Bush was “disciplined and daring”? I don’t quite know where she gets that. The two main points I got — amid quite a bit of filler — are that the current Administration resorts to name-calling when opposition to its agenda appears and that Bush, like his father, squandered his political inheritance by breaking up the “conservative movement.”
First, it seems true that the Bush Administration cannot fathom such a thing as a principled debate with those whose agendas may differ. There is little opportunity for discussion and consensus and compromise. Instead, the White House labels its opponents as un-American and unpatriotic for having the temerity to think that the Administration’s agendas might not be the best solutions. This is why many outside the Republican Party — and now some of those within it — don’t even try to engage the White House in discussion. Fending off the juvenile attacks just doesn’t lead anywhere. Destabilizing the debate isn’t the same as winning it.
Second, I don’t know that there is a “conservative movement” really, any more than there is a “gay community.” I’ll accept the term to describe a loose body of political beliefs, but unless I’m mistaken, it’s too broad to be a movement like the civil rights movement. Noonan is probably correct that Bush the Elder failed to be Reagan’s third term, but there was no similar head of steam when Bush the Younger came into office. The circumstances following 9/11 were not a great conservative groundswell of support but a national closing of ranks in response to terrorism.
Indeed, Brutus. What immigration has done is awoken many past Bush supporters to the very qualities about Bush that his detractors noticed and disliked from the get-go. I am proud to say that I voted for Keyes for the 2000 nomination and Phillips (Constitution Party) for the Presidency.
Bush always struck me as a man without strong arguments or reason, and as a man without well-defined principles, other than sticking to the course once he made a decision.
Sean Hannity, Mike Gallagher, and their ilk may look at the immigration issue as an aberration for Bush, but it is completely consistent with how he has behaved on most important issues.
So Noonan has observed that the Rove-infused Bush administration engages in the politics of personal destruction regarding the IMMIGRATION bill?
Wow. Nice catch Peggy.
Yeah, it’s a real shame Bush doesn’t turn out to have whatever virtues Noonan wanted. Too bad these shortcomings were undetectable too even keen political observers like herself, or else she might have – oh, I don’t know – maybe REFRAINED FROM CAMPAIGNING FOR THE MAN?
What Brutus and Glaivester said. Peggy and the rest of the Republican Party made their deal with the devil. Now the nation is mad as hell about it, and she’s scampering for someplace to hide. But given that we all must live with the consequences of this administration – except for those of us who must die with the consequences – I wish she’d spare us her sincere professions of buyer’s remorse. We’ve got more things to worry about than how she goes about covering her ass.
Comment by nobody.really — June 4, 2007 @ 12:17 pm
| Reply
Money Quote:
Leading Democrats often think their base is slightly mad but at least their heart is in the right place. This White House thinks its base is stupid and that its heart is in the wrong place.
Of course, this White House also thinks that Democrats are traitors, and that so are most members of the American public.
Creative Destruction 
Bush was “disciplined and daring”? I don’t quite know where she gets that. The two main points I got — amid quite a bit of filler — are that the current Administration resorts to name-calling when opposition to its agenda appears and that Bush, like his father, squandered his political inheritance by breaking up the “conservative movement.”
First, it seems true that the Bush Administration cannot fathom such a thing as a principled debate with those whose agendas may differ. There is little opportunity for discussion and consensus and compromise. Instead, the White House labels its opponents as un-American and unpatriotic for having the temerity to think that the Administration’s agendas might not be the best solutions. This is why many outside the Republican Party — and now some of those within it — don’t even try to engage the White House in discussion. Fending off the juvenile attacks just doesn’t lead anywhere. Destabilizing the debate isn’t the same as winning it.
Second, I don’t know that there is a “conservative movement” really, any more than there is a “gay community.” I’ll accept the term to describe a loose body of political beliefs, but unless I’m mistaken, it’s too broad to be a movement like the civil rights movement. Noonan is probably correct that Bush the Elder failed to be Reagan’s third term, but there was no similar head of steam when Bush the Younger came into office. The circumstances following 9/11 were not a great conservative groundswell of support but a national closing of ranks in response to terrorism.
Comment by Brutus — June 3, 2007 @ 10:55 am |
Indeed, Brutus. What immigration has done is awoken many past Bush supporters to the very qualities about Bush that his detractors noticed and disliked from the get-go. I am proud to say that I voted for Keyes for the 2000 nomination and Phillips (Constitution Party) for the Presidency.
Bush always struck me as a man without strong arguments or reason, and as a man without well-defined principles, other than sticking to the course once he made a decision.
Sean Hannity, Mike Gallagher, and their ilk may look at the immigration issue as an aberration for Bush, but it is completely consistent with how he has behaved on most important issues.
Comment by Glaivester — June 3, 2007 @ 9:25 pm |
So Noonan has observed that the Rove-infused Bush administration engages in the politics of personal destruction regarding the IMMIGRATION bill?
Wow. Nice catch Peggy.
Yeah, it’s a real shame Bush doesn’t turn out to have whatever virtues Noonan wanted. Too bad these shortcomings were undetectable too even keen political observers like herself, or else she might have – oh, I don’t know – maybe REFRAINED FROM CAMPAIGNING FOR THE MAN?
What Brutus and Glaivester said. Peggy and the rest of the Republican Party made their deal with the devil. Now the nation is mad as hell about it, and she’s scampering for someplace to hide. But given that we all must live with the consequences of this administration – except for those of us who must die with the consequences – I wish she’d spare us her sincere professions of buyer’s remorse. We’ve got more things to worry about than how she goes about covering her ass.
Comment by nobody.really — June 4, 2007 @ 12:17 pm |
Money Quote:
Of course, this White House also thinks that Democrats are traitors, and that so are most members of the American public.
Comment by ohwilleke — June 4, 2007 @ 2:36 pm |