The Right Wing's Deep, Dark Secret (Some hope for a Bush loss)

[papau]

http://www.latimes.com/news/opinion/la-oe-micklethwait28jul28.story
COMMENTARY
The Right Wing's Deep, Dark Secret
Some hope for a Bush loss, and here's why.
By John Micklethwait and Adrian Wooldridge
John Micklethwait and Adrian Wooldridge, writers for the Economist, are co-authors of "The Right Nation: Conservative Power in America" (Penguin, 2004).

July 28, 2004

BOSTON — One of the secrets of conservative America is how often it has welcomed Republican defeats. In 1976, many conservatives saw the trouncing of the moderate Gerald Ford as a way of clearing the path for the ideologically pure Ronald Reagan in 1980. In November 1992, George H.W. Bush's defeat provoked celebrations not just in Little Rock, where the Clintonites danced around to Fleetwood Mac, but also in some corners of conservative America. <snip>

First, President Bush hasn't been as conservative as some would like. Small-government types fume that he has increased discretionary government spending faster than Bill Clinton. Buchananite paleoconservatives, libertarians and Nelson Rockefeller-style internationalists are all furious — for their very different reasons — about Bush's "war of choice" in Iraq. Even some neocons are irritated by his conduct of that war — particularly his failure to supply enough troops to make the whole enterprise work. <snip>

The third reason for the right to celebrate a Bush loss comes in one simple word: gridlock. Gridlock is a godsend to some conservatives — it's a proven way to stop government spending. A Kerry administration is much more likely to be gridlocked than a second Bush administration because the Republicans look sure to hang on to the House and have a better-than-even chance of keeping control of the Senate.

The fourth reason has to do with regeneration. Some conservatives think the Republican Party — and the wider conservative movement — needs to rediscover its identity. Is it a "small government" party, or does "big government conservatism" make sense? Is it the party of big business or of free markets? Under Bush, Western anti-government conservatives have generally lost ground to Southern social conservatives, and pragmatic internationalists have been outmaneuvered by neoconservative idealists. A period of bloodletting might help, returning a stronger party to the fray. <snip>

[qwlauren35]

1. Hey!

As long as they stay home on November 2nd, I'm a happy camper!

[papau]

2. My feeling exactly! :-)

:-)

[KoKo]

3. Pshaw! Bluff and Bravado used to explain why their policies always fail.

We will be seeing lots of this kind of thing in the coming months to explain away their failures.

[htuttle]

6. Yes, it's the old Pee Wee Herman excuse

"I meant to do that!"

[Catfight]

4. GOP stands for Great Opportunities for Profits. They are the

the Corporation Party, for the elite, of the elite, by the elite. I miss all the little businesses that were on the corners in my neighborhood, now my choices are Outback, McDonald's, Wal-Mart...how un-America can the Repugs get? I'll guess much more by November.

[AlabamaYankee]

5. There's talk that GHW Bush took a dive

Somewhere in my archives (the pile beside my desk) I have a article that argues pretty persuasively that GHW Bush was told to throw the '92 election to keep the lid on Iran-Contra and all the other scandals that were just beginning to come to a boil. It's not coincidental that he issued a number of midnight pardons just before vacating the White House.