’)
One of the continuing themes we’re seeing with the conservative movement’s attempts to recover from the last two elections is a search for leadership. The problem is that structurally conservatism has a strong tendency to gravitate towards the known – a mindset that’s part and parcel of an ideological movement that thinks America’s best days were in 1950.
As such, the new leadership of the GOP looks a lot like the old leadership – Gingrich, Limbaugh, DeLay, etc. Add to that I guess Ralph Reed who wants to start up the old Christian Coalition in some fashion. Of course, Ralph’s problem is that he left the Coalition in disgrace to the point where they lost their non-profit status and he got entangled with now-jailed conservative lobbyist Jack Abramoff. Oh, he also had a disastrous run for Lt. Governor.
Political parties in America tend to have their success when they face down what ailed them and come up with fresh voices and fresh takes on the issues. It could be the Reagan revolution, Clinton triangulation, Dean’s 50 state strategy, or some other fundamental change in how the party operates but the right seems to be locked in to retread action. Even George W. Bush tried for a while to at least dress up old school conservatism in the cloak of “compassion”. Sarah Palin isn’t subtle enough to do that with her clear desire to whip up the tired old culture war of us vs them.
Unlucky for us, conservatism failed America again under the last president, but unlucky for them as a movement they think the blind are the perfect navigators for the blind.
Corruption Coalition
Unlucky for us, conservatism failed America again under the last president,
I agree with you that the GOP needs new leadership but you’re off base once again.
There wasn’t all that much conservatism under the last President (despite the nonsense being the left says about Bush being this hard core right-winger. It sounds as stupid as conservatives who argue that Clinton governed from the far-left) except for the area of taxes and foreign policy and that was both win/win. Something cannot fail if wasn’t really implemented.
We’re seeing the ill effects already of Obama era foreign policy which is to try and make friends with every dictator around the world. Meanwhile, they’re laughing their asses off. There are some areas where Obama has continued to maintain Bush era policy (which of course laughingly dismisses the notion Obama fan-bots have that every single thing done during the Bush administration was wrong) and that’s only because it was clear cut common sense that dictated he do so.
His reckless spending (which already has gone off the reservation in less than a year) has done nothing but exacerbate an already bad economic situation. The ’stimulus’ package has proven to be a mega-failure with the O-Team trying to brag about the supposed 150K “created or saved” jobs which is a phantom number. Smart people know the best way to get the economy moving again is to free up capital for people to spend and invest, but it’s hard to do that when Democrats are consistently seeking more and more ways to raise taxes and thereby removing capital from the private sector.
As for mindset of conservatism, it has nothing to do with thinking back on the 1950’s. The bedrock ideals of conservatism transcend generations – economic freedom, entrepreneurship, strong foreign policy, lower taxes, less government spending, etc.
It’s far better than the extremely simplistic ideal of liberalism which is: “There’s a problem? Then we need a government program to fix it.”
We’re seeing the ill effects already of Obama era foreign policy which is to try and make friends with every dictator around the world.
I think you misunderstand his position. It is not to be friends with all the dictators of the world, it’s to stop being an asshole to everybody else.
The bedrock ideals of conservatism transcend generations – economic freedom, entrepreneurship, strong foreign policy, lower taxes, less government spending, etc.
So who do you think embodies that in the GOP today? And if you say Cut-and-Run Sarah, I will come over there and kick you in the junk.
I will concede the George Bush was not really a conservative so much as a Neoconservative bastard-love-child-hidden-under-the-stairs of Conservatism.
jr, the term is “Cretin Coalition”.
What we’ve got here from Jay is the incoherent wail of someone who’s been wrong about pretty much everything for eight years straight. At some point I suppose the only way to get through the day is to keep saying to yourself “there is gold at the end of the rainbow, there is! there iiiiisssssss!
Shorter JT,
“Conservatism cannot fail, despite the history of failures under conservative presidents (Hoover, Reagan, Bush I & II). It can only be failed by these midgets of politics.”
JT, when does the GOP plan to nominate a “true conservative” so the rest of us can see what they really look like?
As Reagan said, Wilbur, keep digging through that pile of horseshit, there must be a pony in there somewhere!
except for the area of taxes and foreign policy and that was both win/win
Those tax cuts clearly helped the economy, look at how awesome it is now! And all those dead people in Iraq are a testament to conservative foreign policy.
Is this really the kind of thing you think when you’re a conservative? Scary.
The bedrock ideals of conservatism transcend generations – economic freedom, entrepreneurship, strong foreign policy, lower taxes, less government spending, etc.
So Bush was a conservatism when it came to taxes and foreign policy but not on the other three points?
I knew he was a big spender, but I had no idea he didn’t support economic freedom or entrepeneurship. That’s news to me.
Repack, I’m not ‘JT’ and I don’t bother arguing with people who actually believe that Reagan’s presidency was a failure. Such a person is either, A) A blinded ideologue or B) A moron. Take your pick.
Oliver, I hope you’re not gullible enough to think Bush’s tax cuts had anything to do with our current economic condition. If anything, it’s more disposable income that has kept the economy from getting worse under the bloat of Obamanomics (Incidentally, a new CBS poll shows 75% of Americans think the stimulus is one big fat FAIL). And it will only get worse as Democrats keep spending, spending, spending.
You mean all of those free people in Iraq? Of course, you can’t understand something like that because you seem to take your own freedom for granted. You’d never (because of your own blinding ideology) even start to consider that what happened in Iraq in part helped to influence protests in Iran (coupled with Obama’s election raising expectations of the democratic process) would you? Nah. I can’t raise expectations that high.
Reagan’s presidency set the stage for various failures down the road – such is the nature of problem solving on such a large scale. Hopefully Obama’s considering this. But Reagan occasionally does still makes the top 10 in polls: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Historical_rankings_of_United_States_Presidents
Most of the stimulus cash hasn’t even been spent yet. What the party of NO has on their side is the fast food mentality of Americans.
Free people in Iraq = good. Free people in Iraq = priceless, I don’t think so.
Oliver, I hope you’re not gullible enough to think Bush’s tax cuts had anything to do with our current economic condition.
They helped to make a bad situation worse. Salt in the wounds.
(Incidentally, a new CBS poll shows 75% of Americans think the stimulus is one big fat FAIL).
Yes, we all know that the first quarter of a game defines the entire season.
You mean all of those free people in Iraq?
No, I mean all of those dead Americans and Iraqis and the lack of WMD or the capture/death of Al Qaeda leadership. And we can’t babysit the Iraqis forever.
You’d never (because of your own blinding ideology) even start to consider that what happened in Iraq in part helped to influence protests in Iran (coupled with Obama’s election raising expectations of the democratic process) would you?
No, because I’ve never smoked crack in my life. People want to be free, despite the warmongering of George W. Bush.
So conservatism isn’t a political philosophy so much as it’s a Platonic ideal, never to be fulfilled on Earth by fragile, all-too-liberal humans like GEORGE W. FUCKING BUSH.
You guys are so full of shit. As others have written, it’s never the philosophy but the politicians who fail the philosophy.
When are you going to wake up and realize that conservatism and the GOP have nothing to do with one another?
Ronald Reagan? Raised taxes in his second term. George W. Bush? Largest and most intrusive Federal government ever.
You guys are well and truly fucked.
Obama is doing a great job so far, and you’re going to increase in irrelevance when he’s re-elected in 2012.