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

Skip to comments.

The Death of Conservatism? - 43 Mistakes and the GOP's Dobson's Choice
Sideshow Bob | January 29, 2008 | Sideshow Bob

Posted on 01/29/2008 11:55:19 AM PST by Sideshow Bob

There have been more than a few recent articles and editorials attempting to affix blame for the demise of the Republican Party. Peggy Noonan blames President Bush. Rush Limbaugh believes a McCain nomination will kill the party. However, even in a worse case scenario, the Republican Party will probably stagger along for several years much like the last decade of the Whigs. Conservative Republicans should probably be more concerned about the impending demise of the conservative movement within the party. Some individuals can be blamed more than others, but this folly has many fathers. The latest blow to conservatives has come from within – thanks to Dr. James Dobson and other egotistical evangelicals. Political doomsayers may be correct and it is likely too late to save the conservative movement in 2008. Conservatives can correct their path to destruction for 2010 and beyond, but only if they look back at recent history, recognize the actions and actors that have brought the party and movement to this point, and to learn from a long series of missteps and mistakes.

Ronald Reagan built a winning coalition of conservatives, independents and establishment moderate Republicans in 1980. A coalition of social, economic and security conservatives had come together to form a plurality within the GOP and wrest leadership of the party from the establishment, moderate GOP. The Iran-Contra scandal (Mistake #1) weakened the coalition and the moderate wing of the party regained control of the GOP (Mistake #2), which led to the election of President George H.W. Bush (Mistake #3).

While the elder Bush had adopted – albeit reluctantly – many conservative ideals, he and the moderate GOP leaders advocated a “kinder, gentler” approach (Mistake #4). Conservatives might have been content to take a back seat to moderate GOP leadership, but they read Bush’s lips and their support and enthusiasm for the Republican Party evaporated after the Bush tax increase (Mistake #5). In 1992 some conservatives were taken in by Ross Perot and his anti-establishment, anti-Washington message (Mistake #6). Others just stayed home (Mistake #7) and helped Democrats elect the Dope from Hope, Bill Clinton, with just 43% of the popular vote (Mistake #8).

The only positive to come out of 1992 was that it helped create an opening for an obscure, but brilliant Congressman from Georgia to lead conservatives to regain control of the Republican Party. Newt Gingrich reformed the three-legged conservative coalition and took an upstart innovative approach of leading the GOP from the House with a 1994 national congressional campaign platform – the Contract with America.

It is important to note that prior to the ’94 elections, Senate Minority Leader Bob Dole and other establishment, moderate GOP leaders scoffed at and were dismissive of Gingrich and the Contract. Dole and Senate moderates rode the Contract’s election coattails, but made it plain that the GOP Senate did NOT sign on to the program, was not obligated to it, reluctantly followed Gingrich's lead, and worked to water down each and every one of the Contract's provisions (Mistake #9).

By January 1996, Dole was the presumptive Republican presidential nominee (Mistake #10). Dole sought to convince Speaker Gingrich to fold up the federal government shutdown stalemate with President Clinton and allow Dole to lead the GOP via his presidential campaign.

Dole gave Gingrich the choice of single-handedly continuing the shutdown and fight with Clinton and the media with Candidate Dole seeking a different path from the House GOP or deferring to Dole's presidential campaign and resuming the conservative battle together with Gingrich’s friend Trent Lott to keep President Dole honest after the ’96 elections. Gingrich made the wrong choice (Mistake #11). Gingrich probably should have run for President himself in 1996 (Mistake #12).

We all remember what happened. By caving in and compromising on the shutdown, the conservative House leadership lost some of their ability to control their more moderate members (Mistake #13). Bob Dole lost (Mistake #14). Trent Lott built his own voice separate from the House (Mistake #15). And with no help from Lott & the GOP Senate and a Clinton veto looming on all conservative issues, Gingrich, Armey & DeLay focused too much of their efforts on the growing Clinton scandals (Mistake #16).

Gingrich was able to maintain order within the House even during the Clinton impeachment. But after the Senate RINOs failed to do their duty and convict Clinton (Mistake #17), the House moderates began feeling their oats (Mistake #18).

Then, the impact of the missing FBI files took effect. Allegations of marital affairs Gingrich and Hyde took their toll (Mistake #19). Seeing his conservative House coalition slowly diminish and Lott's desire to set on a different path, Gingrich stepped down as Speaker (Mistake #20). Then his presumed successor, Bob Livingston from Louisiana, was also taken out by a marital affair (Mistake #21).

House Moderates became emboldened and championed the lackluster Dennis Hastert as Speaker to muzzle Armey & DeLay and appear less confrontational (Mistake #22). This effort also helped to clear the agenda of party leadership for the 2000 GOP presidential candidates (Mistake #23). And in 2000, conservatives settled for the "compassionate conservatism" of George W. Bush (Mistake #24). Many conservatives stayed home, nearly costing Bush the presidency and actually losing GOP control of the Senate in 2000 (Mistake #25).

To be fair, conservatives should thank God everyday for W's leadership in dealing with 9-11. But Bush also squandered the opportunity to push the party and country to the right following that horrible event (Mistake #26). The GOP regained control of the Senate in 2002, but based solely on the country’s fears of Democrats’ inability to deal with national security concerns and not on conservative social and economic principles. Meanwhile, the House drifted further to the center (Mistake #27).

Conservative fears of repeating Florida 2000 helped Bush win reelection in 2004, despite the party's overall drift to the center. By now, any conservative elements in the House and Senate were in complete retreat. The moderates ruled the roost in both houses. RINO defections on the Iraq war (Mistake #28), wasteful earmarks (Mistake #29) and ethics scandals (Mistake #29) were now front and center for the GOP. The only conservative victories of 2005-06 were the confirmations of Roberts and Alito to the Supreme Court. And it took a battle to defeat Bush on his nomination of Harriet Miers to do it.

By Fall 2006 conservatives had become utterly disheartened. Attempts to make the Bush tax cuts permanent stalled (Mistake #30), the continued treachery of Arlen Spector, John McCain, Lindsey Graham and the Gang of 14 (Mistake #31), increased dissatisfaction with George Bush and the Miers nomination debacle all caused conservatives to stay home in November 2006 (Mistake #32). And the GOP lost both the House and Senate.

Occasionally, the conservative movement can still rise up. The reaction to the Amnesty bill was encouraging. But other than that, conservatives have again been wandering in the wilderness. GOP moderates and RINO's have been resistant to allowing a conservative to assume leadership in Congress. And any potential conservative congressional leader has held back (Mistake #33), in part due to the extremely early start of the 2008 presidential race (Mistake #34).

And what did conservatives get for 2008 GOP candidates? Were there any Reagan conservatives who possessed all three legs of the coalition stool - strong national defense, social conservatism, economic conservatism?

Nope.

Instead, we got Rudy Giuliani. An autocrat who has little affection for social conservatives, but pledged to nominate strict construction judges. Whoopee!

Instead, we got John McCain. An angry RINO maverick who enjoys flouting social and economic conservatives AND even the GOP establishment to gain favor and positive reviews from the liberal media.

Instead, we got Mitt Romney, an uber-wealthy GOP establishment moderate. At least Romney panders to social and economic conservatives with recently discovered flip-flopped positions on issues of importance to those two factions.

Instead, we got Mike Huckabee – the Dope from Hope, part II. While he is just as slick and manipulative as Bill Clinton, Huckabee is nowhere near as smart.

Instead, we got Ron Paul, a true blue, libertarian nutbag. Paul has a few economic bona fides that have pulled away a few non-nut job libertarians. But I'm sorry, Dr. Paul is a kook.

Instead, we got the Obscure Four - Tom Tancredo, Alan Keyes, Tommy Thompson & Duncan Hunter. Tancredo & Keyes are single issue candidates. Tommy & Dunc are well-rounded politicians (especially Hunter), but they lacked the ability to have broad nationwide appeal.

Seeing this morass of blech, Fred Thompson entered the fray expecting to be the savior of the Republican Party and the conservative movement. Fred should have been that candidate.

Unfortunately, Dr. James Dobson and a few evangelical leaders decided to cut off their nose to spite their face (Mistake #35). You see, Fred's not a Bible thumper. Neither was Ronald Reagan. And like Reagan, Fred is a bona fide, all-around, federalist conservative. That wasn’t good enough for Dobson. And when Fred refused to kiss Dobson's ring of evangelical purity, Dobson went shopping for a candidate he thought he could control.

Flim Flam Huckabee seized on that opportunity. Huckabee played Dobson into thinking that Dobson could be a GOP kingmaker (Mistake #36). A handful of evangelical leaders blindly pushed Huckabee as a viable conservative (Mistake #37). The media, who knows a GOP loser when they see one, helped fan the flames of Huckabee's support. For a time, the scheme worked. Huckabee won Iowa (Mistake #38), but eventually the truth of Huckabee's Christian Socialism became evident to most conservatives.

But the damage had been done. Social conservatives were now spilt. Some had been taken in by Huckabee's class warfare (Mistake #39). Some had been taken in by the media's false depiction of Fred as a lazy campaigner (Mistake #40) and settled for Romney, Rudy or, worse, McCain (Mistake #41).

Added into this deceptive mix was the ability of independents and Democrats to participate in and distort the Iowa, New Hampshire & South Carolina Republican primaries (Mistake #42). Media darling McCain was back! McCain – the new Comeback Kid – was ready to lead....the GOP down to defeat. Meanwhile, Fred's race and the ability for the GOP to unify behind a Reaganesque conservative died (Mistake #43).

At best, the GOP could still end up with a George W. Bush-lite nominee like Mitt Romney. He will at least pretend to care about conservative ideals from his Country Club wing of the party.

At worst, the GOP could end up with John McCain. McCain, the perennial thorn in the GOP's side who was once touted as a possible VP running mate for John Kerry!

Who knows? It’s still remotely possible that none of the moderates and RINO’s still in the presidential race will win a majority of the primary delegates. Maybe a conservative nominee could still rise up in a brokered GOP convention. Maybe a conservative national congressional campaign like the Contract with America could still arise in time for the 2008 elections. But really, that’s a fantasy.

The reality is that conservatives will have to wait until 2010 or 2012 to reassert itself as the true and legitimate leaders of the Republican Party. The reality is that conservatives have allowed numerous people to make numerous mistakes which have led the movement to this precarious point. The reality is that conservatives and the GOP are now left with this Dobson's Choice of Romney or McCain. Pass the nose clips and prepare for the worst.


TOPICS: Editorial; Your Opinion/Questions
KEYWORDS: 2008; 2008campaign; 2008election; campaign; conservatives; dobson; fred; fredthompson; gop; jamesdobson; presidential; shadowparty; soros; votefraud
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 161-180181-200201-220 ... 481-487 next last
To: Bryan24
I agreee with you. Dobson’s attack on Thompson was disasterous.

If I may...

I agree with you. Dobson’s attack on Thompson was disastrous. DISGUSTING!
181 posted on 01/29/2008 3:14:09 PM PST by papasmurf (No "Leftovers" for me. I'm votin' for Fred!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 42 | View Replies]

To: cowdog77; DannyTN
Hey, hey now....don’t be interjecting facts into this emotional issue!

You have an odd definition of "facts."

182 posted on 01/29/2008 3:15:18 PM PST by the808bass
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 158 | View Replies]

To: the808bass

Ok, Maybe Fred wouldn’t have had a say. It doesn’t matter. Fred said he wasn’t supportive of it. Which means he was against it. It hurt Fred big time in the eyes of the evangelicals.


183 posted on 01/29/2008 3:15:26 PM PST by DannyTN
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 179 | View Replies]

To: ejonesie22

Well, you KNOW I agree with that. Who would you say is the correct “carter”...the Hildebeast, or the golden tongued, limited experience, socialist?


184 posted on 01/29/2008 3:16:06 PM PST by papasmurf (No "Leftovers" for me. I'm votin' for Fred!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 50 | View Replies]

To: dinoparty

I was shocked to hear Rush give this explanation a couple of days before.

I have listened to Rush for years and years, and he has ALWAYS said (rightly so, IMO), that “you NEVER WIN BY LOSING.”

But that’s exactly what he’s arguing for now. What a flip flop.

His argument that, at least with a Rat president, the Republicans in Congress could be “full-throated” in their opposition was okay; it was better than nothing. But, please, the answer to that is to change the culture of temerity in opposing the President when he’s wrong.

Yes, we do want some party order and decorum. But if the President is not doing what WE want-—for example, in a Supreme Court nomination (Meyers)-—then WE have to raise hell and OUR REPS have to raise hell. Even if they do so behind closed doors, blah blah blah. They have to stand up to the President even if he is from our party. What’s up with that?

Rush was right: you never win by losing. If the Republican president is wrong, the Republicans need to do whatever it takes to get him on the right path, including opposing him when necessary. But no way does the country come out ahead with a Rat president.

For one thing: just compare who ANY Rat will make Secretary of Defense compared to who ANY Republican will. Any questions?


185 posted on 01/29/2008 3:16:30 PM PST by fightinJAG ("Tell the truth. The Pajama People are watching you.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: Sideshow Bob

Yes.


186 posted on 01/29/2008 3:17:48 PM PST by fightinJAG ("Tell the truth. The Pajama People are watching you.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: DannyTN
It’s the fact that Fred wasn’t supportive of it at all. Fred wasn’t on the same page with us.

Who is "us", Kimo Sabe? I'm sorry, you don't speak for all evangelicals, especially not this one.

187 posted on 01/29/2008 3:18:31 PM PST by Sideshow Bob
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 162 | View Replies]

To: NavVet

i think you are right and isn’t it sad that we have enough STUPID people in the Republican party for it to happen.


188 posted on 01/29/2008 3:19:12 PM PST by lolhelp
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Rick.Donaldson

Oh, THAT worked the last time we tried it (8 years of Bill Clinton). He left no lasting damage upon the country or our future. /s


189 posted on 01/29/2008 3:19:19 PM PST by fightinJAG ("Tell the truth. The Pajama People are watching you.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: Squantos; TheThirdRuffian; Jim Robinson
What do you think of a FreeRepublic primary wherein we agree to vote on a candidate and then back that person to the hilt? After that it's to emailing everybody we know.

There's no reason we can't stir up some energy with 100,000 FReepers doing that.

190 posted on 01/29/2008 3:20:45 PM PST by Carry_Okie (We have people in power who love evil.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 171 | View Replies]

To: DannyTN
Thompson didn’t thumb his nose at anybody. I’m an evangelical and I don’t know what you are talking about. Dobson’s attack was completely unprovoked and without merit.

Sadly, too many evangelicals did let the fact that Huckabee had a Bible in his hand blind them to the fact that he is exactly the kind of nanny-state socialist, that they would otherwise abhor. Not to mention his childlike grasp of national security issues.

As for making me consider voting Dem. If the Huckster gets the nod, I would be tempted.

191 posted on 01/29/2008 3:21:56 PM PST by NavVet ( If you don't defend Conservatism in the Primaries, you won't have it to defend in November)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: DannyTN
It hurt Fred big time in the eyes of the evangelicals.

By evangelicals, you mean evangelicals who are politically naive or who believe that style counts more than substance (i.e. RLA, DOMA vs. conservative Supreme Court Justices). I was evangelical before it was cool and I never took a shine to Mr. Mike. Perhaps too much experience with preachers who talk out of both sides of their mouths, yet they have no problem speaking sanctimoniously about minute differences, all the while ignoring their glaring lack of integrity.

192 posted on 01/29/2008 3:22:09 PM PST by the808bass
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 183 | View Replies]

To: Yankereb
better half a loaf than none at all

Yeah, a half a loaf today. And next time, another half of that half. And next time...

THAT'S where we are RIGHT NOW! That's how we got here.

No more halves!

No "Leftovers" for me. I'm votin' for Fred!



193 posted on 01/29/2008 3:22:54 PM PST by papasmurf (No "Leftovers" for me. I'm votin' for Fred!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 58 | View Replies]

To: the808bass

Fred caused hid own demise. I voted for him although I knew he had no chance.


194 posted on 01/29/2008 3:23:38 PM PST by westmichman ( God said: "They cry 'peace! peace!' but there is no peace. Jeremiah 6:14)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 130 | View Replies]

To: fatez

Hunter is a protectionist, so even he has a chink in the conservative armor.


195 posted on 01/29/2008 3:23:41 PM PST by NavVet ( If you don't defend Conservatism in the Primaries, you won't have it to defend in November)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 67 | View Replies]

To: Carry_Okie

Not much. FReepers are not that close together on anything or anyone.


196 posted on 01/29/2008 3:24:01 PM PST by Jim Robinson (Our God-given unalienable rights are not open to debate, negotiation or compromise!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 190 | View Replies]

To: the808bass
"So, you're against the state's rights when it's one of your issues."

This issue is different, because the pressure will come on all states to conform once a few states begin.

Some things do need to be federalized. I'm in favor of adhering to the constitution. I'm against using federal matching funds to intefere in things that should be explicitly state rights. But there are things that need to be federalized that are not presently in the scope outlined for the federal government. And that does call for Constitutional amendments.

197 posted on 01/29/2008 3:24:08 PM PST by DannyTN
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 168 | View Replies]

To: Sideshow Bob

I’ve never voted Democrat in my 48 years not about to start

Never have i been left with such a choice of Republicans that i can’t vote or support The so called Republicans running aren’t even close to being Conservastive at the best they are Democrat Lite !

I will not Embrace Socialism in my life or by the vote i guess my choice will be not to make a choice if i do that the choice is set ...


198 posted on 01/29/2008 3:24:45 PM PST by ATOMIC_PUNK (Global Warming : A perpetuation of Lies Levied onto sheep to give up their Fleece)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: fightinJAG

What good would it do for Rush to spend 4 years bashing a Republican?

The GOP is drifting away to Liberalville and the GOP Establishment is kicked back and snoozing, enjoying the ride.

I WILL NOT SUPPORT A LIBERAL JUST BECAUSE HE IS LESS LIBERAL THAN CLINTON OR OBAMA.


199 posted on 01/29/2008 3:25:05 PM PST by Bryan24 (When in doubt, move to the right..........)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 185 | View Replies]

To: Sideshow Bob

I WILL NOT SUPPORT A LIBERAL JUST BECAUSE HE IS LESS LIBERAL THAN CLINTON OR OBAMA. I WILL STAND BY MY CONSERVATIVE PRINCIPLES, WIN OR LOSE.

If you compromise your principles, then you didn’t have them to begin with.


200 posted on 01/29/2008 3:29:30 PM PST by Bryan24 (When in doubt, move to the right..........)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 161-180181-200201-220 ... 481-487 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