Call for a new Republican political strategy to fight liberalism
Below, Evariste argues that this country wants a loyal opposition, and that the Congressional Republicans should be the ones to play that vital role—whether the president of the moment is a Democrat OR a Republican.
Also, on the subject of the present pathetic Republicans who fail to oppose liberal presidents if they have “R.” after their name, see a reader’s explanation of why he has stopped listening to Rush Limbaugh.
Evariste writes:
Liberalism is so all-pervasive today that we have to take a stance that we’re going to have to fight “our” guys tooth and nail, because the minute they’re in power, we’ll just get policies that can best be described as Liberalism with Republican Characteristics. George Bush delighted conservatives with his no-nonsense, straight-talkin’, straight-shootin’ image, but it was all a show. A mirage. This has framed a question for me: Do we want to have conservative leaders, or do we want to have conservative entertainers? Bush was a great conservative entertainer, with all the “smoke “em out of their holes,” “with us or against us” talk. But he was a dud. I think the reason people are upset with your careful stance on Palin is that they haven’t internalized just how badly conservatism is losing the fight.
Constitutionally speaking, this country is a dictatorship of the Congress. You wouldn’t know it by looking at the supine, craven, rubber-stamping performance the Republicans turned in during the first six years of the Bush administration. You’d think it was a dictatorship of the Supreme Court, but Congress’s trump card is its constitutional power to limit the jurisdiction of the courts. Imagine if the Republicans in Congress had realized their predicament with Bush very early on and kept him on a tight leash, overriding or preventing his worst liberal excesses. Wouldn’t we be in a much better position today? Someone has to be the loyal opposition. It’s not going to be the Democrats, so why not the Republicans? I think the wise thing for conservative activists to do is to become Congress-oriented. The presidency is important, but even if we get a president we like, we won’t get conservative government. Reagan made no lasting difference, and neither did Bush. Congress holds the winning hand here. The mistake Republicans are making is in ending their opposition to the president any time a Republican is sitting in the Oval Office. Time to treat all presidents and would-be presidents as dangerous liberal maniacs until proven otherwise, not as potential saviors. If we could only get Republicans to lead from the Capitol and maintain a psychological independence from the president, be he one of theirs or one of ours. The Republican revolt against Bush’s bailout is a great start. Where were these guys from 2001 till 2007? The Clinton administration gave us several important conservative outcomes even though Clinton was as liberal as they come, because the Republicans in Congress decided that the Democratic President was not going to get his way, and they led from the Capitol.
LA replies:
You write:
“Imagine if the Republicans in Congress had realized their predicament with Bush very early on and kept him on a tight leash, overriding or preventing his worst liberal excesses. Wouldn’t we be in a much better position today?”
Of course. I’ve said it myself a hundred times. They did it once or twice, with Harriet Miers and with the 2006 immigration bill which passed the Senate and then the GOP-controlled House refused even to go into conference committee over it. But then the House GOP failed to follow up on this signal achievement, by campaigning for reelection on the explicit basis that they had stopped the immigration bill and would do so in the next Congress. Explicitly taking a stand against Bush was beyond their ken. So they failed to run on their one winning issue and lost control of the House.
“Time to treat all presidents and would-be presidents as dangerous liberal maniacs until proven otherwise, not as potential saviors. If we could only get Republicans to lead from the Capitol and maintain a psychological independence from the President, be he one of theirs or one of ours.”
Beautifully said. This fits with my formula: “I oppose both McCain and Obama, and whichever one is elected, I will continue to oppose him.” If conservatives took that stand, they could become the squeaky wheel in American politics that gets the grease.
Posted by Lawrence Auster at September 27, 2008 05:32 PM | Send