The Death of Conservatism? - 43 Mistakes and the GOP's Dobson's Choice

There have been more than a few recent articles and editorials attempting to affix blame for the demise of the Republican Party. Peggy Noonan blames President Bush. Rush Limbaugh believes a McCain nomination will kill the party. However, even in a worse case scenario, the Republican Party will probably stagger along for several years much like the last decade of the Whigs. Conservative Republicans should probably be more concerned about the impending demise of the conservative movement within the party. Some individuals can be blamed more than others, but this folly has many fathers. The latest blow to conservatives has come from within – thanks to Dr. James Dobson and other egotistical evangelicals. Political doomsayers may be correct and it is likely too late to save the conservative movement in 2008. Conservatives can correct their path to destruction for 2010 and beyond, but only if they look back at recent history, recognize the actions and actors that have brought the party and movement to this point, and to learn from a long series of missteps and mistakes.

Ronald Reagan built a winning coalition of conservatives, independents and establishment moderate Republicans in 1980. A coalition of social, economic and security conservatives had come together to form a plurality within the GOP and wrest leadership of the party from the establishment, moderate GOP. The Iran-Contra scandal (Mistake #1) weakened the coalition and the moderate wing of the party regained control of the GOP (Mistake #2), which led to the election of President George H.W. Bush (Mistake #3).

While the elder Bush had adopted – albeit reluctantly – many conservative ideals, he and the moderate GOP leaders advocated a “kinder, gentler” approach (Mistake #4). Conservatives might have been content to take a back seat to moderate GOP leadership, but they read Bush’s lips and their support and enthusiasm for the Republican Party evaporated after the Bush tax increase (Mistake #5). In 1992 some conservatives were taken in by Ross Perot and his anti-establishment, anti-Washington message (Mistake #6). Others just stayed home (Mistake #7) and helped Democrats elect the Dope from Hope, Bill Clinton, with just 43% of the popular vote (Mistake #8).

The only positive to come out of 1992 was that it helped create an opening for an obscure, but brilliant Congressman from Georgia to lead conservatives to regain control of the Republican Party. Newt Gingrich reformed the three-legged conservative coalition and took an upstart innovative approach of leading the GOP from the House with a 1994 national congressional campaign platform – the Contract with America.

It is important to note that prior to the ’94 elections, Senate Minority Leader Bob Dole and other establishment, moderate GOP leaders scoffed at and were dismissive of Gingrich and the Contract. Dole and Senate moderates rode the Contract’s election coattails, but made it plain that the GOP Senate did NOT sign on to the program, was not obligated to it, reluctantly followed Gingrich's lead, and worked to water down each and every one of the Contract's provisions (Mistake #9).

By January 1996, Dole was the presumptive Republican presidential nominee (Mistake #10). Dole sought to convince Speaker Gingrich to fold up the federal government shutdown stalemate with President Clinton and allow Dole to lead the GOP via his presidential campaign.

Dole gave Gingrich the choice of single-handedly continuing the shutdown and fight with Clinton and the media with Candidate Dole seeking a different path from the House GOP or deferring to Dole's presidential campaign and resuming the conservative battle together with Gingrich’s friend Trent Lott to keep President Dole honest after the ’96 elections. Gingrich made the wrong choice (Mistake #11). Gingrich probably should have run for President himself in 1996 (Mistake #12).

We all remember what happened. By caving in and compromising on the shutdown, the conservative House leadership lost some of their ability to control their more moderate members (Mistake #13). Bob Dole lost (Mistake #14). Trent Lott built his own voice separate from the House (Mistake #15). And with no help from Lott & the GOP Senate and a Clinton veto looming on all conservative issues, Gingrich, Armey & DeLay focused too much of their efforts on the growing Clinton scandals (Mistake #16).

Gingrich was able to maintain order within the House even during the Clinton impeachment. But after the Senate RINOs failed to do their duty and convict Clinton (Mistake #17), the House moderates began feeling their oats (Mistake #18).

Then, the impact of the missing FBI files took effect. Allegations of marital affairs Gingrich and Hyde took their toll (Mistake #19). Seeing his conservative House coalition slowly diminish and Lott's desire to set on a different path, Gingrich stepped down as Speaker (Mistake #20). Then his presumed successor, Bob Livingston from Louisiana, was also taken out by a marital affair (Mistake #21).

House Moderates became emboldened and championed the lackluster Dennis Hastert as Speaker to muzzle Armey & DeLay and appear less confrontational (Mistake #22). This effort also helped to clear the agenda of party leadership for the 2000 GOP presidential candidates (Mistake #23). And in 2000, conservatives settled for the "compassionate conservatism" of George W. Bush (Mistake #24). Many conservatives stayed home, nearly costing Bush the presidency and actually losing GOP control of the Senate in 2000 (Mistake #25).

To be fair, conservatives should thank God everyday for W's leadership in dealing with 9-11. But Bush also squandered the opportunity to push the party and country to the right following that horrible event (Mistake #26). The GOP regained control of the Senate in 2002, but based solely on the country’s fears of Democrats’ inability to deal with national security concerns and not on conservative social and economic principles. Meanwhile, the House drifted further to the center (Mistake #27).

Conservative fears of repeating Florida 2000 helped Bush win reelection in 2004, despite the party's overall drift to the center. By now, any conservative elements in the House and Senate were in complete retreat. The moderates ruled the roost in both houses. RINO defections on the Iraq war (Mistake #28), wasteful earmarks (Mistake #29) and ethics scandals (Mistake #29) were now front and center for the GOP. The only conservative victories of 2005-06 were the confirmations of Roberts and Alito to the Supreme Court. And it took a battle to defeat Bush on his nomination of Harriet Miers to do it.

By Fall 2006 conservatives had become utterly disheartened. Attempts to make the Bush tax cuts permanent stalled (Mistake #30), the continued treachery of Arlen Spector, John McCain, Lindsey Graham and the Gang of 14 (Mistake #31), increased dissatisfaction with George Bush and the Miers nomination debacle all caused conservatives to stay home in November 2006 (Mistake #32). And the GOP lost both the House and Senate.

Occasionally, the conservative movement can still rise up. The reaction to the Amnesty bill was encouraging. But other than that, conservatives have again been wandering in the wilderness. GOP moderates and RINO's have been resistant to allowing a conservative to assume leadership in Congress. And any potential conservative congressional leader has held back (Mistake #33), in part due to the extremely early start of the 2008 presidential race (Mistake #34).

And what did conservatives get for 2008 GOP candidates? Were there any Reagan conservatives who possessed all three legs of the coalition stool - strong national defense, social conservatism, economic conservatism?

Instead, we got Rudy Giuliani. An autocrat who has little affection for social conservatives, but pledged to nominate strict construction judges. Whoopee!

Instead, we got John McCain. An angry RINO maverick who enjoys flouting social and economic conservatives AND even the GOP establishment to gain favor and positive reviews from the liberal media.

Instead, we got Mitt Romney, an uber-wealthy GOP establishment moderate. At least Romney panders to social and economic conservatives with recently discovered flip-flopped positions on issues of importance to those two factions.

Instead, we got Mike Huckabee – the Dope from Hope, part II. While he is just as slick and manipulative as Bill Clinton, Huckabee is nowhere near as smart.

Instead, we got Ron Paul, a true blue, libertarian nutbag. Paul has a few economic bona fides that have pulled away a few non-nut job libertarians. But I'm sorry, Dr. Paul is a kook.

Instead, we got the Obscure Four - Tom Tancredo, Alan Keyes, Tommy Thompson & Duncan Hunter. Tancredo & Keyes are single issue candidates. Tommy & Dunc are well-rounded politicians (especially Hunter), but they lacked the ability to have broad nationwide appeal.

Seeing this morass of blech, Fred Thompson entered the fray expecting to be the savior of the Republican Party and the conservative movement. Fred should have been that candidate.

Unfortunately, Dr. James Dobson and a few evangelical leaders decided to cut off their nose to spite their face (Mistake #35). You see, Fred's not a Bible thumper. Neither was Ronald Reagan. And like Reagan, Fred is a bona fide, all-around, federalist conservative. That wasn’t good enough for Dobson. And when Fred refused to kiss Dobson's ring of evangelical purity, Dobson went shopping for a candidate he thought he could control.

Flim Flam Huckabee seized on that opportunity. Huckabee played Dobson into thinking that Dobson could be a GOP kingmaker (Mistake #36). A handful of evangelical leaders blindly pushed Huckabee as a viable conservative (Mistake #37). The media, who knows a GOP loser when they see one, helped fan the flames of Huckabee's support. For a time, the scheme worked. Huckabee won Iowa (Mistake #38), but eventually the truth of Huckabee's Christian Socialism became evident to most conservatives.

But the damage had been done. Social conservatives were now spilt. Some had been taken in by Huckabee's class warfare (Mistake #39). Some had been taken in by the media's false depiction of Fred as a lazy campaigner (Mistake #40) and settled for Romney, Rudy or, worse, McCain (Mistake #41).

Added into this deceptive mix was the ability of independents and Democrats to participate in and distort the Iowa, New Hampshire & South Carolina Republican primaries (Mistake #42). Media darling McCain was back! McCain – the new Comeback Kid – was ready to lead....the GOP down to defeat. Meanwhile, Fred's race and the ability for the GOP to unify behind a Reaganesque conservative died (Mistake #43).

At best, the GOP could still end up with a George W. Bush-lite nominee like Mitt Romney. He will at least pretend to care about conservative ideals from his Country Club wing of the party.

At worst, the GOP could end up with John McCain. McCain, the perennial thorn in the GOP's side who was once touted as a possible VP running mate for John Kerry!

Who knows? It’s still remotely possible that none of the moderates and RINO’s still in the presidential race will win a majority of the primary delegates. Maybe a conservative nominee could still rise up in a brokered GOP convention. Maybe a conservative national congressional campaign like the Contract with America could still arise in time for the 2008 elections. But really, that’s a fantasy.

The reality is that conservatives will have to wait until 2010 or 2012 to reassert itself as the true and legitimate leaders of the Republican Party. The reality is that conservatives have allowed numerous people to make numerous mistakes which have led the movement to this precarious point. The reality is that conservatives and the GOP are now left with this Dobson's Choice of Romney or McCain. Pass the nose clips and prepare for the worst.

This is a good piece. Thanks for posting it.

We ought to be focusing on how to be more effective as conservatives, maybe take back the Republican party, do something positive. Like supporting good congressional candidates, good Senators if you can find them.

Instead about all I see is people saying who they are going to vote for. It doesn’t make a clown’s hat full of difference who anybody votes for with this lackluster group. That is all most freepers want to do, and it is the most useless exercise in futility this year.

I haven’t read the posts yet, I will, but I would love to be surprised. This is a good post to discuss what should we do now?

LOL. Don’t be ridiculous. I like Rush, but you must be blind as a bat if you don’t see that his show thrives on (1) defending his guy against liberals, (2) criticizing liberals.

If McCain is elected, he will take many conservative positions on the WOT, Iraq, etc. Rush can either defend him (which goes against everything he has said up until now), criticize him anyway (and thereby be in cahoots with liberals) or ignore him. Anyway you cut it, ambiguity will reign, which is not good for a show such as his.

His argument that, at least with a Rat president, the Republicans in Congress could be “full-throated” in their opposition was okay; it was better than nothing. But, please, the answer to that is to change the culture of temerity in opposing the President when he’s wrong.

That's never going to happen. Look at all the people, even passionate, politically involved folks here on FR, who actually argue in favor of things like higher taxes, or "assault weapons" bans, when their GOP candidate supports said taxes and gun bans. That is all the proof I need that we are not going to be unified enough to hold any of these would-be GOP presidents' feet to the fire.

Look at all the folks right here on FR who vehemently opposed any criticism of W. or the GOP Congress, until at least 2006?

"Team" think and pack mentality is human nature. Only when people are threatened by an outside source do we get truly unified (Orwell covered this in 1984).

He had no business whatsoever issuing a statement on whether or not a particular candidate is a Christian

He didn't "issue a statement", he expressed his analytical opinion in a conversation with a U.S. News & World Report reporter. I don't think Thompson is a Christian because he has never given anyone any reason to believe that he is. What is so hard about confessing Jesus?

Luke 9
25 For what is a man advantaged, if he gain the whole world, and lose himself, or be cast away?
26 For whosoever shall be ashamed of me and of my words, of him shall the Son of man be ashamed, when he shall come in his own glory, and in his Father's, and of the holy angels.

Romans 10
9 That if thou shalt confess with thy mouth the Lord Jesus, and shalt believe in thine heart that God hath raised him from the dead, thou shalt be saved.
10 For with the heart man believeth unto righteousness; and with the mouth confession is made unto salvation.
11 For the scripture saith, Whosoever believeth on him shall not be ashamed.

Mark 16

15 And he said unto them, Go ye into all the world, and preach the gospel to every creature.

No, conservatives and/or the GOP shouldn't take evangelicals for granted. But I don't think that it is too much to expect evangelical leaders to understand the political process and to learn to form winning conservative coalitions.

I agree with you. We Christians (Dobson and people like myself) have a delicate balance. To be in the world and not of it. When we become of it, things like Jim and Tammy Baker happen and the world views us as hypocrites (and rightfully so). When we focus on the other world, we are accused of not being engaged and part of the problem (again rightfully so). When dealing in politics, you are dealing with the art of the possible; Christians tend to be ideal and frown at compromises that are politically expedient.

I understand your disappointment in Mr. Dobson. Mr. Dobson is anything but expedient. I love the work he has done, but he is just another fallen human and I think on the issue of Fred, he fell again. Occasionally on Free Republic and in the MSM regularly, I hear the pitting of fiscal, constitutional and social conservatives against each other. I don't buy it. We do have some problems and they should be dealt with openly and honestly, but we have a great coalition that has a lot more in common than differences.

I appreciate your well thought out post. I hope I wasn't too preachy.

I must have missed the memo on the Christian sponsored amendments. Did Christ return to earth and endorse them? Oh, I know, Pope Benedict included it in his last papal address, right?

I said "Christian sponsored", not "Christ sponsored". As far as papal addresses are concerned, I wouldn't know. I ain't a Catholic.

And there is a difference between opposing an amendment and endorsing a patronizing and losing political effort.

A hardheaded and ill-conceived path. The result, considering his already shaky position with the Christians, was predictable (and was in fact predicted right here on FR). A poorly taken stance (regardless of the reason)for one hoping to be elected and needing the Christian Right's aid in that regard.

As for McCain-Feingold, Fred completely disavowed his former support for that abomination on free speech.

The damage was already done. His change of position might be forgiven by the masses, but certainly not so amid the organizations, and that shut him out of the Christian networks- Networks that dwarf anything the Republicans currently have, including Conservative Talk Radio.

But I seem to recall that an evangelical Christian George W. Bush) signed that bill into law.

Yes. Thanks for that reminder. Certainly a big reason not to support the moderate Baker wing. They do seem bent upon removing the Bill of Rights. Especially when they get to work together like that.

I fail to see how Fred's appearance at a sparsely attended [...] would have seriously impacted the race,

It's not hard to see, you're looking at it right now.

The problem with your post is, there is no half a loaf with any of them. None of them has a history of governing or advocating conservative principles in the past so there is no assurance of what they will do if elected. Promises don’t mean anything this year.

There is no lesser of two evils. If these RINOs act like they have in the past they will be just as bad or worse than the rats.

>>>No, Huckabee is not a socialist.<<<

You are a rare breed. Every conservative I know is convinced the Huckster is a socialist (Marxist).

>>>I don’t personally dislike Romney because he is a Mormon. But I think electing a Mormon to the office of President, legitimizes Mormonism. Mormonism is a severe distortion of true Christianity. So severe, that almost all mainstream Christian organizations consider Mormonism to not be Christian. It’s absolutely the wrong signal to send to the youth of this country. So if need be, I will vote for a democrat to keep Romney out of office.<<<

My God, you are a bigot!

Answer this: have you ever met a bad or mean Mormon (ignore Harry Reid, whom I assume you have never met, and also whom I assume is not a Mormon)? And what does Jesus say about whom to trust? Well, the devil appears in sheep’s clothing (for example, a Marxist (socialist) claiming to be a minister of Christ). The others? Ye shall know them by their fruits.

That said, how many mean Mormons have you known. None, I’ll bet. Now, how many mean “Christians” have you known? Plenty, I’ll bet.

My point is, judging a man because of his Christian denomination is venturing into hypocritical territory. Besides, it violates the very Constitution (the one I’ll bet you claim to support and defend) which forbids a religious test for public office. And, as aforementioned, it violates the teachings of Jesus Christ (remember, there was, at least, one Good Samaritan).

How many conversations and meetings did Dobson have with Thompson? Dobson has never heard me confess Jesus either, am I not a Christian?

Speaking to a reporter is the equivalent of issuing a statement, a press release, or going on any talk show. Just because issue a statement isn’t “technically” correct doesn’t negate the fact that Dobson’s point was to steer Christians who listen to him AWAY from Thompson.

If I wanted to get “technical” I could accuse Dobson of breaking the Ninth Commandment, but I don’t know for sure if he meant it that way, and that’s for God to judge. I have made a personal decision to scrutinize Dobson’s statements because of that.

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.