Whose Role to Monitor the Conservative Movement?

William F. Buckley and National Review magazine took on as part of their role in the conservative movement defining the movement excluding all of the conspiracy theorists, objectivists, and other assorted wackos.  With Buckley gone, the wackos have been coming to the forefront, with the help of Glenn Beck.  Paul Ryan was accused of collusion with the objectivists during the campaign, still a charge to make some shutter although they probably have no idea what objectivism is.  Agenda 21 is being mentioned at City Council meetings and state legislatures.  The conservative movement is losing focus and getting sidetracked with a lot of nonsense.

The latest wave of activists to invade the Republican party, the Tea Party activists, still seem reluctant to define conservatism, other than vaguely part of the Liberty movement.  Establishment Republicans like John Boehner not only are withholding funds and support from Tea Party politicians, but have no real political philosophy themselves to help define the movement.  Unlike the Goldwater and Reagan conservatives before them, the Tea Party movement is unwilling to take responsibility for its role in the movement and as such unable is partly responsible for its lack of  efinition.  The main spokes person for the Tea Party movement, Sarah Palin, seems to prefer DWS than trying to be a political leader, she can't be blamed considering the ferocity of the attacks against her, but interest in her and SarahPAC has disintegrated.

The Bushies time has come and gone, outside of Fox News no one really cares what they think.  Karl Rove lost any credibility he may have had in the recent Presidential election.  Dana Perino is nice to look at but a policy lightweight.  Bush 43 owed much of his policy decisions to the neocons, a group that has lost meaning as its main objective was foreign policy and Obama has completely undermined their middle eastern initiatives.  I have alot of respect for the intelligence of William Kristol, but he too has now lost any relevance in a post-Bush world.  The Weekly Standard, the house organ of the neocons, outside of Roger Ailes, no one really cares what they have to say.

The Libertarian Party has strictly defined the liberty movement, but feels it is not important to actually win elections or gain any influece politically preferring philosophical purity.  This defines the liberty movement but keeps the liberty movement from having any influence on national politics other than as spoilers.

Robert Bartley as Editorial Page Editor of the National Review helped define free market capitalism.  The page now under the watchful eye of Paul Gigot does not have quite the same panache.  Bartley brought the WSJ Editorial page to new heights, as a Reaganite he was an avid supporter of Jude Wanniski and supply side economics.  He even wrote a book about it 'The Seven Fat Years and How To Do It Again', never wavering from his principles unlike some of the opportunists like David Stockman and Bruce Bartlett.  The conservative movement has no real spokesman defining a good economic message outside of Larry Kudlow and Stephen Moore.  Paul Ryan and Marco Rubio are supply siders but fail to deliver the message with the enthusiasm of a Jack Kemp.

The Swing of the Pendulum Has Reached an Apex

The culture of the 60’s significantly changed American culture, but it failed to produce an heir and after a short fling has been decaying.  Pop culture has transformed into a sensationalist, attention gathering device totally without any philosophy, other than ‘what can we do today that is more sensationalistic than what we did yesterday’.  One only has to see Lady Gaga, Katy Perry, or Kim Kardashian to see that this is true.  The Hollywood elite, like Sean Penn, have moved so far to the left that America no longer understands or relates to them, they have become a joke, and totally irrelevant to the culture.  The presidency of Barack Obama is the last desperate gasp of this elitist struggle to take over the culture.  Forcing legislation through that is so leftist it receives little general support. 

This cultural shift has finally reached an apex and is shifting back slowly in the other direction.  What was the turning point?  Sarah Palin, love her or hate her, she might not have been the cause but was definitely the beginning of the cascade.  In music there is a definite rise in the popularity of country music.  A comparison of the major award shows makes it easy to understand why this is going on:  The MTV music awards is laced with profanity and sensationalism.  The 60’s transformation started out with some great talents, Paul McCartney, David Bowie, Eric Clapton, etc., but has turned into this hideous rap music that is as appealing as fingernails on a chalk board.  In contrast, the CMA awards are very family oriented, winners thank God, their families, etc., sing about their country and patriotism. 

Political correctness’ has also been taken to the extreme.   It is almost impossible to put the words Muslim and terrorist together in the same sentence, even though we all know that the terrorists are all Islamic and muslims living in America have a greater sense of pride more than ever.

The conservative swing was bound to happen, and things will shift in that direction until another 60’s generation is produced.   The last came about due to the Baby Boom years following WWII, so for the forseeable future nothing so cataclysmic is likely to occur, but a swing back toward the subdued culture of the 50’s is certainly likely.

The interesting thing is, the left has also seen this.  Barack Obama is their last gasp of hope and with him they will attempt to force through all of the statist legislation they have been hoping for.

Obamacare, whether or not one supports socialized medicine could not be passed by both houses of Congress and was forced through by some slick maneuvering by Nancy Pelosi.  Obama’s ‘mandate’ could not have taken place without several of his constituents voting multiple times and enlisting indigent and mentally impaired individuals to also vote.  Forcing through higher taxes and a populist agenda now seems to be his goal for the next four years.

Conservatives know this too and instead of holding firm waiting for the shift to occur, we are flailing our arms in desperation.  John Boehner and Mitch McConnell are ill equipped to deal with the political machinations of the Obama machine and instead of delivering a meaningful alternative have been dithering and caving in with a 'statist lite' approach.

 

Other conservatives have been running around predicting the end of the world; the nationalization of 401(k) savings accounts; the dismantling of the military, and; an end to the charitable deducton for not for profits.  Surely, if conservatives would hold firm and get a grip, they could weather the Obama storm without much ado except reams of regulations that could be undone.  I too, felt as if this was the end of the world, but there will be a silver lining.

Why the Tea Party Has Become Irrelevant

I like so many others, got truly excited about the Tea Party.  Finally, conservatives and libertarians were getting charged up and politically active.  These were people who believed the same things as I do, Fiscal Responsibility, Constitutionally Limited Government, and Free Markets.  These were people who actually got out and protested for these things and more importantly worked for candidates who believed these things as well.

Candidates like Marco Rubio, and more importantly Sarah Palin.  McCain's vice-presidential nominee had a meteoric rise in Alaskan politics believing in these same ideals.  Yet after the media savaged her during the campaign, she backed away.  She had the means at her disposal to create a national organization, nothing like Team Sarah had been seen since the heady days of Goldwater, and none will, I predict, for some time.  Yet Palin found it more pleasurable to be cheering on DTWS than in the trenches trying to defeat Harry Reid.

A big part of the Tea Party philosophy is that it is a spontaneous organization, created by the issues of the day, not a permanent fixture of any party, and disappears just as quickly when its issue is resolved or candidate is elected.  This is also its biggest downfall.  After the Goldwater for President campaign ended in disaster its legion of supporters did not fade away, instead they integrated themselves into the Republican Party.  They were elected to Central Committees, appointed to party positions and for several dominated the Party.  Until they began to fade away and the party 'apparatchiks' remained in key positions, people like consultant Karl Rove and Congressman John Boehner.  Their only concern is maintaining their power.  Paving the way for the next wave of political activists to take up leadership positions and help reenergize the Republican Party, except the Tea Partiers have been reluctant to do so.

Until the Tea Party decides that it needs to be a more permanent fixture on the political landscape and personalities like Sarah Palin decide to be truly leaders of the body politic, the Republican Party will be under the thumb of the 'apparatchiks' and to politicians without any real belief system.  The party will continue to flop around and have internal battles.  The Libertarian Party remains rooted totheir philosophy preferring ideological purity to achieving any results politically.  A shame, as the Libertarian Party would be a natural home for many of the Tea-Partiers, as it had been for many of the Goldwater army.