"They will be either impressed or frightened by what they see."As long as Fox News keeps giving them a platform for their crazy, I'm
going to go with frightened.
How can conservatives have any success in light of Obamacare success? The
success of the ACA is the demise of the right that opposed it with everything
all the time.
The current left wing administration has utterly failed in its effort to turn
this Country into just another European-style post-Christian state.
As I always say I'm an Eisenhower Republican which makes me a Democrat in
our current political climate. Ike embodied all of the conservative virtues
highlighted in this piece, and if Republicans were ever to return to the spirit
of Ike, Nixon, Ford, and Bush Sr. I would happily vote Republican again. I just
don't see it happening.
Granted, Sarah Palin can say some pretty strong stuff that appeals to the far
right wing of the party. But I have heard plenty of rhetoric that is just as
radical from the likes of Harry Reid, Nancy Pelosi, Chuck Schumer, and Howard
Dean.Somehow progressive commentators like this one never seem to
point to those examples as proof that the Democratic Party is shifting to the
far left or is becoming more "radical" or "crazy".Hmmm..... Can anyone say "Double Standard"?
Some people simply do not want conservative values. They can move to Washington
Remember, twenty years ago, when faced with a push for true nationalized
healthcare, Republicans proposed an alternative rooted in the private sector.
"Conservative temperament," one might say.It didn't go
anywhere nationally, but under a Republican governor, it became the basis for
one of the greatest health care success stories of recent memory. There were a
few hiccups at the beginning, but Massachusetts achieved some of the highest and
most affordable coverage rates in the nation.However, after a
Democratic president adopted the same strategy, it somehow tranformed from a
conservative alternative into a Communist revolution. An attack on cherished
religious freedoms (which, curiously, nobody was all that worried about two
decades ago). And a reason for a Republican
governor-turned-presidential-candidate to turn his back on his signature
achievement.--If the GOP wants to return to an honest,
intelligent conservatism, I can think of one place to start.
Gun waving, bearded rebels, wraps on their heads, scream GOD, forced morals, one
religion, ranch stand off, and out ragious threats?We are not
talking about the Middle East we are talking about the Tea Party and hard right
I could almost label myself a Republican by the Gerson standard. Humility,
intelligent reform, respect for institutions, etc. Don't buy the social
stuff, but everything else is reasonable.He had me till he made his
comments about the current President. Obama is no radical left-winger. He does
have progressive tendencies toward social issues, but his overall message and
policy is one in the American center. Economically, he has not pursued anything
close to leftist reforms and policies. He still pursues a muscular foreign
policy. The financial industry is still coddled. He even pursued Republican
plans to change health care rather than the Democrats hope for universal
coverage ala the rest of the civilized western democracies. And he got
demonized for it!The unvarnished truth as pointed out by Gerson is
that the Republican/Tea Party has moved so far to the right they can not even
see the center of politics in America. Cast blame where you will, but it is
still so. All we get out of the Republican/Tea Party are silly allegations,
witch hunts and aspersions. No policy, no good government reform and certainly
@Gerson "The authors describe the attributes of the conservative temperament
— humility, an appreciation for what is worthy in our society, a
preference for incremental reform, a distrust of abstraction...."Conspicuously absent from this list is "fiscal restraint."
Progressives such as Michael Gerson always seem to leave this out. It gets in
the way of their activist agenda. However, he will not begin to convince tea
partiers of anything without addressing it.Our nation owes
$17,500,000,000,000 to its creditors. Any talk of federal expansion is
ridiculous if we don't have the will to pay for it. It is common sense to
spend only what you take in. But expect it of your government, and it somehow
turns you into a radical.
First, I would argue that President Obama has not been all that
"progressive". In fact, in many respects, he has been pretty darn
conservative. He's been middle of the road overall. But here is the
kicker. I can't think of a single advancement in society that has been
brought to us by conservatives. It is by being progressive, shaking up the
status quo, that we have seen advances in our society. By definition,
conservativism is about staying the same or going back to the past. I
can't wait to see how the reactionary conservatives will flip out over this
concept. They have a hard time admitting this reality.
"Conservative values" is a ubiquitous term for policies that are
so-called pro life, on the other hand they strongly oppose health care reform
that would give life extending benefits to millions of their fellow citizens."Conservative values" aren't pro-life, they are pro birth.
"Conservative values" protect an unborn fetus over that of
infant recently birthed who is in need of medical care that his/her parents
can't afford."Conservative values" embrace the selfish
values of John Galt ("Atlas Shrugged") and not those of Jesus. "Conservative values" are those that value only certain kinds of
families and not all families."Conservative values are those
that think corporations actually have religious values that they can impose on
their employees, regardless of the health consequences for those employees."Conservative values" are those that think that corporations are
people, but real people need voter ID's to stop non existent voter fraud.
"Conservative values" are those that think might makes right
and military intervention should be done with your sons and daughters lives, not
Esquire: '...President Obama has not been all that "progressive".
In fact, in many respects, he has been pretty darn conservative.'That is very funny!! That is like me saying "Sarah Palin has not been all
that conservative, in fact she has been pretty darn liberal". See how funny
that sounds now?
T. Party said "Conspicuously absent from this list is "fiscal
restraint." Progressives such as Michael Gerson always seem to leave this
out. It gets in the way of their activist agenda. However, he will not begin to
convince tea partiers of anything without addressing it. Our nation owes
$17,500,000,000,000 to its creditors. "So what would you do Tea
Party, and I mean actual solutions not bumper sticker simpelton nonsense?Much like Sarah Palin's Moronic speeches, I hear little solutions
from the tea party.
As long as conservatives pledge allegiance to Grover Norquist and remain
addicted to the Koch bro's money errr free speech, the GOP will be a mess.
"This advice is timely. Precisely because President Obama's
progressivism is exhausted and increasingly discredited, Americans will give the
GOP another look."LOL. . . . If wishes were fishes, Republicans
would have a LOT of fish, wouldn't they Mr Gerson?Unfortunately
for them, the nation and world is no longer willing to submit to Republican
wishes.Mr Gerson has been known to place a lot of hope in hopeless
Right Wing goals. As a member of the GW Bush administration, he argued long and
hard in favor of the various ridiculous Bush initiatives that embroiled our
nation in two wars and imperiled the very financial foundation of our nation.And now here he is referring to that same right-wing agenda to which he
has shown his allegiance as an oiiii"empirically grounded and practical
conservatism.”The United States and the world does not need or
want this so-called “practical conservatism,” because the words have
been rendered meaningless by actual “Conservative” practice.For far too long, high sounding words spoken by
“Conservatives” like Gerson have been backed up by nothing but
In theology one gets credit for intentions. Politics is not theology. Liberal
intentions that hurt the poor are not liberal. Stupidity is not a replacement
Calling for impeachment is the latest political attention getter. It Gins-up
the base, and it gets you in the news.If getting in the news, and
ginning up the base is what you're about... it's fine (and apparently
that's what Sarah Palin is about now days). But before you totally trash
her... at least be consistent. How many DEMOCRATS called for Impeachment of
President BUSH? Google "Efforts to impeach George W.
Bush"... There's a LONG list of things DEMOCRATS tried to
impeach Bush for.. even over Katrina (article 31)! -Valarie Plame (article
14)-2004 Election (articles 28 & 29)-NSA surveillance (gimme a
break hypocrites)-Global Warming (Yes, Democrats wanted to IMPEACH him
over Global Warming) article 32-9/11 (articles 33-35)-Signing
Statements (article 26) even though Clinton issued more signing statements than
Bush did.-Medicare - For QUOTE "Misleading Congress and the American
People in an Attempt to Destroy Medicare"Many DEMOCRATS called
our President's impeachment (some big names in the Democrat party
today).... They were doing EXACTLY what Palin is doing.So as long as
you're consistent in condemnation... go for it....
Apparently Mr. Gerson believes that we were better off in 2008 than right
now.I don't think many Americans outside of Karl Rove, Sarah
Palin, and Rush Limbaugh believe that.In other words, Gerson is
wrong... Dead wrong
@ JustGordon, what a great comment you made.@ JoeCapitalist2, your
mocking doesn't change the facts. Many liberals are not happy with the
President because he hasn't been more liberal or assertive. I tend to
agree with them on some issues. Obama's record is pretty moderate, but
because the right wing has swung so far to the extreme, even many rational
Republicans are accused of being liberal or RINOs. If the President was an
extreme liberal, I doubt Wall Street would be flourishing in such an
unprecedented way. You can throw stones, but a little substance from you would
be quite nice.
Hey 2 bits -Despite your claims, the idea of impeaching GW Bush was
NEVER in the news.Sure, perhaps a few Democrats threw that idea
around, but it was never embraced by Democrats in general . . . And that is
because, unlike Republicans, Democrats don't want to sacrifice the good of
the nation for the sake of harassing a sitting President.By rights,
GW Bush and his administration should be tried in International Court for war
crimes and crimes against humanity. But that would do no good for this nation,
would it?That is why most Democrats do NOT want to see justice done
in that particular situation.Unlike Republicans, Democrats, by and
large, have the best interests of America and Americans in mind.
@Happy Valley Heretic "...I hear little solutions from the tea
party."I'm sure I've posted general outlines in this
forum hundreds of times (general, because restricted by word count). The people
who can't hear are the people invested in the social programs bleeding
money the worst. They refuse to consider change. (Which is more than just a
little ironic.) Apparently change ratchets in only one direction.
Jon M. Huntsman Jr. was the ONLY Republican to run with those ideals.And
look how the Tea-Publicans threw him under the bus!BTW -- There is
hope.Huntsman was the first Republican I've voted for in over 30
years.So long as Palin, FoxNews, Limbaugh, Hannity, Beck and the
like remain the Spokespersons, figureheads, talking heads, and voice of the GOP
-- you're not driving, so take your seat at the back of
the bus, and please be quiet.
Nate said: @Happy Valley Heretic "...I hear little solutions from the tea
party.""I'm sure I've posted general outlines in this
forum hundreds of times (general, because restricted by word count). "Yes, defund all social programs increase military spending. Then
give tax breaks to corps and the wealthy and tax increases on the poor and
middle class. See that didn't take up all your words.Or
is there another plan I'm missing?
GaryO: "Hey 2 bits - Despite your claims, the idea of impeaching GW Bush was
NEVER in the news."True. None of the press covered them. But, it
would have been on the front page of all the main stream press outlets if they
were interested at all in trying to embarrass those Democrats who proposed them,
like they are about embarrassing Sarah Palin.
To all my right-wing friends, please read some of the early comments in the
thread, especially Roland’s. He speaks for many of us and you are simply
out of touch with reality (and your favorite media outlets certainly are, so you
get somewhat of a pass here) if you think that everyone who doesn’t think
like you is a socialist or communist.And this article is spot on
– today’s right-wing has little in common with historical
conservatism and has much more in common with the radical leftists of the
60’s. By way of personal confession, I began to have doubts
when Bush Jr. was nominated despite voting for him… twice (the 2nd time
because I thought we should finish what we started in Iraq – which given
current developments was a mistake on my part… a big one).But
when McCain picked Palin I was out!
Happy Valley Heretic:Of course there are tons of plans that you are
missing. Just open your eyes. Cheap shots that ignore all the fiscal responsible
proposals and just try to paint all conservatives as heartless, corporate
lap-dogs - are a dime a dozen.If you were at all interested in
sensible solutions that have been proposed by Tea Party supporters, you can find
them all over the internet. I don't expect you to agree with all of them,
but stop pretending they don't exist.
one vote The ACA is costing a lot more for people who had insurance before, and
in many cases offering less care. That is not success and it will get worse as
time goes on. People will realize that the A in ACA is a big lie.Furthermore, the far left has had the stage now since January 2007. Look at
what has happened. Massive debt. An unpopular health care plan (just look at
the polls) pushed through with not one Republican vote. A messed up foreign
policy. A messed up domestic policy. Polls show Obama is not seen as a leader
in every area. Esquire Yes Obama as you point out is all talk
(those nasty big money wall street types) and all hypocracy by taking tons of
money from them. Americans are realizing this and the tide is changing for the
Republicans. All the Republicans have to do now is show up. The Democrats, led
by Obama, are self destructing. Democrat candidates are running from Obama as
if he had the Ebola virus. That's becoming clear to everyone, whether you
want to believe it or not. Even the Obama media is admitting it.
Don't forget the -- Rape victims should make lemonade from
lemons, or "legitimate" rape victims will spontaniously self
abort.Until the GOP can expunge the Sarah Palins, Rush Limbaughs,
and Glenn Becks, speaking for them --- The defacto party of
'Archie Bunker' will keep the re-runs going for rest of America to
ignore, not take seriously and enjoy a good 'ol comedic laugh.Sincerely,Mike the "Meathead Liberal" Stivic
@GaryO,Re "Sure, perhaps a few Democrats threw that idea
around"...Maybe your memory is failing. Did you Google it and
read... to remember what life was like back when Bush was President (and DEMs
were working to stop EVERYTHING he did)? Hint... they didn't
just TALK about it! They actually wrote up articles of impeachment, authored a
bill, got it approved, and had a vote (that's not talking about it...
that's about as far as you can go)!The DEMOCRAT controlled
House voted 251-166 to send the resolution to the Committee...That's
NOT just talking about it...I recommend you read the "Democrats
in Congress" section. It was not a casual idea (like Palins)... these
DEMOCRATS were serious.John Conyers, Keith Ellison, Jerrold Nadler,
House Speaker Nancy Pelosi , Cynthia McKinney, Presidential candidate Dennis
Kucinich, Joe Biden, ALL said they would move to IMPEACH.Palin was
just throwing the idea around (to gin up her base). Democrats actually DID
IT!===============Did Palin write up articles of
impeachment? and have Congress vote? Nope!Did Democrats... Yep!So much for your, "Democrats, have the best interests of America and
Americans in mind"...
SCfanclearfield, UTone vote The ACA is costing a lot more for people
who had insurance before, and in many cases offering less care.======== We are in open enrollment.Our Insurance is
going DOWN, and our coverage is going UP.So much for these
boogieman under the bed, strawman, hyperbole, rhetorical, half-truth, no-truth,
arguments....It boosts radio ratings, talkshow profits, and
listeners blood pressure...but it is not the truth.
@JoeCapitalist2I Did look around, and my comment is a summary of
what those different ideas were, sorry I couldn't write a more flattering
comment on those plans, perhaps you could point out some of the less offensive
@SCfan – “Massive debt… A messed up foreign policy.”You really want to compare Obama here to his predecessor? Do
you think we would even have a deficit if Bush (Greenspan mostly) had not driven
the economy off a cliff (drastically reducing the GDP component of tax revenue)?
And do you honestly believe Obama would have tampered with the
Clinton/Gingrich tax rates (the other component of tax revenue) that provided
the first surplus in decades? And you can’t be serious on
foreign policy. By all accounts today, Iraq will go down in history as one of
the stupidest and costliest foreign interventions we have ever attempted. And
for what… because we thought people engaged in a centuries long religious
civil war would “greet us as liberators” and lap up our Jeffersonian
democracy like an exhausted dog? Please… your blaming the
janitor whose cleaning up the after-party.Put down the
Kool-Aid… that stuff will rot your brain. I did and my brain has never
to John Charity SpringTell me exactly what a roaring, non-stop, good
time, thrill ride it was in Pre-renaissance Europe?
to Open Minded Mormon"Jon M. Huntsman Jr. was the ONLY
Republican to run with those ideals. And look how the Tea-Publicans threw him
under the bus!"Not to mention, how they marginalized Ron Paul
and ignored Gary Johnson.
@Happy Valley Heretic "Yes, defund all social programs increase military
spending [etc.]"Here's where you get to either provide
quotes, or admit I didn't say that stuff. Which will it be?
What does "Conservative Temperament" mean?
Obama’s progressivism, weather-beaten as it may be, remains the more
viable choice when the alternative is the GOP’s continuing dysfunctional
conservatism. Notice how the GOP has been forced even further to the right on
immigration? With the Tea Party chugging away at being such a disruptive force
in Republican politics, the left has its most valuable unwitting ally.
@Question – “What does "Conservative Temperament"
mean?”It might be better described as traits or
characteristics and historically (since England in the late 1600’s) would
probably include the following:1.Skeptical of change and when change
is embraced it is done so cautiously and incrementally. 2.Recognize
differences in people and believe society & political structures should
incentivize & support these stratifications and not try to coercively level
them. 3.Have historically preferred hierarchies, expertise and
elites (as opposed to democracy or populism which they view as mob rule).4.A strong tendency to romanticize the past.5.The family as
the fundamental societal unit.6.Prefer a strongly conformist society
and typically disdain non-conformists.7.A strong aversion to
zealotry and radicalism.8.Political realism – tend not to let
the perfect be the enemy of the good.I hope it’s clear that
today’s right-wingers do not share all these traits and in some cases (#1,
3, 7 & 8) are quite the opposite.
Conservatism used to be associated with preserving the status quo. That
definition is more descriptive of liberalism these days.
Tyler D,Of course you would take away, or diminish anything that could
cast them in a positive light... I get it...
To be the voice of reason, either party trying to impeach the President was
stupid. This talk of rhetoric, regardless of party, is not going to help our
country go forward...
How about educating the progressives, both Democrat and Republican, about the
concept of liberty and freedom. Anybody that doesn't vote for tyranny,
Communism, or Socialism is a radical! Anybody that asks who will pay for the
debt is close minded. anybody who advocates for protection of the unborn is
fomenting a war on women. That is why independents, Tea-party, and libertarians
exist without any leaders. We don't need leaders to tell us how to think,
which infuriates the progressives. Progressives are the most ignorant people I
know. They only know the moment, which sounds pretty much like how the youth
make decisions now. Whatever makes me feel good today!
"The tea party movement, of course, is more than the sum of its
Palins."--- Love how "Palin" is now a metaphore for
failure."And some of the Republican Party's brighter policy
lights, including Sens. Marco Rubio of Florida and Mike Lee of Utah,..."--- Huh? "Brighter lights"? A much more valid comparison would
be "dim bulbs"."They will be either impressed or
frightened by what they see."--- The GOP has been terrifying for
years now."A party that is genuinely excited about conservative
anti-poverty proposals, the child tax credit and other reforms — rather
than impeachment and the abolition of modern government — might even be
judged worthy of the presidency again."--- Republican
politicians can't embrace these things; anybody who did would be
crucified.Overall an interesting editorial.
@Esquire 9:41 a.m. July 11, 2014. . . because the right wing has
swung so far to the extreme, even many rational Republicans are accused of being
liberal or RINOs.----------------Today, Barry Goldwater
("Mr. Conservative" who defined and established the consesrvative
moveing in the 1960s) and Ronald Reagan would be called "RINO" today
because of their policies. That's how far to the extreme far right wing
fringe the "conservative" movement has warped the Republican Party.
They are not true conservatives.