Perhaps the US does have a functioning opposition?

[cheers]

<p><a href=“http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,2092-2361008,00.html[/url]”>http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,2092-2361008,00.html&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;

<p>From Andrew Sullivan:</p>

<p>

…if Buckley has decided George W Bush is not a conservative, it cannot be easily dismissed…</p>

<p>“I think Mr Bush faces a singular problem, best defined, I think, as the absence of effective conservative ideology,” Buckley recently explained. “[The president] ended up being very extravagant in domestic spending, extremely tolerant of excesses by Congress. And in respect of foreign policy, incapable of bringing together such forces as apparently were necessary to conclude the Iraq challenge . . . There will be no legacy for Mr Bush. I don’t believe his successor would re-enunciate the words he used in his second inaugural address because they were too ambitious. So therefore I think his legacy is indecipherable.” </p>

<p>His legacy, I’d argue, is actually quite decipherable. It includes two bungled wars, a doubling of the national debt, a ruination of America’s moral high ground in the war against Islamist terror, the worst US intelligence fiasco since the Bay of Pigs, and the emergence of Iran as a regional and potentially nuclear power with control of the West’s energy supplies. </p>

<p>But the damage to America itself — to its cultural balance and constitutional order — is just as profound…</p>

<p>American conservatism has gone from being a political philosophy rooted in scepticism of power, empirical judgment and limited government into an ideology based in born-again religious faith, immune to empirical reality and dedicated to the relentless expansion of presidential clout. It sanctions wiretapping without court warrants, indefinite detention without trial and the use of torture… </p>

<p>Last week saw perhaps the tipping point in the reawakening of the traditional conservative perspective. In the Senate, the president’s bid to legalise torture and ad hoc military tribunals was stopped not by the Democrats but by four key Republican senators: John McCain of Arizona, the frontrunner for the Republican nomination in 2008, John Warner of Virginia, Lindsey Graham of South Carolina and Susan Collins of Maine…</p>

<p>“The United States has seen political swings and produced its share of extremists, but its political character, whether liberals or conservatives have been in charge, has always remained fundamentally Burkean. The constitution itself is a Burkean document, one that slows down decisions to allow for ‘deliberate sense’ and checks and balances. </p>

<p>“President Bush has nearly upended that tradition, abandoning traditional realism in favour of a warped and incoherent brand of idealism. At this dangerous point in history, we must depend on the decisions of an astonishingly feckless chief executive: an empty vessel filled with equal parts Rove and Rousseau.” </p>

<p>That passage was written by Jeffrey Hart, a speechwriter for Nixon and Reagan and another pillar of the conservative movement. It’s a sign of a brewing conservative revolt against Bush’s policies that may crest at November’s elections. </p>

<p>…It turns out that the US does have a functioning opposition party after all. It’s called the authentically conservative wing of the Republicans.

</p>

<p>So says Sullivan…</p>

[driver]

<p>No one stands straighter at attention in honor of Hart and Buckley than I. However, their Bush critique is not new–as is often alleged–and with all respect to these gentlemen, Edmund Burke’s time finally passed, too–immortal quotable material notwithstanding. Their intellectual heirs are named Steyn, Lileks, and Hitchens–and they have an updated take on things, equally eminent and quotable. </p>

<p>Which is not to relegate any of the older generation to the dustbin of history…the latest from WFB, jr. <a href=“http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2006/09/stumped_by_morality.html[/url]”>http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2006/09/stumped_by_morality.html&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;

[DRJ4]

<p>Actually, I think the only opposition party in America right now is the moderate wing of the Republican Party. McCain can never be considered a true conservative in light of McCain-Feingold.</p>

[lizschup]

<p>oh my my, denial in it’s finest form. I"m speaking of Driver and DJ4, not Buckley.</p>

[driver]

<p>Denial of what, liz? Discuss among yourself.</p>

[DRJ4]

<p>Yes, Lizschup, please elaborate.</p>

[lizschup]

<p>Well you’ve got that one right - discuss among yourself. CC seems to have been run amuck with conservatives in love with their fearless leader. For a while there I saw some humility, but never mind now, it’s election season.</p>

<p>When I speak of denial I’m talking about the inability to understand that your president is a serious failure on all counts. A disgrace to all legacies everywhere. Seriously. It’s probably individuals like GW that inspired Harvard’s bent towards establishing admittance by meritocracy in the 1930’s (or somewhere around there) and the creation of the SAT. Instead of acknowledging the truth Buckley speaks you dismiss him as being out of touch and mention the the far right bloggers of Powerline. Give me a break. I used to be a Republican too but I know enough to admit when they aren’t true conservatives anymore. You are so concerned with keeping power that you cannot see the evil that lurks in our own country and within our elected officials. As one poster said in some other thread, he considered himself to be a moderate until the last eight years.</p>

[driver]

<p>

Instead of acknowledging the truth Buckley speaks you dismiss him as being out of touch and mention the the far right bloggers of Powerline. Give me a break. I used to be a Republican too but I know enough to admit when they aren’t true conservatives anymore. You are so concerned with keeping power that you cannot see the evil that lurks in our own country and within our elected officials.

liz, you know that I like you…and I say that with all sincerity, since we’ve pm’d on that subject. Same with Cheers. The evil that I see lurking–perhaps within our country, but definitely without–has nothing to do with our elected officials. I don’t dismiss Buckley, as I specifically said. No one quoted Powerline in this thread, and I would dispute your characterization of them as “far right.” I would agree that the congressional Republicans aren’t holding true to “true conservative” principles. But still…the choice is obvious.</p>

[DRJ4]

<p>George W. Bush is at best a marginal conservative. I disagree with his stance on immigration, campaign finance reform, steel tariffs, and profligate government spending. Not to mention a host of little things that annoy me daily and that I will continue to ignore as long as the Democrats are so lousy on terrorism.</p>

[xiggi]

<p>“CC seems to have been run amuck with conservatives in love with their fearless leader. For a while there I saw some humility, but never mind now, it’s election season.”</p>

<p>Run amuck? That is very generous estimation for the handful of conservatives on this board. I would not worry too much about the other side of aisle. It’s still very well represented when it comes to run around in jumbled, confused, or uncontrolled state. Especially when looking for the next leader of the Great Democratic Party while clicking on that Daily KOS link. </p>

<p>They are just recharging their batteries for the October stretch. :)</p>

[Allmusic]

<p>True conservatism isn’t a part of this administration’s policy making. No wonder those who held fast to original Republican ideals, of fiscal conservatism, and reducing big government, are recoiling from this administration, who are NEOconservatives…all about big spending, big government…</p>

<p>If I were an old fashioned conservative, I would be seeking new party affiliation, as many old fashioned conservatives are. There are plenty of reasons that the party is fracturing; profligate spending and immigration are the two biggies, but the war debacle is becoming a liability, even to staunch conservatives (except here on CC ;))</p>

[overseas]

<p>I know my 95 year old father has begun to say nice things about Bill Clinton. Will wonders never cease. He is a true Republican conservative who donated to the party.</p>

[driver]

<p>Interesting, I mention Steyn and Lileks, and Steyn quotes Lileks in his column this morning:

“If 9/11 had really changed us, there’d be a 150-story building on the site of the World Trade Center today. It would have a classical memorial in the plaza with allegorical figures representing Sorrow and Resolve, and a fountain watched over by stern stone eagles. Instead there’s a pit, and arguments over the usual muted dolorous abstraction approved by the National Association of Grief Counselors. The Empire State Building took 18 months to build. During the Depression. We could do that again, but we don’t. And we don’t seem interested in asking why.”

These guys can write.</p>

<p><a href=“http://www.suntimes.com/cgi-bin/print.cgi?getReferrer=http://www.suntimes.com/output/steyn/cst-edt-steyn17.html[/url]”>http://www.suntimes.com/cgi-bin/print.cgi?getReferrer=http://www.suntimes.com/output/steyn/cst-edt-steyn17.html&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;

[lizschup]

<p>Woops, I misspoke Driver. I read Hitchens name and was thinking of Hinderaker of Powerlineblog.</p>

[DRJ4]

<p>Driver,</p>

<p>Mark Steyn is one of my favorite columnists, especially since 9/11. I also like James Lileks and if he wrote a Screed every week, I’d probably pick him #1. The good news is that the internet lets me read both - and Hitchens, VDH, Sowell, Powerline, Insty, Taranto, RealClearPolitics, etc., etc. - so I don’t have to pick a favorite. It’s Baskin Robbins every day.</p>

[sjmom2329]

<p>

@DRJ4

Not to mention a host of little things that annoy me daily and that I will continue to ignore as long as the Democrats are so lousy on terrorism.

This expresses my sentiments, also. Allmusic, some conservatives may have issues with the current Republican administration, but I’m fairly confident in saying that they won’t decide to vote for a Democrat as a result. Is that what you were thinking?</p>

<p>Liz, I can think of about six or seven conservative posters. If there are more, I’d love to know about it! As a registered Republican in a state where there are about 18% of us, I’m always looking for political friends. :)</p>

[Allmusic]

<p>You CC conservatives are just the most vociferous! (We liberals are so shy, so quiet and retiring).</p>

<p>Hey SJ, if there are only 18% of you, how did we get Romney?</p>

[sjmom2329]

<p>That’s the mystery, AM! I haven’t lived here long enough to understand the ins and outs of MA politics – maybe the voters didn’t want one party (Democrats) to dominate all levels of government here?</p>

[cheers]

<p>Is this another media tempest in a beer mug or is the media reporting on a real political movement? I wonder.</p>

<p>Again the The Times of London today: <a href=“The Times & The Sunday Times: breaking news & today's latest headlines”>The Times & The Sunday Times: breaking news & today's latest headlines;

<p>

It may be in McCain’s interests for the Republicans to get a drubbing in the November elections, Frum suggested. “He is offering a tough love approach: you may not like me, but I’m the only one who can save you. ‘McCain or else’ is a pretty powerful message.” </p>

<p>The desire for a Bush “clone” to lead the party into the 2008 elections is fading. One sign of the moderate conservative centre’s improving fortunes was the victory last week of Lincoln Chafee, a Republican and frequent Bush critic, in a primary election for Rhode Island senator. </p>

<p>The contrast could not be greater with the Democrats, who allowed Joe Lieberman, the pro-Iraq-war senator for Connecticut and former vice-presidential nominee, to be tossed overboard by the anti-war left. </p>

<p>The rise of the left has hitherto been one of the Republicans’ strongest arguments for keeping control of the House. The prospective Democrat speaker would be Nancy Pelosi, an anti-war Californian and hate-figure for the Republicans. They fear she will be tempted to spend the next two years investigating the conduct of the war and trying to impeach Bush. </p>

<p>Even that argument no longer washes with disaffected conservatives, according to Bruce Bartlett, another contributor to Washington Monthly. “Bring on Pelosi,” he urged. Voters treated to Democrat follies will be more likely to vote for a Republican president, he believes. If the one-party government that Bush has enjoyed has got to give, it is better that it cracks now than in 2008.

</p>

<p>sj…there are MORE than a handful of conservative posters on the CC parent’s forum. You should be able to recognize them. They write well but sometimes carry big sticks (though liz is the one swinging today)… ;)</p>

[driver]

<p>Cheers:
Not a movement, but there are some true doctrinaire conservative commentators–my way or the highway purists–who are speculating such things.
Bruce Bartlett is one such; I would liken him to David Stockman, from the Reagan administration.</p>