Recently, I had an exchange with a very passionate Conservative (Seane-Anna, who blogs over at Poorgrrlzone), who tends to feel that if it was good for the goose (G W Bush), then it’s good for the gander (Barack Obama), in rationalizing some of the scathing attacks on ALL things Democratic and related to the Obama administration that have come from some quarters of the Right.
That is definitely NOT my own view and I cannot and do not support doing to the Obama administration, what was wrongly and often outrageously done to the G W Bush administration.
I have a number of reasons for that view, but the primary one is that we don’t have a supportive mainstream media (MSM) backing that up and providing cover for such tactics.
Conservatives had and still have a huge problem with what many in the MSM and the far-Left did to the previous administration and AGAINST America...and rightly so. The far-Left, the Moore-Gore-Soros-MSNBC Axis are without question, “enemies within the gates”.
But Conservatives are faced with a unique and challenging dilemma and that is, “How do we reach and convince a majority of that vast middle, the 60% of Americans who are largely apolitical and skeptical of all politics and political ideologies”?
Our tactics must be different than those of the far-Left because our assets and our strengths and weaknesses are different than theirs.
I’ll thank Seane-Anna (of PoorGrlZone - http://poorgrrlzone.blogspot.com/) in advance for stimulating a discussion on the dilemma that Conservatives and Conservatism currently face.
I’ve used some of Seane-Anna’s points and my responses to offer both sides of the issue. I’ve put Seane-Anna’s points in italics;
<
<
"I think the major difference between me and you is that you have faith in the goodwill of liberals and I don't."
<
<
Not really. I separate the far-Left from more moderate Liberals and you and some others apparently don't, and yet there’s absolutely no question that they are two separate and distinct entities.
Moreover, I look at the bigger picture. There are currently appx. 15% of Americans who self-identify as Liberals and appx. 25% of Americans who self-identify as Conservatives, some polls put that at 16% self identified Liberals and 33% self identified Conservatives, but why quibble? Suffice to say, the numbers are in that vast middle.
My numbers leave a VAST middle of about 60% of Americans who are (1) apolitical, (2) entirely self-motivated, that is "I support whatever's best for ME" and (3) while generally more traditional in their views than not, they are suspicious of ALL politics, nor wed to any specific ideology.
THOSE are the people who Conservatives have to reach. They are turned off by personal attacks and they get most if not all their information from the MSM that tends to support the far-Left. The bulk of those people were solidly with the Conservatives under Reagan and Gingrich, as well. More of them supported Bush over Al Gore in 2000 and John Kerry in 2004, but since then, they’ve moved away from the GOP and back toward the Democrats. They did that in the 2006 mid-term Elections and they did again in (rightly, in my view) choosing a REAL Liberal (Obama) over a half-hearted, pseudo-Liberal or “Liberal-light” (McCain) in 2008.
That creates a real challenging problem for Conservatives.Many Conservatives don't seem to recognize that fact, but the elections of 2006 and 2008 certainly seem to bear it out.
The fact is that over the past five years, the Left has done a better job of attracting more of that vast apolitical middle, or perhaps more precisely, the GOP has done a better job at driving them away. If Conservatives don't reverse that trend, they're in for a very long period in political exile.
<
<
<
"All too often, we have thought that just winning elections was all that was necessary to win the culture, the hearts and minds of the American people. It wasn't, and now we're paying the price."
<
<
That's NOT what we're paying the price for.
We're paying the price of accepting G W Bush's, Tom DeLay's and Dennis Hastert's, among other Republicans, abandoning of Newt Gingrich's and Ronald Reagan's mantle of SMALLER GOVERNMENT, lower taxes and LESS intervention.
G W Bush signed onto one of the most expensive and far-reaching pieces of business regulation (Sarbannes-Oxley a/k/a Sarb-Ox) in history and though he cut taxes, he did so to INCREASE tax revenues (which those cuts DID) and then used those revenues NOT to pay down the DEBT, but to spend more. He spent MORE (even adjusted for inflation) on reckless social spending than even LBJ did.
As to Sarb-Ox, many have called that “an overreach” that responded with a whole slew of new and expensive rules (Sarb-Ox was responsible for the “jobless recovery”) that many feel a responsible and active SEC could’ve accomplished simply by enforcing existing laws and standards. It’s the same as the post-9/11 complaint that all manner of airport hyper-security measures could’ve been avoided had only the cockpit doors on planes been reinforced as they should’ve been in the wake of numerous less lethal incidents that occurred over the previous decade.
Conservatives who still claim that "even a Rockefeller-wing Republican (a McCain or a Bush or a Dole, etc) would be infinitely better than any Democrat....are not only wrong, they erode support for real Conservative principles. There’s really nothing worse than a pseudo-Conservative, a Liberal Republican – a Trojan horse Liberal inside the Conservative tent.
Our problem wasn't "a focus on merely winning elections", it was supporting Keynesian Republicans and allowing the Rockefeller/"Moderate" wing of the GOP to set and pollute the Republican agenda and heap that blame upon Conservative and Supply Side principles.
<
<
<
"JMK, this is why I adamantly disagree with your passive, let's-just-wait-for-Keynesianism-to-fail attitude."
<
<
I never said that Conservatives can "do nothing until Keynesianism fails". We CAN and probably SHOULD organize, register protests when appropriate and even complain loudly and often, while offering reasonable, workable alternatives.
What I said is that there's NOTHING POLITICALLY that we CAN DO, with the Democrats in control of the White House, the House of Representatives and with nearly a 60 vote filibuster-proof majority in the Senate – right now, THEY control the government.
The Democrats, currently run by their Left-wing, have every right (via the past two elections) and what's more EVERY INTENTION of forcing their agenda through.
The people have ALREADY SPOKEN! For better, or for worse, a sound majority of Americans SUPPORT the Democrats having that chance...to take THEIR SHOT at "fixing things". The fact that the Electorate may have wrongly blamed Conservatism for the policies of a very Keynesian G W Bush, is really immaterial, given the fact that the results are already in place.
I've said that it's tragically ironic that Conservatism was tarred by the actions of Keynesian (LIBERAL) Republicans like the Bush's, the DeLay's and the Hastert's....who while uttering a few "socially Conservative cliches" governed as ineptly, wastefully and corruptly as any Liberal Democrat.
STILL, that is what Conservatism faces right now. It's been slimed by its own biased support of GW Bush, Tom DeLay and Dennis Hastert, who ALL abandoned Gingrich's and Reagan's policies!
So, now we're faced with complete Liberal control of our government. There really is NOTHING that Conservatives CAN DO POLITICALLY to derail the inevitable Leftward tilt now under way. It will almost certainly take another Carter-like implosion for that to change.
Personally, I say, so be it.....because there's NOTHING else TO SAY, since the Electorate has already spoken very clearly.
So, YES, Keynesianism MUST be allowed to be enacted (and with an overwhelmingly Democratic government, it WILL BE) and to FAIL, before ANY of that vast middle is going to switch back to the Supply Side point of view. Without a majority of that vast 60% middle, neither side can win an election.
Commentators, Bloggers and Talk radio are NOT going to stop the Liberal control of government....which is LOCKED IN until at least 2010. THAT will be our first opportunity to change course, until then, Conservatism has little to no political leverage.
And all that angry and over-the-top Conservatives CAN DO, in the interim, is to marginalize Conservatism and those who support it even more.
Conservatives HAVE TO BE smarter than their opponents. We don't have the luxury of a supportive MSM and entertainment industry.
Those who don't see that and don't accept that as our existing reality, are really no friends to Conservatism.
<
<
<
"I know you don't want to accept this, but we conservatives are NOT having a respectful disagreement with people of goodwill. We are in a WAR with people who HATE us and want to DESTROY us."
<
<
That's ONLY true of the far-Left, the appx. 3% to 5% of Americans who root against America and revile Capitalism as "innately unfair".
That is NOT even close to true for even the majority of committed LIBERALS, who merely see a greater role for government, a greater need for more social programs, universal medical coverage at taxpayer expense, etc.
While I vehemently disagree with even Moderate Liberals, I don't hate them, nor do I believe they "hate America" and they are NOT aligned in any real way with the far-Left - the Moore-Gore-Soros-MSNBC-NY Times axis.
It's both foolish and short-sighted to lump all people who disagree with Conservatives and don't care for the recent Republican rule with the far-left.
The far-left (that 3% to 5% of radicals/extremists) who revile America's "unfair market-based economy" and see America as "an Imperial power and a force for ill around the world" ARE "enemies within", NONE of the rest of the vast majority of Americans who are skeptical of Conservatism, Conservatives and Republicans fall into that group.
I’d advise my fellow Conservatives that we don't push more people in that direction by responding in anger and frustration.
Consider the murder of Dr. George Tiller of Kansas in a Church, in front of his wife, singing in the Church choir, shot dead by, ironically enough, an alleged pro-LIFE zealot.
The stooge who murdered “George Tiller the baby killer” only succeeded in making a martyr out of the late Dr. Tiller.
That’s the price of extremism – marginalization and ultimate destruction.
I hate to say this, but being non-religious myself, I’ve become more and more convinced that these so-called “Religious Conservatives” often do Conservatism a LOT more harm than good.
I can’t and won’t try to rationalize that kind of insanity, where a pseudo-religious devotee think that KILLING a physician, who provides abortion services is somehow advancing the pro-LIFE cause.
It’s not. It only tars the entire movement with that insanity and by extension, drags Conservatism down into the muck of that insanity.
<
<
<
"One thing I'd really love to see is for conservatives to get back into the entertainment industry full force, producing GREAT music, movies, novels, video games, etc., that "sell" our beliefs in the "sneaky" way progressives have so successfully used to transmit their views into the hearts and minds of Americans."
<
<
As would I Seane-Anna, but where are the Conservatives who support Conservative artists like Mr. Avilar, and other Conservative artists whom I've highlighted here on this blog?
Maybe it's true that "Conservatives don't dance", that is, they don't buy as many movie tickets, patronize the arts, etc., as much as Liberals do...perhaps that's the reason the Left dominates the arts and entertainment, just as why the Right dominates Talk Radio.
Another thing to remember is CONSERVATISM, like any belief in HUMAN LIBERTY and INDIVIDUALISM is the hard choice. Not asking anyone for anything and standing on your own two feet, accepting personal responsibility for ALL that happens to you is HARD.
Expecting others to help out, "because we're all in this together" and supporting free housing, free food, free clothing and free healthcare is EASY. Liberalism is emotionalism and as such, it’s predicated on appealing to “what feeeeels good”, and quite frankly, that often sounds very good to an awful lot of people.
It's only natural that far more people want FREE STUFF than support everyone working for and paying for their own stuff.
There are too many naive Conservatives who don't realize that fact.We're not selling/advancing something EASY or something that resonates naturally with most people, we, like America's Founders, are “selling”/advancing something that's very difficult to sell, a very hard choice that many, many people see as ultimately unfair, especially to those less able to compete.
WE'RE the ones in an "UPHILL BATTLE".
The Left is selling a worldview in which it "rains root-beer" and where "anything that feels good (even pedophilia) is fine." Free stuff and a LIBERTINE ("anything goes") morality is the EASY choice, the more tempting sounding path.We're the ones selling the "no free lunch" viewpoint.
Right now, there are fewer takers of our view than there were in the past.
So, the most basic and most important facing Conservatives today is, “How do we reach out to that vast middle”?
In anger and outrage?
No, not at all, I would not only hope, but encourage those folks to STAY LEFT if that is the path the majority of Conservatives take.
In fact, I truly believe that this is such an important issue that those Conservatives who really care about reaching that vast middle, isolate and marginalize those more bellicose and unreasonable Conservatives for the good of Conservatism itself.
We are the ones with the harder case to make and we must make that case as rationally and reasonably as we can, otherwise we risk allowing that radical few Conservatives, that I see as no more than 3% to 5% of that group, marginalizing Conservatism itself.
We have to be smarter both in how we formulate our arguments and how we approach those who disagree.
I hope you come around to seeing things a little differently....I don’t write and discuss things to CONVINCE or CONVERT, I don’t have that kind of arrogance, but merely to offer a different way of seeing things.
You mistakenly seem to believe that "the majority of Americans are on our side and strongly support freedom, property rights and individualism." In FACT, the vast majority of Americans, like the vast majority of humans, hold to no such political or ideological predilections. They'll support whatever they perceive as being in their own best interests.
WE are the ones who have the much more arduous and difficult case to make.
We forget that at our own peril.
