Posted on 12/10/2003 8:59:00 PM PST by BobbyK
Enough With The Neocon And Paleocon
Carping—I'll Stand With George W. Bush In 2004
Like most Toogood Reports readers, I observed this year's battles within the conservative ranks with profound discomfort. In my mind, there are far too many real enemies out there to waste time and print fighting one another.
It seems that the world of conservatism has been split up between the "conservatives" and the "paleo-conservatives" or between the "conservatives" and the "neo-conservatives." Both sides present themselves as the bona fide article and the other side as the one in need of a prefix.
Personally, I just want to spit up this strife the same way the bleachers of Wrigley Field do the opposition´s home run balls. This qualifies as a "which side are you on boys" issue. It is my goal to conserve America's wonderful, non-living Constitution, and to forever preserve the personal and economic freedoms that embody our way of life. If you agree with me about these basic propositions, then you're on my side and the rest of your views are of secondary concern. Simply revering the spirit of the Founding Fathers puts you in the top 50 percent of the population on the Chap-o-meter.
Not only is an inter-journalist, inter-intellectual, conservative civil war fruitless, it is also detrimental to the nation as a whole. The country needs all of our efforts just to have a chance of mitigating the damage the culture war has wrought.
Our daily resistance may be the biggest obstacle to the federal pacman swallowing up fifty percent of the economy. We cannot afford to bicker amongst ourselves. The odds are too great. Obsessing over who said what about Taki, Buchanan, Frum, Lowry or any of the other public figures who make up the American right is counter-productive.
The neocon/paleocon debate is as bewildering as it is petty and misguided. Sadly, some conservatives now feel more comfortable with leftists than they do their own kind [I know of one who astonished me by saying that he regards the American Enterprise Institute as "The Death Star"]. Certainly, internal disagreements are to be expected, but they are trivial in comparison to accepting the positions advocated by the other side of the political spectrum. Socialism, cultural Marxism, white guilt, and radical feminism are eternal obstacles to advancing society. Other conflicts pale in importance when compared to them.
I propose that we abandon slurs like paleo-con and neo-con. Instead we should all evolve into "Logicons." The Logicon refuses to slash at the brethren who march alongside him because maintaining some level of public harmony is the only logical way in which we will succeed. Logicons realize that our fighting strength should not be diluted by internecine combat.
Much of the controversy currently centers around President Bush and whether or not one approves of his job performance. I've written here and elsewhere how much I personally admire him, but I also acknowledge that certain criticisms have been valid. Those who label him a big spender are correct in their assessments. He has not used his veto to curb the size of government and has developed a habit of hugging Ted Kennedy's voluminous appropriations.
While this is unfortunate, to pretend that Bush is not the best bet for advancing the country's interests is shortsighted. There are many conservatives out there who could do a better job of slashing outlays, but it is highly unlikely that any of them could get elected by our emotive and squishy electorate. On our side, George W. Bush "feels their pain" better than anyone. He brings in moderate voters the way my old Erie Dearie lures used to bag walleyes .
The problem is one of perspective. We can spend time complaining about steel tariffs or the administration´s pathetic capitulation on affirmative action last summer. Yes, I would have been greatly pleased if he disseminated a Michigan Law brief of his own after the decision entitled “O´Connor a Known Fruitcake,” but the fact is that he didn't and there´s nothing we can do about it. However, we must keep our outlook global by remembering what the alternatives are.
What would Al Gore do with affirmative action? How about Howard Dean, the neurotic would-be-king, with Al Qaeda? Makes you shudder doesn´t it? After the election, Al Sharpton would take his standup around the world as our Secretary of State and we´d hear Patricia Ireland lambasting “patriarchal textbooks” in her role as Secretary of Education.
In actuality, my examples really aren´t all that farfetched. The radical left has been carrying the Democrat Party since 2001 and, now, if the Democrats win, bills will need to be paid.
Rather than fantasize about an ideal future, conservatives need to think about how things can, and will, get devastatingly worse, should Bush lose. Be it Dean or Kerry or whatever burrito they decide to roll out of the Taqueria next summer, the fate of the country will be in jeopardy. By this time in 2006, there will be a foreign policy coward in every pot and a benefit check in the hands of every college drop out. Think France, think Germany, and then be grateful we have a president who doesn't spit after saying "tax cuts."
Besides, the Bush Presidency has produced many hidden benefits. His appointees may well be our salvation even though he backs obese budgets. In the latest issue of The New Criterion, we see that his appointments to the National Endowment of the Arts have had a wonderful effect. Under Dana Gioia, the agency is sponsoring Macbeth for military bases and has resurrected traditional Shakespeare at the national level [Shakespearean plays are now staged as in the days of old which means brothels and bath house scenes are no longer mandatory].
I don´t care if you insult him or trade in Karl Rove conspiracy theories, but, in November of 2004, this particular rightist is going to stand by George W. Bush just as the bumper sticker on my car promises. Our hopes for a better tomorrow rest in the White House on his bed. We must support him because heady days await and also because his reelection keeps the Democrat Party headless. Let´s proudly stand by our man as he loudly subsumes the popular positions of the left while promoting many of ours in the shadows though his judges, appointees, and minions.
So far, the reasons TO vote for him in 2004 are outweighing the reasons NOT TO vote for him.
I'm going to judge my vote on the war on terror. If he lets Powell continue to control policy when it comes to dealing with NK, Syria, Iran, etc., then I'm out.
And I PRAY we are slapping the Saudi's around behind the scenes but I'm not optimistic. I PRAY Bush is "keeping his enemies closer" with them.
Neither do any of these PURISTS care that historically speaking, their argument doesn't hold water, either. Look at that post about the governement/president shredding the Constitution having started 25 years ago, or in 1978 , forinstance. My GOD, 1978 ?
As regards which country is ''better'', now, in the terms I named -- that the gov't simply follows its OWN rules, and ''allows'' the citizen to be left alone to a greater extent -- I would say (Scots-American that I am, so you may find this odd) that Ireland USED to be (the Creative Works Act of 1974 is what led to their being the computer capital of Europe, btw), and is still to some degree, although its unfortunate ratification of Maastricht makes me FAR too suspicious to live there. Ah, so where else?
An objective person will consider Iceland. Inhospitable climate, but absolutely marvelous people, and they put up with NO kwap from their gov't. Very much to be admired, and very independent folks. Equally, if one wanted to go through the process of gaining what used to be called a ''crown exemption'' (I can look up the current phrase if you like), the Balaeric Islands are worth a look -- cost of living is far too high, just like the Caymans, but still worth a look.
10 years ago, I would have said Costa Rica was a definite. Still is, except that -- courtesy of indifference on the part of the US -- Marxism is spreading like wildfire through Latin America. Chavez, Lula, the new clown in Peru, the Colombian narcoterrorists who control that nation...not for me. It'll spread northward, too, just wait.
Singapore is very interesting -- sure, they'll bust your ass if you leave a piece of gum on the sidewalk...but I don't chew gum. Capitalists down to the nth degree, the gov't leaves you alone as long as you do something productive (and, hence, pay taxes).
There are several other possibilities, couple of slots in the West Indies, and Turks and Caicos Islands for one specific. Just a rockpile, but some lovely scenery, and the weather's decent, the gov't is benign, and modern communications are very available.
As they say -- investigate BEFORE you invest...or move.
We can elect a Marxist or a quasi-Marxist.
If, under either choice, we get larger government and an expansion of the assorted Ponzi schemes now in favour with most governments, and the associated restrictions on and confiscations of our respective liberties, what's the difference?
And -- keeping in mind that I (more's the idiot, me -- and I admit my error, unlike a large number of our fellow citizens) voted enthusiastically for Mr. Bush in 2000 -- why MUST I play **their** game any further?
Btw, I will cheer you up to this extent: if Hitlery runs, I'll vote for ANYONE the Pubbies nominate. Period. I once spent 5 1/2 months in the old Soviet Union, 1971-2 (don't EVER spend a winter in Leningrad...wups, Sankt Peterburg...TRUST me on this one point!) and there is precisely nothing to differentiate the Clinquant of Chappaqua from a female version of Stalin, except possibly the moustache.
Why only Hillary? Is there a democrat running that you would prefer over Bush?
It isn't " just " which governemnt is more strick about keeping true to their Constitution; no, rather it also is about just WHAT is actually therein. Then, there is also the fact that most other places, depending upon one's wants, needs, and proclivities, aren't nearly as hospitable, to most Americans, as is the USA.
Would I ever leave ? Maybe. Is there someplace else, where I could find what, at the minimum, I KNOW that I need ? Doubtful. You haven't mentioned a place, where I and mine would go...for various and sundry good reasons.
Oh, and by-the-by...you harped on the fact that South America is turning into/has turned into a Marxist slum, implying that OUR governemnt should have been doing something, long ago, about that. That is NOT exactly all that CONSTITUTIONAL. LOL
Is it only when YOUR wants/positions aren't being met 100%, that you think that the governemnt has the absolute RIGHT to interfer? And yes, I know all about the Monroe Doctorine and all that THAT implies. :-)
There is ALWAYS option C -- none of the above. Whether or not that this option is palatable to you, it is an option...therefore, let's please in future be just a trifle more cautious about declaiming about logic, ok?
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.