Posted on 01/29/2009 9:34:54 PM PST by rabscuttle385
As members of the GOP bemoan the inauguration of President Obama, far-sighted right-wingers are looking to the future with their own brand of hope. For the latter, the overwhelming victory of National Journal's most liberal senator of 2007 is a definitive repudiation of the pseudo-conservative principles championed by Messieurs Bush and McCain. Indeed, the results of this past election and President George W. Bush's 22 percent approval rating give testament to their ability to reach across party lines: by receiving bipartisan disdain.
Now while liberals would bash anyone who doesn't call all their plays from the writings of the Frankfurt School, the fact that a good portion of card-carrying Republicans decries their president raises an eyebrow. But this isn't surprising considering Bush and Sen. John McCain have promoted some of the worst policies in Republican history. Under the conservative banner, these two promoted an imperialist foreign policy that provided terrorists with their greatest recruiting tool, robbed us of our civil liberties via the Patriot Act and were complicit in the greatest financial disaster of all time. "At least we haven't had another terrorist attack!" some devout Republican might call out. Well that's a miracle considering the duo's refusal to enforce our immigration laws has allowed millions of aliens to invade and rove unchecked throughout the country. Not all of these aliens may be here to take our jobs; some may also be here to take our lives. On top of all this, Bush and McCain and Co.'s support of hundreds of billions of dollars in wealth redistribution has given us a foretaste of the socialism to come.
Let us be honest on this point: Nearly every aspect of Bush-McCain politics is left wing. In truth, liberals had a win-win situation this election. And with neoconservatives like Bill Kristol now advocating the abandonment of the basic tenet of small government and promoting "national greatness," we might as well call our political process what it is: a one-party system.
And as the Bush administration takes its final turn around the toilet bowl, to whom can we look for hope of true reform? To make an appropriate reference, we wouldn't look to the CEO of Lehman Brothers to revive the failed company — we would punch him in the face. Thus should right-wingers proverbially punch the likes of David Brooks, Bill Kristol and Dick Cheney?
Well, then who is out there fighting the good fight? A good indicator is whether a person has been labeled an "extremist" or "out of the mainstream," which basically means he or she doesn't deliberate between which left-wing policies are preferable. Examples include Pat Buchanan and Ron Paul — both of whom were against the war in Iraq from the start, predicted the economic crisis well in advance, support secure borders and identify and speak out against cultural Marxism. For many, Ron Paul was the only interesting thing to come out of the alleged right this past election season. His grassroots-style campaign rallied two important demographics: students — the future of the political process — and the elderly, who have seen how backwards the GOP has become. As Richard Spencer of Takimag.com says, "The Ron Paul movement has a lot of potential and amazing dynamic. It represents something viable rather than a boring movement that accomplishes nothing.”
Whether the Paulites or the Buchanan Brigade are the keys to the future of the right, or are simply things of the past, is conjecture. What is certain, however, is that real change needs to take place. And to that end, Obama's inauguration certainly provides hope. The centrist Republican establishment consistently tries to blur the differences between left and right. But the Obama inauguration promises to be a gruesome spectacle, one that will again clarify the vast differences between them and us. The desire for a new right wing resistance was born on Inauguration Day. But before you look to the establishment for leadership, remember that it was the Bushes and the McCains — and the Sean Hannitys and the Rush Limbaughs — who made the Obama administration possible. Let's recognize the GOP for what it really is: all-too-grand and all-too-old. Let's hope the toilet doesn't clog and spoil its exit.
Folks, I think this editorial is a bit of an interesting read, if you’ve got the time.
.
I voted for Ron Paul. I knew damn well McCain didn’t have a chance.
fyi
There’s not even a pony under this pile.
Agreed. Regardless, Palin 2012 cause she’s hella better looking than Ron Paul :)
As wonky as Paul's was, it was at least something. Didn't matter here on FR... advocate for Ron Paul during the election, and you were considered a no-good SOB.
But the take-away isn't "Vote for Paul"... rather, it's "Have a Vision." Have a coherent image of what the future should and could look like, real ideas that support that image, and be able to connect the dots for people to show how to get there from here.
You hit the nail on the head.
And the financial crisis is the fault of Barney Frank, Chriss Dodd, Chuck Schumer, Franklin Raines and a whole host of Democrats who pretended that everything was just fine.
Paul and Buchanan???
got to be kidding!
How about Palin, Sanford and Jindal?
Feminists are all liberals in practice. They need government to help them “have it all”. Palin is no different.
Then where are the WMDs?
And seriously, how is this any different from Kosovo under Clinton? Of course, if it were a Democrat conducting the war, Freepers would be up in arms, pissed as hell.
And the financial crisis is the fault of Barney Frank, Chriss Dodd, Chuck Schumer, Franklin Raines and a whole host of Democrats who pretended that everything was just fine.
Don't try to pretend that the Republicans are spotless and pure on this one. They held control of the legislative and executive branches for six years and still did nothing.
Oh, goodie. Paleos to the rescue. I think Dev picked the wrong day to stop sniffing glue.
“Feminists are all liberals in practice. They need government to help them “have it all”. Palin is no different.”
To date Governor Palin appears to have needed no one to help her get to where she is other than the love of her family, she is the most self made woman to reach her level that I can think of.
She wasn’t born into it, she didn’t inherit it, she did not marry it, she didn’t gain it as a widow, she is doing it on her own, she is the first one of her line to emerge.
You are one bitter feminist trying to control the future of any woman that angers you.
The knee-jerk crap about the Patriot Act was a dead giveaway - - that's where I stopped reading.
The author is a simpleton.
Saddam himself thought he had WMD. So did a lot of other people. He needed removed.
I am not saying that all Republicans were spotless. I’m sure many of them had their hands in the cookie jar too. But he can’t just point to Bush and McCain and say it was their fault without mentioning some of the really BIG players.
” But before you look to the establishment for leadership, remember that it was the Bushes and the McCains — and the Sean Hannitys and the Rush Limbaughs — who made the Obama administration possible.”
What’s to debate here?
I was thinking along similar lines earlier today, we need to lay a clear path to victory in 2010 and 2012. However, in order to find that path, looking to the past may be helpful. The last 28 years of politics has been, for the most part dominated by Republicans. Not necessarily dominated by Conservatism always, unfortunately, but at least by people with an (R) after their names. How did that happen, and how can we achieve a similar string of victories in the future?
The answer lies with Reagan, not only in his qualities as a leader, which Republicans always try to paint themselves with during the Presidential primaries, but in reality with his electoral strategy. Reagan succeeded where Goldwater did not. It wasn’t just because he was charismatic, well known, and principled, though of course those all helped him. It was mainly because he put together a viable coalition of voters who could agree on some common issues and constitute a pretty ironclad majority.
Since then, as conservatives strayed from the principles Reagan emphasized, we saw that coalition erode. When we tried to return to those principles, the coaliton came back to us. But simply winning back the Reagan majority may not be enough anymore. It’s been 28 years, and demographics change. Many of the hawkish “true” liberals Reagan won over were part of the Greatest generation, and unfortunately their numbers are dwindling.
The baby boomers are getting older, but even after 9/11 the majority of them are not getting very much more conservative. If we can’t win them over, we need to go elsewhere for votes. I think the only option are to go after demographics Republicans haven’t been successful courting in the past, such as the youth vote, the Black vote, etc. We can find a way to win these people over without compromising our principles. If we think we cannot, then we are conceding that our principles must not be able to stand on their virtues in a war of ideas. That wasn’t Reagan’s attitude and it shouldn’t be ours.
Drop the blinders about the WOT and get a candidate that doesn’t remind me of a sulking three-year-old and this may go somewhere.
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.