Posted on 02/21/2006 9:47:12 AM PST by raccoonradio
THE WONDERFUL thing about writing commentary pieces is that I get ample feedback, often from people unencumbered by the niceties of interpersonal diplomacy.
Last week, I did what you might expect a conservative columnist to do. I told young orphans there is no Santa Claus. No, no, just kidding. (Besides, I'd have gotten a better reaction closer to the holidays.)
No, I merely cataloged the troubles of the Democratic Party. The infuriated response from hordes of liberal readers was, "How could you criticize the Democrats when the Republicans are in so much more trouble?" Fortunately they provided their own answers, most of which involved words such as "hack" and "shill," and phrases ill-suited to a family newspaper — or even to bars frequented by ex-cons. Angry readers recounted the long parade of GOP problems: warrantless wiretaps, the Abramoff scandal, Tom DeLay's indictment, Katrina, the revelation that President Bush is Rosemary's baby, etc.
And that was before Vice President Dick Cheney started shooting people.
Allow me to defend myself. First, fish gotta fly, birds gotta swim, and conservative columnists gotta indulge their schadenfreude about the sorry plight of the Democratic Party. It's what we do.
Second, of course the GOP is a mess (although I would remind liberals that it is better to be a majority party with problems than a minority party with problems). Congressmen are hanging out in K Street warrens like addicts in 19th century opium dens, but instead of Chinese dudes passing out pipes, there are lobbyists handing out checks, golf trips and other prizes from behind Curtain No. 2 on "Let's Make a Deal." The Contract With America that brought the Republicans to power more than 10 years ago is a distant blur in the GOP's rearview mirror. Smaller, competent and restrained government has been sacrificed to the new coalition of Republican rent-seekers.
Compassionate conservatism may have had some intellectual rigor when it was the stuff of egghead journals and think tank conferences, but under Bush it has always been a marketing strategy designed to justify spending vast sums of money. This shattering of the GOP's at-least-nominal commitment to limited government has not only resulted in a bidding war between Congress and the White House on how "best" to expand government, it has also caused philosophical incontinence on the right.
I'm less critical of Bush's handling of the War on Terror, but there, too, one certainly needn't struggle to the point of herniation to find mistakes.
Third, Republicans and conservatives aren't the same thing. This distinction seems lost on lots of people, including cable television bark-show bookers and partisan Democrats and Republicans alike. To a principled conservative, it is bad news when the Democrats lurch to the left, even if it makes the Democrats less likely to win elections. Why? Because when the Democrats move left, so do the Republicans.
In American politics, when one party moves left or right, the political center of gravity moves that way too. Bill Clinton, whatever his flaws, moved his party to the right. His triangulation infuriated Republicans because it is always vexing when someone steals your lunch. Democrats despise Bush's compassionate conservatism for similar reasons. A Republican President promising to "leave no child behind" annoys Democrats as much as Clinton's denouncing of Sista Soulja irked Republicans. When the Bush presidency is over, it will be more obvious in hindsight how much he moved the GOP to the left — by making the Nanny State bipartisan.
It all boils down to what matters to you most. As a conservative, the extent I root for the GOP depends entirely on how successful it is in moving the political climate of the country toward fiscal restraint, limited government and cultural decency. Single-issue voters understand this point best: Pro-lifers would dearly love to break the GOP monopoly on opposing abortion, just as abortion rights supporters dream of the day when both parties are pro-choice. Many conservatives, including yours truly, would have agonized over a choice between a reliably pro-war Democrat and George W. Bush in 2004, particularly if judicial appointments weren't so important.
The point, dear liberals, is that some conservatives who criticize the Democrats or offer them advice do not do so solely to salt wounds, but in the hope that someday we will have a real choice on Election Day — and not between the lesser of two evils.
schadenfreude is still what's for dinner!
>>The Contract With America that brought the Republicans to power more than 10 years ago is a distant blur in the GOP's rearview mirror. Smaller, competent and restrained government has been sacrificed to the new coalition of Republican rent-seekers.
>>Republicans and conservatives aren't the same thing. ...To a principled conservative, it is bad news when the Democrats lurch to the left, even if it makes the Democrats less likely to win elections. Why? Because when the Democrats move left, so do the Republicans. In American politics, when one party moves left or right, the political center of gravity moves that way too.
--------- So...it's a matter of picking the lesser of two evils or the evil of the two lessers...the party that will hurt us less in the wallet. But does he have a point about Republicans leaning more to the left when Dems do the same?
It's too late for that.
>>a strong, healthy Democratic Party.
In my home state of Mass., that's just what we have. Only the gov and lt gov (Romney & Healey) are GOP (and prob RINOs
at that). Both senators and all 10 reps are Dems. Most of
the state legislature is. Peter Blute, former GOP US rep.
(3rd district) might challenge Ted Kennedy, though. But if you want one party rule, come to Massachusetts...
There's a larger point that Goldberg is making. The only way for healthy ideas and policies to be developed within the political system is if both parties work to offer an intelligent, feasible outlook on the nation's path and future. This is done within the larger context of intense but loyal and patriotic competition.
The reason the Republican Congress and, to a lesser extent, the Bush Administration, have passed such mediocre legislation is because they've become intellectually lazy. They've been able to sink to that state because the Democrat Party has become such a joke.
It doesn't take serious thought to win a debate with a simpleton.
That's why I'd hope that the more the Dems become Moonbats,
the more people would pick the GOP. But does this guy
have a good point about the GOP _moving to the left when
the Dems move more to the left_? Spending more and more...
"when you have a choice between a Democrat and a Democrat,
the Democrat wins every time". The midterm elections will be interesting...and if the GOP can't get a strong candidate
for Pres. in '08, well, we'll be stuck with...Shrillary...
(shiver)
>>It doesn't take serious thought to win a debate with a simpleton.
I hope that's true! Again, we'll see come this November...
let's hope it's not another case of "the party out of power
making gains"
Or New Jersey. No matter how many people in the administration or local townships are thrown in jail for corruption the Democrats rule here. Only a couple of counties (such as mine) vote Republican.
From Goldberg's column a week or so ago:
"It is amazing how obvious — OK, even trite — is the Democratic plight. Democrats need the money and energy of their "progressive," blog-addicted base, but in order to get it, they turn off mainstream voters. In other words, they can't get escape velocity.
"Clinton's Wal-Mart refund is a perfect illustration not merely of her hypocrisy but of the quicksand she is now in. She thinks it's a winning message to say she's too good for Wal-Mart's money but not Hollywood's. That's not exactly red-state savvy."
I couldn't agree more!
For the past 12 years the Canadian Conservatives were splintering and then re-forming, all the while trying to find some coherent message to tell voters. While the party struggled internally the Liberals had no real effective opposition. The result was arrogance that led eventually to a culture that enabled corruption.
Even the best political parties need to be opposed by competant and patriotic opposition. The nature of the political beast and it's willingness to act in it's own interests when unchecked demands it.
I want a strong, healthy opposition party. It doesn't have to be the Democrats, and it's beginning to look like it might not be. The problem is that most of the alternatives are even kookier.
If the Dem party dies, the GOP coalition will probably fall apart.
The only thing keeping social conservatices, small 'l' libertarians and neo-cons together is the existence of the Democrat party.
I would love a healthy Democratic party.....one that sits somewhere to the right of the Republicans on the political spectrum.
I don't want one-party rule, even if it's the GOP. I would prefer for the Democratic Party to once again have plenty of Scoop Jackson Democrats. We can disagree on domestic policy, but politics would stop at the waters' edge.
The further left the Democratic Party goes, the further left the Republican Party will drift into that murky middle. Then at the voting booth you have a choice between socialists and a big spending Republican Party. I wish the Democrats would move right so the Republicans would start acting like Republicans again.
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.