scratch-mark

Perfect Fools

Radley Balko is right, of course:

The Miers nomination stands in
direct contrast to everything conservatives are supposed to believe in.
Merit, opposition to identity politics, accountability in government.
The list goes on.

The right is now facing the
harsh reality that President Bush never was the conservative they
believed him to be. He’s a fightless opportunist. Not even a
pragmatist. An opportunist.

President Bush is a political
coward. He shirks from fight, as evidenced by his record-setting streak
of refusing to use his veto, and his capitulation on big, legacy-making
issues like the tax code and Social Security reform, and his refusal to
take a stand even on the more mundane, everyday issues like the federal
budget and regulatory policy.

And so is Chris Roach, whom Radley referenced:

Even if […]
she would fulfill my every dream on the bench, she still must be voted
down. The price of her confirmation is the systematic discrediting of
everything we’ve believed in and fought for in this area.

We’ve opposed identity politics and victimology.  Now we are told by our leaders that opposition to her is “sexist”

We’ve stood for standards.  Now we are told that questioning her credentials is elitist.

We’ve pilloried the Democrats for using the religion of a nominee as
a proxy for how they will behave on the bench. Now we are told to trust
her, because she’s an evangelical Christian and therefore would be good
on the bench.

We’ve maintained that judging is about the rule of law, not about
personal beliefs and desired outcome. Now we are told to trust her,
because she is pro-life and will reach our desired outcome.

We tried to end the judicial filibuster, arguing that a simple
majority vote wouldn’t make the Senate a rubber stamp for the
President, because we would use our independent judgment in weighing
the credentials and abilities of the candidate. Now we should support
this nominee because the President does.

But the think that almost no one seems to get is that all of this, down to the very last miserable bit of it is completely unsurprising and perfectly in keeping with the logic of politics. Bush is only doing what politicians do, which is to strike the political "balances" (i.e., contradictions) in such a way as to get and keep himself, his friends, his colleagues, and his party: in power. That is all there is to it.

The more interesting tragedy is how otherwise good and honest people sacrifice so much of their lives and hearts in the virtual worship of politics as their ultimate savior. What perfect fools.

Richard Nikoley

I'm Richard Nikoley. Free The Animal began in 2003 and as of 2021, contains 5,000 posts. I blog what I wish...from health, diet, and food to travel and lifestyle; to politics, social antagonism, expat-living location and time independent—while you sleep—income. I celebrate the audacity and hubris to live by your own exclusive authority and take your own chances. Read More

6 Comments

  1. mojotek on October 18, 2005 at 10:56

    "Bush is only doing what politicians do, which is to strike the political "balances" (i.e., contradictions) in such a way as to get and keep himself, his friends, his colleagues, and his party: in power. That is all there is to it."

    I couldn't agree with you more. The single mechanism that keeps a group in power is the exact same mechanism that destroys the effectiveness of the whole political process.

    Great post.

  2. OTTMANN on October 19, 2005 at 14:45

    Good post. Bush seems to stay centered by using his brain and instincts rather than his power (energy) to fight those whirling all about in hysterics. But is finding the balance to every problem, leadership or appeasement, and what will it cost us in the long run?

  3. Rich on October 20, 2005 at 10:28

    Not me. My single support for Bush, whom I have never voted for (nor anyone else, for that matter), has been the drive to kill as many islamic terrorist radicals as possible, as soon as possible.

    I hold my nose, but sometimes, the stench is just too much and I have to pop off.

    Maybe if he could get busy filling a few hundred thousand body bags with practitioners of the "religion of peace," I could hold my nose a little longer.

  4. paul on October 20, 2005 at 06:41

    I don't understand the following:
    "The right is now facing the harsh reality that President Bush never was the conservative they believed him to be. He's a fightless opportunist. Not even a pragmatist. An opportunist."

    Bush has not governed as a Conservative for the past four years(sprawling government and mounting debt), and his whole governing strategy has reeked of opportunism. Could it be that with Bush's support plunging, you are just piling on?

  5. Jeff on October 20, 2005 at 12:14

    I must agree, to an extent. Bush has become more big government than I care for. Is it an attempt to hijack the center? I don't know, but he's losing many conservatives.

    As for Miers, I'd only care about her personal philosophy if she was running for a the presidency or a position in the legislative branch. What matters is whether she will support the Constitution. Period.

  6. Heathen Dan on October 21, 2005 at 03:05

    "The right is now facing the harsh reality that President Bush never was the conservative they believed him to be. He's a fightless opportunist. Not even a pragmatist. An opportunist."

    Well, Bush is a conservative, but not of old-conservatism (Merit, opposition to identity politics, accountability in government…). Rather he's a "christian coalition"-type conservative, and his Miers nomination is admittedly religiously motivated and nothing more. The christian right has pretty much bastardized what was once a worthy political position.

Leave a Comment

You must be logged in to post a comment.

YouTube1k
YouTube
Pinterest118k
Pinterest
fb-share-icon
40
45
Follow by Email8k
RSS780