The Path to Republican Revival

Commentary Magazine ^ | August 17th 2009 | Peter Wehner and Michael Gerson

[Jbny]

At some point about five years ago, America became a “One-Party Country”—and the party in question was the GOP. Such, at least, was the conclusion of Los Angeles Times reporters Tom Hamburger and Peter Wallsten in the book they wrote under that title following the 2004 presidential election. Bizarre as their claim may sound today, it stood on solid ground. In November 2004, George W. Bush had won re-election with the largest number of votes up to that point in American history while racking up the seventh Republican win in the previous 10 races for the White House. Republicans, moreover, were in control of the Senate by a margin of 10 seats, and of the House by a margin of 30. To complete the sweep, they also boasted a majority of the nation’s governorships and a plurality of state legislatures.

[Kenny Bunk]

There is no difference between the two parties except this:

Most of the people who run our daily lives are not elected, but appointed. The Democrats, most of whom are not stupid enough to reveal what their true ideology is for electoral purposes, appoint people who are absolutely required to pass muster with the official Democrat Party leadership, which is very far left and intellectually akin to European Socialism, and actual Communism, in some cases.

The Republicans who through some miracle actually achieve elected office, have no ideology, but will appoint far more "conservative" people to appointed posts. This is not to appease the Republican Party Leadership, which is just as bereft of any philosophical underpinning as the average Republican office holder. However, if the Republicans have any sort of ballast, it is the common sense of many of its supporters among the practical, more functional, and normative segments of society. Hence, A GW can appoint an Alito ... instead of a Sotomayor.

Both parties have reached and indeed gone beyond the point of weakness of democracy as pointed out by the ancient Greeks: i.e., they both use public money to support their supporters as a means of attempting to stay in power. The Democrats, in all fairness, are one hell of a lot better at it than the Republicans. The Republicans deserve no credit, because they have a tendency to accept minority status in return for a share of the goods and permanent incumbency.

The Republican Party has made a Devil's Bargain. Their only feasible platform, "We're not as bad as the other guys in a slim majority of cases." That's not exactly a recipe for leadership of the nation.

2010 will tell the tale.

[Paul Ross]

In November 2004, George W. Bush had won re-election with the largest number of votes up to that point in American history while racking up the seventh Republican win in the previous 10 races for the White House.

And W immediately governed as if he was as liberal as Barney Frank. From pushing for globalism (NAU, Law of the Sea, Illegal Amnesty, Phoney Free trade that gutted America's industry, pooh-poohing the immense deficits, misusing taxpayer funds with foreign aid, funding global warming ideologues (to the tune of $79 billion) They went progressively leftward non-stop.

And we all know what that did. The center could no longer hold, because there was no conservative counterbalance anymore to any extent in the public sensibility. Bush's "compromise" (actually more likely his real positions) undercut conservatism directly...and to the degree that too many talking heads in the Party had annointed W as one of us, that left the philosophy leaderless when he proved to be a phony.

[Ann Archy]

All you wonderful PURISTS will ENSURE that we are run by LIBERAL DEMOCRATS for the foreseeable future. THANKS SO MUCH.

[SoConPubbie]

The only way the Republicans can come back to prominence is to embrace limited government conservatism as its platform. Regardless of whatever people may have as social beliefs the majority of people don’t want the government involved in their lives.

Short-sighted and myopic.

The base of the GOP is still the social conservatives.

Your approach will never win, the social conservatives vote their principles, not pragmatism, not selfishness.

The best model is the Reagan model where all three wings of conservatism, social, fiscal, and military, get what is most important to each group and each group allows the other groups to get what they want.

In real terms, this means the Social Conservatives get their Pro-Life support and Anti Gay Marriage and a strong emphasis on families, for the Fiscal Conservatives, they get a strong push for limited government with tax cuts, cutting the size of government, and getting the Government out of our lives with all the regulation, and for the Military conservatives (Neo-Cons) there must be a strong push for strengthening our military.

In short, we need to come together as a team, quit fighting among ourselves and compromise where it counts.

[Uncle Ike]

” That’s all people want. “

Just my, perhaps pollyannish, opinion, but I think people are hungry for clearly and simply stated Line-In-The-Sand Principles, *and* integrity in defending those Principles at all costs....

Big-tent, go-along-to-get-along, politics has proven to be a loser, in the long run....

[MizSterious]

Oh yeah, and liberal REPUBLICANS like Arlen Specter are so helpful, too. NOT.

[Ann Archy]

i NEVER said vote for a LIBERAL Rep......one bad vote from a conservatice and you all will call for their heads and call them RINOS.

[SoConPubbie]

i NEVER said vote for a LIBERAL Rep......one bad vote from a conservatice and you all will call for their heads and call them RINOS.

Massive over-simplification and distortion of what conservatives want.

What we do want, is leaders who will vote from a sense of principle, not self-interest masquerading as "pragmatism" .

[RC2]

Exactly. Get our government back to doing what it was intended to do and get them out of our lives. It’s not “pollyannish”....it’s fact. Don’t fall for this Health Bill crap. It’s a controlling factor over everything in American’s lives.

[MayflowerMadam]

Amen to that!!

[parsifal]

Its not really “move toward the center” as much as it is “re-move head from hindquarters”.From the article:

“In this respect, Republicans would be well advised here to borrow a page from David Cameron and Iain Duncan Smith in their revival of the British Conservative party. These leaders have emphasized a range of issues that directly influence the quality of life in community: homelessness, addiction, prison reform, family breakdown, long-term unemployment. As yet, Republicans have no comparable agenda to address such issues of social justice from a conservative perspective. This, as we noted earlier, may be partly owing to the curse of previous success, which has allowed the issue of social justice to be seized by Democrats. But, to invoke a historical reference, the GOP must be the party of both Adam Smiths: the free-market champion who wrote The Wealth of Nations and the moral philosopher who authored The Theory of Moral Sentiments. Like Smith in the 18th century, the party of the 21st century must uphold the paramount virtues of freedom and the “invisible hand” and the no less paramount truth that the free life is nurtured and sustained in community.

Running through this analysis is, as well, an attitude toward government. No party founded by Abraham Lincoln—a president who advocated internal improvements while being simultaneously prepared to maintain the Union by force—can consider itself simply and purely antigovernment. Nor does such an attitude befit a conservatism inspired by the writings of the same Edmund Burke who averred that God, “Who gave our nature to be perfected by our virtue, willed also the necessary means of its perfection—He willed therefore the state.” (By “perfection,” Burke meant human improvement.) Skepticism toward government, however warranted and indeed necessary, is not the same as outright hostility.”

The GOP could probably accomplish both of these tasks by giving the heave-ho to the anarcho-capitalists in its ranks. These guys are friggin idiots and their simplistic little solutions do nothing except prohibit the GOP from doing anything if it does return to power.

parsy, who has been saying this for the last 11 years.

[parsifal]

Most people on FR don’t have a clue what “tort reform” means either which is why they are all for it. “Tort reform” is one of the most anti-conservative ideas to come down the path in ages. Replacing an American jury of 12 ordinary citzens with what, a gov’t answer. Proponents of “tort reform” usually don’t know a thing about the law. Insurance companies, though, love it.

parsy, who says “eschew the simplistic answers”

[MizSterious]

Speak for yourself.

I do NOT consider one “bad vote” (in other words, a vote I don’t agree with) grounds for filing them as RINOs. Quite a lot of “bad votes” (see: Olympia Snowe, Arlen Specter, etc.) will certainly qualify, however.

On the other hand, you seem perfectly willing to paint some good people with a wide brush, without knowing anything about them except their screen names.

Please, get control of your knee. It’s jerking all over the place.

[parsifal]

“Also, is there anything limiting frivolous lawsuits?”

Yes. The current law. That’s the part the insurance company shills don’t want to tell you about. “Frivolous” lawsuits tend to not go very far.

parsy, who will send you a link.

[MNJohnnie]

The GOP could probably accomplish both of these tasks by giving the heave-ho to the anarcho-capitalists in its ranks. These guys are friggin idiots and their simplistic little solutions do nothing except prohibit the GOP from doing anything if it does return to power.

How did turning the GOP into Democrat Lite work out for you McCain guys last year?

[Ann Archy]

Then you better work at getting a CONSERVATIVE REPULICAN to run against Snowe in a PRIMARY!

[MizSterious]

If she’s voting with the ‘Rats anyway, what’s the point of having a Republican in that office? She might as well do as Arlen did, and change parties. She’s no help to us, or this country, in her current capacity.

[MNJohnnie]

parsy, who says “eschew the simplistic answers”

Actually you seem to be at the wrong party. Your dogmas set here so far are merely recitations of Democrat party talking points, not thoughtful analysis of the facts.

So are you one of Free Republican original Moveon.org trolls? One of those people sent over by Moveon to spew Democrat talking points on Conservative Websites?

Your analysis of tort reform is completely divorced from all fact. Tort Reform merely caps damage awards to 3 times punitive damages. It does not "replace a jury" at all. That is pure Democrat Party/Trial Lawyer demagoguery.

[Ann Archy]

I said to get a conservative Republican to run against her in the primaries.

[sickoflibs]

FROM ABOVE :”The reasons for the vertiginous decline are both proximate and long term. At the top of the list, surely, is the Iraq war—a venture that, at the outset, had garnered the support of more than 70 percent of the public and strong majorities in both the Senate and House. But that support quickly unraveled. The Bush administration never fully recovered from the revelation that Saddam Hussein did not possess stockpiles of weapons of mass destruction, and many Americans came to believe, despite clear evidence to the contrary, that the administration had “lied” the country into war. Add to this an Iraqi insurgency the White House did not adequately anticipate and an occupation strategy poorly conceived and poorly executed, and one had the makings of massive political erosion. By the time Bush embraced a new and successful counterinsurgency strategy in Iraq, it was too late for Republicans. The public had grown bone-weary of the war and blamed both the president and his party.”

So many here will never accept this but they needed to talk to more voters and would see how much this ended up hurting republicans. And it wasnt just 'the liberal treasonous MSM' that caused this like Levin and Hannity claim on their shows because things looked bad on FNC too until after the surge. (The surge seemed to repudiate the GWB messages that everything was on track prior.)