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.
good point
Does everyone forget how the left felt after 2000 & 2004? (liberalism is DEAD, blah blah blah). And look at how “well” the far left has recovered. One of their candidates has the probability of being in office.
Why is it we think conservatism in the republican part is “dead” because of setbacks?
Hell, half the GOP membership Nationwide gave up on Conservatism back with Bush41. Further poisoned by trying to swallow "read my lips" for a second term followed four years later by "Brady Bill" Bob Dole. Getting a "compassionate conservative" RINO like Bush43 pushed at us not once... but TWICE is just more nails in the conservative coffin.
Is there any wonder why "conservatives" are feeling like their Party left them battered and abused on the side of the roadway somewhere?
spellcheck: I meant to say lose to Hillary, which I hope doesn’t happen ;)
Peggy Noonan is just wrong and it is high time to out her.
Her unease with Romney’s religion speech was a powerful sign of her disaffection with conservatism. She is old school secular Republican.
President Bush presides over a global Gettysburg and only fools fail to see it. Like Lincoln, he is presently besieged and belittled. This small minds will all be swept away by the overwhelming tides of history.
President Bush is a critical historical centerpiece that deserves praise and not the absurd dishonor that supposed conservatives and deranged liberals heap upon him. Had Bush only prevented a repeat of the 911 attacks, his Presidency should be judged a success. That fact that he stubbornly stuck to his principals challenging the bogus “international law” protecting terrorism globally is astounding. The military has crushed no less than three major foreign governments encompassing 50 million lives, forced the surrender of a sovereign WMD program in Libya, chased terrorist with explicit operations on the oceans and in Somalia and the Phillipines.
Old School conservatives resent President Bush because he has changed the terms of debate. The Neocon has introduced a way of thinking that so demands a creativity which they lack that they can only respond with reactionary scorn. Paleocons and Radical leftists know that their worldviews are hopelessly doomed. We all now see clearly see before us the hatreds that are in the world which Paleocons and various ideological stripes of isolationists have promised us will pass away with mere denial. FALSE.
Paper Tiger or Strong Horse?: pick one.
Bush picked the Strong Horse— are you in our out.
We had to work hard to keep him from screwing that up too.
ping
Reading articles like this and a lot of the posts on this site in recent weeks, I think that folks need to look up the terms “hyperbole,” “Chicken Little,” and “gloom and doom.”
Sheesh!
We’re doomed, Gulliver! Doooooooomed!
You are right!
Peggy Noonan is right. I’ll add that Reagan made two great mistakes. One was the first illegal amnesty bill. The second was George Bush.
To those agreeing with the hysterical Peggy Noonan I say thanks for the laugh.
I agree with Noonan to a degree.
The Miers nomination and the Dubai Ports deal, in particular, led to total outrage and near civil war among republicans.
Terry Schiavo didn’t help.
McCain-Feingold didn’t help.
McCain-Kennedy didn’t help.
Each of those things split off a segment of the party and set them warring with one another.
Although I don't think he ever used the term "privatize," Bush certainly gave the impression--during both campaigns, that he was going to dramatically overhaul social security. Then, after he was re-elected, he made a half-hearted, crap effort to create optional private accounts, and then as soon as he caught some flak, he shrugged his shoulders and walked away. Pathetic.
we all know Bush did everything, but whe give him the credit ...they did it all by themselves
The GOP is on life support, but Bush was the catalyst on the road to destruction. By removing conservatism from the GOP domestic agenda, the party of Lincoln and Reagan has been reborn as the party of big govt Republicanism. The 2008 general election will seal the party's fate.
And McCain would be FAR WORSE.
Ahhh. Sophistry. Too complicated for our wee little minds.
Complete, unmitigated pap.
The first one is easily rectified. Reagan would say, don't make the same mistake again. The second mistake is set in concrete, forever. Read my lips ...
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.