Thou shalt not speak ill of a fellow Republican 'Two'
Inside Liberty Watch Today - Feb. 23, 2006

2006 is a crucial election and we must keep our focus on Republican victories in November. As we work through the primary process, it is imperative that Republican candidates focus on issues and not personal attacks. We are the party of ideas and rational thought; the party that considers problems and applies our principles to develop and propose solutions. We may differ internally on how 'limited' is limited government and how 'low' are low taxes, but these are differences based upon our interpretation of fundamental Republican principles.

Campaigns should focus on the issues and the candidate's vision for the office they seek. The 11th Commandment is not a shield to avoid discussion of issues and does not prevent discussion of issues; it is a rule that Republicans not attack Republicans, especially in a way that ultimately damages our candidate in the general election. Let us not do the work of democrats on our candidates. If a candidate cannot fashion a positive message of their vision and can only campaign by attacking their opponent, you should question that candidate’s fitness for office. 

The NRP blast email list is nearly 29,000 strong. We will not forward candidate announcements that mention their Republican primary opponents. The NRP is developing a number of services to support candidates, but will not provide those services to candidates in breach of the 11th commandment. 

As a general proposition, voters respond better to a positive message, so the 11th commandment should not hinder a campaign; but rather leaven it with a little class. 

Paul Adams, State Chairman, Nevada Republican Party


Editor's Note: Mr. Adams also attached the following article on the subject that may be of interest.

Nasty campaigns should consider the Reagan touch

Feb. 4, 1996 

By Cal Thomas
Los Angeles Times Syndicate 

As Ronald Reagan prepares to celebrate on Tuesday the 46th anniversary of his 39th birthday, his party and nation need his attitude and ideas more than ever. 

Time was when Democrats carved themselves up before an election, giving Republicans the opportunity to use Democrats' own words against them. Now, Republicans are doing it, violating Reagan's ''11th Commandment'': Never speak ill of a Republican. 

This strategy always worked well for Reagan. Ed Meese, his trusted aide in California and later his Attorney General, recalls that when Reagan campaigned for governor of California in 1966, he left room in his organization so that when the primary was over, key people in the camps of his Republican opponents would be welcome in his campaign. That strategy allowed him to unify the California Republican Party and defeat the formidable incumbent Democrat, Pat Brown. It is difficult to imagine any of the current GOP presidential candidates doing that after the primary contests. 

There were many reasons for Ronald Reagan's success. His critics think it was all personality and acting skills. But Reagan's strength was that he loved people, even his opponents. He kept his focus on the real enemy: wrong ideas. Even when he attacked ideas he didn't like, he never attacked the people who held them. People weren't the enemy. Ideas that hurt people were the enemy. It is a fine line, but an important one, that too many presidential candidates in the current campaign have crossed. 

Reagan gave many memorable speeches, but two of his most important were delivered in 1964 and 1984. 

In his nationally televised speech in October, 1964, Reagan proposed to talk of ''controversial things'' and then laid out for the public what remains the fundamental difference between the two parties today: big and ever-growing and oppressive government vs. big and ever-growing opportunity. In words that are as fresh today as they were then, Reagan said, ''Government has laid its hand on health, housing, farming, industry, commerce, education, and to an ever-increasing degree interferes with the people's right to know. Government tends to grow, government programs take on weight and momentum as public servants say, always with the best of intentions. . . . But the truth is that, outside of its legitimate function, government does nothing as well or economically as the private sector of the economy. . . .'' 

Newt Gingrich, take note. Government has a legitimate function, but the private sector has one, too, and it is superior. In other words, people are better than institutions. Reagan always praised ''the people,'' believing we are good enough and great enough to fix any problem we have. And in saying such things, he made us believe it, too. He restored our faith in ourselves. Isn't this what leadership is about? Isn't this what is missing from today's political debate? 

On Aug. 23, 1984, Reagan accepted his party's nomination for a second term as president. He showed he had not forgotten the battle he outlined 20 years before: ''The choices this year are not just between two different personalities, or between two political parties. They are between two different visions of the future. Two fundamentally different ways of governing -- their government of pessimism, fear and limits . . . or ours of hope, confidence and growth.'' 

In that speech, as in so many others, the enemy wasn't a person. It was always the wrong ideas that injured people. The distinction is important: One tactic wounds and alienates, the other heals and unifies. 

Greatness lies ahead of us, he always said. But to listen to the current crop of Republican presidential candidates, one would think that, while they give lip service to Reagan, they have forgotten why he succeeded and they are not. Perhaps they should reread his speeches. Perhaps they should emulate his life. The greatest present they could give the 40th president is to win the White House for the Gipper -- but win it the way he did. 

There was also this classic line: ''Isn't our choice really not one of left or right, but of up or down? Down through statism, the welfare state, more and more government largess, accompanied always by more government authority, less individual liberty and ultimately totalitarianism, always advanced as for our own good. The alternative is the dream conceived by our Founding Fathers: up, up to the ultimate in individual freedom consistent with an orderly society.''

See article at http://tinyurl.com/cc3q6.


What's Next?
Liberty Watch On-Line covers indepth issues on the issues of the day. Comming Friday The Anti-Capitalism Virus, don't miss it.