...is a joy for me. Pundit by pundit, he eviscerates the lazy "journalism" and complicity of the DC press with the radical agenda of the Bush administration.
One comment on this post I found apposite:
Conservatism still alive and well
The political fringe you mention has been split over the war in Iraq, which is symbolic of the new Progressive Activism of George Bush. Congressional Democrats haven't reined in Bush. They would rather influence his decisions, and work with the President, because there is no fundamental political difference between the world view of the Congress, and the President.
On social and cultural issues, the media's wellspring of nativist ideology is alive and well. Core Republicans are fightng a battle against the President, and his cross party alignment with the Democrats, on the issue of immigration. Defending core Conservatism is a viable strategy. If all of your polls are accurate, why are the GOP candidates running closely to their Democratic challengers? Let me add that if not for the Iraq war, the GOP candidates would be running ahead of their Democratic counterparts.
I agree with this anonymous poster. The inability of the Left to market their ideas as common sense solutions is quite maddening. I guess it goes back to the "What's the matter with Kansas?" conundrum -- in the US, the poor people are rich enough to vote against their economic interest. Like debating Ford vs. Chevy or "how much Jeff Gordon sucks" and voting Republican, if at all.
However, this forgets that the Iraq War will be a divisive and GOP-crippling issue for at least five years. All Democrats want out of Iraq, but only some Republicans are meekly differing with the President on his unencumbered disaster of unprovoked invasion.
Coupled with the immigration issue, which took until we had ~12-15 million illegal immigrants in the US to boil up in the media, the GOP is toast. This is because the GOP vote is split between the union-busting corporate elite and management vote, who want more cheap labor from illegals to maximize quarterly earnings -- hey, it's working! -- and the traditional nativist vote of white Protestants, who are always "under attack". (Is there anything more pathetic than the claim that WASP males are "under attack"?)
So, in other words, there are two salient voting issues which directly split the GOP vote, with absolutely no middle ground or compromise for, as an example, Fred Thompson or Rudy Giuliani (sp?). Fred Thompson either wants to "ship 'em out and build a wall" or takes a pragmatic approach and the nativist vote doesn't turn out. Giuliani either wants to continue fighting the Iraq War (and loses the general population) or takes on a "defeatist" position and loses the support of the GOP.
Add to the fact that for GOP activists, Bush has been their hero on pro-life, "faith-based", and the stem cell issues, so whoever comes around as the next candidate won't be able to draw that vote.
So, in response to the above post, it's true that "Conservatism" is alive -- how could it not be? It's ingrained into the national character? But whether the Left has a coherent ideology and message doesn't matter at all. Promise to get out of Iraq, and address the health care crisis, and talk about alternative energy (i.e. instead of invading oil-rich countries), and that's about it.
Add to the fact that Kucinich, Obama, and Hillary Clinton are making people swoon, longing for the halcyon days of JFK.