Posted on 03/21/2005 1:42:58 PM PST by RWR8189
PRESIDENT BUSH DID NOT INITIATE the political realignment that made Republicans a majority party. But he has helped create the current moment of opportunity for Republicans to enact a far-reaching conservative agenda. Absent Bush, Republicans might not have 55 senators--which they also had in 1997, but otherwise their greatest number since 1930--which was enough to approve oil-drilling in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge last week and to enact bankruptcy reform the week before. Both measures had failed repeatedly in recent years.
Five factors have come together to give Republicans their best chance for major legislative and foreign policy achievements in nearly 80 years. And Bush has been crucial to each one.
The first factor is, obviously, the Republican ascendancy. Bush had only a little to do with the breakthrough election in 1994, when Republicans won the Senate, House, and a majority of governorships (including that of Texas, where Bush became governor). Nor did he aid Republicans much in 2000 when he won the presidency but not the popular vote.
But in the midterm election of 2002 and last year's presidential contest, Bush campaigned aggressively for Republican congressional candidates. And Republicans picked up seats. Many Republican challengers might have won anyway, but not all. Either his campaigning or his coattails were critical to Senate victories for Saxby Chambliss in Georgia, Mel Martinez in Florida, and David Vitter in Louisiana. The Bush landslide in Alaska helped Sen. Lisa Murkowski keep her seat. And, of course, Bush's own reelection was necessary for Republican rule.
Factor two: Democratic disarray. Nothing drives Democrats to distraction--and to demagoguery--the way Bush does. He brings out the worst in them. If Bush wants something, they're reflexively and often mindlessly against it. They chose the shrill Howard Dean as national chairman, and he insists Republicans in general and Bush in particular are "evil." Senate minority leader Harry Reid says the Bush gang seeks "absolute power." And so on.
Worse for Democrats, Bush makes them delusional. Sen. Edward Kennedy claims that while Democrats lost the 2004 election, they still represent "majority opinion." And he appears to believe it. Others, like Democratic representative Maurice Hinchey of New York, spin conspiracy theories, in public, about the Bush White House and Karl Rove, Bush's political adviser. The conspiracy? Rove slipped those fabricated memos to CBS News, which led to Dan Rather's downfall and Bush's reelection. Really.
The CBS scandal leads to factor three, the crackup of the mainstream media. The MSM--the big papers, TV networks, and newsmags--had been slipping for years. Their role as gatekeepers, deciding what was or wasn't news, was a thing of the past. In the 1990s, the arrival of talk radio and Fox News meant there was a popular alternative media. In 2004, bloggers emerged as a nation of fact-checkers whose chief target was the MSM.
Bloggers exposed the CBS story on Bush's Texas Air National Guard service as a fraud almost instantly. Just as important, they forced a reluctant mainstream media to take up the story of the Swift Boat Vets and their challenge of John Kerry's claim to have been a Vietnam war hero. Studies found that the national media were lopsidedly more favorable to Kerry than Bush in their coverage. But Bush won, which tells you something about Big Media's loss of influence.
Factor four: the decline of liberalism. No one has described liberalism's sad state better than Martin Peretz, editor in chief of the New Republic. Liberalism is no longer a serious set of ideas. Nor is it a coherent ideology used to guide political action. In 2005, it has become merely a complaint, Peretz suggested, a complaint about Bush and much of America.
And, finally, factor five: an ambitious, impatient president with an agenda. In a word, Bush. Presidents have a choice. They can lead or they can govern. President George H.W. Bush governed. His son leads. He does what he doesn't have to do. Or at least tries to. So Bush aims to reform Social Security, curb trial lawyers, make the federal courts more conservative, and implant democracy all over the world.
These five factors have produced a rare political moment for Republicans. It's a moment that won't last more than a year or two. The question is whether they'll do anything with it. Nothing is guaranteed. But a lot is expected.
Fred Barnes is executive editor of The Weekly Standard.
AND YOUR STILL THE BLIND FOLLOWING THE BLIND.
The "talking points" accusation is a red herring. Treat the points as honest and debate them. There is definitely room for an honest debate along the lines of your argument. I've seen hundreds of them.
TALKING POINTS ARE NOTHING MORE THAN SPIN. WHY ARGUE SPIN.
IT'S LIKE J@CKING OFF.
There are a bunch on this forum who think that. In their mind the perfect candidate is the only person they will support even though they might agree with President Bush on 75%-95% of the issues. Usually they let one thing blind them to reality and instead of trying to advance the conservative agenda they spend their time trying to destroy it since in their mind that is the only way to "save it".
WHY WON'T ANYONE JUST ADMIT THAT THE WAR IN IRAQ HAS HAD THE OPPOSITE AFFECT AS INTENDED.
SOMEONE PLEASE DEBATE WITH ME HOW RUSSIA ARMING THE MIDDLE EAST BECAUSE EVERYONE IS AFRAID SILLY THAT BUSH HAS ANOTHER PREEMPTIVE STRIKE IN PLANS IS CAUSING PEACE AND STABILITY IN THE REGION.
SOMEONE EXPLAIN TO ME HOW CHINA AND RUSSIA ARMING UP AND PRACTICING WAR GAMES TOGETHER TO OFFSET THE MUSCLE WE'VE USED IS CAUSING PEACE & STABILITY IN THE WORLD.
Ping
A PREMEDITATED FALSE PEACEFUL ACT TO LET US PUT OUR GUARD DOWN WHILE RUSSIA-CHINA & FRIENDS (IRAN, SYRIA) TAKES CARE OF THE DIRTY WORK.
I CALL THIS A HUGE VICRORY ON THE PART OF bUSH FOREIGN POLICY.
Only in your dreams. Either you're a DU sleeper who is showing his true colors or one of those conservative purists who has never actually supported the President because he wasn't "conservative enough" for you.
History will show President Bush to have been one of the greatest Presidents in United States history. I know this because I will be one of the people writing it and teaching it to our future generations.
Waht are you? Stupid of something. go back to DU
"instead of trying to advance the conservative agenda they spend their time trying to destroy it since in their mind that is the only way to "save it"."
Is a conservative agenda running up DEBT or campaign finance reform or extended government entitlements or a worthless education plan or a non-existent domestic energy policy or a failed national security program? <- Those are republican policies, not conservative policies. What I find ironic is that if the republicans were in the minority they would be squelling like a hog with the GWB agenda.
I will, gladly, but first you must turn off Caps Lock.
"I know this because I will be one of the people writing it and teaching it to our future generations.
Unfortunately our future generations will be so far in DEBT they wouldn't have time to read your your fiction tales.
You can say that again and again, every word of it!
"WHY WON'T ANYONE JUST ADMIT THAT THE WAR IN IRAQ HAS HAD THE OPPOSITE AFFECT AS INTENDED. "
Maybe because it hasn't. Has that ever entered your mind? Could you possibly be wrong?
YOUR?
Which rogue nations have tried to develop nukes due to the Iraq invasion that weren't trying to get them before?
When were China and Russia NOT building up their militaries?
I think you need to study a little more history. Bush's will be seen as a historic presidency for its not caring what the weak-kneed think about what our enemies think of us, while helping democracy grow in an area NO ONE believed ti could.
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.