I've been receiving a surprising amount of communication, including an article by an otherwise genius writer, suggesting that the best thing that could happen to conservatives would be a Kerry victory in November. Hold onto your hats for the "reasoning" behind this movement.
Since George W. is not really a conservative, but is simply a socialist to a lesser degree than the Dems, and since the Republican party is taking the right wing for granted, what better wake-up call could be imagined than ignominious defeat? This defeat would supposedly energize the conservatives in Congress, who would fight Kerry at every turn, thus setting the stage for a comeback in 2008.
There are several things wrong with this plan, of course.
First of all, how energized are the conservatives in Congress NOW, with a somewhat ally in the White House? Have they rallied to support good judicial nominations? Except for Tom Tancredo, have they spoken out about illegal immigration? Have they argued for tort reform? Have they strongly advocated lowering taxes, or cutting back the Federal Leviathan? Have they articulated in any manner the threat to our very way of life from Islamo-fascists? In short, are they any better than supposed empty suit Bush?
But more than that, how many real conservatives are in Congress, or could ever be elected to Congress? It should be clear, 59 years after the death of FDR, that most Americans like our unique blend of socialism, regulated capitalism, and an all-powerful central government and imperial court, that relegates to the states only the most minor functions, along with a host of unfunded mandates. How we got this way is an essay for another day—but make no mistake, we did get this way.
Secondly, and more importantly, the plan completely ignores the enormous cultural divide that exists in this country. On the Left, besides the true believers and useful idiots, there are the militant atheists and religion haters, the fanatic baby killers, the self-hating blame America first crowd, the race baiters, the radical gay activists, and the Orwellian free speech-only-for-their-side hypocrites. This entire sick bunch is given aid beyond measure by the Leftist-dominated information mandarin class and academia.
While it may be true that most Americans do not line up with this cohort, it is undeniable that its influence is strongly felt and is changing this country for the worse every single day. Even if Bush is lukewarm on conservative issues, he is clearly hated by the other side as a symbol. There is simply no other explanation as to how they could rally around "anyone but Bush."
Consider that their first champion was the hapless Howard Dean. Generally, one can analogize a state's chief executive to the nation's chief executive, but with Dean, there was a major problem. Of all 50 states, Vermont is the least similar to our country at large, and certainly shares none of the country's major problems. There are no large cities, scant minorities, and virtually no immigrants! His only claim to fame was his opposition to the war in Iraq, and that was enough to excite the granola crowd, who took to their dorm rooms and ecologically friendly townhouses to mount an Internet blitz, that turned out to be a big nothing. When put to the primary test, Dean failed miserably, probably because his candidacy was never blessed by the Dem power brokers, the unions, or the minorities.
John Edwards seemed more electable for a short time, based mostly on his boyish good looks and faux Southern charm. Yet, they were rallying around a scumbag plaintiff's lawyer with absolutely no Leftist bona fides.
For a while, they danced around Wesley Clark, a career military man with gravitas to spare, who seemed to be great in theory, but not quite as good in practice. Somehow this super-hawk in Kosovo couldn't muster the cred needed to be a dove in Iraq.
Then there was Dennis Kucinich, a true believing Lefty, rated one of the worst mayors in American history, famed for having to wear a bulletproof vest when he threw out the first pitch at a Cleveland Indians game, having sharpshooters positioned on the stadium roof. Holding one of the most anti-abortion records in Congress, he had no problem changing his stripes when he set his sights on the big job.
Finally, they ended up with John Kerry, a career politician and dyed-in-the-wool socialist. Of course, it's easy to be a socialist when your wife is worth a billion dollars. Imagine, they rally behind a pathetic phony, who uses his four month tour in 'Nam as the key to his campaign, even though 105 percent of those who were alive at the time opposed the war.
And don't forget, the same stupid argument about supporting the opponent could be made on the other side. Clearly, the Hillary lovers should be campaigning like mad for Bush. Why? If Kerry wins, absent a disaster in his administration, Hillary will be eight years older for her next try, and much less in the limelight, seriously diminishing her chances for the oval office.
Funny thing, though. I haven't heard a word about this strategy. For them, the sine qua non is anyone but Bush. I guess the symbolism matters.
Michael D. Shaw is a Los Angeles-based free lance writer, talk show guest, public speaker, and small business owner, who has an opinion on everything. You can see more of Michaels interesting articles on his own website, bestwriters.com. Comments to Mr. Shaw should be sent to: