Republicans lost because they went left, not right

Since the GOP bloodbath of Nov. 4, there have been numerous attempts to diagnose what went wrong for Republicans. Unfortunately, the story taking hold is that the GOP moved "too far to the right." Really?

"Compassionate conservatism" did not come from the right wing of the Republican Party. I'm sure all those years of passing 15 to 25 percent annual increases in state and federal spending seemed "compassionate" at the time, but look where it got the party today.

Of course, learning from mistakes is a must. But let's make sure that we properly diagnose the problem before trying to solve it. Failing to do so will only prolong the minority status Republicans deserved and received from the voters.

Right-wing principles on fiscal matters are not the problem. GOP leaders deviating from them is. Abandoning these core principles damages the Republican brand to the point where all Republicans, moderates to conservatives, lose elections. It happened in Nevada's state Senate races this year. Bob Beers and Joe Heck never deceived the voters, promising one thing but doing another. But others higher up in the GOP did, and Beers and Heck went down with the ship.

U.S. Sen. John McCain opposed tax cuts for all Americans in 2001 and 2003. This year, as the party's presidential nominee, he supported making the same tax cuts permanent. That's hard to explain.

In politics, it is said that if you are explaining, you are losing. Promising tax cuts to 95 percent of us, as Barack Obama did, was pretty enticing. In fact, except for the part about the other 5 percent, it's a pretty "right-wing" thing to say.

And what about the "5 percenters," the ones who ship American jobs overseas? Does the GOP really not have a response to that? The Republican ticket joined Democrats in attacking them.

Where is the articulate conservative asking, "You know why these jobs are leaving America? They're leaving because we sock them with the second-highest level of taxation on Earth." And now, in this economy, we seek to raise their taxes even higher?

Perhaps if we raise taxes on American companies high enough, we can get rid of these 5 percenters once and for all. Never mind the fact that the 5 percenters provide more than 60 percent of our entire federal budget revenue, which funds our military, homeland security, roads and highways, Social Security and Medicare, the federal courts and even Congress. (Come to think of it, maybe they're on to something there.)

Republicans got beat on the issue of spending, too. When Sen. Obama mocked Republican spending, he sounded, dare I say, like a true right-winger. The most damaging blow actually occurred long before Obama vs. McCain. Anyone remember when Tom DeLay, as the Republican Majority Leader in the U.S. House of Representatives, insisted that there was no fat left to trim in the federal budget? That one hurt. Then came the "Bridge to Nowhere."

Neither, by the way, came from the right wing of the GOP.

Like many other right-wingers, I can confidently and passionately defend core, conservative principles to anyone. The freedom argument is a good one, and it still works. What conservatives cannot defend is when GOP leaders deviate from conservative values, damaging the credibility of anyone who has an "R" by their name.

Ronald Reagan led Republicans back to power in 1980. He did it by adhering to and defending core, conservative principles. When George H.W. Bush abandoned some of those principles, especially on taxes, he lost his re-election bid. Why? He couldn't defend it.

In 1994, Newt Gingrich regained control of Congress for the GOP by adhering to and defending core, conservative principles. Republicans lost the trust and good will of party faithful, however, when GOP leaders deviated from these principles. The GOP went on a spending spree with money that didn't exist. You can't defend that.

After eight years of Bill Clinton, Republicans elected a "compassionate conservative" president who never seemed to find it in his heart to veto excessive spending bills. Instead, he rewarded federal bureaucracies with huge increases in taxpayer funding. These massive spending increases went to the same federal government that gave us the Hurricane Katrina response, the robbery of Social Security and the Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac boondoggles. You can't defend that.

In fairness, I applaud President George W. Bush for his aggressive fight against terrorists. To this day, he has not deviated from the policy he set just days following the terrorist attacks of 9/11, when he said to the world that anyone who provides terrorists with the funding, tools, training or safe harbor required to carry out their attacks is just as guilty as the terrorists themselves. This is an argument Republicans can defend. Ask John Kerry.

But now, as the Bush era ends, I hope a new promise emerges, one of tax relief for all, protections of liberties and freedoms, equal opportunity, earmark and spending reform, and a return to the true conservative calling of our time. Ironically, this calling was brought to us by Democratic President John F. Kennedy, who said, "Ask not what your country can do for you, ask what you can do for your country."

What a "right-wing" thing to say.

Robert Uithoven is president of j3 Strategies, a Nevada-based Republican political consulting firm. He is a former chief of staff and campaign manager for Nevada Gov. Jim Gibbons.