Free Republic
Browse · Search
Smoky Backroom
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

The Paradox of Unified Control–How Conservatives Can Win Without Bush
Vanity | 1/31/2004 | Self

Posted on 01/31/2004 3:07:29 PM PST by Kevin Curry

Can conservatives win in November if Bush loses the White House? The easy answer is "No." The thinking answer is quite different. The easy answer overestimates the power of a Democrat president who must work with a Republican-controlled Congress. The thinking answer is that gridlock is often preferable to a government shifting into high gear regardless of whether a Republican or Democrat is at the wheel. And gridlock is always preferable to progressivism, whatever its form.

Liberal nanny state progressivism is a rouged tart wearing a high tight skirt standing on the street corner, who whispers "$20 for a good time." Compassionate conservative progressivism is the wholesome girl next door in a county fair booth that reads, "$20 for a kiss"–only the bargain is even worse, because the government forces you to pay, and someone else gets the good time or the kiss.

Neither form of progressivism is acceptable to a conservative who has better and more profitable things to do with his time and money.

The key to understanding why the thinking answer attaches such small value to a Bush win this November is to understand the paradox of unified control. Common sense suggests that conservatives are best served when Republicans have unified control over the two branches that write the checks, pay the bills, and write and enforce the laws: the executive and the legislative. That was the delirious hope of conservatives, including myself, who cheered in November 2000 as Bush won the White House by the narrowest of margins and the Republican Party won combined control of the Senate and the House in 2002.

But this delirious optimism has turned steadily to dark dismay as Bush recklessly and heedlessly cranked the conservative agenda hard left and smashed it into reefs of trillion-dollar Medicare entitlements, record deficit spending, incumbent criticism-stifling campaign finance reform, illegal alien amnesty-on-the-installment-plan, NEA budget increases and the like.

Where has the Republican co-captain –Congress–been as Bush has pursed this reckless course? Mostly sleeping or meekly assisting. Would a Republican Congress have tolerated these antics from a Democratic president? Absolutely not! Why has a Republican Congress tolerated and even assisted Bush to do this? Because he is a Republican and for no other reason.

Thus, the paradox of unified control: a president can most easily and effectively destroy or compromise the dominant agenda of his own party when his own party controls Congress. Bush has demonstrated the potency of this paradox more powerfully than any president in recent memory–although Clinton had his moments too, as when he supported welfare reform.

Does this mean conservatives should desire a Democrat president when Congress is controlled by Republicans? No. Conservatives should desire a consistently conservative Republican president who with grace and inspiration will lead a Republican-controlled Congress to enact reforms that will prove the clear superiority of the conservative, small government agenda by its fruits. Bush's tax cuts are a wonderful achievement, and have had a powerful stimulating effect on the economy. But imagine how much better the result if he had not set forces in motion to neutralize this achievement by getting his trillion dollar Medicare boondoggle enacted.

Ten steps forward and ten steps back is may be how Republicans dance the "compassionate conservative" foxtrot, but in the end it merely leads us back to the same sorry place we started. It is not an improvement.

When a Republican president compromises the conservative agenda and is enabled to do so by a Republican Congress too dispirited or disorganized to resist, the next best answer might well be for a Democrat to hold the White House. Nothing would steel the courage of a Republican Congress and enliven its spirit more than to face off against a Democrat bent on implementing a liberal agenda.

Any Democrat unfortunate enough to win the White House this year will face the most depressing and daunting task of any Democrat president ever to hold the office. The Iraq War will become his war, and he will be scorned and repudiated if he does not with grace, power, and dignity bring it to a satisfactory conclusion. That means he will have to conduct the war in much the same way that Bush is conducting it now–he will not have the latitude to do much else. If he conducts the war in the manner that Bush is conducting it, his own base will abandon him.

Any Democrat president will also have to choose between spending cuts or raising taxes. If he chooses the latter, he will see his support plummet as the economic recovery sputters and stalls. If he chooses the former, he will dispirit his base supporters. In either case he will strengthen the hand of the Republican controlled-Congress and see Republican strength enhanced in the Senate and House.

If SCOTUS vacancies open up, he will see his nominees scrutinized and resisted with a zeal that can only be expected and carried out by a Republican-controlled Senate Judiciary Committee that has suffered through years of kidney-punches and eye-gouging in judicial appointment hearings by a Democrat minority (it would help immensely if the spineless, Kennedy-appeasing Orrin Hatch were replaced as Committee Chair).

As his frustrations grow, his support plummets, and the Republican Party adds to its numbers in Congress, a Democrat president would be viewed as opportunistic roadkill by zealots in his own party, including and especially the ice-blooded and cruelly-scheming Hillary Clinton. In the run-up to the 2008 election Democrats would be faced with the choice of continuing to support a sure loser in the incumbent or a scheming hard-left alternative in Hillary. The blood-letting in the Democratic Party through the primary season and into the convention would be grievous and appalling, committed in plain view of the American public–who could be expected to vomit both of them out.

That would leave the field open for the Republican presidential candidate to achieve a victory of historic proportions in 2008. With greater Republican strength in Congress, the opportunity would again present itself for this nation to finally achieve the dream of implementing a real and substantial conservative agenda, of actually shrinking government in a large and meaningful way.

The key to achieving that dream, of course, is to carefully select an electable conservative for 2008 who will remain true to the conservative vision and not cause conservatism to fall victim again to the paradox of unified control.

It is not too soon to start looking for that candidate.


TOPICS:
KEYWORDS: gop
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 161-180181-200201-220 ... 1,961-1,963 next last
To: Tamsey
We are not splitting down the middle. This is just the traditional 80/20 split we see on FR every election cycle. It never changes.
181 posted on 01/31/2004 9:23:06 PM PST by Texasforever
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 177 | View Replies]

To: Kevin Curry
You ought to know better than to heap praise onto the Clinton's.
182 posted on 01/31/2004 9:23:37 PM PST by BigSkyFreeper (All Our Base Are Belong To Dubya)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 170 | View Replies]

To: PhilipFreneau
Bush did not vote for CFR. Were you just as surprised when during the election he talked about education and reform? Were you not expecting him to follow thru?

So you want to just walk away and let the democrats win? Don't believe you are a conservative. I am not sure what you are but if you were a conservative you would be applauding Bush for the defense, war on terrorism, banning of partial birth abortion, opposing affirmative action. Sir, that is what core conservative views are. \

As for the growth of government--tell me in what ways did it grow?

Patriot act was a must during times of war. CFR was wrong, Illegal immigration--someone needs to address this problem--Bush has opend the discussion--now time to address this problem. Medicare, social security reform are a must as well. Time to clean up and modernize--
183 posted on 01/31/2004 9:24:58 PM PST by olliemb
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 158 | View Replies]

To: Tamsey
It's only the end of January and the raving nutters have bored me to death with their posts.

Alan Keyes is the flip side of Jesse Jackson/Al Sharpton. He's used the race card, " victim-hood ", and discredited himself badly, by trashing President Bush all over Cable shows, not a week after President Bush took the oath of office. He's in even LESS demand than Pat B. and Pat has fallen into oblivion.

184 posted on 01/31/2004 9:25:21 PM PST by nopardons
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 171 | View Replies]

To: Antoninus
Too many betrayals will do that to a guy.

Only betrayals if you weren't paying attention when he ran against Gore... he is not a perfect conservative and it's simplistic to be "furious" when is doesn't act like one. We need to give him credit where he does make conservative moves and send letters when he isn't right-ward enough... but as far as being part of the "all or nothing" conservative faction? Nope... I'll be much happier with "most" than "zero".

185 posted on 01/31/2004 9:26:20 PM PST by Tamzee (W '04..... America may not survive a Democrat at this point in our history....)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 155 | View Replies]

To: Sandy
Oh, brother. !!!
186 posted on 01/31/2004 9:27:03 PM PST by olliemb
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 176 | View Replies]

To: Antoninus
Perhaps. But are Edwards or Kerry weak enough to be controlled by the Clintons? I don't think so in either case.

Are you aware that Michael Whouley is the guy behind Kerry's campaign?

And Erskine Bowles is helping John Edwards with his PAC?

So if you think Clinton aren't controling their strings .. think again

187 posted on 01/31/2004 9:28:18 PM PST by Mo1 (Join the dollar a day crowd now!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 165 | View Replies]

To: BigSkyFreeper
You're right, but the UNAPPEASABLES don't care.
188 posted on 01/31/2004 9:29:32 PM PST by nopardons
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 178 | View Replies]

To: Texasforever
We are not splitting down the middle. This is just the traditional 80/20 split we see

Ahhh, so they are just extra-loud to the point where they SEEM like 50% instead of 20%. Got it!

Pssssttt... They seem more liberal by the second ;-)

189 posted on 01/31/2004 9:29:34 PM PST by Tamzee (W '04..... America may not survive a Democrat at this point in our history....)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 181 | View Replies]

To: nopardons
Not to mention Keyes trashed Bush all over OK in 2000! Talk about name calling, Keyes did it with the best of them here in my State.

190 posted on 01/31/2004 9:30:11 PM PST by PhiKapMom (AOII Mom -- Support Bush-Cheney '04)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 184 | View Replies]

To: Texasforever
When I look back on Bush's record and 2000 election campaign platform, he's followed through on every single one of his campaign promises.
191 posted on 01/31/2004 9:30:11 PM PST by BigSkyFreeper (All Our Base Are Belong To Dubya)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 166 | View Replies]

To: Tamsey
With no real 3rd party alternative "gridlock" has taken up the slack. We are seeing the traditional 3rd party types coalescing around this new cause and its roots lie in sites such as the John Birch Society, American Patrol, FAIR,the Constitution Party, the Libertarian party, Conservatives against Bush, Republicans against Bush, Arab-Republicans against Bush and Republicans for Dean, all of whom have several posters assigned to Freerepublic.
192 posted on 01/31/2004 9:32:55 PM PST by Texasforever
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 177 | View Replies]

To: nopardons
Yep... that "murder" garbage Keyes directed at Bush lost me forever. Forget the ethics of such a statement, it was politically the act of a mental midget.... he's an embarrassment to the right-wing.
193 posted on 01/31/2004 9:34:19 PM PST by Tamzee (W '04..... America may not survive a Democrat at this point in our history....)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 184 | View Replies]

To: BigSkyFreeper
Don't focus on the fact that both of them are radically liberal, thats not the point of their fight. Just watch, Kerry's political aspirations will implode before Edwards' does. It's all about who will regain and keep hold of power. The Kennedy dynasty or the Clinton regime? Time will tell.

Good points all. When dealing with Democrat intramural fights, I try to think of how communists have behaved in other countries. In my opinion, the leadership of the Democrat party is almost entirely composed of megolomaniacal egomaniacs. Even a Clinton-endorsed/propped up John Edwards will want to be done with those people if he happens to win the election. I'll bet if he wins the nomination and Bush looks beatable in August, Hitlery ends up in the VP slot...
194 posted on 01/31/2004 9:34:33 PM PST by Antoninus (In hoc signo, vinces †)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 178 | View Replies]

To: Kevin Curry; Howlin
What do you know about Bush's supporters!? You clearly aren't one. Do you claim the ability to look into the heart of an individual and discern their motives? How "liberal" of you! -- questioning people's motivations.

You clearly don't understand the motivations of those of us true conservatives who support Bush. Our posts are here for you to read, but they don't seem to penetrate your thick bias.

Your sanctimony and narrowmindedness are appalling.

195 posted on 01/31/2004 9:36:19 PM PST by My2Cents ("Well...there you go again.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 117 | View Replies]

To: Texasforever
all of whom have several posters assigned to Freerepublic

Are you SERIOUS??? Groups actually assign people to come here and stir up deliberate conflict?

196 posted on 01/31/2004 9:36:23 PM PST by Tamzee (W '04..... America may not survive a Democrat at this point in our history....)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 192 | View Replies]

To: Texasforever
Yep. Third party types going around flaunting their "principled Conservatism" and masquerading as "true Conservatives" in order to fragment the larger sum of the whole GOP.
197 posted on 01/31/2004 9:36:27 PM PST by BigSkyFreeper (All Our Base Are Belong To Dubya)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 192 | View Replies]

To: Antoninus
Hillary is not the type who wants to play "second fiddle" to anyone. Using your logic, it's like the puppeteer taking commands from the puppet. She'll run for President, it won't be in 2004. I'd wager it will happen in 2008 if she loses her senate seat in 2006.
198 posted on 01/31/2004 9:39:28 PM PST by BigSkyFreeper (All Our Base Are Belong To Dubya)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 194 | View Replies]

To: Mo1
Are you aware that Michael Whouley is the guy behind Kerry's campaign? And Erskine Bowles is helping John Edwards with his PAC? So if you think Clinton aren't controling their strings .. think again

Ok, but please explain what happens to that "control" should Kerry or Edwards win in November? What's to keep them from telling the Clintons and Terry McAwful to "take a hike."
199 posted on 01/31/2004 9:40:29 PM PST by Antoninus (In hoc signo, vinces †)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 187 | View Replies]

To: Tamsey
Go to each of the sites I listed. You will see the pattern and the word for word posts we are seeing on FR. I know of 2 from the Arab-Republicans against Bush. One is currently active the other one recently banned. The John Birch Society has 2 articles posted in the last 2 weeks and American Patrol is the source for numerous immigration articles. All of these articles are posted by the same individuals depending on source.
200 posted on 01/31/2004 9:42:01 PM PST by Texasforever
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 196 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 161-180181-200201-220 ... 1,961-1,963 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Smoky Backroom
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson