Posted on 12/28/2011 6:03:28 AM PST by SeekAndFind
I’ve made a disturbing discovery: I am a member of the conservative “establishment.” I feel like Michael Douglas at the end of Falling Down: “I’m the bad guy?”
Largely in response to the real and perceived excesses of the Bush years and the overreach of the Obama administration, the base has become more populist. In particular, the rank and file of the GOP and the conservative movement have become deeply disenchanted with what they see as the rubber-spined, foot-dragging quislings drinking from a trough of Chablis at some Georgetown party. The term “RINO” (Republican In Name Only) has become an epithet of ideological enforcement, spit out in much the same way Mao cursed “running dog capitalists.”
In 2010, the tea parties and the conservative base (not always synonymous terms) tried to cull as many RINOs from the herd as they could in the primaries. They were extremely successful, with only a few stumbles.
Things are messier this time around. And to some extent this is to be expected. Presidential primaries rely on much larger pools of voters than primaries in midterms. Moreover, rather than a single Tea Party candidate challenging a worn-out incumbent, the field has had lots of candidates seeking the Tea Party or “true conservative” mantle.
Each of them has tried to play the populist card, not just against the liberal media establishment but also against the so-called conservative establishment. “I believe it is a deliberate attempt to damage me because I am not, quote unquote, the establishment choice,” explained Herman Cain when asked about his troubles.
Though he never intended any of this, Mitt Romney is largely to blame for the anti-establishment tumult. Somehow, he has managed to become the Arlen Specter of the 2012 field. (Specter is conservative-speak for “demon RINO from hell.” You’re supposed to spit on the ground after you say “Arlen Specter.” Ptooey.)
In 2008, Romney was the conservative alternative to John McCain, earning endorsements not just from National Review but from many titans of right-wing talk radio — Rush Limbaugh, Mark Levin, Sean Hannity, and Laura Ingraham. Now Limbaugh insists that support for Romney proves that “the Republican establishment does not want a conservative getting the nomination.” Erick Erickson, a CNN contributor and editor of the conservative site RedState, says that if Romney is the nominee, “Conservatism dies and Barack Obama wins.”
Recently, after National Review issued a stinging anti–Newt Gingrich editorial, many of the same voices insisted that the magazine (where I work, though I didn’t write the editorial) has, in the words of one right-wing blogger, lived long enough “to become the villain.” Fox News, Karl Rove, Charles Krauthammer, George Will, and even pro-Romney columnist Ann Coulter are routinely denounced as part of some RINO cabal.
It’s difficult to catalogue all of the oddities. Hugely successful, powerful, and rich conservatives are lambasting the establishment as if they are in no way part of it. Gingrich has gone from being too establishment to being too anti-establishment faster than you can say “Freddie Mac.” And you can only wonder how befuddled Romney is, given that he’s moved even further rightward since 2008.
Frankly, I can’t blame anyone for being underwhelmed by Romney, or begrudge anyone their frustration with the field. What’s harder to understand is how nobody has noticed that the conservative establishment, which includes many of my friends denouncing it, has become vastly more conservative over the last two decades. It’s more pro-life, more pro–Second Amendment, more opposed to tax increases.
The political corpses of RINOs litter the roadside of this great migration. Rockefeller Republicans went out with 8-track tapes, leisure suits, and Kevin Phillips. And yet people talk about the conservative establishment as if David Gergen is calling the shots.
The mere fact that there’s something one can meaningfully describe as a conservative establishment today is a victory, never mind that it is more conservative than it has ever been. But a conservative establishment is useless if it doesn’t bring the nation with it. The frustration on the right stems from the fact that none of the candidates seems up to that task.
— Jonah Goldberg is editor-at-large of National Review Online and a visiting fellow at the American Enterprise Institute
I had forgotten about Mitt and ethanol pandering.
But as to him in 08 versus today: in 08 he clearly was more conservative overall than McCain - and on all economic and regulatory issues clearly more than Huckabee. He was in the middle of the field for conservatism overall and the most conservative of the final 3.
This cycle he’s cynically moved to be the most moderate-liberal of the field with the possible exception of Huntsman on some issues. And clearly in tone with the exception of Huntsman. It is how he has positioned himself - moving left while the electorate and the over all field moves right ,that REALLY aggrevates me.
This website is quite possibly the finest resource on the internet, where it comes to amassing data about politicians and government.
Use the search bar in the upper right hand corner of the front page to find articles and editorials about Mitt Romney. Use the drop down menu button to choose 'keywords' and enter "Romney". You'll get back hundreds of results.
Read through a half dozen threads, and you'll soon get a sense of what I said in my prior post. Mitt is no conservative. Not even close.
Btt
Jonah, I will stop short of calling you a RINO or of not being a real conservative, but you've created the classic media (and NRO) strawman by conflating "conservative" with "Republican" in discussing the establishment.
Goldberg calls it the conservative establishment. THERE IS NO SUCH THING AS A "CONSERVATIVE" ESTABLISHMENT!!!
There is only the Republican establishment which aligns itself with the party's conservative base usually close to every election cycle and then discards us as needed once elections are done they are safely back in office for another term.
And this Establishment class is rooted in their smug superiority of economic or social class, education, region (East Coast corridor), religion (or lack thereof) and profession. The Republican Establishment would rather be "liked" by others within these groups than with the more conservative rubes from flyover country.
Most conservatives are adult enough to understand that no nominee is ever going to be "THE perfect" candidate, but there is also no doubt that nearly every nomination cycle we end up with some RINO nominee largely because conservative candidates are savaged by the media (which sadly now includes too many "conservative" media outlets like NRO).
True conservatives are by definition incapable of thinking in such a way, therefore it is impossible for there to be an "establishment" of any kind when it comes to conservatives. We are by definition individualistic and find such ruling class predilections distasteful if not offensive to our very core beliefs.
And Goldberg (and Rich Lowry, Anne Coulter, Ramesh and the other Romneybot sell-outs at NRO) should know better.
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.