Is Conservatism Brain-Dead?
I opened up the Washington Post this morning and Steven Hayward’s opinion piece this morning jumped out at me. The title is “Is Conservatism Brain-Dead?” – a subject which always pegs my anger-meter. But as I read it, I found that I agree with Hayward – in fact, I’ve made many of the same comments here and in private. For example;
Consider the “tea party” phenomenon. Though authentic and laudatory, it is unfocused, lacking the connection to a concrete ideology that characterized the tax revolt of the 1970s, which was joined at the hip with insurgent supply-side economics. Meanwhile, the “birthers” have become the “grassy knollers” of the right; their obsession with Obama’s origins is reviving frivolous paranoia as the face of conservatism. (Does anyone really think that if evidence existed of Obama’s putative foreign birth, Hillary Rodham Clinton wouldn’t have found it 18 months ago?)
Conservatives are sufficiently charged up to win elections – but who are we going to elect? When Gerald Ford lost the 1976 election, he faded into the background and Ronald Reagan positioned himself at the head of the party. He became the anti-Carter and struck out with counterpoints to virtually everything Carter said for four years.
So who is trying to remake the Republican Party now? John McCain – the candidate we got saddle with by the Democrats last election. For some reason Republicans believed Democrats when they said “Oh, I’d vote for John McCain”. Dumbasses.
The Democrats denigrated Ronald Reagan as a crazy whacko who could never bring the country together – they portrayed him like they did Goldwater in the ’60s. A war mongering crazy old man who would nuke the world as soon as he got near the “red button”. Yeah, that didn’t happen – but the point is that Democrats use hyperbole to scare us away from picking a candidate who could win an election.
They did the same thing to George Bush. Remember how he was going to bring back slavery? That Black churches were going to be burned under his direction? No hyperbole about John McCain, though, huh? Because Democrats knew they could beat McCain.
The Tea Parties are great…but what do they accomplish without someone walking in the front LEADING the movement. We’re disparate voices shouting at clouds.
If we’re going to have Sarah Palin at the head of our movement, she needs to get to the front right now. If Fred Thompson wants the mantle, seize it NOW! At this point, we look like millions of cranks shaking our fists at the moon.
Category: Politics
I think Republican’s need for a leader is real. They’ve been sitting on the fence for so long, I don’t think they know what their platform is anymore. But, and it’s a big “but,” I don’t think we are a bunch of cranks. That’s because, even with a lack of leadership in the party, a good number of those cranks are running for office at the local level. People running for school boards, county commissions, state positions. People who would have never run for office before all this happened. New leaders are emerging every day.
Boy, I’ll hate myself in the morning, but I agree totally, especially the million cranks shaking their fists at the moon.
This is the best I’ve read in a long time. excellent. And I totally agree.
It’s already starting at the local level. There are several good conservative people running for Congressional office against RINOs. And I’m doing my best to help and support them. As for the run for The Big One in 2012? We’ll see who comes to the front. And this time, their “street creds” will be VERY closely scrutinized. It won’t be just another “vote for me because I suck less then the other candidate.”
If nothing else, I’ll write in my vote, like I did in ’08. No more bowing to family & peer pressure to “not waste your vote.”
And besides all that, the TEA Party movement has already accomplished something, even being as unruly a mob as we are. We’ve put Congress on notice NOT to vote for most of the Obama agenda big bills; HealthKale and Crap & Tax. Consequently, the Narcissist-in-chief’s socialist agenda has ground to a virtual standstill, with Kongress wasting most of their time arguing over (unConstitutional) picked nits. And can you think of a better way for them to NOT pass bills that would so negatively impact our daily lives? Knowing that the American people are no longer complacent and drowsing, but instead, hyper-awake and looking over their virtual Kongressional shoulders, micro examining every word in every bill.
Forget about the Republican/RINO political party. They’re as irrelevant as the MSM. And they’ve done it to themselves, by trying to be “big-tent all-inclusive”. I thought that mode of thinking was for the Demonrats.
Please…I begging you, please Mrs. Palin, please lead the Republican movement. You are the best conservative out there.
Jonn said: At this point, we look like millions of cranks shaking our fists at the moon.
This is one of those situations where stating (and restating) the obvious is a painful necessity. Well done.
Yet I’ll have to suggest that perhaps you’ve missed a point somewhere along the line.
We need to concentrate on those elements we have in common – not those that make us different.
I’d have said: At this point, we look like millions of cranks shaking our fists at the government.
Birthers, Ron Paul Libertarians, and people who don’t like broccoli, can join together to right a greater wrong.
As for finding a national leader… I’m concerned that anyone who’d want the job would be either a fool or a liar. Maybe there is someone brave enough to walk into the minefield and lead the way??? I don’t see anyone stepping up.
The birthers are not wrong. Back in the 80’s when David Axlerod was the british caretaker of Robin Masters estate he traded Rick use of the tennis courts for two weeks and Thomas Magnum could use the Ferrari for a month if rick could get “icepick” to forge a birth certificat for a small Kenyan child who accidently bodysurfed up on the estates private beach.Also the open bar at this hotel is awsome
Amen.
It’s more fun to be a crank than trying to make excuses for some politician or political party that embarrasses you on a daily basis.
Hope you don’t mind a newbie to the site saying so (and the delayed reply courtesy of a busy weekend), but I wholly disagree that this article is good advice. In fact, my immediate reaction was to wonder about the motivations of the writer. From the article’s first (to my knowledge) appearance on LDot: Whatever the intentions may be, this feels very much like a false flag article. The boiled-down version seems to be the same “Conservatives need to quit being so grassrootsy and coalesce around a central figure or two (so liberals have easy targets)” being pushed by any number of people and publications on the Left. They got so used to “BUSH/CHENEY/HALLIBURTON IS EVIL!!!” being the easy, and usually non-sequitur, response to everything that they aren’t sure what to do now that they’re fighting a loosely-organized yet highly-mobilized mass of everyday citizens. While a new Reagan (read: conservative with the charisma and savvy to largely bypass the Dem-run mass media) would be great, unless/until one comes along, decentralized leadership is the better route to take. Obama and the Democrats are self-destructing before our eyes, and the decentralized investigative powers of web denizens and citizen journalists combined with the reach of blogs, radio, and the few fairly honest legacy media outlets ensures that anyone eschewing intentional ignorance has ample access to the illuminated follies of O&Co. For now, what need have we of an easily-targeted lancer? Better to take Napoleon’s advice and wait until the enemies are finished weakening themselves. This isn’t to say we will never need a leader, because we will. There’s just no purpose in building one up when the Dems will merely use him/her to distract from their own failings. Continue in this vein, make gains in 2010, and have a strong leader ready to emerge for 2012 when the damage of Dem policies will be undeniable. At least, that’s the opinion of one from the masses. A re-reading hasn’t changed my overall opinion, either. I don’t argue that a leader isn’t necessary. I simply see no benefit in trying to identify one right now.… Read more »
No one likes dealing with a petulant, spoiled, argumentative adolescent who’ll gladly cut off his nose to spite his face -not even his parents. With that in mind, it’s validating when a respected public figure (Nobel Prize winner) like Paul Krugman reenforces what one has observed for a long time: “For one thing, we learned that the modern conservative movement, which dominates the modern Republican Party, has the emotional maturity of a bratty 13-year-old” (http://www.nytimes.com/2009/10/05/opinion/05krugman.html?ref=opinion). Maybe the GOP should try to rectify that tiny little problem, for one? Start acting like an adult party, refrain from a scorced earth policy, try and regain some moral high ground, get some spokespeople other than manic-depressive conspiracy theorist, a porcine, old drug addict, and a couple of bitter, over-the-hill bimbos, and the party might start to regain some respect. I say this as one who would like a little dignity returned to the political process, and have an adult on the other side of the table to debate with. Just some freindly constructive criticism….
Shaking our fists at the Moon is the first step to nuking it, so FrnakJ is probably happy.
I think it’s too early. The media is going to go into serious attack mode once they know who to attack so jumping in now could be a bad idea.
Two years of relentless, lying attacks by Minitru would be difficult to overcome.
Pawlenty is trying to position himself, so is Sarah Palin and Romney, but none are jumping in too enthusiastically.
They’re waiting.