Revisiting a Discourse Revisited
Published by Al Adomite on May 30th, 2008
By Al
I wanted to follow up on Mark’s previous post about our need for more “discourse” and the state of our blog as we near our third calendar month.
I would have to side closer to Ron than Mark on the “pandering” of the Democratic Party to “victims” of all sorts. But, here’s where I part ways with even Ron’s opinions on the matter. I think the Democratic Party just invented the pandering, but the Republican Party is now also mastering the political art.
I was thinking of this very subject as I was reading an article Ron e-mailed to me from the National Review Online. Alex Castellanos writes about the Republican “identity crisis”:
Perhaps it’s time to lie on the couch, acknowledge our fears, and ask, “What do Republicans believe?” Every descendant of Goldwater knows that our crisis of character is real. Late in the evening, through the mists of our memories of the 1980s, we confess it: American conservative thought ran out of gas after Ronald Reagan. Perhaps we were exhausted, and allowably so, after routing the Soviet Union and rescuing Western civilization.
Short of having fresh new ideas, Republicans have reverted to finding new ways to pander to Americans and, in a move usually reserved for Republicans, the Democrats have responded by attacking the Republican pandering. Take the Bush Economic Stimulus Bill as an example.
One might wonder if the Democrats have lost their focus, as well. I could argue that the Democrat candidates support one thing this primary season: opposing President Bush. Sounds like a successful 2008 party platform, but it’s certainly not an ideological masterpiece for the future.
Castellanos goes further:
When Bill Clinton declared in his State of the Union address that “the era of big government is over,” Clinton not only killed liberalism’s organizing doctrine, he also buried the remaining distinction between Democrats and Republicans.
Is not the immense push-back of Senator McCain by conservatives and the ongoing civil war between Obama and Clinton not indicative of what I’m describing?
I’ve been reading the book “A Magnificent Catastrophe” about the election of 1800. It’s made me wonder if we’re headed for a political realignment of sorts. We’re certainly due for one. Some say the “Republican” brand name is irreparably damaged and 2008 might just prove that true. Heck, the GOP isn’t even the first group to use the name “Republican” for a political party.
More and more, it seems economic conservatives and social conservatives are parting ways. The “liberty” and “freedom” sought by marketplace conservatives doesn’t match the aims of social conservatives. Castallanos quotes David Brooks on this matter:
He says the next generation of conservatives must learn to compromise individual freedom and “use government to foster dense social bonds.” “Individual freedoms,” he says, quoting David Cameron, leader of Britain’s Conservatives, “count for little if society is disintegrating.”
Yet, this sounds more like the big government social experimenting of the Great Society, just exchanging economic liberals with social conservatives.
I can sum up the thoughts of many marketplace conservatives when in just a few words: “Doesn’t 1994 seem like a lifetime ago?”
As we sit one week away from the State Republican Convention, what are the fresh ideas that should shape the Republican Party for 2010?
Filed under Housekeeping
May 30th, 2008 at 1:26 pm
When the Republicans got into the game of pandering, they were in a no win situation and destined to eventually lose. They could never outbid the democrats on giving away our tax dollars.
For example, 100 plus Republicans in Congress voting for a farm bill, which includes billions of dollars in subsidies for farmers. Corn prices are up 60% in the last year. The food middlemen are making record profits at levels 40% to 50% over the prior year. Oil companies could only dream of those kind of returns. Subsidies?! Please!
New ideas!
Maybe not new, but let’s attack some of the social issues facing the country from a market driven approach. Health care and education are just two, but they are biggies. The democratic approach to education funding and policy has produced a decline in the quality of output since the 60’s. Yet, thet continue to call for more funding, with- out real accountablilty.
Health care reform, with market solutions have worked in many states that have implimented them. Even when offered as alternatives, the democrats dismiss outright as not workable. Health savings accounts have been very successful and are growing in popularity. Democrats are trying to kill them, now. There not for everybody, but they work. The democrats continue to call for a nationalized health program similar to Canada and Europe, while those programs show more and more signs of not working well. Wait until the union members find out under these programs, they will pay a lot more for coverage and get less in benefits than they receive now.
May 30th, 2008 at 3:15 pm
I didn’t specifically state this above,but Republicans thought, incorrectly, they could master the art of political pandering and play the democrats game. They were way out of their league. Al, just because I can drive a car 150 mph at a Richard Petty driving experience doesn’t mean I can ever compete with the Nascar drivers. If they do master the game, then what do we have other than a race to the bottom. I don’t think Republicans have gotten the message, yet. Maybe, 2008 election will drive it home. Illinois Republicans have been wondering in the desert, with regards to pandering, since the Ryan administration.