Redstate

By haystack Posted in The Parties — Comments (8) / Email this page » / Leave a comment »

[Wilderness Conservative mascot courtesy Avalanche Software]
[New Thatcher Liberal courtesy New York voters]

It is increasingly apparent, given the hysteria in the "off-the-shelf media", that the Presidency is already the Democrats' to lose. While we hear the steady drumbeat of "You Decide 2008" being ever so loudly heralded as the final death knell of the GOP, we Conservatives out here just getting our teepees set up in the wilderness find ourselves more than a little bewildered.

Perhaps most fascinating for me is the memory of the GOP making much the same claim about the death of the Donk were they to reign supremely victorious two months ago.

To be sure, attempts at seizing momentum in the throes of a near-loss being touted as a sweeping victory seem strategically prudent. Continuous flurries to the midsection have always been good form in the middle rounds. That the Republican party is dead without even having been given a mandatory standing eight count is, well, bordering on surreal. It also serves as a stark reminder that "he who does the MOST swinging usually watches the eight count from the neutral corner."

So, here we are two years out, and there is one declared Republican in the race. While similar numbers can be offered up from the anointed front-runners on the Left, they at least have the media doing the swinging for them as they "explore".

From the GOP?

bupkus.

More below the fold...

McCain has been running for President since '98, basically, even though he ultimately lost to Bush 43. His politics, photo ops and sound bites have been easy enough to see for what they were intended to be; "staying in the race". Why then has he not done any more than go "exploratory"?

Former Governor Romney? Check.

Governor Richardson? Ditto.

The rest of the Media's court jesters on the Right have, at least, some modicum of an excuse ranging anywhere between relative obscurity to intentioned "head down awaiting the next mortar round" strategery...McCain has no such excuse, and he should be deemed the poster child for the disease the collective Right suffers (and has for the last 6 yrs.)- my newest word:

Testicular Diffidence

How is it, then, that we face 22 months of campaigns and electioneering (or will be forced to) given the foregone conclusion that the Republicans are dead, and "We the People" are about to embark on the new autocratic monarchy that IS today's Democrats?

Several diarists have opined in recent days here that there are a few rather clear explanations for the woes of the GOP.

As kyle8 so aptly put it:

(1) Republicans will always lay low when being attacked
(2) Republicans will always give feeble responses even when they have good explanations
(3) Republicans will always show their hands when making deals with Democrats, and will always fold too quickly, even when they have the winning hand.
(4) Republicans will always turn against one of their own when he/she has a winning issue
(5) Republicans never seem to highlight, or campaign on controversial issues even when they have overwhelming public support.
(6) Republicans are never aggressive except when supporting things like earmarks and bridges to nowhere.
(7) Republicans are always quick to throw parts of their constituency under the bus.

There are more, of course, and several commenters offered some of their favorites. As true as these and other comments of the same ilk may be, there is one in particular that was missed:

Democrats suffer, in epic proportions, from a severe case of testicular fortitude.

This enables them to lie, cheat, steal, and do all of same with no compunction, no conscience, and a deep-rooted belief they are in fact being truthful, loyal, and hold only the best interests of their fellow Americans more closely to their breast than they do their very own best interests.

I penned a rather weakly constructed acronym recently...the LDL syndrome-"Liberal Dementia and Lies". Though cute and funny and good for a couple laughs and some sage dialog, there is something to this notion of self-delusion and a belief in pre-ordained ascension to a sphere of higher existence.

To be sure, there is no shortage of these traits among GOP hopefuls given that this disease develops over time and is logarithmically proportionate to the number of elections won and Lobbyists serviced. Further, there seems to be a more devout determination from the Left to quell all challenge to their throne - at all costs to any who would stand in their way. The Right typically bows its collective head, and shrinks away from the heat like cheap cellophane.

Consider the latest barrage of fodder trying to raise the level of consciousness of the erstwhile indifferent electorate vis a vis Hillary Clinton.

We are to believe Senator Clinton may well be the next Margaret Thatcher . Really, folks. Really. Think about that. Does anyone really believe these two names belong in the same sentence?

Consider, from her own words, how laughable it is to consider her on par with the likes of the Iron Lady:

Clinton has, it seems, been a fan of Margaret Thatcher's for many years. Following the Iron Lady's career from afar, Clinton particularly admired Thatcher's ability to adapt herself to fit the job. "My goodness, she changed her hair, she changed a lot of things," Clinton told a British interviewer[from the WaPo July 2003]

Does anyone ever remember Thatcher gasping in delight at Reagan's hair style?

A speech long forgotten that Mrs. Thatcher delivered to the Heritage Foundation (December 10, 1997) included this remark:

I've always considered America fortunate in having an apparently inexhaustible supply of conservative thinkers prepared to challenge the fashionable liberal consensus. That is a tribute to the intellectual energy and the taste for debate which are so characteristic of this great country and which sometimes seem distressingly absent in contemporary Europe. But it is also a tribute to Heritage (and in particular to Ed Feulner) that these conservative thinkers have been motivated and sustained in their mission.

It is no less an honor -- and, dare I say, still more of a pleasure -- to be invited here on the occasion of the presentation of the Clare Booth Luce award to my old friend Ronald Reagan.

President Reagan is one of the greatest men of our time, and one of the greatest American Presidents of all time. If that is not fully appreciated today, and sadly it is not, it isn't really surprising. After all, so many people have been proved wrong by Ronald Reagan that they simply daren't acknowledge his achievement. Forests have already been pulped to print the revisionist analyses of the eighties. Those who were once so confident of the superiority of the Soviet system that they advocated appeasement of it, now pretend to believe that it was doomed to inevitable collapse. Tell that to the Russians! The former Soviet ministers didn't and don't doubt the seriousness of the struggle, even if Western liberal commentators do.

No one in the West appreciates all this better -- and no one served the President and this country more loyally -- than Cap Weinberger, here to receive the award on Ronald Reagan's behalf. He was also a great friend to Britain, above all during the Falklands War. It's nice to be among conservatives. It's still nicer to be among friends.

When the Heritage Foundation asked me to make the virtue of Courage the centre-piece of this Lecture I was not displeased. Of the four cardinal virtues -- courage, temperance, justice and prudence -- it is the last -- prudence -- that the ancient philosophers traditionally placed at the moral apex.

They did so because they understood, quite rightly, that without that practical, seemingly rather dull, virtue none of the others could be correctly applied. You have to know when and how to be brave, or self-controlled or fair-minded, in particular situations Prudence -- or what I would prefer to call a good, hearty helping of commonsense -- shows the way

I challenge anyone anywhere to offer a substantive counter-claim from the Senator from New York that stands up to this brilliance from Mrs. Thatcher.

Instead, what we get from the aspiring as-yet-uncommitted Presidential candidate runs more along the lines of this:

I'm in. And I'm in to win.

After six years of George Bush, it is time to renew the promise of America.

I am not just starting a campaign though, I am beginning a conversation with you, with America.

I have never been afraid to stand up for what I believe in or to face down the Republican machine," she wrote. "Only a new president will be able to undo Bush's mistakes and restore our hope and optimism ... Let's talk about how to bring the right end to the war in Iraq and restore respect for America around the world.

In an interview with Greta Van Susteren, Mrs. Clinton discussed her trip to, and positions on, Iraq. I can't decipher anything intelligible...read it for yourselves. A morsel:

Well, but look what the Iraq Study Group came up with. You know, that was a totally nonpartisan group of, you know, 10 wise Americans, you know, some of them Republican, some of then Democrats from different, you know, experiences. They came out with a long list of recommendations.

Now, can you say well, I wouldn't agree with that one or wouldn't agree with this one, but the fundamental point they made is that there is no military solution. There is only a political resolution and you've got to bring everybody into the game in order to move it forward, you know.
And for whatever reason, this administration rejects that. They won't talk to bad people. That means they won't talk to the Iranians and the Syrians. I think the first rule of warfare there are know enemies. If they're our enemies, then believe me, I think they are, because they certainly don't wish us any well outcome, then we need to know more about them. I think it's a sign of strength to get into a process with people who you are concerned about their motives, who's really calling the shots. This administration won't do that. So, to a certain extent we're flying blind, Greta.

Wait, before we finish this...our future President on the slaughter of innocent unborn children...err, I mean, the anniversary of Roe:

"As we mark the 34th anniversary of Roe v. Wade, we are at a critical moment for women's health. Women's right to make choices about their reproductive health has been systematically challenged and family planning and contraception are under attack. All women must be able to make their own choices about their reproductive health. At the same time, we must work for the day when abortions are truly rare. That means preventing unwanted pregnancies and doing everything we can to ensure that all women have access to family planning, contraception and the medically accurate information they need and deserve.

I was proud to help launch the National Campaign to Prevent Teen Pregnancy, which has helped reduce teen pregnancy by one third. Together with Senator Patty Murray, I pressed the FDA for a long overdue decision on Plan B, making emergency contraception available over-the-counter for millions of women – a real victory for women's health. I have also introduced the Prevention First Act, which increases funding for family planning services, ensures that health plans that cover prescription drugs cover contraceptives, improves education about emergency contraception, ensures that hospital emergency rooms offer emergency contraception to victims of sexual assault and strengthens Medicaid coverage of family planning services so family planning and contraception are accessible and affordable for low income women. These are common sense policies on which we can find common ground. By taking these steps, we can realize the goal of making abortion safe, legal and rare.”

Ladies and Gentlemen, I present the next President of the United States...(fill in the blank from ANY on the list).

This is what we will be inaugurating in January 2009 unless the GOP gets up and gets to the business that needs doing. This includes talking plainly and openly, and with strength and determination about the merits and necessities of Conservatism.

It includes the open discussion of ideas and values and goals and most of all, why America is great and will continue to be when the arena of debate and dialog brings us together to realize our full potential, not squander it on the highway of partisanship and political self-aggrandizement.