Grim Old Party
- From: NoName <NoName@xxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Sun, 29 Apr 2007 04:28:40 -0700
This is an op ed piece by David Brooks, the
New York Times conservative columnist. I would be
interested to hear from some conservativs in the
group -- is he off base or on target?
The New York Times
April 29, 2007
Grim Old Party
By DAVID BROOKS
At the University of Chicago there?s a group of scholars who are
members of what is called the Rational Expectations school of
economics. They believe human beings tend to anticipate unpleasant
future events and seek in advance to avoid them. Their teachings do
not apply to the Republican Party.
The Republicans suffered one unpleasant event in November 2006, and
they are headed toward an even nastier one in 2008. The Democrats have
opened up a wide advantage in party identification and are crushing
the G.O.P. among voters under 30.
Moreover, there has been a clear shift, in poll after poll, away from
Republican positions on social issues and on attitudes toward
government. Democratic approaches are favored on almost all domestic,
tax and fiscal issues, and even on foreign affairs.
The public, in short, wants change.
And yet the Republicans refuse to offer that. On Capitol Hill, there
is a strange passivity in Republican ranks. Republicans are privately
disgusted with how President Bush has led their party and the nation,
but they don?t publicly offer any alternatives. They just follow
sullenly along. They privately believe the country needs new
approaches to the war against Islamic extremism, but they don?t offer
them. They try to block Democratic initiatives, but they don?t offer
the country any new ways to think about the G.O.P.
They are like people quietly marching to their doom.
And at the presidential level, things are even worse. The party is
blessed with a series of charismatic candidates who are not orthodox
Republicans. But the pressures of the campaign are such that these
candidates have had to repress anything that might make them
interesting. Instead of offering something new, each of them has been
going around pretending to be the second coming of George Allen ? a
bland, orthodox candidate who will not challenge any of the party?s
customs or prejudices.
Mitt Romney created an interesting health care reform, but he?s
suppressing that in an effort to pretend to be George Allen. Rudy
Giuliani has an unusual profile that won him a majority of votes on
the Upper West Side of Manhattan, of all places, but he?s suppressing
that to be George Allen. John McCain has a record on taxes and
spending that suggests he really could take on entitlements. But at
least until last week, he suppressed that in order not to offend the
George Allen vote.
And just in case any of these George Allen wannabes weren?t George
Allen enough for voters, Fred Thompson may enter the race as the
Authentic Conservative, even though deep in his heart he?s no more
George Allen than the rest of them.
The big question is, Why are the Republicans so immobile?
There are several reasons. First, there are structural barriers to
change. As it has aged, the conservative movement has grown a
collection of special interest groups that restrict its mobility.
Anybody who offers unorthodox tax policies gets whacked by the Club
for Growth and Americans for Tax Reform. Anybody who offers unorthodox
social policies gets whacked by James Dobson.
Second, there is the corrupting influence of teamism. Being a good
conservative now means sticking together with other conservatives, not
thinking new and adventurous thoughts. Those who stray from the
reservation are accused of selling out to the mainstream media by the
guardians of conservative correctness.
Third, there is the oppressive power of the past. Conservatives have
allowed a simplistic view of Ronald Reagan to define the sacred
parameters of thought. Reagan himself was flexible, unorthodox and
creative. But conservatives have created a mythical, rigid Reagan, and
any deviation from that is considered unholy.
Fourth, there is the bunker mentality. Republican morale has been
brutalized by the Iraq war and the party?s decline. This state of
emotional pain is not conducive to risk-taking and free and open
debate.
In sum, Republicans know they need to change, but they have closed off
all the avenues for change.
The tale is not entirely hopeless. McCain seems now to be throwing off
his yoke. Newt Gingrich is way ahead of his colleagues when it comes
to new ideas and policies. The libertarians and paleoconservatives
have been losing for so long they are suddenly quite interesting.
There are even a few of us who think it is time to revive the
Alexander Hamilton-Theodore Roosevelt legacy.
Change could, miraculously, come soon. But the odds are it will take a
few more crushing defeats before Republicans tear down the
self-imposed walls that confine them.
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: Grim Old Party
- From: Alvin E. Toda
- Re: Grim Old Party
- From: George Z. Bush
- Re: Grim Old Party
- Prev by Date: Re: The Bell Curve globally viewed
- Next by Date: Lt. Gen. William Odom: Bush Should Sign Iraq Bill
- Previous by thread: WAKE UP AMERICA!!!
- Next by thread: Re: Grim Old Party
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
