Feb 26 2009

“Pure” Conservatives Are Shocked Their Worn Out, Rejected Image Not Working

Published by at 9:22 am under All General Discussions

The old (and tiresome) guard of conservatism is apoplectic that there boy Bobby flamed out so badly with his response to President Obama’s report to Congress Tuesday:

Sounds like Ace and I are now Republican personas non grata. As are an awful lot of commenters in last night’s megathread, I might add.

So, where are we? We as conservatives are in the wilderness, and many of you are hopeless. So we have a guy, Bobby Jindal, 37 years old, first time on the national stage, shows up last night to make a response to The Messiah. All he did was articulate what we believe. 

But the people on our side are really making a mistake if they go after Bobby Jindal on the basis of style.

Because if you think people on our side, I’m talking to you, those of you who think Jindal was horrible, in fact, I don’t want to hear from you ever again if you think that what Bobby Jindal said was bad or what he said was wrong or not said well, because, folks, style is not going to take our country back. 

Style or substance? What about substance no one likes anymore, ever think about that? What’s wrong with both style and substance like we have in Sarah Palin? The right is wandering in the wilderness because America looked at what they had to offer and sent them there. And while I have no issues with Rush, I find the rest of the saber rattling conservatives ‘in exile’ tiresome – and I am not upset at all they are in exile. As far as I and a lot of America is concerned, they are were they belong right now.

The pure right has been raging against all the impure (a.k.a., RINOs, Quislings, Moderates, Centrists) for so long they have pretty much repulsed most of America. Which is why we HAVE a President Obama and a liberal Congress trashing up the country. They created their mess and people are fed up with them. They don’t talk or debate, they rant and rave. Rush may be whining about style, but a lot of conservatives were whining about rage and passion. Neither of which is substance either!

When the self anointed ones on the right went after George Bush and his Supreme Court selection (Harriet Miers) for not being a pureblood, they made a huge mistake. One which began their exodus to the political minority they are now. They did not disagree on views or policies (heck, We The People never got a chance to here Miers’ views), they went after her personally and brutally. It was grotesque.

 These purists of passion focused their inquisition on the Gang of 14, which had the audacity to avoid a useless and unproductive constitutional showdown on Presidential judicial nominees. President Bush seated a lot of constructionist judges during his tenure thanks to the compromises made by the Gang of 14 – but to this day these good people are pilloried by the small minded purists on the right.

And pillorying good Americans is all the substance the purists in exile have. They raged against an Arab ally buying a company that loads and unloads ships – an ally that provides a secure port for all our naval operations in the Middle East. They raged against all immigrants as if they were ax murderers and rapists. And they raged against any conservative who dared disagree with their dogma. They claim the far left is neo-fascists and yet want to dictate their ways on the rest, and do so with anger, … sorry – passion.

Here is the political result of all this passionate lashing out:

The election of 2008 proved catastrophic for opponents of comprehensive immigration reform.

 Republicans lost seven Senate seats — eight if the courts sustain Al Franken’s lead in Minnesota. On June 28, 2007, each of the eight previous office-holders (Republicans, all) voted to block the Bush administration’s immigration bill. Replacing these eight immigration hardliners are five new senators clearly favorable to a comprehensive approach — six, counting Franken — and two whose positions are unclear. All, of course, are Democrats.

In the House, comprehensive immigration reformers picked up at least 14 votes, and “enforcement-only” advocates lost 14. Ten incumbent members of the restrictionist House Immigration Reform Caucus were defeated. The “enforcement first/enforcement only” cause lost such major spokesmen as Tom Feeney, Virgil Goode, Thelma Drake, Marilyn Musgrave, Ric Keller, Bill Sali, and Nancy Boyda.

That was just the fall out from one topic. To all those who want to send Senators Specter, Snowe and Collins packing for trying get some compromise into the stimulus bill I ask you this: do you want to be down 8 senate seats or 11? All the far right has done is increase the democrats control. It is like watching the Democrats fawn all over Clinton, who helped create the GOP take over of Congress in 1994. How is it people in politics are so enamored with people who screw up royally?

Here’s are a few examples of the view of the two out of control parties from middle America – the ones who decide which side will win:

  • The far right wants to impose their view of ‘science’ by eliminating evolution and replacing it with some religious based fiction. The far left wants to eliminate all real discussions of science when dealing with Global Warming and Embryonic Stem Cells.
  • The far right want to remove all responsibilities from businesses, but leave the individual alone to fend for itself and be responsible for all its actions. The far left want to nationalize all businesses and bring in socialism, making business an arm of government.
  • The far right are way too paranoid about people in turbins and other Arab garb, spooked by the slightest hint of the possibility of some theoretical threat (which is why they went ape over the Dubai Ports Deal without a single shred of hard evidence). The far left is way too paranoid about people in military uniforms and other deadly-force federal jobs, spooked by the slightest hint of the possibility of some theoretical threat (which is why the went ape over the NSA-FISA changes Bush put into place to protect this nation from real threats).
  • The Amnesty Hypochondriacs on the right want to round up every immigrant without proper paper work (to hell with worrying about terrorists), while the liberals want to open the gates to anyone and make them democrat voters (to hell with worrying about terrorists).

Need I go on? When the hardcore element of conservatism went rabid and lashed out at everyone and anyone who disagreed, they pushed the nation away. Now their is a hardcore liberal element doing the same thing and really screwing up. America is fed up with the endless bickering and extremist policies! Neither side is right anymore.

We will not accept anymore extremist positions as gospel – they are the outliers positions. An their proponents need to be shunned for the simple fact they produce nothing but wasted anger (sorry, passion) at our fellow country men. We need a lot more tolerance and progress and we need to dump the brinkmanship. 

Sarah Palin is like Obama. She projects hope and a solid set of core beliefs while respecting people and their differences. She has real drive to work with others to make things right. She doesn not look to get fat personally, like the current leadership of Congress (on both sides) clearly have as their priority. I think President Obama really is sincere in his naive hopes. He wants to be a miracle worker and he is right in one sense – we can pull together and do a lot.

But he is being undermined and knocked way off track by the liberal power brokers in Congress. He is in over his head. Unlike Sarah, who took down a corrupt and extremely powerful GOP leader in her state, Obama tends to be the ‘a folder’ – someone who keeps giving ground to avoid conflict. It is his Achilles’ Heel, just like Clinton’s need to be liked was his undoing (notice Bush just wanted to get things done). Obama doesn’t have the conviction to weather the storm of DC power brokers, like Palin has proven she can.

Sarah is not a hard core, oppressive conservative. She is like Michael Steele, someone who thinks from a conservative experience base, but is open to discussion and making progress through compromise – instead of stopping progress on the alter of the mythical Perfection of Purity. Moderates are like that. America is like that. We hold off our passion of anger for real threats, not working out solutions. America doesn’t want the “pure right” option it just spent 2 election cycles purging from power. And I am sure with that as the only option to the socialist left now in power it will only delay the time we can purge them. They want something new and away from the fringes.

America rejected Jingle on multiple fronts, just like they rejected every “pure right” candidate in the presidential election and the selection of party chairman. They want something different, and nothing the rejected right says will change their mood. America wants more centrist, common sense leaders. These kind of people can be an acceptable alternative to the current liberal mess – but America is not interested in more of the same. If the GOP and conservatism want to get back into power and help guide (not direct) America, they are the ones who need to change. America is not going to change for them.

Update: Another conservative blogger notes it is time for conservatism and the GOP to move on (no pun intended, but I am sure the purely passionate will pounce on this with all deliberation).

Update: John Cole over at Balloon Juice is seeing the same implosion of the GOP. It is sad to see Reagan’s great vision destroyed by the “pure conservatives in exile”, and claiming this was what Reagan wanted all the while!

8 responses so far

8 Responses to ““Pure” Conservatives Are Shocked Their Worn Out, Rejected Image Not Working”

  1. crosspatch says:

    People need to remember that Reagan never got along with the so-called “conservatives”. Even in California, the “conservatives” called him too moderate. Reagan made peace with the Russians and coined phrases such as “Nations do not mistrust each other because they are armed; they are armed because they mistrust each other.” and worked to attempt to build trust.

    Reagan was about personal responsibility and not making the government responsible for everything in people’s lives. He was about making us feel more optimistic about our future and getting off our duffs and going back to work.

    I hear Reagan’s legacy twisted all the time. Hannity does it practically every day. Reagan was actually quite moderate. He got the biggest immigration amnesty in history in place and conservatives howled.

    Reagan’s popularity was huge among the center and among Democrats. Reagan himself had been a Democrat most of his life. Hard line “conservatives”, the RINOS who say they are “Conservative first, Republican second”, are wrecking this party and trample on the legacy of Reagan who was *extremely* inclusive.

  2. dave m says:

    I wouldn’t worry about Jindal.
    Guess what he is not?
    He is not a Natural Born Citizen.
    Jindal can no more be the President than can the Obama guy.

  3. Laddy says:

    Jindal was born in Baton Rouge.

  4. dave m says:

    And so he was, but at the time of his birth,
    neither of his parents were US citizens.

    Serach Kim Wong Ark, the last SCOTUS decision
    on the meaning of Natural Born,

    which means born in the USA with both parents US citizens,

    Jindal fails one part of the test, Obama both parts.

  5. AJStrata says:

    Dave M,

    Peddle your lies somewhere else. The legal standard is one parent is an American – all the better if it is the mother. You don’t have to be born in the US if one parent is a US Citizen.

    Take that crap some place else.

  6. Redteam says:

    You don’t have to be born in the US if one parent is a US Citizen.

    Uh, I think that one parent has to be over 18 years of age If she or he is married to a non-citizen.

    but I’m not arguing anyone’s case because I don’t care and apparently it’s not required because NO ONE has ‘STANDING’ to contest it anyway.


  7. Redteam says:

    Therefore, as it stands from all I’ve heard, anyone born anywhere in the world even if no one is a US citizen can run and be elected because of that fact I mentioned above “no one has STANDING to contest it”

  8. marksbbr says:

    Bravo AJ on another great post. As a moderate, this is exactly how I feel. I stopped calling myself a Republican after the elections out of anger at the “pure” right constantly peddling the notion that Obama and the Dems won because the GOP was not conservative enough. If the far right is in a hole, and by believing they were rejected TWICE for not being extreme enough, they’re only digging themselves into deeper holes. A few weeks ago the Republican Party called me asking for a donation, and I told them off. I told them not to bother begging me for money if they can’t try to be more inclusive. As Groucho Marx once quipped, “I won’t belong to a club that doesn’t want me as a member.”

    I listen to Rush and Hannity quite often, and I agree with many of their views, but I turn the dial once they start bashing “RINOs”. Like them, I admire Reagan, but if I remember correctly, I think Reagan wanted a big tent GOP, open to moderates as well as conservatives. This is where the far right ignores the wishes of their idol.

    I love Sarah, and I like Steele. I firmly hope they are the new blood of the GOP. To me, the GOP doesn’t have to move completely towards the center. I would be happy if it at least welcomed me with open arms.