Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Breaking Up Is Hard to Do ("Bush Destroyed the Republican Party" -- Drudge Headline)
WSJ.com ^ | Jan 25, 2008 | Peggy Noonan

Posted on 01/26/2008 5:57:27 AM PST by fightinJAG

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-100101-150151-200201-246 next last

1 posted on 01/26/2008 5:57:30 AM PST by fightinJAG
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: fightinJAG

The 100 percenters aren’t going to like this.


2 posted on 01/26/2008 5:59:14 AM PST by Rush4U
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: fightinJAG

Bush destroyed it...Nixon destroyed it...Hover destroyed it...everyone seems to be writing the party obituary. The GOP is a lot stronger than a single person. What it needs is leadership, which is currently lacking.


3 posted on 01/26/2008 6:00:20 AM PST by Non-Sequitur (Save Fredericksburg. Support CVBT.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Rush4U
The 100 percenters....

You mean like this guy?

A thing moderately good is not so good as it ought to be. Moderation in temper is always a virtue; but moderation in principle is always a vice.

Thomas Paine

4 posted on 01/26/2008 6:01:30 AM PST by mewzilla (In politics the middle way is none at all. John Adams)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Non-Sequitur

That is why there is Mitt.


5 posted on 01/26/2008 6:03:06 AM PST by Biggirl (A biggirl with a big heart for God's animal creation, with 4 cats in my life as proof. =^..^=)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: fightinJAG

I don’t think it’s a very well-written piece. It founders and lacks evidence. Which is too bad. The evidence is there.

Bush wrecked the Republican Party by governing as a Scoop Jackson pro-defense democrat.

It was a monumental job of wrecking. The results are all around us in this election cycle.


6 posted on 01/26/2008 6:05:01 AM PST by samtheman
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: fightinJAG

Peggy Noonan taking on the king of the Jaw Bone Media. That will be interesting.


7 posted on 01/26/2008 6:05:03 AM PST by joesbucks
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Non-Sequitur
The GOP is a lot stronger than a single person. What it needs is leadership, which is currently lacking.

Gonna be hard to come by when the suits running the GOP hate conservatives as much as the 'Rats do....

8 posted on 01/26/2008 6:05:03 AM PST by mewzilla (In politics the middle way is none at all. John Adams)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: fightinJAG
Rush is right. McCain or Huckabee will drive the Republican party further to the left. McCain is a social liberal and a fiscal liberal. Mike is a humanist that loves to ues socialism to make his utopia come true. The differences between the Demoncrats and Republicans will be hardly worth mentioning.

I’m voting for Mitt, the “Mormon”.

9 posted on 01/26/2008 6:05:26 AM PST by nmh (Intelligent people recognize Intelligent Design (God) .)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: fightinJAG

There’s nothing wrong with the Republican Party that couldn’t be cured with a dose of legitimate conservativism. It worked in 1980, and it worked in 1994.


10 posted on 01/26/2008 6:05:58 AM PST by popdonnelly (Get Reid. Salazar, and Harkin out of the Senate.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Biggirl
Mittens( real middle name ) the leader.
Couldn’t nominate one single judge.
Couldn’t issue one deserving pardon.
Picked never won an election, before or since, “Muffy Healey” as his Lieutenant Governor.
No Romney has ever in American history ever worn a US uniform.
Post Mitt, Massachusetts GOP less offices since the Civil War.

Mittens Romney, won’t nominate, won’t pardon, didn’t build and never served. The Great Leader.

11 posted on 01/26/2008 6:08:08 AM PST by Leisler
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: fightinJAG

12 posted on 01/26/2008 6:08:08 AM PST by Past Your Eyes (Bill Clinton: Life Member of the Liars' Club.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Biggirl
I agree with Ann Coulter. Mitt could surprise and be a stealth candidate for conservatives in the same way Obama would be a Manchurian candidate for Muslims.

At worst, he will govern like George Bush without the speech impediments and slavish devotion to Mexicanization of America.

13 posted on 01/26/2008 6:08:59 AM PST by Vigilanteman (Are there any men left in Washington? Or are there only cowards? Ahmad Shah Massoud)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: mewzilla

I think that the person who will lead the GOP back to prominence is out there, but not on anyone’s radar screen. When he or she appears I hope that they don’t make the same mistake Reagan didn. If Reagan had a fault it was that he didn’t bring along enough like-minded conservatives into prominent positions to make sure that his positions survived him. Reagan turned out to be a flash in the pan, Gingrich self-destructed, and the business-as-usual Republicans of the 60’s and 70’s took over.


14 posted on 01/26/2008 6:09:01 AM PST by Non-Sequitur (Save Fredericksburg. Support CVBT.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: fightinJAG

I believe we have a great big BINGO!

We will never sell conservatism (or the GOP) to the electorate if we cannot define it. Even if we were not directly responsible, we have to point out where the “right” went wrong and exactly what we need to do to rectify the situation.


15 posted on 01/26/2008 6:10:22 AM PST by David Isaac (Duncan Hunter '08)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: mewzilla
"Thomas Paine"

That's the guy! Lynch 'em.

(What he's already dead? never mind)

16 posted on 01/26/2008 6:11:07 AM PST by Paladin2 (Huma for co-president!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: nmh

Ayn Rand had a wored for the Republican party back in the old days. She described it as the “me too” party. As in, whenever the Democrats proposed another welfare program or subsidy the Republicans would respond that we want that too, just more incrementally. Looks like they’ve returned to their roots. I think Rush nailed it yeaterday when he compared the Republican future to a AAA or AA farm club compared to the major league Dem party.


17 posted on 01/26/2008 6:11:51 AM PST by saganite (Lust type what you what in the “tagline” space)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: fightinJAG
Wasn’t it Noonan who derided the President’s inauguration speech? She has, to my knowledge, never had a good thing to say about W. Just another Washington elite.
18 posted on 01/26/2008 6:11:55 AM PST by Bushbacker1 (I was officially Fredbacker1 but now officially Romney1 and still can't change my name)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: fightinJAG

Brilliant headline on Drudge’s part!
Grabbed everyone’s attention, lured in all the Democrats thinking they were gonna get their Bush Derangement Syndrome jollies off it, then proceeded to read a long piece that eviscerated the Clintons. At the very end is a single sentence aside to a different story where Peggy says McCain can’t destroy the GOP because Bush already did.

Well played, Matt. Well played.


19 posted on 01/26/2008 6:12:03 AM PST by counterpunch (Mike Huckabee — The Religious Wrong)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Leisler

Wikipedia has the middle name as “Mitt”. Where does “Mittens” come from; it must be a family name, but it sounds like Michigan hand covers in winter. HRC will steal MI from him! And he won’t even have a MA campaign if he is the nominee — unwise expenditure of limited funds.


20 posted on 01/26/2008 6:12:10 AM PST by Theodore R. ( Cowardice is still forever!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: fightinJAG

There is nothing new about this. Every thing bad that has happened since he was elected is his fault.


21 posted on 01/26/2008 6:12:11 AM PST by Piquaboy (22 year veteran of the Army, Air Force and Navy, Pray for all our military .)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: nmh

Mitt it is for me, as well.


22 posted on 01/26/2008 6:12:17 AM PST by Rush4U
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: joesbucks
Rush is miles wide, and inches deep. He’s not a very well educated person.

I have had trouble listening to him for many, many years.
He’s not even funny anymore. Kind of stale. I like Neil Bortz way more.

I download MP3 history and economics lectures off the net and listen to them. I’ve even dumped my XM radio.

23 posted on 01/26/2008 6:12:18 AM PST by Leisler
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: fightinJAG
George W. Bush destroyed the Republican Party, by which I mean he sundered it, broke its constituent pieces apart and set them against each other. He did this on spending, the size of government, war, the ability to prosecute war, immigration and other issues.

Well of course. But to be fair, he was simply making palatable the wussified RINO approach prevalent since the gov. shut-down cave in.

Shame on me for falling for it. No more.

24 posted on 01/26/2008 6:12:23 AM PST by ovrtaxt (No Rudy McRombee for me! I'm voting for Ron Paul. The GOP can curl up and die.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Non-Sequitur
Screw the GOP. We need a new party. A second one.
25 posted on 01/26/2008 6:12:27 AM PST by mewzilla (In politics the middle way is none at all. John Adams)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: fightinJAG

Well damn! Me, and a very few other, use to get flamed for saying this, now it’s headlines on Drudge. Again, GWB will go down in history as the worse POTUS. He destroyed the Republican party, and most of our America.


26 posted on 01/26/2008 6:12:46 AM PST by devane617 (I WILL NOT HOLD MY NOSE AND VOTE !!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: fightinJAG

Harriet Myers was a hard one to take ...


27 posted on 01/26/2008 6:12:50 AM PST by GOPJ
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Piquaboy

It’s not that everything bad since 2005 has been GWB’s fault, but he has sure played the role of Nero to the hilt.


28 posted on 01/26/2008 6:12:56 AM PST by Theodore R. ( Cowardice is still forever!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: fightinJAG

Already been posted plenty o’ times FRiend, i.e., “search is your friend”...


29 posted on 01/26/2008 6:13:00 AM PST by mkjessup (GOP + FOX + National Review = The NEW "Axis of RINOs")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Leisler

That’s exactly why I’m for Huma.


30 posted on 01/26/2008 6:13:47 AM PST by Paladin2 (Huma for co-president!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: Bushbacker1

That 2005 speech was a laundry list of liberalism. After sitting through it, I have never listened to GWB again and won’t listen to his last State of the Union speech next week either. He has nothing of significance to say to conservatives.


31 posted on 01/26/2008 6:15:04 AM PST by Theodore R. ( Cowardice is still forever!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: Rush4U
Mitt it is for me, as well.

Then you'd better hope his dealings with Bain Capital were above board...

32 posted on 01/26/2008 6:15:24 AM PST by mewzilla (In politics the middle way is none at all. John Adams)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: Leisler
"I download MP3 history and economics lectures off the net and listen to them"

Sounds like something the high schools should do too.

33 posted on 01/26/2008 6:15:37 AM PST by Paladin2 (Huma for co-president!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: fightinJAG

Bush didn’t destroy the party. He kicked it in the nuts.


34 posted on 01/26/2008 6:16:20 AM PST by Mr Ramsbotham (Laws against sodomy are honored in the breech.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: fightinJAG

Yep,

So now we will be left with McLame in November.


35 posted on 01/26/2008 6:16:43 AM PST by KeyLargo
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: fightinJAG

Unwarranted alarmism.


36 posted on 01/26/2008 6:17:12 AM PST by Chi-townChief
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: fightinJAG
Peggy:

Your point concedes that there are/were many causes for the "destruction" of the Republican party, while you specifically fingered Bush's approach on spending, the war, and immigration.

Assuming for the sake of argument that you are correct, can you really say it was Bush's approach to these issues, and not the inherent divergent approaches to these issues within the party's ranks, that caused the division?

IOW, is there a politician on the face of the earth, using political tools, that, under all the circumstances, could have reconciled all the inherent divergent views on these issues within the party to the even more wildly divergent political reality outside the party?

If not, then was it the politician who "destroyed" the party or was it political reality?

I do agree that Bush could have taken a more conservative approach in several areas. However, I do not agree that it is correct to analyze the effect of an administration on its party in "pieces."

To do so, just plays into and gives legitimacy to the "single issue" (or, in effect, multiple "single/handful of issues") mindset.

An administration can never be successful when measured against the multitude of "single issues" inherent in a party.

What will destroy the Republican party is it becoming more and more like the Democrat party: that is, more and more a loose coalition of multiple "single/handful of issues" subgroups who are unwilling to measure the party's success in terms of "net gain" rather than on a zero-sum basis viz-a-vis a handful of issues.

When subgroups form around their handful of issues, and then measure the party on a zero-sum basis---e.g., the party didn't do what I thought was appropriate on immigration [fill-in-the-blank with an issue], therefore the party accomplished NOTHING across the board---NO party can endure and NO politician can cause it to endure.

37 posted on 01/26/2008 6:17:30 AM PST by fightinJAG ("Tell the truth. The Pajama People are watching you.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: fightinJAG

The Republican party needs to use what worked before, The Contract With America. But why did it work?

1) It wasn’t so much what it said, but how it said it. Most of us probably don’t remember a single item on it.

2) How it said it was simple, clear and honest. No hesitation, no conflicting statements, no hedging, no qualifications, no voting both ways. It was a transparent agenda. You either signed on to it, or you didn’t.

3) Most of the people who signed up were new candidates, not incumbents who had become comfortable with the Washington way of doing things. As such, they were there to break the two party “monolith of stagnation”, not to become part of it.

4) The public loved it. Not just Republican voters, but Independents, and even a lot of moderate Democrats. Finally, a simple checklist to determine who *should* be running the country, and those who just *wanted* to run the country.

5) Conversely, the professional politicians and bureaucrats hated it. It was like light shined on cockroaches, forcing them to flee. They *couldn’t* sign on to it, because it would ruin so many of their schemes and plots.


38 posted on 01/26/2008 6:17:36 AM PST by yefragetuwrabrumuy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Leisler

Neil Bortz??? That fag lover wouldn’t make a pimple on Rush’s ass.


39 posted on 01/26/2008 6:17:44 AM PST by Past Your Eyes (Bill Clinton: Life Member of the Liars' Club.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: All

Bush destroyed the Republican Party for this election cycle...


40 posted on 01/26/2008 6:17:46 AM PST by Doofer (Carl Cameron Is A Weasel)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: Leisler

Like the Lincoln that most Republicans admire, Rush is self-educated. He can be repetitious because he has to explain positions ad nauseum to the sheeple. Reagan tried that approach too with some success. I lost interest in the program in 2005, when he seemed to be a defender of GWB and the RNC even as they were adopting ruinous policies. Sometimes I listen some to M. Savage now.


41 posted on 01/26/2008 6:17:46 AM PST by Theodore R. ( Cowardice is still forever!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: Non-Sequitur

For some reason I’ve yet to figure out, Reagan named the “anti-Reagan” (GHWB) to be his VP and other Bush people to positions of great power. He also kept the advisors who convinced him to sign the “Therapeutic Abortions” bill, while Governor of Kalifornia.

It is way past time we figured out and concentrated on what we have, and must have, in common. We must find leaders that feel, and have felt that way also, instead of taking whatever candidates the GOP establishment and the media choose for us.


42 posted on 01/26/2008 6:18:12 AM PST by David Isaac (Duncan Hunter '08)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: mewzilla

Duncan Hunter certainly doesn’t think so.


43 posted on 01/26/2008 6:18:32 AM PST by ovrtaxt (No Rudy McRombee for me! I'm voting for Ron Paul. The GOP can curl up and die.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: counterpunch

I think Reagan was more than just a flash in the pan. His commitment to reducing marginal tax rates from 70% to 30% or so and to supply side economics (people responding to incentives) has had long lasting effects not just in the US but elsewhere.
Except for that observation, post #14 is spot on.


44 posted on 01/26/2008 6:18:52 AM PST by Maine Mariner
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: fightinJAG

The flaw in GWB is that he has left a “base” that practically no longer exists and is totally demoralized. And he has procured no Democrat support to replace that base, as he apparently sought to do.


45 posted on 01/26/2008 6:19:35 AM PST by Theodore R. ( Cowardice is still forever!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies]

To: fightinJAG
BS. Bush is not responsible for the behavior of people like Mark Foley, Abramoff and Weldon, but Bush sure is a convenient whipping boy isn't he? He's not even allowed credit for the tax cuts we enjoy, for us not having been attacked again since 9/11/01, for dropping federal funding of fetal stem cell research, dropping federal funding for abortions worldwide, trying to protect the sanctity of marriage...nothing. He is allowed NO credit whatsoever. He's the DEFINITION of "damned if you do and damned if you don't".

I am sure the one-trick borderbots who will disagree, though they don't help fight for the fence that the government is still fighting envirowackos in court to get built.

46 posted on 01/26/2008 6:20:21 AM PST by cake_crumb (Even if you're unable to FIGHT to save your country, you CAN vote to save it.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Maine Mariner

I imagine the Reagan as “flash-in-the-pan” stems from his two poor Supreme Court nominations, one of which was practically an outright shill for liberals.


47 posted on 01/26/2008 6:20:26 AM PST by Theodore R. ( Cowardice is still forever!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 44 | View Replies]

To: cake_crumb

A lot of middle-income persons saw very little tax relief, as the taxes are so high as the “cut” was not observed otherwise.


48 posted on 01/26/2008 6:21:19 AM PST by Theodore R. ( Cowardice is still forever!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 46 | View Replies]

To: yefragetuwrabrumuy

“The chief problem of American political life...has been how to make the two Congressional parties more national and international. The argument that the two parties should represent opposed ideals and policies, one, perhaps, of the Right and the other of the Left, is a foolish idea acceptable only to doctrinaire and academic thinkers. Instead, the two parties should be almost identical, so that the American people can ‘throw the rascals out’ at any election without leading to any profound or extensive shifts in policy.”

~Carroll Quigley, ‘Tragedy and Hope’


49 posted on 01/26/2008 6:21:34 AM PST by ovrtaxt (No Rudy McRombee for me! I'm voting for Ron Paul. The GOP can curl up and die.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies]

To: David Isaac

Good point, apparently some of the Reagan advisors convinced him he needed a “moderate” Republican (GHWB) to hold the liberal Republican segment of the party — to keep it from defecting even more to John B. Anderson of liberal IL. He had already tapped a “moderate” at best in 1976 — Richard Schweiker.


50 posted on 01/26/2008 6:23:05 AM PST by Theodore R. ( Cowardice is still forever!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 42 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-100101-150151-200201-246 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson