of conscience, and not fit subjects of policy. Equally, many feel that abortion, gun rights, illegal immigration, and gay marriage are not matters of the most immediate importance in the present circumstances, and would be reluctant to support the GOP's more doctrinaire candidates who allow these issues to dominate public discourse at the expense of what they see are more pressing challenges facing the nation.
The antipathy that many of these voters feel toward economically illiberal elements of Democratic policy is often not as strong as that which they feel towards the (numerically speaking more significant) socially illiberal elements of Republican policy.
If you examine right-wing parties in other countries whose constituents are made up of similar "alliances" of classical liberalism and social conservatism (e.g. the U.K., Canada, and Australia), I believe you will find that the two factions often have difficulty in reaching consensus or compromise, and tend to be dominated by either one or the other at any given time. In the U.S.A., I suspect that the wider gulf between the two putative wings of this future GOP occasioned by the relatively "harder" brand of social conservatism espoused in the GOP and by its evangelical base, together with the likelihood of its greater strength within a catholic right-wing entity, would make such a union seem a losing proposition to classical liberal voters.
S. Maiyah
Taxes are lower now than under Bush, the deficit is lower now than under Bush, there are more jobs being created now than under Bush, and the stock market has skyrocketed after flatlining during the Bush years.
I'm not sure the faculty lounges are salvageable. They've become leftist echo-chambers, and feast off of BigGov and the cottage industries (global warming anyone?)they can create through grants, etc.

Funny, I live in an extremely affluent area chock full of doctors (wait until Obamacare kicks in, they'll be flocking back to Team Elephant in droves), high-tech workers, and other "achievers." And guess what, the county votes about 80-85% Republican. So, it's likely the self-anointed elites that are voting democrat are leftist ideologues anyway - all the posturing and indignation about the religious right and elitist-haters is a smokescreen.

And, there's nothing wrong with middle-America getting a little put-off about the advance degreed set in America. Look at Obama and his crew of Ivy League minions: They can't walk and chew gum, but they read a book and wrote a report about it one time.
That should be that many Republicans want to limit LEGAL immigration. (Although I am sure they want to dramatically limit illegal immigration as well.)
1. Too many Republicans are anti-immigration, not just anti illegal immigration. Not only do they want to secure the border, but they want to limit illegal immigration as well. Immigrants and those from immigrant families simply do not feel welcome in the GOP.

2. As the Republicans have become more reliant on the votes of white evangelicals (thanks, Karl Rove) they have had to incorporate more positions that are not offensive to this base. The problem is that these views are completely incompatible with the views of the well-educated, well compensated elites. For example, the religious right may believe that God created the world in one week, but to a scientist anyone who believes this is unfit to govern and anyone who would want to teach this to their children is dangerous.

3. What Karl Rove intended as a cynical political strategy has taken over the GOP. The inmates are now running the asylum. "Ignorant and proud of it" might as well be the new motto of the Republican Party. Sarah Palin was an easy target for the left for a reason. The fact that so many Republicans don't understand why shows how much trouble they will have winning this demographic.

I live in an area with lots of these well-educated elites, and I have lived in the buckle of the bible-belt. The problem is that the GOP needs both groups to win, but the more they cater to one, the more they lose the other.
@Lin B:
Not anti-science, just prolife.
Not anti-immigration, proleagel immigration Not anti-equality, pro-fairness (no special treatment for anyone)
Absolutely ProAmerican. If you don't love and think this is the greatest country on the planet, leave!
Where are the CJ articles criticizing the "dumb and proud of it" pols like Palin/Beck? Hard to take this article too seriously without some recognition of these elements of the GOP. Most people vote for someone they perceive to be "like them", platforms be damned (the elected can't enact them anyway), and educated tech-savvy people on the coast know that these morons on Fox, who think the Bible literally happened, aren't "like them", and so avoid the GOP.
As long as Repubs show contempt for education, expertise, even the hard work that went into acquiring degrees/credentials, they will have trouble luring tech-savvy, educated voters.

It's bad enough that prominent Repubs tout their sci-tech ignorance (which includes an inability to educate themselves) as a badge of honor. But even the ones who have serious academic credentials are forced to pander to morons. Calling evolution a "theory" means it's just some scientist's wild-assed guess?

Advanced degrees/expertise have to be earned. They take time and require effort. People who have degrees/expertise usually define themselves around them. If the Repubs want to lure educated voters, they can't so casually dismiss what these voters consider the most important dimension of their lives.
Many of the commenters here offer that oh-so practical advice that the Republicans move to the middle to attract the "independents"(largely democrats who want to seem above it all). And how did that move to the middle with McCain work out last election cycle.

And, it seems, in order to garner these "independents" the party must accept Global Warming, er, Climate Change as gospel (you know you have a losing proposition when you have to re-brand something midstream), and an endless supply of illegal immigrants. Two subjects that are complete losers with the electorate outside of the "independents"...or at least those claiming independence at this site.

Quit worrying about the scary, evil religious right: they make up roughly 40% of the party. And let's face it, religious fundamentalists with their "because God says so" beliefs are no different than the huge chunk of the American leftist fundamentalists who implore you with their collectivist/government uber alles theology of "for the common good."

If the democrats are so "pro-education" why do they constantly fight Republican attempts to better education by allowing school choice. That's right, school union dollars are more important than educating children at the end of the day.
Take heart, I may not be well compensated but I am well educated AND experienced enough to see that the policies of the Democrats are killing innovation and the economy of this country. As someone who has retooled himself, started a new business and now produces iPhone applications instead of construction projects, I am looking forward to a Republican controlled Congress this year and a Republican in the White House in 2012.
To Chris:
>> unless I stopped hearing the anti-science, anti-immigration, anti-equality, arrogant American exceptionalism rhetoric I hear from the right

Sorry about your blinders.
These are all interesting points. I also think that having high-profile Republican officeholders from the tech world,such as Carly Fiorina, or people who can speak 'financial' such as Rob Portman, will boost the party image in those sectors.
The main reasons the educated classes have shifted away from the republican party are as follows. (1) Somehow the party decided that educated classes do not belong in the party. Theses "elites" do not represent American views so it goes. Why would an educated person vote for someone who doesn't value, in fact abhorres education? (2) The republican party has shifted away from science to a religious-based fairyland. How can a scientist or educated person align with a party where the majority of its presidential candidates believe the earth is 6600 years old? The party is now completed beholden to its theocratic elements. Until this changes, the educated classes will continue to favor the other side.
FreeMarketHypocrisy September 19, 2010 at 1:12 PM
What about skilled immigrant visas for doctors, lawyers, civil servants, and bankers?

The 'free market' types, like this author, will rig the labor market in favor of big business at any opportunity. Is government choosing the winners and losers your definition of 'freedom'?
Free trade has nothing to do with getting back the educated or high tech. I would substitute this in its place. Argue your points of view from an academic point of view - minus the liberalism - Lay it out logically, and not emotionally. They will come in droves.
I have long been puzzled by the movement of well-educated scientists, doctors and entrepreneurs away from the only party that has traditionally supported both free enterprise and US technological strength. Let's just say that these people are not immune to general demographic trends and the steady anti-Bush, anti-GOP drumbeat of the media for 8 years, and also that Republicans have done a particularly poor job of either defending their policies or nominating solid attractive candidates for hundreds of state and local offices.

But look now what Obama and the democrats have done. Beholden to public service unions like SEIU, they have opposed school choice and any reform of our disgracefully inadequate education system. The next generation looks woefully unprepared for the stiff economic competition the US will face in the 21st century. In California, as in other states, their ruinous fiscal policies are now threatening to shortchange higher education at such liberal bastions as Berkeley. They continue to bash Wall Street and small business entrepreneurs alike with redistributionist rhetoric and thousands of new regulations and mandates. They have passed a complex and ill-considered health care bill that will limit the options for patients but which will be particularly onerous on doctors in private practice, perhaps driving them out of operation entirely. And let's not forget the transformation of NASA from a bold scientific mission of exploring the cosmos to a social outreach program for the Muslim world.

Mr. Troy is right that well-educated professional people like doctors, scientists, engineers, and entrepreneurs are disenchanted now with the democrats and winnable back to the GOP. Many scientists are rightfully worried about the politicization of science (such as in global warming) and the shortchanging of individual basic research at the expense of top-down government directed diktats, based on politics not scientific merit.

It will take consistent and clear policies, of the kind outlined in this article intelligently espoused by principled and credible candidates in a reformed and renewed Republican Party to do this.
As an entrepreneur myself in the high tech field, I have been wondering when a political party would wake up to the power that we bring to the economy and to our country as a whole. How much net new employment has been created by our industry in the form of Microsoft, Apple, Red Hat, VMware, and the thousands of businesses that leverage the success of those companies.

VMware just did a study and found that for each dollar of their revenue another $20 of revenue gets created in its ecosystem of partners and service providers.

This is the kind of leveraged job creation that has been the foundation of our greatness as the best economy in the world, and that Obama/Pelosi/Reid are hell bend upon destroying.

Distributing wealth is not the same thing as creating wealth. The party that figures out how to implement policies that create wealth will be the winning party for the next 20 years.

The Democrats are more interesting in re-slicing the pie than growing it.

The Republicans had historically been more interested in getting money from big business than from helping new businesses to grow.

Whoever steps up to the plate and helps the most important sector in the economy help the entire country will win. The question is who will take off their blinders first.
While I do agree with most of the proposals you put forth here, I still couldn't see myself voting Republican unless I stopped hearing the anti-science, anti-immigration, anti-equality, arrogant American exceptionalism rhetoric I hear from the right. I doubt there would be much of a party left if everything I disagreed with were rooted out of the party. There is just too much else wrong with the Republican party these days that adding a few good ideas on top of countless bad ones won't make any difference in the way I vote.
Forgot one thing:

With respect to my last comment, highly intelligent, non-corrupt voters should support small-government candidates, whether they completed 2 PhD's at Princeton ... or dropped out of kindergarden. All that matters is the size of the public sector....
I would suggest a slightly different explanation for the "highly educated" not being Republicans:

But first, let's change the discussion from the "highly educated" (degreed) group to the "highly intelligent."

And let's base the definition of "highly intelligent" on the ability to grasp the EMPIRICAL FACT that there is a demonstrable, direct negative correlation between the size of government and economic growth -- whether comparing between countries or within this country, over time. The primary mechanism responsible for this inverse correlation is the reduction in high-multiplier private investment -- the key to future growth.

So I submit, if one is "highly educated" and an advocate of big government, either:

1. They are NOT, in fact, highly intelligent


2. They are crassly dependent on government largesse to fund their position in academia -- aka a sell-out

It is an illusion to believe that science or intelligence adheres to a polical party. Peer and political pressure has clouded objective analysis of raw data. Myopic bubbles exists in the east and west coast big cities.
Spot on! Great article.

Making America the best place in the world to do business will both draw these groups back to the GOP and create the jobs needed in by blue collar workers to cement the majority.

As a life-long member of the so-called “scientific community,” I have many reasons that I do not self-identify with Republicans. On the other hand, during this time I have been consistently nauseated by my peers. They are for the most part just as brainwashed by the Marxist propaganda they were fed in school as the less mathematically proficient.

Yes, they understand the scientific method of thinking, but many lack the logical and critical thinking skills to escape their Marxist worldview to the point it compromises their ability to do science. Many haven’t studied the classics or religion. They don’t understand the concept of God, of reason as a gift from God, of the nonsense of the human mind as superior, as science as an explanation of everything. They reject faith as an intellectual exercise, every bit as valid as scientific pursuits.

Any one who justifies supporting the imposition of all the failed Marxist/socialist policies of the past and statist/collectivist bases for governing because they don’t want to be identified with social conservatives is hopeless. Claiming economic conservatism of libertarianism but social liberalism and letting the latter trump the other two demonstrates a failure understand the supreme morality of capitalism, and the inextricable connection between social and economic conservatism, or individual liberty.

Man-made global climate change and embryonic stem cell research are just two high profile topics where the limitations imposed by these shortcomings reveal themselves. Sadly, I can site many of the comments here as evidence, the authors of which will quickly employ their well-learned skills of fallacy to attack us.

The Republican Party is in trouble not because they cannot attract these self-aggrandized technicians. They’re in trouble because as a party, they‘re no different than their competition on the left. Team Elephant just wears uniforms different from Team Donkey. Their world view and policy differences are too small to even matter, especially of they are to be cast as better solutions to the country’s ills. More and more people are just on to the “Yankees vs. Red Sox” BS. Neither team offers effective solutions.

I am looking for defenders of the constitution; defenders of individual ordered liberty; defenders of our God given rights to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.

I’m looking for people who understand government’s role in our society to secure these things from attack, not to provide them.

I’m looking for people who want to phase-out Social Security and Medicare.

I’m looking for people who want to reduce our military commitments around the globe.

I’m looking for people who want to abolish the Federal Reserve and our fiat currency.

I’m looking for people who want to rebalance the power of the Supreme Court and increase their accountability to congress, and require them to return to basing decisions on the constitution and not case law.

I’m looking for people who want to drastically reduce the size of the federal government by eliminating worthless bureaucracies like the departments of education, energy, agriculture, HUD, EPA and more.

I’m looking for people who want to reform the FDA and state medical licensing boards and end the health industry cartel between these, the insurance companies, the drug manufacturers, and medical schools that keeps medical costs artificially high.

I’m looking for people who want to secure our borders.

I’m looking for people who want to create a true free-market economy and eliminate the vast majority of government regulations.

Finally, I’m looking for people who realize, as our founders did, that the states control the federal government; not the other way around; who want to end the popular vote of senators and return to their appointment by state legislatures.

If Team Elephant or the Tea Party would do these things, the support of the scientific community would be moot. The scientific community is just as lost on these issues as any other brainwashed marxist. Our elitist disdain for intellectual inferiors is just a great and just as stupid as anyone else’s. We have not earned any exceptional attention from anyone.
One thing you missed is that the dems own a lot of these guys. They work for the government, or soon will. It is easy to see that they may just be voting for those they see controlling government money.
Okay, after going back and reading some of these comments, I don't see how this is going to work. I have a degree that isn't from the best schools, I am from the South, I am neither polished nor sophisticated, I don't make a lot of money, and I don't have a life with problems, but what I am is not stupid. From some of these comments, I can plainly see that because of all the above that I'm not, that I will probably be included in the stupid, racist, uneducated, idiots some from below will expect all of us to be--especially because we don't agree with them on what they think we should believe. A tech savvy, PhD toting, MD, conservative will be able to see through the different personalities that make up the Republican Party. The author of this article seems to want to recruit RINOs based on the samples that have responded in the comments. We have enough of them already. Besides, why would people like me want to have people in my party who will label me as stupid, ignorant, unelectable if I wanted to run for office, just because I am average. Aren't the Democrats doing that enough?
Free trade? I don't know. Companies are outsourcing and there are fewer and fewer jobs at home. It is a bitter pill to swallow when the big corporations have their corporate HQ here and allow cheaper countries to get the benefit of the labor, especially when business is so eager to allow uneducated cheap illegals in for their workforce. Don't you think this love-fest should work both ways?
In addition to the scientists, doctors, Wall Street execs, and tech workers that you mention, Republican policies and rhetoric have also lost them the gays, the blacks, the Latinos, and the Muslims. The attempt to eliminate Social Security will lose them the seniors.

Gosh, who's left?
The primary reason that intellectuals (PhDs, MDs, etc.) have left the Republican Party is the influence of the Religious Right on the party. It is very difficult for educated persons to relate to those wanting to push creationism in the schools, put religion into politics, fight womens rights to an abortion, etc. Many intellectuals are libertarian and would relate closely to Republicans without the religous right.
After graduating with honors from a top engineering school, I worked in industry as an environmental engineer. Later, I pursued a second career as a public school math & science teacher and am still working in this field. I am also an evangelical Christian.

I have been involved with Republican politics - sometimes more so than others. I have been especially attracted to the GOP principles of empowering the individual and limiting the power of the state. These have not always been at the forefront, but those who embrace these principles are far more likely to be found in the GOP than the Democratic party.

It was refreshing to read this article that offers pragmatic ideas for the betterment of our country. It was refreshing to read an article that was free of the hot-button rhetoric that generally characterizes today's politics. I would love to see the GOP embrace and generally agree with the author's premise that only the GOP could strongly advocate for these.

Some of the commenters here have despised the average citizen. However, I believe that all of our people add to the richness of our nation. We need leaders who can make strong intellectual arguments for ideas and at the same time appreciate the contributions of those who just want to live their lives without government interference. I have found that in those that are not deemed "intellectual," there is often far more genuine common sense.

I have often looked to my cousin as a great role model. Although a PhD professor at Columbia (Barnard), he is every bit as comfortable and engaging with our Midwestern & Appalachian farm family as he is with leading academics and international leaders.

As I teach in the public schools, I am continually disillusioned with our nation's embrace of intellectual mediocrity and failure to develop leaders. I have rejected NEA membership as they fight for everything that is anathema to me. Many of my colleagues have no business being in the classroom. I would like to see educational reform that begins with a serious discussion of who should be considered eligible candidates for the teaching profession and implementing restrictions comparable to other industrialized nations.

I also concur that there are elements in the conservative movement that discount intellectualism as elitism. And when intellectuals look upon the lesser-educated with disdain, this only adds fuel to the fire. Can we not have intellectual leaders who also embrace common-sense and all types of people? I am encourgaed that I have recently begun seeing both conservative and evangelical leaders advocating for an intellectual embrace of policy and belief.
All this article really says it would be nice to have some smart people in the party. We should encourage them to join.

I mean, after all, it is supposed to be a "party," and the scientists have all the best beverage concoctions. ::rolls eyes::

There is a lot more to the trends presented by the author than meets the eye. It is not so much as if the professors became liberal: the universities have indeed changed hands of power, and have hired many more liberal professors through a systematic tenure process that screens out any free thinkers. For more information, watch "Indoctrinate U"
Regarding the working class' economic interests: Democrats want to redistribute wealth to the worst off, 'seal the border' Republicans offer them protection from wage competition.
I'd be surprised if there are any blue collar people voting against healthcare but in favor of an illegal immigrant amnesty.

Now onto the issue at hand: Republicans more than democrats have embraced anti-intellectualism viz. fox news, Palin, etc.
Intellectual conservatives are horrified by the appeal to the innumerate, those who need issues framed in simple emotive terms and have no concern for pragmatic decisions. Where are the sensible alternatives to the democrats' ideas?

Republicans should be trying to attract high level thinkers with RAND corporation style foreign policy debates which focus on national strategic interest rather than neocon/liberal moral posturing, education policy that focuses resources on the brightest students rather than the badly behaved and reasoned critiques of affirmative action and immigration where there is no articulate voice of dissent.

Incidentally, Sarah Palin is a very good eample of why affirmative action is such a disaster, a low IQ canditate promoted far above competence based on a quota.

Lastly, the system of controlling block votes through favors to bible-thumping religious leaders is just as bad as when the dems do it but far more widespread. The evangelical movement loses more credibility every time a leading figure is found in bed with a rent boy or announces their teenage daughters next pregnancy. At least Obama was embarrassed by Rev Wright, and downplayed Rick Warren.

Would anybody with a PhD want to be in the same room as Pat Robertson?
I suppose I would classify myself as an "elite" tech worker. Your article glosses over a perception, which is becoming more prevalent i.e. that the Republican party is the party of uneducated rednecks. Everything designed to appeal to the Republican base is aimed at the lowest common denominator: god, guns and gays. Well educated people are turned off by this message, no matter how "pro tech" the party might become. While I'm much more fiscally conservative than my friends, I could never bring myself to vote Republican so long as the vileness of the Rush Limbaughs and Glen Becks' persists.
Most education is still delivered the way it was 2500 years ago in Plato's time: With a live teacher spoon-feeding about 30 students in a physical classroom. Thus, to teach 1 million students 9th grade history requires about 33 thousand teachers.

So here's my idea of REAL education reform:

Pick out the best teachers and put their courses online. Students could then watch the video lectures on their computer or TV at home, or they could watch them at a physical "school" outside the house (in cases where the school doubles as day care/babysitting).

Maybe the students would also go in once a week for a live hour of discussion, and every few weeks to take a test.

In any case, this would reduce the unit labor cost of education to a tiny fraction of what it is now. And economically disadvantaged students would have the same access to quality lectures/education that wealthy students currently have. It would bring education into the 21st century. We would have a much better product at a much lower price.

Funny that you *never* hear politicians and the media bring up this obvious solution to the malaise that is our current education system. They are too afraid of offending the powerful teacher's unions.

But fiscal reality is catching up with us, and soon the powers-that-be will have to acknowledge that the internet allows education to finally be delivered in a modern, efficient, and cost-effective manner, and that the ancient system of spoon-feeding 30 students at a time is an atrociously expensive dinosaur that needs to be put down.
You don't think Palin, Rush, Glenn Beck have anything at all to do with this re-alignment? Most people don't think of "City Journal" when they think of Republicans, they think of Fox.
I'd add on more to the list and it's an item President Obama is already aware of as displayed by his actions: education.

I don't mean the "mo' money", typical, Democratic party response to any noise from the education lobby but substantive reform that threatens to tear the Democratic party apart.

There are already the Democrats for Education Reform and they're in favor of some pretty scary changes if you happen to be an NEA ideologue. Obama's already made it clear by actions as well as words that he favors many of those changes and the reason's clear - the black vote. Black voters are much more supportive of educational choice - vouchers, tax credits, charters - then white voters and without a virtual lock on the black vote the Democratic party isn't a national organization any more.

The Republican party could get out in front on that issue, I don't think it's too late yet, and seize it from the Democrats who are already sniping at each other over which constituency can be taken for granted and which can't. Empowering the individual is much more comfortably a Republican response to a social problem then the knee-jerk Democratic party genuflection to government but the Republicans have to recognize the issue, it's importance and to start singing from the same hymn book.
Richard L. Kent, Esq. September 14, 2010 at 12:44 PM
votes of well-educated, well-compensated elites>>

We're getting them because they've discovered Obama's confiscatory agenda. We're keeping them because they've discovered his foreign policy is not of this earth. We'll keep enough of them--the ones who can smell marxist poison--to remain in power for the foreseeable. It really stinks to be a Democrat these days....
Seems like the local management doesn't participate in these conversations. I would like to hear from them.

I am impressed with the number of commenters that appear to be progressive. There seem to be very few conservatives participating, other than a few flames and lack of ideas.

Hey Tevi, what do you think about all these ideas we are offering? Hey City Journal, are you there? Can you hear us? Seems like a cool thing you have going here. Nice quotes from George Will and Guiliani, lots of progressives tuning in. A regular purple people love in. Let's do something constructive!
As an educated, multi-degreed, working professional I ask my Republican friends: do you expect me to vote for the dodos I see claiming the Republican mantle? Am I supposed to cover my eyes and turn Sharon Angle into an intellectual? Am I supposed to buy into the pea-brain from Alaska and pray she receives a brain transfusion? Tell me who I might vote for without vomiting at the choice? Surely there are some Republicans who value intelligence and thought, aren't there? Are they all hiding?
I think the problem goes beyond just improving the education system.

On one hand, Liberals are masters of the social networks. They can round up a million voters - or protestors - in a minute. Obama might well be called the "Organizer-in-Chief".

On the other, those "Anyone with a doctorate" folks Rove spoke of are almost exclusively doctorates in the soft sciences: political, social, liberal arts.

I have to suggest that these people are undereducated - and made so by at least a generation of Liberal Arts professors (who have distorted the original meaning of "liberal arts" into "progressive arts").

Your suggestions for education are good, but it would be many years - at least another generation - before we'd see results.

We need to keep hammering on the Progressive Democrats' fixation on taxing us to spend on them. That policy is eventually going to lead to more of them, and less of us, compounding the problem.

Your fifth suggestion, "improving our educational system front and center", will never happen until we rein in the NEA and the AFT. Their sole emphasis is on teachers' - and administrators' - longevity and tenure. If a few students just happen to get a good education, "that's nice, but we have more important things to do". Like spend their members' dues to keep electing Democrats.

Mr Fair really needs to get his own website.
A real commitment to decreasing government control over personal behavior would help too. So would ditching the nuttiness (creation "science", biblical fundamentalism,simplistic economic doctrine etc.) Faculty tend towards the libertarian rather than the Tea Party. This would upset the Republican "core" of course.
None of that is going to happen in a GOP that is overwhelmingly Southern. They cannot be reasonable about social issues, educational or scientific matters or immigration without alienating their White Trash base. Without racism, jingoism, intolerance and obscurantism they would run the risk that the trash will wake up to their own best economic interests, and vote Democratic. I also don't think that anyone with a brain is gullible enough to believe that the Republicans will be fiscally responsible.

They are in deep sh*t until the Yahoos are no longer in charge, and picking up some seats in a midterm isn't going to change that. I doubt that enough Western-style conservatives remain to beat the Southerners in a fight for the party. If they get control of the House, and still play NO!, they are going to piss people off just as Gingrich did in '95. My guess is that no one can beat Obama. His popularity has come down, but he's the homecoming queen compared to the Republicans in Congress.

There might be sane parts of the Tea Party, but they are not visible to me. These cranks are why I long ago stopped saying that I was a libertarian.

This week, the Federation for American Immigration Reform (FAIR) came out with a report entitled, The Fiscal Burden of Illegal Immigration on U.S. Taxpayers, which discusses the costs of unauthorized immigration to the United States. As usual, FAIR has put out a highly misleading fiscal snapshot of the costs allegedly imposed on U.S. taxpayers by unauthorized immigrants and completely discounts the economic contributions of unauthorized workers and consumers. Moreover, FAIR inflates their costs in a variety of ways and conveniently ignores any contributions that would offset these costs.

While the publication is long and deals with a wide range of issues that warrant more dissection by credible economic experts, the trade publication Education Week has already begun the deconstruction with an item that sheds light on their misleading claims about providing English language services in schools.

Another argument FAIR makes, which makes it hard to glean what their solution would be is the high cost of deporting undocumented workers which FAIR blames on the immigrants themselves. It's a somewhat circular argument to say that the cost of undocumented immigrants includes the cost of failing law enforcement efforts. So, in essence, FAIR is saying that the deport-them-all approach costs too much money and doesn't work. Yet their "solution" is to spend even more money on enforcement.

FAIR's data is meant only to reinforce their vision of "attrition through enforcement." It is not rooted in an effort to move the immigration debate forward. Therefore, passing comprehensive immigration reform - which would yield a cumulative $1.5 trillion in added U.S. gross domestic product over 10 years - is the only sound economic decision the United States can make.

SOURCE Immigration Policy Center

Who's behind these laws?

The Immigration Reform Law Institute, or IRLI, the legal arm of the Federation for American Immigration Reform, or FAIR, drafted the Arizona law and most of the copycat bills. The Southern Poverty Law Center designated FAIR a hate group because of its founder's writings, its repeated participation with white nationalist groups, and its receipt of major funding from a racist organization.

Copycat laws frequently rely on the work of attorney Kris Kobach, who works for IRLI. Kobach's lawyering has cost localities who have hired him millions of dollars while the laws have been found unconstitutional. The Arizona law was brought forth by State Senator Russell Pearce, who the Arizona press has described as having a history of associating with neo-Nazis and sending anti-Semitic emails.
Gov. Jan Brewer, who signed S.B. 1070 into law, and the legislation's principal architect, Russell Pearce, both have extensive financial ties to the private prison industry powerhouse Corrections Corporation of America, a company which stands to profit in the sum of millions if Arizona's "papers please" legislation is enacted.

CCA, one of the leading providers of detention and correction services in the country, holds the contract to imprison all federal detainees in the state of Arizona. S.B. 1070 would lead to more arrests on federal immigration charges, causing money to pour into the gargantuan coffers of the private prison industry and directly into the bank accounts of those who are financially tied to it.

Republican state senator Pearce submitted a draft version of S.B. 1070 to the American Legislative Exchange Council for revision months before the bill was introduced to the floor of the Arizona Senate. Pearce is one of 35 Arizona legislators who belong to this organization.

Two years prior, ALEC was the recipient of millions of dollars in contributions from CCA and Geo Group, two of the largest private prison companies in the state.

Pearce's financial records also indicate that the political action committees funded by both CCA and Geo Group have donated the maximum amount allowable to his campaign.

Gov. Jan Brewer's deputy chief of staff, Paul Senseman, is a former CCA lobbyist. His wife Kathryn Senseman currently lobbies the state legislature on behalf of the company.

Still more damning is the fact that the governor's leading policy advisor, J. Charles "Chuck" Coughlin, is the president of Highground Consulting, the lobbying firm which represents CCA's interests in Arizona.

CCA also contributed a total of $10,000 dollars to the Prop 100 campaign earlier this year, an initiative, along with S.B. 1070, which set the stage for Brewer's reelection bid.

Phoenix CBS affiliate KPHO was among the first to report on this glaring conflict of interest. In retaliation, the Brewer campaign pulled ll advertisements from the network.

The economics of immigration, Stephen C. Goss, the chief actuary of the Social Security Administration and someone who enjoys bipartisan support for his straightforwardness, said that by 2007, the Social Security trust fund had received a net benefit of somewhere between $120 billion and $240 billion from unauthorized immigrants.

That represented an astounding 5.4 percent to 10.7 percent of the trust fund's total assets of $2.24 trillion that year. The cumulative contribution is surely higher now. Unauthorized immigrants paid a net contribution of $12 billion in 2007 alone, Goss said.

Previous estimates circulating publicly and in Congress had placed the annual contributions at roughly half of Goss's 2007 figure and listed the cumulative benefit on the order of $50 billion.

The Social Security trust fund faces a solvency crisis that would be even more pressing were it not for these payments.

Adding to the Social Security irony is that the restrictionists are mostly OLDER AND RETIRED WHITES from longtime American families. The very people, in other words, who benefit most from the Social Security payments by unauthorized immigrants.








Moments after signing Arizona's tough new immigration law in April, Gov. Jan Brewer was asked WHAT A ILLEGAL IMMIGRANT LOOKS LIKE????

The question, posed during a news conference that was broadcast live on TV, seemed to catch Brewer off guard. After a long pause, she said, "I DON'T KNOW WHAT A ILLEGAL IMMIGRANT LOOKS LIKE. I can tell you that there are people in Arizona that ASS-U-ME they know what an illegal immigrant looks like. I DON'T KNOW IF THEY KNOW THAT FOR A FACT OR NOT."

Her answer cut to the very heart of the controversy surrounding the law, which takes effect July 29. Although there are many people who assume they know what an illegal immigrant looks like, the fact is, IT IS IMPOSSIBLE to tell a person's immigration status by appearance, experts say.

So despite assurances to the contrary, some civil-rights groups and others fear that enforcement of the law will lead to racial profiling. Several lawsuits already raise worries of civil-rights violations, and a group of Arizona law professors concluded the law authorizes enforcement based on ethnicity. That, they allege, would mean officers would end up harassing and possibly detaining people who aren't illegal immigrants.

The vast majority of illegal immigrants are Hispanic. But most Hispanics in Arizona are not illegal immigrants - they are legal residents or U.S. citizens, many with roots dating back generations.

Read more:

What both these Republicans FORGOT to Mention in their SPIN POLITICS is that

It's all about economics! Removing undocumented workers from the U.S. would total a loss of $1.8 trillion in annual spending and $651.5 billion in annual economic output, according to a study by the economic analysis firm The Perryman Group. It would cost about $28 billion per year to apprehend illegal immigrants, $6 billion a year to detain them, $500 million for extra beds, $2 million to judicially process them and $1.6 billion to transport them home. $230 Billion is the estimated amount it would cost over the next five years to enact the scenario of the mass-deportation caucus and deport the undocumented population, according to a report by the Center for American Progress. Legalization of undocumented immigrants would significantly expand the economy—by a cumulative $1.5 trillion in gross domestic product over 10 years. A deportation approach, by contrast, would have the cumulative effect of draining $2.5 trillion over 10 years from the U.S. economy. Illegal immigrants are paying their share of taxes, they pay the same taxes as you and me when they purchase anything, They don't carry a card that says Undocumented Immigrant, DON'T CHARGE TAXES
Start looking at FACTS & NUMBERS.

Who's behind these laws?

FOLLOW THE MONEY$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$ Many may want them gone, but illegal immigrants in Oklahoma can be good business.

So say county officials who handle the purse strings of some sheriff's departments in the state. Millions in revenue for transporting and detaining immigrants for the federal government have financed jobs, departments and, in some cases, entire jails.

"It's a good business plan," said Tim Albin, chief of the services division that oversees the budget for the Tulsa County Sheriffs Department. "It allows us to bank and put money back and carry over for other things."

Read more:

The Immigration Reform Law Institute, or IRLI, the legal arm of the Federation for American Immigration Reform, or FAIR, drafted the Arizona law and most of the copycat bills. The Southern Poverty Law Center designated FAIR a hate group because of its founder's writings, its repeated participation with white nationalist groups, and its receipt of major funding from a racist organization.

Copycat laws frequently rely on the work of attorney Kris Kobach, who works for IRLI. Kobach's lawyering has cost localities who have hired him millions of dollars while the laws have been found unconstitutional. The Arizona law was brought forth by State Senator Russell Pearce, who the Arizona press has described as having a history of associating with neo-Nazis and sending anti-Semitic emails.
Before you Scream and show Ignorance and Hate at least read the Immigration Law regarding Undocumented Immigrants.

The Undocumented immigrants paying more taxes than you think!!

Eight million Undocumented immigrants pay Social Security, Medicare and income taxes. Denying public services to people who pay their taxes is an affront to America's bedrock belief in fairness. But many "pull-up-the-drawbridge" politicians want to do just that when it comes to Undocumented immigrants.

The fact that Undocumented immigrants pay taxes at all will come as news to many Americans. A stunning two thirds of Undocumented immigrants pay Medicare, Social Security and personal income taxes.

Yet, nativists like Congressman Tom Tancredo, R-Colo., have popularized the notion that illegal aliens are a colossal drain on the nation's hospitals, schools and welfare programs — consuming services that they don't pay for.

In reality, the 1996 welfare reform bill disqualified Undocumented immigrants from nearly all means tested government programs including food stamps, housing assistance, Medicaid and Medicare-funded hospitalization.

The only services that illegals can still get are emergency medical care and K-12 education. Nevertheless, Tancredo and his ilk pushed a bill through the House criminalizing all aid to illegal aliens — even private acts of charity by priests, nurses and social workers.

Potentially, any soup kitchen that offers so much as a free lunch to an illegal could face up to five years in prison and seizure of assets. The Senate bill that recently collapsed would have tempered these draconian measures against private aid.

But no one — Democrat or Republican — seems to oppose the idea of withholding public services. Earlier this year, Congress passed a law that requires everyone who gets Medicaid — the government-funded health care program for the poor — to offer proof of U.S. citizenship so we can avoid "theft of these benefits by illegal aliens," as Rep. Charlie Norwood, R-Ga., puts it. But, immigrants aren't flocking to the United States to mooch off the government.

According to a study by the Urban Institute, the 1996 welfare reform effort dramatically reduced the use of welfare by undocumented immigrant households, exactly as intended. And another vital thing happened in 1996: the Internal Revenue Service began issuing identification numbers to enable illegal immigrants who don't have Social Security numbers to file taxes.

One might have imagined that those fearing deportation or confronting the prospect of paying for their safety net through their own meager wages would take a pass on the IRS' scheme. Not so. Close to 8 million of the 12 million or so illegal aliens in the country today file personal income taxes using these numbers, contributing billions to federal coffers.

No doubt they hope that this will one day help them acquire legal status — a plaintive expression of their desire to play by the rules and come out of the shadows. What's more, aliens who are not self-employed have Social Security and Medicare taxes automatically withheld from their paychecks.

Since undocumented workers have only fake numbers, they'll never be able to collect the benefits these taxes are meant to pay for. Last year, the revenues from these fake numbers — that the Social Security administration stashes in the "earnings suspense file" — added up to 10 percent of the Social Security surplus.

The file is growing, on average, by more than $50 billion a year. Beyond federal taxes, all illegals automatically pay state sales taxes that contribute toward the upkeep of public facilities such as roads that they use, and property taxes through their rent that contribute toward the schooling of their children.

The non-partisan National Research Council found that when the taxes paid by the children of low-skilled immigrant families — most of whom are illegal — are factored in, they contribute on average $80,000 more to federal coffers than they consume. Yes, many illegal migrants impose a strain on border communities on whose doorstep they first arrive, broke and unemployed.

To solve this problem equitably, these communities ought to receive the surplus taxes that federal government collects from immigrants. But the real reason border communities are strained is the lack of a guest worker program.

Such a program would match willing workers with willing employers in advance so that they wouldn't be stuck for long periods where they disembark while searching for jobs. The cost of undocumented aliens is an issue that immigrant bashers have created to whip up indignation against people they don't want here in the first place.

With the Senate having just returned from yet another vacation and promising to revisit the stalled immigration bill, politicians ought to set the record straight: Illegals are not milking the government. If anything, it is the other way around.

The Undocumented Immigrants pay the exact same amount of taxes like you and me when they buy Things, rent a house, fill up gas, drink a beer or wine, buy appliances, play the states lottery and mega millions . Below are the links to just a few sites that will show you exactly how much tax you or the Undocumented Immigrant pays , so you see they are NOT FREELOADERS, THEY PAY TAXES AND TOLLS Exactly the same as you, Now if you take out 10% from your states /city Budget what will your city/state look like financially ?

Stop your folly thinking , you are wise USE YOUR WISDOM to see the reality. They pay more taxes than you think, Including FEDERAL INCOME TAX using a ITN Number that is given to them by the IRS, Social Security Taxes and State taxes that are withheld form their paychecks automatically.

Taxes, paid by You & the Undocumented are the same in each state check your state :

GAS Taxes paid by you & the Undocumented are the same. Go to and check out your states tax;

Cigarette Taxes paid by you & the Undocumented are the same, check this out in :

Clothing Sales Taxes, are the same paid by you & the Undocumented Immigrant;

City Taxes, are the same paid by you or the Undocumented, since he pays rent and the LANDLORD pays the city :

Beer Taxes, are the same paid by you or the Undocumented:

"President Obama's job-approval ratings in free fall"

This assertion is not supported by actual numbers. Pres. Obama's approval rating has been fairly steady for months, hovering around the mid-40s.
Charie -- Thanks for your comments. Not sure what you mean by "edgy beliefs." Anthropomorphic climate change is mainstream. Every nation gets it, and more importantly business leaders get it. For example, check out American Energy Innovation Council -- a group of top business leaders who recognize the need to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and ramp up renewable energy R&D -- fast.

This is not unlike the early 60's when science established cigarette smoking was deadly. Science had spoken and the majority of people stopped smoking. The tobacco industry ran a denial strategy for decades and funded bogus science. For of the five largest companies in the world are oil companies, and they are doing the tobacco industry one better. It will slow things down, but the science is clear enough. There are always early adopters and late movers. Nations and business are planning accordingly and momentum is building.

Regarding your statement "If man doesn't cause it there's nothing we can do about it." Man does things about all kinds of things he don't cause. For example, just because lightning is natural and not manmade, doesn't mean we can't protect ourselves by using lightning rods.

Regarding your comment on church and state and the constitution, Troy's article is not about the constitution. None of Troy's ideas are constrained by your constitutional requirement. He is simply suggesting ideas to help make the Republican party more attractive to "well-educated, well-compensated" people.
My ideas are offered in that spirit.

And regarding contemporary religion, and the role of religion in personal and public life, I found Bishop John Shelby Spong's new book Eternal Life: A New Vision remarkable and well thought out.

Regarding your comment to Jacob about still being a Democrat, Republicans don't need to attract Democrats. They simply need to move the middle. The best way to do that would be to focus on independents.
JK,you may be a big believer in climate change, but there are a couple of thousand scientists in the US who believe there is no such thing as anthropomorphic climate change. If man doesn't cause it there's nothing we can do about it.

Read your constitution. There's not one thing in it about separation of church and state.

My, you do have edgy beliefs, don't you?

Troy says that the illegal alien problem is splitting the party. I believe the last time I saw figures on it, something like 79% of Republicans are for sealing the border. That doesn't sound like much of a split to me. It's more like a seesaw with a 200 pounder on one end and a 50 pounder on the other. Amnesty is a lesser number but still considerable.

Jacob, of course you'd be a Republican in that case, because you'd still be a Democrat.

If the "elite" on Wall Street have turned away from the Republicans it's more than likely because they're getting more bang for their buck from Democrats. I think the bailouts and stimuli have shown us that. The same goes for the rest of the groups mentioned. Doctors? Surely Troy meeans the AMA which must be getting some kind of exchange for the money they pour into the Democrat coffers. Talk to your own doctors and you'll get a whole different story.

Where the writer of this article gets the idea that creationism is being taught in schools I have no idea and no, most Republicans don't believe it should be. Now that is a party plank we can all disagree on.

This article is either naive or a deliberate distortion of facts. Or perhaps a conglomeration of the two.

Adding to my early comment, and regarding the need for republicans to stop climate change denial - for an example of a well regarding business leaders take on climate change, check out:
How embrace science over fear mongering. Stop denying climate change. Encourage a renewed interest in separation of church and state. Less drill baby drill and more investment in renewable energy.
Until the Republicans drop their objections to having the public schools teach the scientific case for evolution, to the exclusion of the nonexistent "scientific case" for intelligent design, they cannot expect much in the way of support from people with scientific and technical educations.

This is a deal breaker.
You refer to who went where in 2008. In 2008 my choices were:
1. a radical freak
2. a will-o-the-wisp who, when the chips were down, abandoned conservative principles for whatever would get him good press from the op-ed writers at WaPo and the NYT.

How about a conservative? Paul Ryan of Wisconsin? Republicans once did themselves proud nominating an untried politician with some new ideas from the mid-west. Name of Lincoln.
I'm with Jacob on that one. I might actually see the Republicans as more than the Religious Right should they adopt something other than mistruth and Fox News talking points. The agenda laid out here I agree with, and that's a liberal speaking! Even the evangelicals will eventually see thru the BS, guys. Time to make yourselves relevant again.

Let's try moving the country forward for a change. The most any of us have really seen in the last 10 years is an endless circle of partisan bickering which has done nothing to help the country. The voters are sick of it.
Great ideas but will Republicans listen?
Great article; if the Republicans adopted Tevi Troy's suggestions, I might turn Republican. The only thing missing from the argument is an acknowledgement of and clear disengagement from the ruinous policies of the "W" years.