How the right went wrong

“I spend a lot of time in the Peoples Republic of Amherst. High intellectual discourse this past fall consisted mainly of Sarah Palin jokes.”A certain discernment is necessary here. Such a blanket statement is goofy.

The election was a referendum on Bush, no more, no less. If know-nothing populism is dead, how did prop 8 pass?

More on a similar topic from Kathleen Parker in WaPo. But she blames the religious fundies:As Republicans sort out the reasons for their defeat, they likely will overlook or dismiss the gorilla in the pulpit.Three little letters, great big problem: G-O-D.I’m bathing in holy water as I type.To be more specific, the evangelical, right-wing, oogedy-boogedy branch of the GOP is what ails the erstwhile conservative party and will continue to afflict and marginalize its constituents if reckoning doesn’t soon cometh.

Don, false dichotomy is no way to run an argument.I wouldn’t vote for a know-nothing or someone who thinks he/she knows everything. I voted for Obama, who actually knows quite a bit and demonstrated that, and knows where to go for what he doesn’t know (Biden VP, for example).I actually keep thinking that the Republicans have peaked in their embrace of willful ignorance, only to see it surpassed every time. Electing Bush, denying global climate change, insisting Schiavo would be just fine, Iraq had WMDs — they just keep exceeding themselves. Sarah Palin looks like they peaked again, but I’m sure it will keep on going.

I guess we’re expected to forget that McCain-Palin were ahead in the polls until McCain’s catastrophic response to the economic meltdown in September. McCain needed only to vehemently oppose the bailout and attach the crisis like a burning tire necklace (a la Winnie Mandela) around the throats of Obama, Frank, Dodd, Waters, Raines et al while switching every campaign ad to “I warned the Democrats this would happen” and he would have kept the lead, or as Dick Morris said in late October, “McCain would be up by 10% if he opposed the bailout.”Instead, McCain responded haphazardly, looking panicked while Obama gracefully tap-danced to his own advantage. Then, in what was rightfully portrayed as an anti-climatic defeat, McCain ultimately did exactly what Obama did. McCain never regained the lead. Critics who pinpoint the defeat to populist conservatism before blaming McCain are simply trying to effect massive renovations when only minor tweaking will do. Sort of reminds me of the spouse who demands a new house because the faucet is dripping.

Fish: Tell ya what, go ahead and nominate Sarah Palin in 2012 and we’ll see whether know-nothing populism can carry the day. The truth about McCain’s fall is a lot more complicated than his ham-handed reaction to the Wall Street meltdown. First, he was severely hampered by the failure of Bush’s Presidency and the resultant damage to the Republican brand. Then, the only time he got close to Obama was during his predictable post-convention bump, which was magnified by the intrigue over Palin. Then a bunch of things went wrong. The post-convention bump smoothed out, and that effect was magnified by Palin’s extremely limited and disastrous performances in interviews and other uncontrolled situations — thus scaring off a lot of independent voters. Debate viewers saw all the debates as clear wins for the Dems. And yes, McCain fumbled the Wall Street crisis. Afterward, his campaign clung desperately to a vapid set of tactics: flimsy Obama attacks and Joe the Plumber hagiography. It was a combination of all those factors that brought McCain down. And it’s pretty clear that Palin hurt the ticket more than she helped it.

It seems to me, historically, that the incumbent has managed to maintain the appearance of economic stability long enough so that the consequences of his fiscal policy implode on the next Administration. Bush’s failure to maintain his House of Cards seems to have pre-empted McCain’s campaign strategy of resurrecting a Vietnam referendum. What else did he have to sell?Since Republicans have told me that they refused to vote for McCain because of Palin, let’s not blame Democrats for her downfall when, in fact FOX has been the most willing to erect the pyre. Palin convinced many undecideds not to vote for McCain. You betcha!

While I don’t disagree with these analyses of what’s gone wrong with the GOP, there’s also the problem of what’s gone wrong with the attempts at leadership by people like Alan Greenspan — it ain’t just about ignorance, stupidity, and populism.

“I voted for Obama, who actually knows quite a bit and demonstrated that, and knows where to go for what he doesn’t know (Biden VP, for example).”C’mon, Zadig. Sarah at least has the excuse (if she wanted to use it) that she had no real experience with foreign policy. Katie may have made a fool of her, but Biden has made a career of doing it to himself.Hey, Barack, if you are reading this, go ahead, consult with Joe and then do the opposite.

tvoh, Don’t confuse Biden’s (or anyone’s) foot-in-mouth disease for lack of intelligence or experience. Here’s the test: when he’s not mis-speaking, is what he says smart, informed, and well thought-out? For Biden, I’d have to say yes. His occasional gaffes in no way mean he’s an idiot like some VP candidates.

Well, you got me there, tvoh. A whole lot of people, Biden included, were stupid enough to vote for the war.But I still think he’s a decent source of foreign policy expertise for Obama, which goes back to my earlier point that Obama’s neither a know-it-all nor a know-nothing, but instead is a smart guy who knows where to go for what he doesn’t already know.

Zadig,Obama called it a dumb war. Since then he’s flipped the flop and become a neocon in training, but his earlier instinct was dead on and a lot smarter than Biden, and, yes Mike, John the Strait Jacket Talker.Sorry, Zadig, but being there a long time doesn’t mean you’ve profited by the experience.

Doug,If you have a point, make it. Don’t throw around a book.I have nothing against abusing any tradition but I can’t tell from your comment.

tvoh: I know words can be difficult. Instead, have a look at this 1995 Kirkpatrick interview conducted by Charlie Rose. Pay special attention to her remarks on the hazards of nation building.Now envisage her and Sarah Palin on the same stage and ask yourself what has become of the conservative tradition, and why thoughtful debate within the Republican party has been stifled by the screeching baboons in right-wing populist media. Country first.

Doug,”I know words can be difficult.”Surely with some effort you can learn.I watched Jeanne as long as I could. When Charlie asked for the right policy and she said “effective use of air power” I was done.Bismarck enunciated the correct policy for outsiders as regards the Balkans.

To observe stupid behavior is one thing Tunder.To denigrate another’s arguments by implying unobserved behavior is another.

“your ego demands that you have the last word which annoys those around you to know end.”If you go to my blog and see what tvoh stands for you would realize how wrong you are.I yield to no one in taking pride in my humility.