What Republican Party?

Ken McCracken over at WILLisms.com sent me an email asking me to participate in WILLism’s Pundit Roundtable.

Here’s what he asked me:

Now that the Dubai ports deal has fallen through, and with all the rancor these days over pork, immigration, policy failures such as Social Security reform, and a backlash over the Iraq War, is the Republican party cracking up as some have suggested?

What does Karl Rove need to do?

Here is my reply:

Dear Ken;

You have asked me to answer the following questions:

Now that the Dubai ports deal has fallen through, and with all the rancor these days over pork, immigration, policy failures such as Social Security reform, and a backlash over the Iraq War, is the Republican party cracking up as some have suggested?

What does Karl Rove need to do?

This I cannot do: Your questions presume the Republican Party I joined in 1982 still exists.

When I look at John McCain, Bill Frist, Tom DeLay and Duncan Hunter, I see the doppelgangers of an enervated and corrupt Democratic Party leadership that I abandoned 24 years ago. I look at these men, then look at those who preceded them – Jim Wright, Tony Coelho, Dan Rostenkowski, Ted Kennedy – and see a distinction without a difference.

This Republican Party has become exactly what it set out to destroy. Republicans marched into Washington with a Contract with America in 1994, and in less than a decade and a half have descended to depths of corruption, careerism and moral cowardice I could not have imagined from either party.

Were Ronald Reagan alive today, he would no doubt be working tirelessly to destroy these men and what they have wrought. And I would be with him in that task. Today’s Republican Party epitomizes the very things Reagan worked his whole life to defeat.

The Republican Party is not cracking up: It has ceased to exist.

Comments

[Cardinal Martini]

But certainly the Democrats are no better. So, Dennis, do you just refrain from voting? (As a blogger, you're not obligated to provide answers [see Part 2, Myth 4 of The Dennis the Peasant Blogging System] but it'd be nice nonetheless.)

[richard mcenroe]

Shit. Last week I might have argued with you. Of course, last week, the Republicans still looked like the party that gave a damn about the survival of this country.

[Michael Robinson]

DtP: "When I look at John McCain, Bill Frist, Tom DeLay and Duncan Hunter, I see the doppelgangers of an enervated and corrupt Democratic Party leadership that I abandoned 24 years ago."

I've been wanting to tell you something like this for a while now, but this is better than anything I could have come up with.

Abandon the Democratic Party, and what do you get? Something worse, or at least no better.

The Democratic Party desperately needs people like you, DtP, to wield your clue-stick mercilessly against the narcissism, callowness, and innumeracy that are endemic to the Left.

Whether you're outside the tent pissing in, or inside the tent pissing in, it's important, not just for the Democratic Party, but for the country as a whole, that people like you don't give up pissing on those pissworthy aspects of liberal/progressive institutions.

The God-and-Mammon alliance has seized power through a multi-decade tour-de-force of self-discipline. However, it has been a purely tactical self-discipline in the ultimate pursuit of the greater wantonness now spread before you.

What the country desperately needs is a viable party instilled with a deeper self-discipline, a disciplined commitment to Enlightenment principles of hard facts, rigorous analysis, and fearless introspection. That's the kind of self-discipline that I think you're about, and I believe it should be obvious to all that, for the foreseeable future, the Republican Party will not be that party.

That's all.

[Terrye]

I don't think that either the Democrats or the Republicans are the parties they were 15 or 20 years ago.

[Lou Minatti]

Despite all of the problems facing Republicans, Democrats still cannot figure it out. Democrats should have their own Newt Gingrich, to come up with a list of promises that they will do in their first 100 days. Hot-button issues that piss off voters who aren't being heard. It has to be someone other than Pelosi or Kennedy. The congressional elections need to be nationalized, just like in 1994.

That is what Newt did and it worked. For about 2 years. Then they reverted back to the same old shit that has been in Congress for decades. And here we are, as if the 1994 elections never happened.

[richard mcenroe]

Although I am puzzled as to when Karl Rove became Speaker of the House. Is it his job now to babysit every Republican Congressman, too?

And is it not perhaps time for Congressional Republicans to start taking responsibility for their own actions and inaction, rather than expecting George and Super Karl to carry them along?

Michael — Where do you see Dennis or lapsed Democrats like myself fitting back into today's Democratic Party? Embraced by Howard? By Kos? By Hillary? Where are the candidates we can support, the issues we can get behind? Where, for example, in the recent Hackett dogfight, was there the slightest sign of a healthy political party?

[Lou Minatti]

"Where do you see Dennis or lapsed Democrats like myself fitting back into today's Democratic Party? Embraced by Howard? By Kos?"

As long as these asshats are the face of the modern Democratic Party, people like me have no alternative. Don't forget, Howard Dean says he "hates Republicans". He thinks Republicans suck. OK, so that means I won't vote for any of his candidates. Seems like a fair trade.

[badanov]

DTP: It sounds like your newly minted leftist allies are thrilled to hear that.

[wxjames]

I'm with Lew on this one. I'll continue to vote republican until they forward a candidate that rivals Jimma Carter or Slick Willy.
The problem here is not politics, but elections. The people have been screwed by the process of elections in America.
First, it takes millions of $ to run TV ads.
TV broadcasters should either be forced to run political ads on the cheap, or TV should be removed from campaign participation.
However, TV should be encouraged to host debates and organizations who want to participate should support such debates.
Second, why do we have primaries starting in February and March ? A more sane approach would be to have a single primary day and duke it out in the convention. Part of the reason the republicans are in today's mess is that Bush didn't even have to meet with major republicans to secure the presidency. A little team rally would have helped outline practical, reachable goals. The use of a 'contract with America' would also help.
Third, ALL $ collected by parties should be limited in amount and limited to personal donations only, no organizations.
Fourth, All press releases must be published by participating media and labeled as such.
Fifth, all opinions about candidates must be labeled such.
Sixth, serious enforcement of legal voting would be appreciated.

[richard mcenroe]

wxjames, Dennis — on the bright side, McCain crashed and burned in the GOP pony show this week.

On the down side, 10% of the delegates actually voted for Bush even though he is legally ineligible for a third term.

[M. Simon]

I'm a small government (Goldwater-Reagan) Republican.

So OK Dems. What have you got to offer me?

Ha. Ha. Ha. Ha. Ha. Ha. Ha. Ha.

The Republicans at least mouth the words occasionally.

[Cameron]

Looks like a grim short-term future. The two major parties suck, and there isn't any other party that's going to get any clout soon. Of course, I mean the major parties suck if you're an average American - if you're plugged in, it doesn't matter which of the two you belong to 'cause you're gonna get taken care of. Not good.

[M. Simon]

I'm with wxjames. More restrictions on speech will help the right candidates get elected.

First we must repeal the First Amendment.

Yep. That will fix it. Fer sure.

[Alan]

Gee, I don't understand...today's GOP is pro-life. What more do you want?

[richard mcenroe]

The one real distinction for me was that one party didn't think we should be shot at in our own cities. Not sure Congressman Hunter gets that.,, or cares.

[Michael Robinson]

richard mcenroe: "Michael — Where do you see Dennis or lapsed Democrats like myself fitting back into today's Democratic Party? Embraced by Howard? By Kos? By Hillary?"

I don't know if embraced is the right word. And as for Hillary, she'll embrace anything for a vote, so let's leave her out of it.

But as for Howard Dean and Kos, they probably hate "today's Democratic Party" every bit as much as you and DtP.

But, for those two, what they hate most about today's Democratic Party is that on almost every significant policy issue, the Democratic Party position enjoys a healthy nationwide advantage in popular opinion over the Republican Party position, yet the Democratic Party is locked out of any influence at the national level.

This is what Howard Dean, in one of his notoriously inept moments, was getting at when he said that guys driving pickup trucks with Confederate flag stickers on the back should be natural supporters of the Democratic Party. Because, when it comes to substantive issues, the Democratic Party is going to be more responsive to their interests than the Republican Party.

So, like I said, embrace is probably not the right word, but if you ask Howard Dean and Kos, does the Democratic Party need people like you and DtP, and do they value legitimate criticism from people like you and DtP, I'm certain the answer is an unqualified "yes".

But the obsessive focus of Dean and Kos is on the simple mathematical fact that a party that can't poll a winning number on election day is an irrelevant party. And if, because of this, it appears they have little time for the likes of you and DtP, well, that's unfortunate, and it's not obvious to me what the solution is.

"Where are the candidates we can support, the issues we can get behind? Where, for example, in the recent Hackett dogfight, was there the slightest sign of a healthy political party?"

And that's my point. The Democratic Party is absolutely not a healthy political party. But throwing up your hands and walking away from the problem isn't going to make it any healthier. Say what you like about Howard Dean and Kos, but you can't dispute that these are two people who have definitely not thrown up their hands and walked away in disgust. They were unhappy about where the Democratic Party had gotten itself, and they have made a significant personal commitment to try to fix it.

[Lou Minatti]

Here are some reasons Democrats don't win in the heartland.

http://www.zombietime.com/hall_of_shame/

I don't recall any national Democrat distancing himself or herself from these people. In fact, during the last DNC who did I see sitting in a very influential seat? Michael Moore.

[Michael Robinson]

M. Simon: "I'm a small government (Goldwater-Reagan) Republican."

Are you really a "small government" Republican, or are you actually a "I don't want to pay taxes" Republican or a "no money for brown people" Republican?

Because whether the Democrats have anything to offer you depends on the answer to that question.

"So OK Dems. What have you got to offer me?

Ha. Ha. Ha. Ha. Ha. Ha. Ha. Ha.

The Republicans at least mouth the words occasionally."

If you really are a small government Republican, this is what the Democrats have to offer you:

http://govinfo.library.unt.edu/npr/whoweare/appendixf.html
http://www.orau.gov/pbm/links/npr1.html

[Cardinal Martini]

It sounds like there's some true-believerism going on here. The two national parties didn't just start sucking. They always sucked. Elections are about choosing the less bad of the two options. (I know that thought's not original to me, but that is the way it is.)

[richard mcenroe]

Michael Robinson — Oh for godsake.

They ARE where the Democratic Party had gotten itself... and WHY. What do you think I walked away from? FDR? Truman? Zell Miller?

Do you seriously ask us to embrace the party that exiled Joe Lieberman, whose financiers announced they had a plan to "destroy" the DLC, the same financiers who have backed 17 losing candidates in a row?

And do those links you posted correspond to the anointed Hillary telling the American people, "Some of you have too much, and we're going to take it from you and give it to people who will use it better"?

[richard mcenroe]

Michael — If this advantage of public opinion was anything but a poll-generated mirage, the Democrats would have the Congress and probably the White House back.

[Michael Robinson]

Lou Minatti: "Here are some reasons Democrats don't win in the heartland.

http://www.zombietime.com/hall_of_shame/

I don't recall any national Democrat distancing himself or herself from these people. In fact, during the last DNC who did I see sitting in a very influential seat? Michael Moore."

Thanks, Lou, for bringing this up. You're absolutely right, but for the wrong reasons.

Berkeley is my alma mater. I lived there for 7 years during Reagan/Bush I. My parents lived in Santa Cruz. My brother graduated from UCSC. I know the people in those pictures, even if I've never met them.

Maybe you look at those pictures and see a horrifying freakshow. I look at those pictures and see people who are deeply insecure about their impotence and irrelevance. DtP nailed it in an earlier post when he wrote:

"The Movers and Shakers of this world are busy closing the big deal that will make the company’s quarter, writing reports for the Chairman of the Board, or having lunch at a five-star with some headhunter that flew in from Brussels. This kind of person doesn’t read blogs because they don’t have time to... They’re busy getting promotions, acquiring multimillion dollar client contracts and developing company-wide growth strategies."

That world, the real world, is viewed as utterly alien, utterly inaccessible, and utterly hostile by the people in those pictures. They understand it only enough to know that they're never going to be part of it, and they fight back the best way they are able.

Which is to say, badly.

They're paper tigers. They put up a brave front, but inside they're hollow, and they hope you don't find out.

But the reason the Democratic Party loses in the heartland is not because they fail to distance themselves from the freakshow. The freakshow represents diversity, freedom of expression, the pursuit of happiness, and community--all solid American values. There's nothing inherently wrong with a freakshow.

The reason the Democratic Party loses in the heartland is because the alienation from power which is so colorfully manifest in the protests portrayed at your link runs to a lesser extent throughout the traditional constituencies of the Democratic Party.

Unions, minorities, environmentalists, etc., exist as political forces solely as a reaction to abuse of power. They derive their motive force from individual and collective opposition to the politically and economically power.

Consequently, such political constituencies naturally attract those who, due to their own shortcomings, are hostile to the antecedents of power: competence, professionalism, discipline, executive skill, etc.

Until the constituents of the Democratic Party get over their issues with the antecedents of power, they're going remain a hobbled political force.

This is what I was referring to when I wrote: "The Democratic Party desperately needs people like you, DtP, to wield your clue-stick mercilessly against the narcissism, callowness, and innumeracy that are endemic to the Left."

[richard mcenroe]

Michael Robinson — Nonsense. Unions and movements of any sort, once established, exist for themselves and their perpetuation, often very much at the expense of the people they ostensibly serve. I have to wonder if you have ever been a member of a non-civil servant union, if you have not noticed this.

[Michael Robinson]

Michael "If this advantage of public opinion was anything but a poll-generated mirage, the Democrats would have the Congress and probably the White House back."

Doesn't this directly contradict Lou Minatti's assertion above, that the reasons Democrats lose in the heartland is because they are associated with a horrifying left-wing freakshow?

Doesn't this directly contradict your own claim that you walked out on the Democratic Party because of the personalities and politics?

Doesn't this directly contradict the Bush Administration's own Orwellian policy-naming policy ("No Child Left Behind", "Clear Skies", "Healthy Forests", etc.)?

If you have any evidence that the public support for the type of progressive policies embraced by the Democratic Party are "a poll-generated mirage", please, let's see it.

I believe the evidence is overwhelming that bad candidates, bad coordination, bad message control, and bad execution are a more than sufficient explanation for the failure of the Democratic Party at the national level.

[thibaud]

Fun and games with Tweedledum and Tweedledee:

Neither party will seriously address the HEALTH INSURANCE train wreck, ie the economically unsustainable, ridiculously bloated, inefficient, totally absurd pseudo-market system that shovels nearly 20% of health expenditures into pointless paperwork, admin, redundant call center morons, a system that benefits no one save an insurance mafia whose major objective is to find ways to deny claims.

In fact, Tweedledum's Senate leader is even a scion of one of those evil Insurance Empires! Sen Fisting's party will of course never touch this octopus that adds no value, no consumer choice, no efficiency, nothing whatsoever except the highest level, by far, of health care administrative cost and waste in the civilized world.

As to Tweedledee's leadership, they, having botched their own reform effort 13 years ago, will not even touch this subject that is unquestionably the #1 domestic issue and one of the few where market failure-- really, the failure of a pseudo-market run by an insurance cartel-- is so glaring and disastrous that even rock-ribbed Republican business leaders across the country are begging for the national government to remedy it. Tweedledum refusing to make health insurance reform the #1, #2, and #3 issues nationwide is like Tweedledum refusing to stand up for Jesus and "values." One party's totally in the pocket of the worst actor in the entire system, the insurance companies, and the other's completely craven.

Neither party will seriously address the EDUCATION train wreck, ie the near-total failure of the vast majority of this nation's primary and secondary public school systems to achieve even a halfway acceptable return on the absurd investment we make in them, with the predictable result that housing in the handful of acceptable public school districts in any major metropolitan area has become bid up to the point that it's unaffordable for any but dual six-figure income yuppies with two or fewer children-- ie, people who could afford private schools. And of course only those people can afford the top-tier private universities, whose tuitions have steadily increased at twice the inflation rate (or more) each year for the past several decades.

Which is why every one of Tweedledee and Tweedledum's leadership avoids the public school system for their own kids, even though Tweedledee continues to enable the teachers' mafia to ensure that only the wealthiest American families can afford acceptable American public schools.

Here the tables are reversed: in the face of massive public failure, Tweedledee refuses to allow the obvious and sensible market solution; in the other case, we have massive market failure, and Tweedledum refuses to allow the obvious and sensible government solution.

And of course neither Tweedledum nor Tweedledee will even begin to address the mess that is IMMIGRATION. Actually, let's not mince words: the problem isn't with all the high-striving, skilled, overachieving Asians, Israelis, East Europeans, and yes, Arabs and Somalis and others who come here to succeed; it's with Mexican immigrants, period. The problem that Tweedledum and Tweedledee refuse to touch is really a diplomatic problem with a basket-case neighboring nation that is hurtling toward Chavez-style leftism, once whose current leadership has shamelessly manipulated the current administration into allowing free access to semi- or illiterate Mexican immigrants so as to offset the devastation wrought by their own complete corruption and incompetence. And from Tweedledum and Tweedledee we hear only silence. Never mind that the Mexican border issue wins the trifecta for national security threat (how long before Al Qaeda starts infiltrating the coyotes?) + economic security threat (illegals cut the legs out from honest workingmen, especially legal immigrant workingmen) + cultural/educational security.

Re the latter, check out California public school test scores for each ethnic group here for any school district you like. Invariably you will see 70-90% of Asian schoolchildren scoring at the level of "Proficient" or "Advanced Proficiency," 40-60% of non-Hispanic Whites at those levels, and 15-30% of Hispanics. Again, the issue here is Mexico's export of its desperately poor, illiterate, and education-phobic campesinos to El Norte-- social dumping, in the literal sense.

Thank god we have bread and circuses paid for by cheap consumer credit. Otherwise, the poor benighted masses might actually wake up and realize the utter uselessness of this nation's political class and its bogus, contrived, irrelevant kulturkampf.