http://www.weeklystandard.com/Content/Public/Articles/000/000/002/820yqhap.asp
Democrats Go Off the Cliff
From the June 30, 2003 issue: Powerlessness corrupts.
by David Brooks
06/30/2003, Volume 008, Issue 41
ACROSS THE COUNTRY Republicans and conservatives are asking each other the
same basic question: Has the other side gone crazy? Have the Democrats
totally flipped their lids? Because every day some Democrat seems to make a
manic or totally over-the-top statement about George Bush, the Republican
party, and the state of the nation today.
"This republic is at its greatest danger in its history because of this
administration," says Democratic senator Robert Byrd.
"I think this is deliberate, intentional destruction of the United States of
America," says liberal commentator Bill Moyers.
George Bush's economic policy is the "most radical and dangerous economic
theory to hit our shores since socialism," says Senator John Edwards.
"The Most Dangerous President Ever" is the title of an essay in the American
Prospect by Harold Meyerson, in which it is argued that the president Bush
most closely resembles is Jefferson Davis.
Tom Daschle condemns the "dictatorial approach" of this administration. John
Kerry says Bush "deliberately misled" America into the Iraq war. Asked what
Democrats can do about the Republicans, Janet Reno recalls her visit to the
Dachau concentration camp, and points out that the Holocaust happened
because many Germans just stood by. "And don't you just stand by," she
exhorts her Democratic audience.
When conservatives look at the newspapers, they see liberal columnists who
pick out every tiny piece of evidence or pseudo-evidence of Republican
vileness, and then dwell on it and obsess over it until they have lost all
perspective and succumbed to fevers of incoherent rage. They see Democratic
primary voters who are so filled with hatred at George Bush and John
Ashcroft and ***** Cheney that they are pulling their party far from the
mainstream of American life. They see candidates who, instead of trying to
quell the self-destructive fury, are playing to it. "I am furious at [Bush]
and I am furious at the Republicans," says ***** Gephardt, trying to sound
like John Kerry who is trying to sound like Howard Dean.
It's mystifying. Fury rarely wins elections. Rage rarely appeals to suburban
moderates. And there is a mountain of evidence that the Democrats are now
racing away from swing voters, who do not hate George Bush, and who, despite
their qualms about the economy and certain policies, do not feel that the
republic is being raped by vile and illegitimate marauders. The Democrats,
indeed, look like they're turning into a domestic version of the
Palestinians--a group so enraged at their perceived oppressors, and so
caught up in their own victimization, that they behave in ways that are
patently not in their self-interest, and that are almost guaranteed to
perpetuate their suffering.
WHEN YOU TALK to Democratic strategists, you find they do have
rationalizations for the current aggressive thrust. In 2003, it's necessary
to soften Bush up with harsh attacks, some say. In 2004, we'll put on a
happier face. Others argue that Democrats tried to appeal to moderate voters
in 2002 and it didn't work. The key to victory in 2004 is riling up the
liberal base. Still others say that with all the advantages Bush
has--incumbency, victory in Iraq, the huge fundraising lead--Democrats
simply have to roll the dice and behave radically.
But all of these explanations have a post-facto ring. Democratic strategists
are trying to put a rational gloss on what is a visceral, unplanned, and
emotional state of mind. Democrats may or may not be behaving intelligently,
but they are behaving sincerely. Their statements are not the product of
some ***** Morris-style strategic plan. This stuff wasn't focus-grouped. The
Democrats are letting their inner selves out for a romp.
And if you probe into the Democratic mind at the current moment, you sense
that the rage, the passion, the fighting spirit are all fueled not only by
opposition to Bush policies, but also by powerlessness.
Republicans have controlled the White House before, but up until now
Democrats still had some alternative power center. Reagan had the
presidency, but Democrats had the House and, part of the time, the Senate.
Bush the elder faced a Democratic Congress. But now Democrats have nothing.
Even the Supreme Court helped Republicans steal the last election, many
Democrats feel. Republicans--to borrow political scientist Samuel Lubell's
trope--have become the Sun party and Democrats have been reduced to being
the Moon party. Many Democrats feel that George Bush is just running loose,
transforming the national landscape and ruining the nation, and there is
nothing they can do to stop him.
Wherever Democrats look, they sense their powerlessness. Even when they look
to the media, they feel that conservatives have the upper hand.
Conservatives think this is ludicrous. We may have Rush and Fox,
conservatives say, but you have ABC, NBC, CBS, the New York Times. But
liberals are sincere. They despair that a consortium of conservative think
tanks, talk radio hosts, and Fox News--Hillary's vast right-wing
conspiracy--has cohered to form a dazzlingly efficient ideology delivery
system that swamps liberal efforts to get their ideas out.
When they look to the culture at large, many Democrats feel that the climate
is so hostile to them they can't even speak up. During the war in Iraq,
liberals claimed that millions of Americans were opposed to war, but were
afraid to voice their opinions, lest the Cossacks come charging through
their door. The actor Tim Robbins declared, "Every day, the airwaves are
filled with warnings, veiled and unveiled threats, spewed invective and
hatred directed at any voice of dissent. And the public, like so many
relatives and friends that I saw this weekend, sit in mute opposition and
fear." Again, conservatives regard this as ludicrous. Stand up and oppose
the war, conservatives observe, and you'll probably win an Oscar, a National
Magazine Award, and tenure at four dozen prestigious universities. But the
liberals who made these complaints were sincerely expressing the way they
perceive the world.
And when they look at Washington, they see a cohesive corporate juggernaut,
effortlessly pushing its agenda and rolling over Democratic opposition.
Again, this is not how Republicans perceive reality. Republicans admire
President Bush a great deal, but most feel that, at least on domestic
policy, the conservative agenda has been thwarted as much as it has been
advanced. Bush passed two tax cuts, but on education he abandoned school
choice and adopted a bill largely written by Ted Kennedy. On Medicare, the
administration has abandoned real reform and embraced a bill also endorsed
by Kennedy. On campaign finance, the president signed a bill promoted by his
opponents. The faith-based initiatives are shrinking to near nothingness.
Social Security reform has disappeared from the agenda for the time being.
Domestic spending has increased.
Still, Democrats and liberals see the Bush presidency in maximalist terms.
"President Bush's signature on his big tax cut bill Wednesday marked a
watershed in American politics," wrote E.J. Dionne of the Washington Post.
"The rules of policymaking that have applied since the end of World War II
are now irrelevant." The headline on a recent Michael Kinsley column was
"Capitalism's 'Deal' Falls Apart," arguing that the Bush administration had
revoked the social contract that had up to now shaped American politics.
In short, when many liberals look at national affairs, they see a world in
which their leaders are nice, pure-souled, but defenseless, and they see
Republicans who are organized, devious, and relentless. "It's probably a
weakness that we're not real haters. We don't have a sense that it's a holy
crusade," Democratic strategist Bob Shrum told Adam Clymer of the New York
Times. "They play hardball, we play softball," Gore campaign manager Donna
Brazile added. Once again, Republicans think this picture of reality is
delusional. The Democrats are the party that for 40 years has labeled its
opponents racists, fascists, religious nuts, and monsters who wanted to
starve grannies and orphans. Republicans saw what Democrats did to Robert
Bork, Clarence Thomas, and dozens of others. Yet Democrats are utterly
sincere. Many on the left think they have been losing because their souls
are too elevated.
When they look inward, impotence, weakness, high-mindedness, and geniality
are all they see.
--
"[Liberty] considers religion as the safeguard of morality, and morality as
the best security of law and the surest pledge of the duration of freedom."
--Alexis de Toqueville
.
|
