The Conservative Revolt
Fred Barnes is one of those annoying neo-cons who is busy undermining the conservative movement. He is whining about real conservatives and their outright rejection of Harriet Miers' nomination. A few talking points:
...a revolt was inevitable, sooner or later, simply because Bush is not a conventional conservative. He deviates on the role of the federal government, on domestic spending, on education, on the Medicare prescription-drug benefit, and on immigration. Given this kindling, it took only the spark of the Miers nomination to ignite a conservative backlash.
Good of you to finally admit this, Fred. But to translate for the masses: Bush is a Republican. That doesn't necessarily make him a conservative.
Bush, of course, is a conservative, but a different kind of conservative.
What rot. By that logic, Hillary Clinton could be called "a different kind of conservative." Bush is a statist and something of a socialist. That doesn't make him any kind of conservative.
Movement conservatives feel Bush doesn't respect them. They may be right.
May be right, Fred? There is no evidence to suggest Bush has any respect for conservatives or conservatism. As Robert Bork notes, both Bushes have shown an outright disdain for conservatism.
...the White House has grown a bit arrogant and self-centered.
They haven't grown arrogant, Fred, and it isn't just a bit. The only politician of national stature who ditched the constituency who elected him faster than Bush did was Bill Clinton, and not by a wide margin. They started out arrogant and have successively gotten worse.
Many conservatives, who rarely complained when Bush was riding high, have joined in the kicking.
Cry me a river, Fred. Conservatives gave Bush a pass on his socialist and statist tendencies because the opposition was so insanely worse than anything they could imagine Bush could be. Conservatives spent a considerable amount of their political capital getting those in their sphere of influence to back Bush because of the Supreme Court vacancies. They withstood all the slings and arrows of criticism by repeating the mantra of a conservative court. Bush repaid them by peeing on their shoes. Far from actually improving the court, Bush looks poised to actually damage it. We will probably be worse off now than if no vacancies had occurred. Spin all you like, Fred, but Bush brought this beating on himself.
...the press is happy to abet the revolt.
I thought you were enumerating reasons for the revolt, Fred. Are you implying that conservatives revolted in order to get the press, which most conservatives consider to be repulsive, to beat up on Bush? Again, that's complete rot.
...the Miers nomination didn't just trigger the revolt. It provoked deep anger toward Bush as well. The feeling of conservative critics was that Bush had trivialized an enormously important Supreme Court nomination by choosing his legal counsel. Despite Bush's assurances, they are doubtful Miers will turn out to be a judicial conservative.
Finally, you get to the meat of the matter, Fred. If you knew all this from the outset, why all the spin and rationalization?
Can the broken relationship between Bush and conservatives be repaired? Certainly. It's probably just a political phase anyway.
Don't bet the ranch on it, Fred. The level of bile and disgust with Bush among conservatives is something you shouldn't underestimate. Civil war in the Republican Party is inevitable. I hope that makes the neo-cons happy.
...a revolt was inevitable, sooner or later, simply because Bush is not a conventional conservative. He deviates on the role of the federal government, on domestic spending, on education, on the Medicare prescription-drug benefit, and on immigration. Given this kindling, it took only the spark of the Miers nomination to ignite a conservative backlash.
Good of you to finally admit this, Fred. But to translate for the masses: Bush is a Republican. That doesn't necessarily make him a conservative.
Bush, of course, is a conservative, but a different kind of conservative.
What rot. By that logic, Hillary Clinton could be called "a different kind of conservative." Bush is a statist and something of a socialist. That doesn't make him any kind of conservative.
Movement conservatives feel Bush doesn't respect them. They may be right.
May be right, Fred? There is no evidence to suggest Bush has any respect for conservatives or conservatism. As Robert Bork notes, both Bushes have shown an outright disdain for conservatism.
...the White House has grown a bit arrogant and self-centered.
They haven't grown arrogant, Fred, and it isn't just a bit. The only politician of national stature who ditched the constituency who elected him faster than Bush did was Bill Clinton, and not by a wide margin. They started out arrogant and have successively gotten worse.
Many conservatives, who rarely complained when Bush was riding high, have joined in the kicking.
Cry me a river, Fred. Conservatives gave Bush a pass on his socialist and statist tendencies because the opposition was so insanely worse than anything they could imagine Bush could be. Conservatives spent a considerable amount of their political capital getting those in their sphere of influence to back Bush because of the Supreme Court vacancies. They withstood all the slings and arrows of criticism by repeating the mantra of a conservative court. Bush repaid them by peeing on their shoes. Far from actually improving the court, Bush looks poised to actually damage it. We will probably be worse off now than if no vacancies had occurred. Spin all you like, Fred, but Bush brought this beating on himself.
...the press is happy to abet the revolt.
I thought you were enumerating reasons for the revolt, Fred. Are you implying that conservatives revolted in order to get the press, which most conservatives consider to be repulsive, to beat up on Bush? Again, that's complete rot.
...the Miers nomination didn't just trigger the revolt. It provoked deep anger toward Bush as well. The feeling of conservative critics was that Bush had trivialized an enormously important Supreme Court nomination by choosing his legal counsel. Despite Bush's assurances, they are doubtful Miers will turn out to be a judicial conservative.
Finally, you get to the meat of the matter, Fred. If you knew all this from the outset, why all the spin and rationalization?
Can the broken relationship between Bush and conservatives be repaired? Certainly. It's probably just a political phase anyway.
Don't bet the ranch on it, Fred. The level of bile and disgust with Bush among conservatives is something you shouldn't underestimate. Civil war in the Republican Party is inevitable. I hope that makes the neo-cons happy.
posted by Anonymous | 1:37 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home