In his recent article in Slate, historian David Greenberg shows a fundamental failure to understand the current situation in the Republican Party, taking the common viewpoint of many on the left that defectors like Arlen Specter have been driven from the Republican Party because of an intolerance of liberalism in the GOP. That interpretation may appeal to Democrats who want to portray Republicans as intolerant and dominated by the religious right, or who are still afflicted with Bush Derangement Syndrome, but it is a simplistic dismissal of Specter's own failures which led to his loss of support within the party and displays a profound ignorance of where the GOP is now and where it is going.
Greenberg does not understand the changes which are going on inside the Republican Party that made Specter increasingly incompatible, nor does he understand that hostility to Specter had very little to do with his rather flaccid liberalism and everything to do with his failure to adhere to any of the values which any of the still-diverse constituencies within the GOP believe in. What has turned other Republicans against Specter, and led to support for a primary challenge against him, is not his support for the arts or other "liberal" causes. It is his unwillingness to stand firm on fundamental Republican principles of smaller government and protection of individual liberty.
The GOP can be tolerant of someone who is somewhat socially liberal if they remain fiscally responsible. The problem with Specter is that while he was forgivably liberal on some social issues, he was unforgivably unreliable on issues of spending and responsible government. You can be a Republican and be a little bit socially liberal, and sadly you can be a Republican and get away with a bit of excess spending, but in the post-Bush environment you absolutely cannot remain a Republican and do both.
Critics on the left, like Greenberg, are misled by their outsider's view of the situation in the GOP. They keep on attacking the GOP as if it was the party of George W. Bush, but it hasn't been his party in a long time - if it ever was. They want to transfer blame for all of Bush's bad policies to the GOP as it now exists, choosing not to understand that most of the party only went along with him reluctantly in the first place and that the Bush’s failures and the Democrat win in 2008 have empowered elements within the party which have a very different agenda.
Article comments
— go to most recent comments1 - Baronius
Spot-on analysis, Dave. The funny thing about Specter is that, in an era of nasty partisanship, he found a way to be nasty without being partisan.
2 - zingzing
that's right, guys! you're WINNING!
3 - roger nowosielski
What do you expect from natural-born losers?
Sorry, Dave. You're not included.
At least Dave has a positive spin on this. But Baronius? If you disagree with his political views, you're nasty.
You'd better say ten Hail-Marys and hope for the best.
God bless you, my son.
4 - pablo
yep just what the dems need ole single bullet theory Specter. I know that went over many of your heads. :)
The new design and interface SUX on blogcritics.
5 - Arch Conservative
"At least Dave has a positive spin on this. But Baronius? If you disagree with his political views, you're nasty. "
Maybe Baronius was referring to Sphincter penchant for referring to his constituents as racists rednecks.
The ONLY reason Sphincter switched parties is because he had no shot in hell of getting re-elected in the GOP in 2010. So it was either go over to the dark side or call it a career. He should have took McCain, Snowe and Collins with him.
6 - Baronius
Thanks, Arch. I remember that Specter was hated in the GOP for attacking Robert Bork, so he tried to make up for it (pre-election) by attacking Anita Hill. Santorum backed Specter in a tight primary race, but Specter turned around and failed to support Santorum in the next general election. The only thing he's good at is crossing people.
7 - zingzing
but santorum was... well, santorum. and you know what that means now.
8 - Arch Conservative
Speaking of the Supreme Court......Obama voted against both Alito and Roberts two very respected credentialed nominees and actually tried to filibuster Alito.
But I garentee you that when the GOP expresses opposition to whatever character that Obama pulls from some slimy corner who makes Hugo Chavez look like Pat Buchannan in the harsh light of day to replace Souter, King Barry and his comrades will be up in arms and whining like the puerile little hypocrites they are.
Oh and I have 1000 bucks that says when Chief Justice Roberts is administering the oath to whatever Republican ends our "long national nightmare" in 2013, he doesn't flub it.
I hope it's Paul Ryan.
PS: the new format sucks
9 - RJ
Arlen Specter is disloyal, self-interested scum. He's a hack career politician. I think we can all agree on that.
But let's get real. The GOP will be in the wilderness for at least the next 3+ years. 2010 isn't shaping up to be another 1994, unless the economy is still in free-fall (unlikely) or there is some foreign policy catastrophe or horrific terrorist attack (possible, but still not probable).
The GOP is trying to find itself right now. Will it become the party of religious social conservatives? Big-government "compassionate" conservatives? Socially-moderate small-government libertarians? Anti-government conspiracy-mongers?
I don't know. No one does. The various GOP primary elections in 2010 will tell us a lot, though.
But, right now, we do know one thing: The Left is in complete control of the US government for the first time since President BJ Clinton's first two years. And that was a total failure. But Team 0bama seems to be much smarter than the Clintonistas, and the mass media is much more compliant.
10 - RJ
PS - The new format sucks.
;-)
11 - Dave Nalle
RJ, I think you may underestimate how much motivation the damage Obama is doing will provide for the GOP to reinvent itself. People can't remain dupes forever, and when threatened they will eventuallyw ark up and strike back.
Dave
12 - RJ
As for the Supreme Court, 0bama will probably nominate a homosexual Muslim black woman who is an illegal immigrant - and dare the GOP to say anything bad about her.
It goes without saying that the nominee will be a left-wing radical. But identity politics in the Democrat Party means almost as much as ideology.
13 - RJ
Dave,
The damage 0bama is doing is primarily going to be felt by the next couple of generations. They can't vote in 2010, since they aren't born yet. (And some of them won't ever be born, now that 0bama is making USSC appointments.)
The average drone who has no clue about economics [read: probably 25 to 50 percent of the electorate] thinks it's just great that taxes will rise on "evil rich" people, and that CEOs are being demonized and destroyed. They will praise The One for their 13 extra dollars a week, and vote accordingly.
I think you overestimate the intelligence of the average voter. Watch this. But please grab a handkerchief and unload all firearms first. (You may not know whether to break down and cry or just end it all after viewing.)
14 - Clavos
Interesting, but depressing, video, RJ.
I particularly enjoyed the part near the end when some of those dumb shits claimed they got their information from sources like PBS and the NYT.
15 - Bliffle
Dave unlimbers the old "that was then, this is now" argument to accomodate both frugality and the Bush Binge era:
"The GOP can be tolerant of someone who is somewhat socially liberal if they remain fiscally responsible. The problem with Specter is that while he was forgivably liberal on some social issues, he was unforgivably unreliable on issues of spending and responsible government. You can be a Republican and be a little bit socially liberal, and sadly you can be a Republican and get away with a bit of excess spending, but in the post-Bush environment you absolutely cannot remain a Republican and do both."
(BTW, the new format is terrible.)
16 - Baronius
RJ, I love that video.
17 - Ruvy
Gee, Dave, in looking at the recent contributors to this department, I notice that while I've contributed three articles in the last week or so, my name is not listed at all. I have nothing against the fine young lady, but I notice that Meg Toigo is listed. How many articles did she contribute since 23 April?
Trying to shut out the voice from Samaria, Dave? This stinks from the specter of British duplicity.
And yes, it does stink.
18 - Clavos
Here's food for thought for Republicans to consider:
1. Specter is an opportunist.
2. Opportunists, lacking loyalty or principles, invariably gravitate toward the team they see as winning.
3. Democrats are, for the time being at least, the winning team.
19 - zingzing
dave: "RJ, I think you may underestimate how much motivation the damage Obama is doing will provide for the GOP to reinvent itself. People can't remain dupes forever, and when threatened they will eventuallyw ark up and strike back."
yeah, that's what we just did. time to go to sleep for 8 years, dave, until your man comes in to fuck shit up again. now what's this damage he's doing? seriously. and don't say "communism," because that's bullshit and you know it.
rj: "The damage 0bama is doing is primarily going to be felt by the next couple of generations."
what exactly would that be, rj?
clavos: "I particularly enjoyed the part near the end when some of those dumb shits claimed they got their information from sources like PBS and the NYT."
my god. how many videos have you seen just like that? do you think an even more funny video could be made about mccain voters? damn straight it could. have you ever heard of "editing?" it's not hard to make people look stupid. watch this!
clavos: "I particularly enjoyed the NYT."
now you're a liberal! through the power of editing.
baronius: "RJ, I love that video."
natch.
you republicans go rub one off on each other. you're pretty damn smug for people who couldn't do anything while in power and are now powerless to get anything done at all. plus, you're completely falling apart and probably have no chance of coming back in 4 years. you've been voted out of office and your political philosophy is dying. how does it feel?
20 - Arch Conservative
"my god. how many videos have you seen just like that? do you think an even more funny video could be made about mccain voters? damn straight it could. have you ever heard of "editing?" it's not hard to make people look stupid. watch this!"
The only editing done was going from person to person. There was no editing needed to make these people look stupid. The true question to ascretain just how dumb the average Obama voter is would be how many people the person filming spoke to that gave intelligent answers that were left out. If he only talked to twelve and he got these idiots right off that bat then that does not speak well of Obama's supporters.
To be fair I agree with you zing that with a little effort a filmmaker could just as eaisly find twelve idiots who voted for McCain. You'd probably get responses like "I don't like that Barack Obama....no sir.no how. no am I gonna vote for an A-rab for president," or "John McCain wants to secure the borders and that's why I'm voting for him."
But statistically speaking more people voted for Obama so the likelihood there's the likelihood that more idiots voted for him making him the idiot's choice for president. Plus......"hope and change," "yes we can,".....c'mon....let's not exhaust all our neurons at once trying to wrap our minds around King Barry's solutions to the most pressing geopolitical issues of the day huh folks.....
I didn't vote for McCain or King Barry so you lemmings can all kiss my ass. I voted for Chuck Baldwin
Oh and don't be so fucking uppity zing. Blood WILL flow in the streets before the one world government leftist fucks are allowed to take over.
21 - zingzing
archie: "Oh and don't be so fucking uppity zing. Blood WILL flow in the streets before the one world government leftist fucks are allowed to take over."
um, i thought that (according to you) we/they already have taken over...
22 - Irene Wagner
Martha and the Vandella's right?
23 - roger nowosielski
I know you're apt to speak in code and I did look it up in the Wiki. I'm still in the dark.
24 - roger nowosielski
Sorry. I didn't realize it was another thread. Our geniuses.
25 - Irene Wagner
"There'll be wingnuts prayin' and liberals sprayin' blood flow'n in the streets..."