Where the Right went wrong

[International Machine Consortium]

Fifty years ago, when a 29-year-old Yale graduate named William F. Buckley Jr. funded National Review magazine, conservatism was a small insurgency, fighting the dominant tide of liberalism that had governed the United States for a quarter century.

Today, the right is politically dominant. The president is an avowed conservative; so are the vast majority of Republicans who control the Congress. The courts have moved to the right; conservative voices are prominent in the media; and three Americans call themselves conservative for every two who say they are liberal.

Yet now, at what should be the floodtide of conservative power, many on the right are expressing open, even passionate disagreement with what has been done in their name. (Watch what's angered the right -- 1:34 Video)

"I believe that as a movement we have veered off course into the dangerous and uncharted waters of big government Republicanism," said Mike Pence, a three-term representative from Indiana.

Pence is one of a number of conservatives who finds himself dismayed by much of what has happened under Republican rule.

And others, like Buckley, are concerned by what is in the future. He foresees a repudiation of what has been done in the name of the right.

"At the Republican convention in '08 there will be a lot of rhetoric, which will deplore what has been done in the name of conservatism and Republicanism. And I think it will bring the house down," Buckley told me for our "Broken Government: Right Gone Wrong."

Dictating an out of control and wrong headed foreign policy, forcing religion down the American people's throats, obstructing Science in its serach for disease cures, forcing women to bend to their will, the current Republican party is beginning to rot from within.
If they manage to lie, cheat and steal their way into a midterm "victory" the tax and spend big government Republicans will only cement their own fate.

More:

"They have increased the amount of government spending by a degree that no Democrat would ever dream of getting away with," said columnist Andrew Sullivan.

Many of the sharpest attacks on the mix of lobbyists and politicians that have sent prominent public figures to prison come from these voices on the right.

There are social conservatives who say the Republicans have taken them for granted -- and libertarians like Dick Armey and Sullivan, who say government has no more business in the bedroom than the boardroom. In "Right Gone Wrong," you'll see the sharp split over Bush's foreign policy, especially his sweeping goal of promoting democracy around the world. ("Loony," William Buckley calls it).

While conservatives overwhelmingly support Bush on his tax cuts and judicial appointments -- and while many, if not most, back his claim of broad executive authority to wage the war on terror, the discontent on the right has grown so intense that a number of well-known conservatives have openly argued that the Republicans should lose their hold on Congress this year, either to punish conservatives for abandoning the cause, or because divided government actually produces better policy results.

http://www.cnn.com/2006/POLITICS/10/26/greenfield.conservatism/index.html

 

[Thump553]

I depise the term "social conservatives"-to me it's a whitewash label for what is really authoritarianism. Unfortunately the religious authoritarian wing has seized control of the GOP. This will not change until the GOP is cast from power and reforms itself.

In today's GOP, former conservative icons like Goldwater and Buckley, as well as moderates like Nelson Rockefeller, would be relegated to the back of the bus, policy wise.

 

[her209]

Teri Schaivo anyone?

 

[Moonbeam]

The right is the psychotic reaction to self hate that manifests in the need for control. It is characterized by profound fear of the other, the projection of self hate our there in the world. It's sympathies are with the wrath of God and the delusion it favors is that it manifests the hand of God. It will always manifest the hell it fears on earth. This is how psychosis works.

Remember though that if you are on the right you will be completely blind to this. This is why you are in the ditch. The blind have led the blind.

 

[Ferocious]

just a FYI:

The Conservative Soul: How We Lost It, How to Get It Back
Andrew Sullivan

Might be interesting to watch.

on Book TV today

 

[wiin]

The GOP went wrong the minute they started working with the Democ-rats. This, I believe, started with the previous majority leader, then Bush letting Ted Kennedy write the Educational Bill and then the gang of 14. In judicial nomination, the GOP work with the domoc-rats but got kick in the rear instead. The GOP can get a lot of things done if they would only flex their muscle.

 

[blackllotus]

Originally posted by: wiin
The GOP went wrong the minute they started working with the Democ-rats. This, I believe, started with the previous majority leader, then Bush letting Ted Kennedy write the Educational Bill and then the gang of 14. In judicial nomination, the GOP work with the domoc-rats but got kick in the rear instead. The GOP can get a lot of things done if they would only flex their muscle.

Its about time for you to wake up to the real world instead of this "blame it on the minority party" fantasyland.

 

[Craig234]

Originally posted by: wiin
The GOP went wrong the minute they started working with the Democ-rats. This, I believe, started with the previous majority leader, then Bush letting Ted Kennedy write the Educational Bill and then the gang of 14. In judicial nomination, the GOP work with the domoc-rats but got kick in the rear instead. The GOP can get a lot of things done if they would only flex their muscle.

Wow, that is a remarkable level of delusion.

The republicans have practiced less cooperation with the democrats than any time I know of since the civil war.

Go read this article and get a little bit informed for a change.

Some info on how the republicans are acting in Congress

 

[Rainsford]

Originally posted by: Thump553
I depise the term "social conservatives"-to me it's a whitewash label for what is really authoritarianism. Unfortunately the religious authoritarian wing has seized control of the GOP. This will not change until the GOP is cast from power and reforms itself.

In today's GOP, former conservative icons like Goldwater and Buckley, as well as moderates like Nelson Rockefeller, would be relegated to the back of the bus, policy wise.

That's the biggest reason they AREN'T conservatives...the traditional terms have become so twisted that they no longer make sense. "Social conservative" isn't a bad word, in fact, you'd probably agree with what it is SUPPOSED to mean...the government staying out of social affairs (the same thing "economic conservative" means). The problem is that the current Republicans are not "social conservatives" any more than they are ANY kind of "conservative". Hell, the DEMOCRATS are more attractive to those of us interested in REAL conservative ideas. Things like a balanced budget, respect for civil liberties and a free and open economic system are more likely under the Democrats than the Republicans at this point.

One interesting theory I heard is that government is simply a "liberal" institution, whichever group gets power slowly becomes more and more "liberal". This would explain how all these Republicans that just HATED the "liberal government" have managed to turn government into what it is today.

 

[Rainsford]

Originally posted by: wiin
The GOP went wrong the minute they started working with the Democ-rats. This, I believe, started with the previous majority leader, then Bush letting Ted Kennedy write the Educational Bill and then the gang of 14. In judicial nomination, the GOP work with the domoc-rats but got kick in the rear instead. The GOP can get a lot of things done if they would only flex their muscle.

Yeah, cause I got to say...when the Republicans take the initiative, they REALLY manage to do the conservative movement proud. Randomly interventionist foreign policy, a total lack of regard for civil liberties and spending that makes trust-fund frat boys look like they have fiscal discipline is REALLY what the conservative movement stands for. Oh yeah, and a total overriding desire to force their religious beliefs on everyone else. Goldwater would be PROUD.

 

[Jaskalas]

Originally posted by: Rainsford

Originally posted by: Thump553
I depise the term "social conservatives"-to me it's a whitewash label for what is really authoritarianism. Unfortunately the religious authoritarian wing has seized control of the GOP. This will not change until the GOP is cast from power and reforms itself.

In today's GOP, former conservative icons like Goldwater and Buckley, as well as moderates like Nelson Rockefeller, would be relegated to the back of the bus, policy wise.

That's the biggest reason they AREN'T conservatives...the traditional terms have become so twisted that they no longer make sense. "Social conservative" isn't a bad word, in fact, you'd probably agree with what it is SUPPOSED to mean...the government staying out of social affairs (the same thing "economic conservative" means). The problem is that the current Republicans are not "social conservatives" any more than they are ANY kind of "conservative". Hell, the DEMOCRATS are more attractive to those of us interested in REAL conservative ideas. Things like a balanced budget, respect for civil liberties and a free and open economic system are more likely under the Democrats than the Republicans at this point.

One interesting theory I heard is that government is simply a "liberal" institution, whichever group gets power slowly becomes more and more "liberal". This would explain how all these Republicans that just HATED the "liberal government" have managed to turn government into what it is today.

I absolutely despise those, like Bush, who have grown government instead of cutting it back. They are not acting with my interests at heart and I would gladly take part in a true conservative party that is willing to do what is necessary to defeat the unabated government growth and authoritarianism.

 

[Craig234]

I absolutely despise those, like Bush, who have grown government instead of cutting it back. They are not acting with my interests at heart and I would gladly take part in a true conservative party that is willing to do what is necessary to defeat the unabated government growth and authoritarianism.

And yet you are responsible for him, as far as your vote goes, if I understand your voting history correctly.

You refuse to vote for the alternative which has delivered less spending and less deficit, the democrats, because you put ideology ahead of the facts. Right? Did you vote for Bush in 2000 and/or 2004?

 

[Puffnstuff]

Well during the current administration we've seen corporate influence on government decision making rise to an all time high. The democrats have offered little other than criticism of current policies and that's a shame. Meanwhile back at the Bush ranch the raping of America continues while big business continues to prosper and the future security of this nation is sold to the highest bidder. Yep it's a great day here in Amerika.

 

[Craig234]

Puffnstuff, the democrats offer plenty; see my other thread for some examples.

But what have the republicans offered us? Propaganda with waving flags and stern salutes; promises to defend the nation from some terrible threat resulting in hugely wasteful war and other spending; and what else?

They promise to halve a budget defict, that didn't exist when they took the presidency, from a phony number. They promise to fight for ending the estate tax that affects a tiny number of the wealthiest Americans who have been greatly increasing their share of America's wealth at most Americans' expense for 25 years. What else?

They promise to 'fix' social security by pursuing their agenda to destroy the greatest ongoing success of their opponents, and giving windfall profits to their Wall Street backers, while creating a handy wedge issue between the young voters they cannot appeal to on any other issue, at odds with the baby boomers who will need social security. What else?

 

[LegendKiller]

Current "republicans" are nothing more than totalitarians who wrap themselves in every wedge issue in order to get elected.

It's disgusting what they turned that party into. I used to be proud to be a Republican, now anything left of a fascist is a "liberal"

 

[Jaskalas]

Originally posted by: Craig234

I absolutely despise those, like Bush, who have grown government instead of cutting it back. They are not acting with my interests at heart and I would gladly take part in a true conservative party that is willing to do what is necessary to defeat the unabated government growth and authoritarianism.

And yet you are responsible for him, as far as your vote goes, if I understand your voting history correctly.

You refuse to vote for the alternative which has delivered less spending and less deficit, the democrats, because you put ideology ahead of the facts. Right? Did you vote for Bush in 2000 and/or 2004?

I'm 21, I wasn't of voting age in 2000. As for your alternative, I find that unacceptable and I really do wish for a third party which carries more of my beliefs without betraying others so greatly.