Never Quit the Fight
November 21, 2009
Photo Shoot
November 20, 2009
Rogues’ Gallery
November 19, 2009
The Ultimate Mistake?
November 18, 2009
Basic Instinct
November 17, 2009
Weekend Box Office
November 15, 2009
Save It For Later
November 15, 2009
Black is Black
November 13, 2009
HotAir.com on Glenn Beck’s November 13 black conservative symposium. Having watched the symposium on Youtube, I must say that the show was horrible. I have the same grievance with this type of show that I have with the Wall Street Journal’s longstanding practice of dragging out Shelby Steele every time there’s some racial controversy, when I would prefer to hear Steele speak on a wide range of topics. Why don’t Beck, Sean Hannity, Bill O’Reilly, Fox and Friends, etc., have conservatives from a variety of different backgrounds on as standard operating procedure, instead of this Very Special Episode garbage? Will any of these conservatives of color ever appear on Fox News again?
I also had a problem with Harry Jackson and Lisa Fritsch attempting to link conservative philosophy with Christianity. I don’t doubt that they came to conservatism as a result of their Christian faith, but the problem is that when they attempt to link conservatism to Christianity, they’re peddling a stereotype, whether they know it or not. Conservative principles are ecumenical–you don’t have to be a Christian to be a conservative. You can be a Catholic, a Jew, a Muslim, even an atheist or agnostic and recognize the logic of conservatism. I’m sure George Soros had a big smile on his face when Jackson and Fritsch made those remarks, because such remarks effectively discredit conservatism in the minds of those who aren’t already conservatives.
Regardless of how eloquent these men and women were, there’s nothing they could have done to alter the progressive perception that they were brought on to this show in order to perform minstrelsy for Beck. No one’s mind was changed by watching this show. Why did they even bother?
Who’s Next?
November 13, 2009
The Origin of Species
November 12, 2009
Turn It Up
November 11, 2009
The White Shadow
November 11, 2009
The Sarah Strategy
November 10, 2009
Can Sarah Palin emerge victorious in a general election?
Palin’s appeal to the Republican Party’s conservative base is unbelievably strong, but it’s still unclear as to whether she can capture the imagination of enough independent voters to win in 2012 (assuming, of course, that she runs). In order to defeat President Obama, Palin will have to figure out a way to be in, but not of, the conservative world.
The GOP’s base is, as Sam Tanenhaus notes in The Death of Conservatism, “revanchist”—that is to say, committed to reversing the political and cultural gains the American left made over the last four decades. Members of the party base are at war with what they see as a corrosive counterculture—a counterculture comprised of progressive judges and professors, the mainstream media, the entertainment industry, and Republicans who are not committed to conservative philosophy. These men and women embraced Barry Goldwater in 1964 because they viewed him as, for lack of a better phrase, the ultimate anti-counterculture warrior.
Even since the 1964 Presidential campaign, Republican candidates for the Oval Office have tried to satisfy these voters while simultaneously appealing to voters who were not as hostile to the progressive-influenced culture. In his 1968 and 1972 Presidential campaigns, Richard Nixon exploited the conservative base’s anger at cultural liberalism while also reaching out to those who merely desired competent government. While Nixon’s tactics were certainly controversial, they were also quite successful.
Ronald Reagan demonstrated similar skill in 1980 and 1984. Reagan knew how to appeal to conservatives angered by domestic secularism while not driving away those who disagreed with his traditionalist take on cultural matters. Reagan would not have been able to win forty-nine states twenty-five years ago if his appeal did not extend beyond social-conservative borders.
George H. W. Bush had a reputation as a “moderate,” so by definition he did not scare off those concerned about perceived extremism in the GOP. However, since the 1980s, the Republican Party has seemingly lost the ability to appeal to voters who consider themselves culturally tolerant.
Despite his “compassionate conservative” rhetoric, George W. Bush ultimately could not reach far beyond the GOP’s base in 2000, possibly because Bush’s appeal was directly connected to the culture war (i.e., Bush was embraced by those who saw President Clinton as fundamentally amoral). In addition, it’s not that far-fetched to imagine Bush losing his 2004 re-election bid if the War on Terror had not been ongoing. The less said about the breadth of the GOP’s appeal in 2008, the better.
In order to win in 2012, Palin must position herself as someone who respects the cultural right, but is not beholden to that faction of the conservative movement. Newly elected Virginia Governor Bob McDonnell demonstrated this skill in his campaign. Can Palin do the same?
She must. The knock on Palin is that she is the embodiment of right-wing resentment politics—the Statue of Anti-Liberal Liberty. To her detractors, Palin gives voice to the complaints of the Angry Right—the Tea Partiers, the pro-Second Amendment activists, the evangelical Christians, the Club for Growth/Leave Us Alone Coalition crowd. While her supporters see Reagan reincarnated, her critics see Louise Day Hicks back from the dead.
Palin must follow the example of the former and eschew that of the latter. To be sure, Reagan was at war with liberalism, but he always made clear that his grievance was with the ideology itself, not the adherents thereof. It’s not enough for Palin to suggest that progressivism should be consigned to the dustbin of history. She must explain, in clear and concise language, how conservative principles will work for the average American.
Palin’s supporters see her as an iconic figure who could do to liberalism what a pesticide does to insects. However, those supporters must understand that in the battle against the left, diplomacy is sometimes the best weapon. Palin will not always be able to use bellicose language in describing her political opponents. She will not always be the right’s UFC combatant, forcing progressives to tap out within seconds. Sometimes, her strong spirit will be represented by gentle words, her ideological fervor constrained by a calm manner. She can’t be Mark Levin on the campaign trail—but if they just let Sarah be herself, she’ll succeed and not fail.
