Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Did Bush Destroy The Republican Party?
Captain's Quarters ^ | Jan. 25, 2008 | Ed Morrissey

Posted on 01/25/2008 7:58:07 AM PST by jdm

Peggy Noonan aims her considerable cannon at George Bush this morning in the Wall Street Journal in the middle of her analysis of the primaries. She fingers him as the main culprit in the destruction of the Republican Party, discounting other and perhaps better causes and engaging in just a little hyperbole:

On the pundit civil wars, Rush Limbaugh declared on the radio this week, "I'm here to tell you, if either of these two guys [Mr. McCain or Mike Huckabee] get the nomination, it's going to destroy the Republican Party. It's going to change it forever, be the end of it!"

This is absurd. George W. Bush destroyed the Republican Party, by which I mean he sundered it, broke its constituent pieces apart and set them against each other. He did this on spending, the size of government, war, the ability to prosecute war, immigration and other issues.

Were there other causes? Yes, of course. But there was an immediate and essential cause.

And this needs saying, because if you don't know what broke the elephant you can't put it together again. The party cannot re-find itself if it can't trace back the moment at which it became lost. It cannot heal an illness whose origin is kept obscure.

I love Peggy Noonan's commentary, but this is a little over the top. The party has lost exactly one national cycle in the last four. I don't consider them dead after a single setback, and anyone who does appears more interested in garnering attention than in providing trenchant analysis.

It doesn't mean we don't have trouble, but Noonan's wrong to lay the whole thing on Bush. While it's true that he hasn't provided much in the way of fiscal discipline, he didn't run for office as a Steve Forbes conservative, either. He spoke of compassionate conservatism, a code for big-government approaches for center-right policies, and he delivered. Bush talked about working on bipartisan solutions to national issues, and he pretty much did that before the Iraq war turned sour. Republicans elected Bush knowing what they were going to get, and Noonan can't seriously claim shock over the result.

The seeds of Republican discontent took root in Congress, not the executive. It was the succession of Republican Congresses that refused to cut spending, and instead blew wads of cash on non-defense discretionary spending. Bush led in some of these efforts, but he didn't multiply pork exponentially; that came from House and Senate Republicans. He didn't climb into bed with K Street, either -- that project started before Bush ever arrived at the White House with Tom DeLay and others.

It may be fashionable for Republicans to cast all blame on the President, but that falsely absolves those who created the problems that plague us at the moment. It may also sound rhetorically spectacular to declare the party "destroyed" by having its constituent coalitions debate about its direction, but it's both inaccurate and hyperbolic. It's not unusual for parties to have these debates -- and maybe if we'd had it in 2000, we would have elevated leaders more supportive of traditional Republican fiscal discipline rather than just blindly supported the people who threw that legacy in the wastebin.


TOPICS: Constitution/Conservatism; Editorial; Government; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: bush; deathofthegop; destroyed; gop; noonan; presidentbush; republicanparty; rinobush
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 161-180181-200201-220221-230 next last
To: Thunder Pig

Him and his brother have definitely destroyed the GOP in Florida. We have nothing but RINOs in office now...hell...even the head of the GOP here is a RINO.


201 posted on 01/26/2008 9:39:50 AM PST by I got the rope
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Friendofgeorge

She told him she would over turn Roe, I was in the room :) I imagine she told him she would do all things in Respect to Christ and the unborn children.

#####

I always believed Harriet Miers sincerity, too. W is a good longterm planner, and I think he was betting that Ginsburg would retire if another woman had replaced O’Connor. Alito could have been nominated to replace Ginsburg, et voila! 3 conservative judges in an eight year Republican administration.

I also did not fault him at all for the Dubai Ports deal. I live in a container port city, and respect the business instincts of Bush, the committee that had oversight of foreign deals, the admin capabilities of an ally of ours in the ME, and a real red flag for me was Schumer’s protectionism of some union dock workers in Miami who would have lost their jobs in the takeover. It was when they felt threatened, that the whole hysteria blew up -— abetted by a lot of radio talk show hosts, sadly.


202 posted on 01/26/2008 9:44:18 AM PST by maica (Romney '08)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 177 | View Replies]

To: Agent Smith

Ronald Reagan the actual president makes GWB look like Reagan the legend.


203 posted on 01/26/2008 9:46:26 AM PST by RGSpincich
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: jdm

The Bush tax cuts made the tax schedules MORE PROGRESSIVE by reducing the percentage that low and middle income earners paid more than the reduction for the higher earners. There are now more voters who pay no taxes and will vote for panderers offering programs that they won’t have to contribute to.

Watch how when the Bush tax cuts expire the rate for the “rich” will be increased but the rates for the low earners will not.

This not only destroys the GOP, but also our republic.


204 posted on 01/26/2008 10:03:58 AM PST by Poincare (Hope is nostalgia for the future.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Richard Kimball
People can bitch about him all they want, but I thank God he was our president on 9/11.

Yes and know. I don't think that GWB's cabinet performed very well--Rumsfeld, Rice, Wolfowitz, etc. GWB has not held people accountable in his administration. I realize it's left wing talking points, but sometimes the diagnosis is correct, even if the proposed medication is bad.

205 posted on 01/26/2008 10:24:25 AM PST by Huck (Buzzards gotta eat, same as worms.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 164 | View Replies]

To: maica

Well spoken!!!I agree, btw nice boat.


206 posted on 01/26/2008 10:25:46 AM PST by Friendofgeorge (Romney for President!!! Rudy and McCain suck! Huck and John stop Bush bashing)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 202 | View Replies]

To: cva66snipe
Ronald Reagan did nothing to the pro-life movement. Ronald Reagan increases taxes in his second term. Ronald Reagan singed amnesty for millions of illegal immigrants. Ronald Reagan withdrew from Beirut in 1983 when the terrorists attacks the Marines Barracks there. In 1986 mid-term elections the democrats won big.
207 posted on 01/26/2008 10:26:41 AM PST by jveritas (God bless our brave troops and President Bush)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 200 | View Replies]

To: All

He did not help the GOP but it was the gang of thirteen. “McCain”


208 posted on 01/26/2008 10:29:14 AM PST by bitty
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 207 | View Replies]

To: jdm

He damaged it.

McCain will destroy it.


209 posted on 01/26/2008 10:29:34 AM PST by Peter W. Kessler (Dirt is for racing... asphalt is for getting there.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: jveritas
Ronald Reagan did nothing to the pro-life movement.

Oh yes he did. He addressed the cause. National Morality a decline which began under The Great Society. Reagan encouraged family values.

Ronald Reagan increases taxes in his second term.

Which completed building the greatest national defense we enjoyed since the end of WW2 and helped end the Cold War. The beloved of some Poppy and Cheney however wasted not a moment in helping the DEMs tear it down. The result? Todays military running on 1996 End Troop Strength Levels over deployed and over extended with not a mention of remedy from W the so called great CIC. Explain that one especially since Slick Willie had six years of supposed GOP majority to work against.

Ronald Reagan singed amnesty for millions of illegal immigrants.

And Bush has done what? Reagan's deal was to stop it at that point. The DEMS had other ideas the same ideas as the Family Bush. Oh yea pushing Mexican trucks on to our interstates and having BP's prosecuted PLUS tieing their hands to do anything just like he has our deployed troops facing Court Martials on the word of Iraqi nationals. How much more screwed up can that get? How Lyndon Baines Johnson of him.

Ronald Reagan withdrew from Beirut in 1983 when the terrorists attacks the Marines Barracks there.

What were we doing there to start with pray tell? Now Reagan was much brighter in the end though and he learned from mistakes. He realized you can not deal with that culture. ANY OF THEM. He also wisely sat silently while Israel destroyed Saddams Nuclear Weapons program. Funny thing Israel can manage to get it right but we can't. Bush is too busy trying to aid and abet enemies of Israel these days with his insane Road Map to Peace nonsense.

In 1986 mid-term elections the democrats won big.

And Reagan still worked against them. When he believed in something he took it to us to call our congress remember that? BTW what happened to those 1994 GOP wins? They sold out.

Bush had his nose in every election where he had a so called long time family liberal friend yes man running and then if they lost the primary said you're own your own conservatives.

Not ever Reagan would remain silent on what the GOP is today. It's a disgusting DISGRACE as big of one as the DEMs. The only thing about it is DEMs make no pretense that they are anything but Socailist Liberals. John Kennedy would be too conservative for todays GOP.

210 posted on 01/26/2008 10:59:08 AM PST by cva66snipe (Proud Partisan Constitution Supporting Conservative to which I make no apologies for nor back down)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 207 | View Replies]

To: Huck
I agree. Part of the problem is that politics is always about compromise. Unfortunately, compromise isn't always the best solution. If you want to be on the left bank and I want to be on the right bank, the compromise is to sit in the middle of the river and drown.

Bush changed tactics because of political pressure, and we've ended up with a sorta war on terror. In Rumsfeld, he stayed with him until after the elections, then made a change. That was horrible political timing. Removing Rumsfeld prior to the election might have helped the Republicans. Removing him afterwards has helped the war effort, but not our political chances. You have to remember both, because if you're not in office, you're not going to get anything done.

211 posted on 01/26/2008 11:15:15 AM PST by Richard Kimball
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 205 | View Replies]

To: jdm

How is eventual full implementation of the Fairness Doctrine, so that the conservative point-of-view is completely shut out of legal existence for the long-term and allowing both amnesty for illegal immigrants “to the max” and allowing illegals the right to vote in all future U.S. elections all supposed to truly help U.S. conservatism (never mind the entire Republican Party) eventually make a successful comeback sometime in the future throughout the U.S.?


212 posted on 01/26/2008 11:24:43 AM PST by johnthebaptistmoore
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: jdm
The Republican Party isn't dead yet. Most likely it will rebound at some point.

If it doesn't, the responsibility is Bush's. Congress did appropriate too much, but he didn't have to sign those budgets.

Running as a "center-right" candidate shouldn't have meant not caring about budgets and overspending. It didn't with Eisenhower.

Maybe turning a blind eye to overspending was the price of getting support on social issues, but the war erased any gains the party might have made.

Peggy's more right than Morrissey.

213 posted on 01/26/2008 11:30:21 AM PST by x
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Richard Kimball

Agreed.


214 posted on 01/26/2008 11:31:06 AM PST by Huck (Buzzards gotta eat, same as worms.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 211 | View Replies]

To: cva66snipe

All what you said is BS and did not refute any point I made. If Reagan is running today he would be severely attacked by people like you as not conservative enough. You “holier than thou” conservatives are bunch of bitter unappeasable losers. A conservative in your image will be crushed in 45 states if he runs for President in 2008.


215 posted on 01/26/2008 11:34:30 AM PST by jveritas (God bless our brave troops and President Bush)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 210 | View Replies]

To: cva66snipe
"How Lyndon Baines Johnson of him. "

The essence of this Administration. But I have to give credit where it's due. We have not had a repeat of 9-11.

But I won't vote for Jesus Christ for President should he hail from Texas .. come on, three times now?

That alone is enough to make me turn off Ron Paul.

216 posted on 01/26/2008 11:43:10 AM PST by investigateworld ( Abortion stops a beating heart.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 210 | View Replies]

To: jveritas
I voted for Reagan man TWICE and would do so again IF we had another one. The only one in the running now even remotely close to Reagan on most issues is Ron Paul and Hunter was the other. Not only did I support Reagan but Howard Phillips helped get him elected in case you forgot that. Think about that one.

I will never vote for a Bush again. I only made that mistake twice. Once in 1988 and the next time in 1992. The GOP is a long ways from the ideas Reagan had for this nation. There are some so Blasted Party Bot Blind they care more about their precious GOP than the survival of our nation it seems. My Party Tis of... Come on sing and drink the kool-aid....

217 posted on 01/26/2008 11:44:11 AM PST by cva66snipe (Proud Partisan Constitution Supporting Conservative to which I make no apologies for nor back down)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 215 | View Replies]

To: cva66snipe
The only one in the running now even remotely close to Reagan on most issues is Ron Paul and Hunter was the other.

And both have less than 5% combined support from the base of the Republican Party as the primaries have shown.

218 posted on 01/26/2008 11:48:56 AM PST by jveritas (God bless our brave troops and President Bush)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 217 | View Replies]

To: jveritas
And both have less than 5% combined support from the base of the Republican Party as the primaries have shown.

Precious Bush nearly lost by what margin? Not once but twice? The GOP can not afford to tell Conservatives and Independents to shut up and vote any more. I live in Fred’s home state. I saw no Fred signs but a plenty of Ron Paul ones. The GOP underestimated Conservative in 1992, 1996, 2000, and 2004 in the POTUS elections. Doing so this time is certain loss of the Oval Office not matter what Rush, Vannity, or whoever says as such as they are very much out of touch with how angry people are getting.

But back to the primaries. Believe it or not there are quite a few Conservative Independents quite now actually as well as Conservative DEMs who have helped give the GOP landslides. If the GOP insist on being the second Socialist Democratic Party well then it can expect on continuing to hold second place as well.

219 posted on 01/26/2008 1:22:29 PM PST by cva66snipe (Proud Partisan Constitution Supporting Conservative to which I make no apologies for nor back down)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 218 | View Replies]

To: investigateworld
But I won't vote for Jesus Christ for President should he hail from Texas .. come on, three times now?

Every state has their RINO's and Liberals. We have had Frist, Thompson, Alexander, Corker, to name a few. Alexander built a reputation on being better than the felon he replaced but is a big government big spending supporter. But we've had a few good ones too. Congressman Jimmy Duncan is among them as was Ed Bryant one of the house managers. I can vote for Ron Paul though because of his record.

As for more 911 attacks? I think the actions taken by the passengers on the last plane had much more to do with it. That and the Sky Marshall Program. Terrorism has always occurred among nations ever since. We had hijacks etc in the 1960's and in the 1970's. I doubt many can remember the nutjob who hijacked a plane in the early 70's and threatened to crash it into the DOD nuke weapons plant in Oak Ridge. Bush has made us all suspected criminals at airports while at the same time ignoring the obvious causes of the attacks like illegals being able to just walk in to our nation anytime.

The biggest answer to addressing terrorism is the same one as addressing violent crime. Repeal the Brady Bill and all gun laws. Make Concealed Carry legal in all states without permits etc required. Watch the threats and crime drop like a rock. But the WOT isn't about terrorism as much as it is controlling the masses namely me, you, the guy down the street and sticking governments intrusive nose were it has no business nor Constitutional right to do so. Kill a terrorist? Fine by me.

220 posted on 01/26/2008 1:46:51 PM PST by cva66snipe (Proud Partisan Constitution Supporting Conservative to which I make no apologies for nor back down)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 216 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 161-180181-200201-220221-230 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
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

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