Still staying the course

February 8th, 2008 1:43 pm · 22 comments

If you wanted a snapshot of how out of touch the conservative movement has become, and why it is in the process of becoming so marginalized, you need look no further than this one.

The Conservative Political Action Conference is happening this week, a confab where the movement gets together, gives itself whiplash by nodding in agreement and rails against threats within and without (but mostly within). It was here, last year, where Ann Coulter called John Edwards a “fag” - a high point in the history of conservatism.

This year, things have gotten even sillier.

President Bush spoke today, and in so doing he called Vice President Cheney “the best vice president in history.” It’s a laughable statement - Cheney may in fact have had more authority than any vice president in history, and thus bears much culpability for what’s happened to the country these past eight years. But “best?” Right.

But the movement conservatives in attendance, though, weren’t laughing. Indeed, they were cheering Mr. Bush: “Four more years.”

Now, here we have a president who has hit 30 percent in a new AP-Ipsos poll just this week; who more than any other single individual (except perhaps Cheney himself) can be blamed for the complete implosion of the conservative movement and its clout within the party; the Jimmy Carter of his generation, the president who will be remembered for the war in Iraq and Katrina and “heckuva job, Brownie” and Harriet Miers and Abu Ghraib and warrantless wiretapping and more, far more, than we could ever fit on the internets.

But the movement wants “four more years.”

I’m coming to think, in the wake of the scuttling of the Mitt and Rudy campaigns, in the wake of the fact that there is no legitimate conservative left in the presidential race, that maybe the influence of the conservative movement has been overstated all these years. Certainly they rallied the faithful; but the faithful never constituted a majority of the country. A majority might have been induced to march alongside the movement, but that didn’t constitute the permanent realignment hailed, prematurely, by conservatives.

And we see now that those Republicans who were not true believers have broken from this orthodoxy. Those who remain - let’s again call them the 30 percenters - just don’t seem to get it. Everyone else is wrong; they’re right. Everyone else is a fool; they are the only ones who see.

Four more years.

They are failing to grasp that a solid majority of the country is aghast at the mere thought. They are oblivious to the damage that they’ve caused. It just does not compute. But by this point, it should; this - they - are specifically why there is no conservative candidate left in the presidential race.

Yet it strikes me that all of this may serve, in the mind of the movement, as a self-fulfilling prophecy. The conservative movement all these years, even when all three branches of the government were dominated by their Republican Party, thought itself oppressed; saw enemies on all sides. Now they really are being marginalized - or rather, they are marginalizing themselvews. Now they really are becoming the minority, and may stay that way for yet another political generation. Now the forces against them really are closing in.

But you know how that goes. Never admit error, stay the course. The movement still thinks there’s virtue to be found in this. But the rest of the country abanadoned that course long ago.

Update: He’s a laff riot, that funky president of ours:

Prosperity and peace are in the balance,” the president said in speech excerpts the White House released on Thursday night. “So with confidence in our vision and faith in our values, let us go forward … fight for victory … and keep the White House in 2008.”

Yes, the Democrats certainly do threaten our current era of prosperity and peace.

Share and Enjoy: These icons link to social bookmarking sites where readers can share and discover new web pages.
  • Digg
  • del.icio.us
  • Netvouz
  • DZone
  • ThisNext
  • Wists
  • Fark
  • Reddit
  • Slashdot
  • StumbleUpon
  • Technorati

  22 comments  Tags: President Bush · Dick Cheney · Conservatism

There are currently 22 comments on this blog post
View Topic | Comment on this blog
podunk
2/8/08
1:41 PM
Take a look at what the choices are boiling down to and it is easy to see why some would be calling for 4 more years. New choices are no better then what we currently have. I hope you are not expecting many changes through 2012. You may be seriously disappointed.
Artie See
2/9/08
1:49 PM
QUOTE(Lancaster Online @ Feb 8 2008, 12:45 PM) [snapback]355208[/snapback]
Now, here we have a president who has hit 30 percent in a new AP-Ipsos poll just this week; who more than any other single individual (except perhaps Cheney himself) can be blamed for the complete implosion of the conservative movement and its clout within the party
GW Bush is no conservative.

No conservative would increase both the Federal budget and national debt by more than 50% during their terms in office.
usedmeat
2/9/08
1:55 PM

What do you mean" has become"?
lee41
2/9/08
9:46 PM
QUOTE(Artie See @ Feb 9 2008, 01:49 PM) [snapback]355572[/snapback]
GW Bush is no conservative.

No conservative would increase both the Federal budget and national debt by more than 50% during their terms in office.


But for 6 years the Bush budget was approved by the Republican House and Senate, budgets with more and more pork every year. I guess they were spending all that capital that they earned in the 2000 and 2004 elections.

I guess there are no conservatives left in Congress either?
gsmart
2/10/08
12:50 AM
QUOTE(lee41 @ Feb 9 2008, 10:46 PM) [snapback]355680[/snapback]


But for 6 years the Bush budget was approved by the Republican House and Senate, budgets with more and more pork every year. I guess they were spending all that capital that they earned in the 2000 and 2004 elections.

I guess there are no conservatives left in Congress either?


Conservatism has become a meaningless label. Tell me what it is a "conservative" believes.

Smaller government?

Lower taxes? (Yes; but while they profess a belief in smaller government, they actuall grow the government - via the aforementioned pork; via, most importantly via the national security "industry.")

Gun rights? Yes but a small part of the movement; and I more or less support gun rights myself.

Anti-abortion? On the surface yes; but abortion has never been one of the primary interests of the "movement"; most of the "conservatives" I know really don't care about abortion. They'll use it as a political club where convenient - but it doesn't go much deeper than that.

"Conservatism" today is mostly defined by a belligerent militarism - and that's not even the right word. Interventionism. The idea that the United States can and should used its military as overtly as possible to perpetuate its own well-being.

TexasGeorge
2/10/08
11:34 AM
QUOTE(gsmart @ Feb 10 2008, 01:50 AM) [snapback]355823[/snapback]

Conservatism has become a meaningless label. Tell me what it is a "conservative" believes.


Allow me to recommend to you, for your viewing pleasure, Merriam Webster's dictionary.

A conservative is: one who adheres to traditional methods or views.

A cautious or discreet person.
Artie See
2/10/08
12:34 PM
QUOTE(TexasGeorge @ Feb 10 2008, 11:34 AM) [snapback]355932[/snapback]
Allow me to recommend to you, for your viewing pleasure, Merriam Webster's dictionary.

A conservative is: one who adheres to traditional methods or views.

A cautious or discreet person.
Interesting. I try very hard to be both of these. I don't always succeed, but I do try.

And I'm a Democrat.
grieker
2/15/08
10:40 AM
QUOTE(gsmart @ Feb 10 2008, 12:50 AM) [snapback]355823[/snapback]


Conservatism has become a meaningless label. Tell me what it is a "conservative" believes.

Smaller government?

Lower taxes? (Yes; but while they profess a belief in smaller government, they actuall grow the government - via the aforementioned pork; via, most importantly via the national security "industry.")

Gun rights? Yes but a small part of the movement; and I more or less support gun rights myself.

Anti-abortion? On the surface yes; but abortion has never been one of the primary interests of the "movement"; most of the "conservatives" I know really don't care about abortion. They'll use it as a political club where convenient - but it doesn't go much deeper than that.

"Conservatism" today is mostly defined by a belligerent militarism - and that's not even the right word. Interventionism. The idea that the United States can and should used its military as overtly as possible to perpetuate its own well-being.





Those are presumptions by your opinions. What conservatives belive in start with this: http://www.constitution.org/constit_.htm



Bigmaclender2
2/15/08
10:44 AM
QUOTE(Artie See @ Feb 10 2008, 01:34 PM) [snapback]355965[/snapback]
Interesting. I try very hard to be both of these. I don't always succeed, but I do try.

And I'm a Democrat.




Artie See, you are one of the best people that I have seen on here, thusfar. You go, boy!!!!!

Artie See
2/15/08
8:59 PM
QUOTE(Bigmaclender2 @ Feb 15 2008, 10:44 AM) [snapback]357833[/snapback]
Artie See, you are one of the best people that I have seen on here, thusfar. You go, boy!!!!!
Thank you very much for your kind words.

But if I'm one of the best people on here, may God have mercy on TalkBack - for however long it continues to exist.
Kate
2/15/08
9:55 PM
QUOTE(gsmart @ Feb 10 2008, 12:50 AM) [snapback]355823[/snapback]

Conservatism has become a meaningless label. Tell me what it is a "conservative" believes.

Smaller government?

Lower taxes? (Yes; but while they profess a belief in smaller government, they actuall grow the government - via the aforementioned pork; via, most importantly via the national security "industry.")

Hmmmm............. there are a few locals who fit this description. wink.gif
Lancaster
2/15/08
10:51 PM
QUOTE(Artie See @ Feb 10 2008, 01:34 PM) [snapback]355965[/snapback]
Interesting. I try very hard to be both of these. I don't always succeed, but I do try.

And I'm a Democrat.




Then you are a conservative Democrat; I think at one time they were called Southern Democrats - nothing wrong with that!

skeptic2
2/15/08
11:51 PM
QUOTE(lee41 @ Feb 9 2008, 10:46 PM) [snapback]355680[/snapback]


But for 6 years the Bush budget was approved by the Republican House and Senate, budgets with more and more pork every year. I guess they were spending all that capital that they earned in the 2000 and 2004 elections.

I guess there are no conservatives left in Congress either?


I'm gonna find the statistics, but spending in 2007 on things like earmarks did fall. I think both parties realized that the mid-term election was about spending and corruption as well as an unpopular war.

On a less positive note, will somebody please explain to me who will beat that SOB Ric Santorum if he chooses to run for governor of PA. Everytime I hear his voice on the radio, I start thinking that he could pull something like that off- unless he just can't bear to move back from Virginia.
hahaha
2/16/08
5:39 AM
If Santorum could not keep his senate seat, why would people elect him governor?
twinmom
2/16/08
9:30 AM
QUOTE(hahaha @ Feb 16 2008, 05:39 AM) [snapback]358154[/snapback]
If Santorum could not keep his senate seat, why would people elect him governor?




Someone posted earlier that people as indiviuals are intelligent, as a whole are stupid.

Bigmaclender2
2/16/08
10:56 AM
QUOTE(Artie See @ Feb 15 2008, 09:59 PM) [snapback]358108[/snapback]
Thank you very much for your kind words.

But if I'm one of the best people on here, may God have mercy on TalkBack - for however long it continues to exist.




Ahhhh---give yourself some credit. You are VERY objective and open-minded.

usedmeat
2/16/08
1:32 PM
How do conservative Lancaster County republicans square their philosophy with the Convention Center project?
skeptic2
2/16/08
2:15 PM
QUOTE(hahaha @ Feb 16 2008, 06:39 AM) [snapback]358154[/snapback]
If Santorum could not keep his senate seat, why would people elect him governor?


No question Santorum is divisive and sufferred a humiliating defeat in 2006. It's just that he's the darling of the conservative movement and will be well-funded (and well-rested).

My question is (again) who will run against him if he runs?
Lancaster
2/16/08
7:52 PM
QUOTE(usedmeat @ Feb 16 2008, 02:32 PM) [snapback]358252[/snapback]
How do conservative Lancaster County republicans square their philosophy with the Convention Center project?




I'm a conservative LC repub, and I am against the CC. What do you want to know?

Kate
2/16/08
8:38 PM
QUOTE(usedmeat @ Feb 16 2008, 01:32 PM) [snapback]358252[/snapback]
How do conservative Lancaster County republicans square their philosophy with the Convention Center project?

Those individuals are not true conservatives.
Artie See
2/16/08
9:36 PM
QUOTE(usedmeat @ Feb 16 2008, 01:32 PM) [snapback]358252[/snapback]
How do conservative Lancaster County republicans square their philosophy with the Convention Center project?
Not all Republicans support the hotel and convention center project. The last time State Sen. Gib Armstrong pushed through a vanity law to provide additional money for Dale High's hotel, every single Republican State Representative in Lancaster County voted against Gib Armstrong's proposal. The law passed ONLY because Sen. Armstrong made deals with big-city lawmakers from Philadelphia and Pittsburgh.

On the other hand, the hotel and convention center project was started by Republican former County Commissioners Paul Thibault and Terry Kauffman, and Republican former mayor Charlie Smithgall. Republican former County Commissioner Pete Shaub championed the project when it was to his political advantage, although Shaub voted AGAINST Paul Thibault's County bond guarantee and "hostage" bank loan that forever tied the hands of future County Commissioners.

And after all of that, Paul Thibault is presenting himself as a conservative candidate for State Senate.

NONE of these individuals have ever attempted to justify their support for the project in Republican or fiscally conservative terms. In my few communications with Gib Armstrong, he always referred to the economic development aspect. He never responded to my request for justification of the cost of the project, which is much higher than the total of any economic development that can ever be realistically expected to result from this project.
usedmeat
2/16/08
11:06 PM
Sounds like SOP for the GOP to me. laugh.gif
View Topic | Comment on this blog