RNC VS NJGOP?

Does Jay Webber support the National Security Plank of the GOP Platform? 

On September 17th, two months will have passed during which State GOP Chairman Jay Webber has refused to call a meeting of the New Jersey Republican State Committee to even consider voting to adopt or endorse the platform of the Republican National Committee. 

It is September, and the State Committee has had just one of the four meetings it is required to hold.   It should be remembered that the Republican Party Platform represents a consensus of delegates representing all 50 states, the District of Columbia, and the territories. 

It was openly debated and the platform committee delegates from New Jersey – selected by the GOP State Chairman and the GOP state delegation leader – voted to adopt this platform. Some have tried to call it a “right wing” document. 

It is not.  It is a consensus document supported by the New Jersey GOP in 2008.  It is the document on which Senator John McCain based his campaign for President of the United States.  Last time I checked, he was hardly a “right-winger”. In an attempt to uncover just what the current leadership of the New Jersey GOP finds so objectionable in the Republican Platform, I will be looking at each plank of the platform.  Here’s the first: 

Defending Our Nation, Supporting Our Heroes, Securing the Peace 

Three decades ago, in a world as dangerous as today's, Americans of all stripes came together to advance the cause of freedom. They had witnessed the wreckage of inexperienced good intentions at the highest levels of government, the folly of an amateur foreign policy. 

And so, in defiance of a world-wide Marxist advance, they announced a goal as enduring as the vision of Isaiah, to “proclaim liberty to the captives,” and summed up America's strategy for achieving that end in a timeless slogan: Peace through strength – an enduring peace, based on freedom and the will to defend it. 

That goal still requires the unity of Americans beyond differences of party and conflicts of personality.  The rancor of past years must now give way to a common goal of security for our country and safety for our people.  For seven years, the horror of September 11, 2001 has not been repeated on our soil. For that, we are prayerfully grateful and salute all who have played a role in defending our homeland. We pledge to continue their vigilance and to assure they have the authority and resources they need to protect the nation.

The Current Conflict Abroad 

All Americans should affirm that our first obligation is the security of our country. To all those who defend it, we owe our full support and gratitude. The waging of war – and the achieving of peace – should never be micromanaged in a party platform, or on the floor of the Senate and House of Representatives for that matter.  In dealing with present conflicts and future crises, our next president must preserve all options.  It would be presumptuous to specify them in advance and foolhardy to rule out any action deemed necessary for our security. 

Homeland Security 

We acknowledge and appreciate the significant contributions of all of America's First Responders, who keep us safe and secure and who are ever ready to come to our aid. The security of our country is now everyone's responsibility, from the Department of Homeland Security to state and local first responders, private businesses, and individual families. 

The fact that eighty percent of our critical infrastructure is in private hands highlights the need for public-private partnerships to safeguard it, especially in the energy industry. Along with unrelenting vigilance to prevent bioterrorism and other WMD-related attacks, we must regularly exercise our ability to quickly respond if one were to occur.  We must continue to remove barriers to cooperation and information sharing. 

Modernized 9-1-1 services must be made universally available and be adequately funded. We must be able to thwart cyber attacks that could cripple our economy, monitor terrorist activities while respecting Americans' civil liberties, and protect against military and industrial espionage and sabotage.  All this requires experienced leadership.

Terrorism and Nuclear Proliferation 

The attacks of September 11, 2001 were a pivotal point in our national experience. They highlighted the failure of national policy to recognize and respond to the growth of a global terror network. They should have put an end to the Democrats' naive thinking that international terrorists could be dealt with within the normal criminal justice system, but that misconception persists. 

The gravest threat we face – nuclear terrorism – demands a comprehensive strategy for reducing the world's nuclear stockpiles and preventing proliferation. The U.S. should lead that effort by reducing the size of our nuclear arsenal to the lowest number consistent with our security requirements and working with other nuclear powers to do the same.

In cooperation with other nations, we should end the production of weapons-grade fissile material, improve our collective ability to interdict the spread of weapons of mass destruction and related materials, and ensure the highest possible security standards for existing nuclear materials wherever they may be located. 

But that is not enough. We must develop and deploy both national and theater missile defenses to protect the American homeland, our people, our Armed Forces abroad, and our allies.  Effective, layered missile defenses are critical to guard against the unpredictable actions of rogue regimes and outlaw states, reduce the possibility of strategic blackmail, and avoid the disastrous consequences of an accidental or unauthorized launch by a foreign power. 

Better Intelligence – the Key to Prevention 

Intelligence is America's first line of defense.  We must increase the ranks and resources of our human intelligence capabilities, integrate technical and human sources, and get that information more quickly to the war fighter and the policy maker. The multi-jurisdictional arrangements that now prevail on Capitol Hill should be replaced by a single Joint Committee on Intelligence.   

Bioterrorism and cyber terrorism, once the stuff of science fiction films, are immediate threats to our nation's health and safety.  Our food and water distribution systems require special vigilance. By the same token, a well-placed cyber-attack could cripple our economy, shut down our energy and transportation systems, wreck our health care delivery systems, and put millions of lives at risk. 

Although our country has thwarted new terrorist attacks since 2001, those threats do persist. That is why our reform of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act was so vital, and why the Democrats' opposition to it was so wrong. 

I believe that the vast majority of grassroots Republicans would agree with this plank of the platform – but maybe not some of their leaders.  I recently received an e-mail from a GOP candidate for office this November who had this to say about it: 

“Don't preach to me about Republican morality when the parties leading candidate can dance around on stage like a buffoon singing, ‘Bomb, Bomb, Bomb, Bomb Iran’, and the party goes ahead and endorses him for President. 

I watched, like most everyone else, the live broadcasts of the opening days of the second Iraq War, the ‘Shock and Awe’ of the destruction of Baghdad. We saw a light show on the television screen, but with a little imagination it wasn't hard to picture innocent women and children cowering in fear, or worse blown apart for the crime of being Iraqi.” So here’s the big question:

Does the State GOP support the Republican Party’s national security plank or does it believe more along the lines of this so called party leader? 

Will GOP State Chairman Jay Webber consider calling a meeting to even discuss supporting the national security plank of our party platform? 

Saying nothing only begs the question.

Stay tuned.