Peggy Noonan Says “Bush Destroyed The Republican Party”
From The National Review:
Breaking Up Is Hard to Do
By Peggy Noonan
We begin, as one always must now, again, with Bill Clinton. The past week he has traveled South Carolina, leaving discord in his wake. Barack Obama, that “fairytale,” is low, sneaky. “He put out a hit job on me.” The press is cruelly carrying Mr. Obama’s counter-jabs. “You live for it.”
In Dillon, S.C., according to the Associated Press, on Thursday Mr. Clinton “predicted that many voters will be guided mainly by gender and race loyalties” and suggested his wife may lose Saturday’s primary because black voters will side with Mr. Obama. Who is raising race as an issue? Bill Clinton knows. It’s the press, and Mr. Obama. “Shame on you,” Mr. Clinton said to a CNN reporter. The same day the Web site believed to be the backdoor of the Clinton war room unveiled a new name for the senator from Illinois: “Sticky Fingers Obama.”
Bill Clinton, with his trembly, red-faced rage, makes John McCain look young. His divisive and destructive daily comportment—this is a former president of the United States—is a civic embarrassment. It is also an education, and there is something heartening in this.
There are many serious and thoughtful liberals and Democrats who support Mr. Obama and John Edwards, and who are seeing Mr. Clinton in a new way and saying so. Here is William Greider in The Nation, the venerable left-liberal magazine. The Clintons are “high minded” on the surface but “smarmily duplicitous underneath, meanwhile jabbing hard at the groin area. They are a slippery pair and come as a package. The nation is at fair risk of getting them back in the White House for four years.”
That, again, is from one of the premier liberal journals in the United States. It is exactly what conservatives have been saying for a decade. This may mark a certain coming together of the thoughtful on both sides. The Clintons, uniters at last.
Mr. Obama takes the pummeling and preaches the high road. It’s all windup with him, like a great pitcher more comfortable preparing to throw than throwing. Something in him resists aggression. He tends to be indirect in his language, feinting, only suggestive. I used to think he was being careful not to tear the party apart, and endanger his own future.
But the Clintons are tearing the party apart. It will not be the same after this. It will not be the same after its most famous leader, and probable ultimate victor, treated a proud and accomplished black man who is a U.S. senator as if he were nothing, a mere impediment to their plans. And to do it in a way that signals, to his supporters, How dare you have the temerity, the ingratitude, after all we’ve done for you?
Watch for the GOP to attempt swoop in after the November elections and make profit of the wreckage.
* * *
As for the Republicans, their slow civil war continues. The primary race itself is winnowing down and clarifying: It is John McCain versus Mitt Romney, period. At the same time the conservative journalistic world is convulsed by recrimination and attack. They’re throwing each other out of the party. Republicans have become very good at that. David Brooks damns Rush Limbaugh who knocks Bill Kristol who anathematizes whoever is to be anathematized this week. This Web site opposes that magazine.
The rage is due to many things. A world is ending, the old world of conservative meaning, and ascendancy. Loss leads to resentment. (See Clinton, Bill.) Different pundits back different candidates. Some opportunistically discover new virtues in candidates who appear at the moment to be winning. Some feel they cannot be fully frank about causes and effects.
More on that in a moment.
I saw Mr. McCain this Tuesday in New York, at a fund-raiser at which a breathless aide shared, “We just made a million dollars.” What a difference a few wins makes. There were a hundred people outside chanting, “Mac is back!” and perhaps a thousand people inside, crammed into a three-chandelier ballroom at the St. Regis. When I attended a fund-raiser in October there was none of this; perhaps 200 came, and people were directed to crowd around the candidate as if to show he had support. Now you had to fight your way through a three-ring cluster. (When I attended a Giuliani fund-raiser this summer I saw something I wish I’d noted: The audience was big but wasn’t listening. They were all on their BlackBerrys. That should have told me something about his support.)
Mr. McCain is in the middle of a shift. Previous strategy: I’m John McCain and you know me, we’ve traveled through history together. New strategy: I’m the old vet who fought on the front lines of the Reagan-era front, and I am about to take on the mantle of the essentials of conservatism—lower spending, smaller government, strong in the world. He is going to strike the great Reagan gong, not in a way that is new but in a way that is new for him.
In this he is repositioning himself back to where he started 30 years ago: as a Southwestern American conservative veteran of the armed forces. That is, inherently if not showily, anti-establishment. That is, I am the best of the past.
Mr. Romney, on the other hand, is running as I Am Today. I am new and fresh, in fact I’m tomorrow, I know all about the international flow of money and the flatness of the world, I know what China is, I can see you through the turbulence just as I saw Bain to success.
It will all come down to: Whom do Republicans believe? Mr. Romney in spite of his past and now-disavowed liberal positions? Or Mr. McCain in spite of his forays, the past 10 years, into a kind of establishment mindset that has suggested that The Establishment Knows Best?
Do conservatives take inspiration from Mr. Romney’s newness? Or do they take comfort and security from Mr. McCain’s rugged ability to endure, and to remind?
It is along those lines the big decision will be made.
* * *
On the pundit civil wars, Rush Limbaugh declared on the radio this week, “I’m here to tell you, if either of these two guys [Mr. McCain or Mike Huckabee] get the nomination, it’s going to destroy the Republican Party. It’s going to change it forever, be the end of it!”
This is absurd. George W. Bush destroyed the Republican Party, by which I mean he sundered it, broke its constituent pieces apart and set them against each other. He did this on spending, the size of government, war, the ability to prosecute war, immigration and other issues.
Were there other causes? Yes, of course. But there was an immediate and essential cause.
And this needs saying, because if you don’t know what broke the elephant you can’t put it together again. The party cannot re-find itself if it can’t trace back the moment at which it became lost. It cannot heal an illness whose origin is kept obscure.
I believe that some of the ferocity of the pundit wars is due to a certain amount of self-censorship. It’s not in human nature to enjoy self-censorship. The truth will out, like steam from a kettle. It hurts to say something you supported didn’t work. I would know. But I would say of these men (why, in the continuing age of Bill Clinton, does the emoting come from the men?) who are fighting one another as they resist naming the cause for the fight: Sack up, get serious, define. That’s the way to help.
Be respectful of others and their opinions. Inflammatory remarks and inane leftist drivel will be deleted. It ain’t about free speech, remember you’re in a private domain. My website, my prerogative.
If you can't handle using your real email address, don't bother posting a comment.
I agree with Ms. Noonan - The spending and the amnesty and the thumbing of the nose to the conservatives . . . I am sorry - President Bush did this and now we have McCain. I know there are a lot of folks here who support President Bush no matter what and I respect him - BUT THE BORDER IS PART OF THE WAR ON TERROR and for Bush to play games with the border is not protecting this country.
January 25th, 2008 at 5:28 pmAnd that is how I feel . . .
January 25th, 2008 at 5:28 pmThank you for your service Mr. President. The job always looks easier from the outside.
January 25th, 2008 at 6:22 pm
January 25th, 2008 at 6:31 pm@Jim & Irish Gal:
Please don’t misunderstand me. The title gets the click.
This article is Peggy Noonan’s article. Drudge’s headline.
I have the utmost respect for George W Bush. Hell, I like him. I respect the office of the president, anyone who has served in th emilitary understands that concept, and I respected the office even when Clinton was in.
I believe Bush has always operated with America’s best interest at heart. I believe he would make a better president than any of the candidates, Republican or Democrat that are currently running, and if he were in this current race he would get my vote.
I would never even want to President, its a tough job.
January 25th, 2008 at 6:42 pmWhat began destroying the GOP was having Bush win the presidency via the SC.
It made the Libtards soooo fucking angry and nasty…and the GOP didn’t stand up together and ram it right back down their throats. Then, we let the media play games for 8 years, further spreading the hate of the extreme left.
We all share some of the blame for letting these poisonous cocksuckers not rile us up enough to revolt against them. It may take them winning the White House (and getting thoroughly ass-fucked afterwards) before the GOP will get organized to say “ENOUGH”.
If it sounds like we are all in for a real bumpy ride and that right quick, I’m here to tell you that the shit is about to hit the fan.
January 25th, 2008 at 7:09 pmBash thats cool but I never really aimed any criticism at you, sorta through you … if you catch my drift
Brother
January 25th, 2008 at 7:24 pmI agree with Noonan’s article. He did. I agreed with about as many of his policies as I did Clinton’s, truth be told. He’s a good guy and the job is tough. But some of his decisions, I will never figure out–where he got his advice. For instance, this “economic stimulus package” that he agreed to. It has stupid refunds that have been proven not to work. It doesn’t have tax cuts, it should have made the Bush tax cuts permanent. That’s what is creating the turmoil in the markets, mostly, the uncertainty or certainty that taxes are going up and investment activity will go down. He’s a lame duck, he had nothing to lose and everything to gain to help out the GOP contenders by putting in a package that would really do the right thing economically. Stupid and weak. He’s got some “yes men” dumb advisors. And really, they have proven they don’t give a dam about the GOP with this latest “bipartisan” polical cover they put in place.
January 25th, 2008 at 7:32 pmFurther explanation: Clinton ended welfare, put in Nafta, lowered capital gains tax from around 28% to 20%, got rid of deficit, ended Bosnia civil war incident with no loss of American life. He did alot of things I totally disagreed with, too–I don’t need to list them here–all conservatives will know what they are. But Bush put in largest new entitlement program since Nixon (prescription drug), increased gov’t spending and the size of gov’t exponentially, earmarks were incredibly high, started a war that has gone on now for 5 years and history has still not quite adjudicated whether it was “just,” let the dollar fall to its lowest level since 1977 or so, oil prices historically high (where’s the Iraqi oil dividend?). OK, as a conservative, I don’t need to list the good things: liberated 50 million people, got Libya to renounce WMD’s, no new domestic terror since 9/11, raging economy for at least 5 years, tax cuts of 2003 (to expire in 2010), etc.
January 25th, 2008 at 7:40 pm“What began destroying the GOP was having Bush win the presidency via the SC. ”
what idiocy is this, One shot, do you really believe that the supreme court handed Bush the Presidency that he didn’t deserve? Do you know anything about the electoral college? Bush won because he won the election, period. All the supreme court did was tell the ignorants to stop asking for recount after recount. They said follow the law. The outcome wasn’t going to change. What would have been catastrophically wrong would have been if they hadn’t followed the law and gave the false impression that Gore hadn’t lost, period. The supreme court did not give the Presidency to Bush, the American people did.
January 25th, 2008 at 7:51 pmPres. Geo. W Bush will be known as a man who confronted our enemies will a iron fist! He beat the Afgan Taliban, Sadam, Disarmed Kadafy & N Korea. and captured or killed many thousands of Al Qeada scum. Pres. Bush showed our enemies that when you mess with the bull you get the horn. We only hear of our losses from the MSN.We never get an enemy death toll because it wouldn’t advance or fit the narative of defeat! He presided over one of the best economies that I can recall. He lowered taxes more than Reagan. He has stood resolute in the face of harsh critics and second guessers. I am thankful that we have a Pres. with such courage and conviction.
January 25th, 2008 at 7:58 pmto tedders:
I completely agree. It’s stupid assertions like Bush being “handed” the presidency in 2000 that propagate things like that. Even if that -were- the case, which it’s not, he won in 2004. Thank God.
And, I say I have to disagree with Peggy Noonan about the fall of the GOP being Bush’s fault. I think that it’s easy to point from the peanut gallery. I know, because I’m guilty of it. Ronald Reagan (God rest him) is probably spinning in his grave at the egregious spending and pork-barrel BS in our legislature.
Thing is, I think it’s the media telling a bunch of lemmings what to think, and that’s why we’re so divisive now. GWB’s not perfect, but I see him as trying to work with the legislature to get things done (surge vs. troop withdrawl, etc.) things aren’t going to go 100& for him, but when we have assclowns like Dan Rather making literal news and jerks like the Westboro Baptist Church giving Christian conservatives a bad name, what do you expect? In the 24 hour news cycle, we’re slammed with so much that people don’t know what to think. No wonder the political races have gotten progressively worse over time.
Bush’s fault? No more than others’, I think.
January 25th, 2008 at 8:11 pmTedders…I believe that you need to re-read what I wrote. If you think that I am on the wrong side, then you truly are as dumb as a fucking post.
Bush winning in that manner is what set the far lefties on fire. That we did not engage that fire did not help the GOP.
January 25th, 2008 at 8:17 pmOne shot, what’s a fucking post?
January 25th, 2008 at 8:34 pm“increased gov’t spending and the size of gov’t exponentially, earmarks were incredibly high..”
Er, no…that would be your Congress’ doing although I will concede Bush could have vetoed the bills but the arrogant sob’s would have come back with even more.
“…started a war that has gone on now for 5 years…”
Er, no…that would be your Islamofascists along with one psychotic dictator that just couldn’t bring his ego to comply with the Gulf War 1 cease fire that started the war.
“…and history has still not quite adjudicated whether it was “just…”
So why don’t we save that discussion for when “history” has made a decision.
I could go on but frankly I don’t devote much time to fiction and I prefer payment up front for BDS therapy.
January 25th, 2008 at 9:40 pm@LMcG (Texas Mom)
I have to agree. To send troops half way around the world and at the same time leave our flank completely exposed does not fly.
Bush has done a lot of good things and I agree with many of his policies but as far as I’m concerned, the border issue runs a close second to the war on terrorism (in fact it is an integral part of that war) and there isn’t nearly enough being done on that front.
January 25th, 2008 at 11:48 pmMaybe he’s figuring that we’ll be bringing people back from Iraq and they will be positioned on the border. I don’t know why it seems he’s not interested in the border. But, if I could I’d vote for him a third time.
January 26th, 2008 at 12:01 amPeggy,
January 26th, 2008 at 12:08 amYou’ve said what I’ve been thinking for the past three years. The day after I voted for Mr. Bush, for the second time, I felt like I was suckered again. For every one thing he does that I agree with, he does another that I don’t. Was this man ulitmately our fault? Did we expect too much? Were we asking for more than he could deliver? After 911, I was so proud. Proud to be an American and proud that I had voted for Mr. Bush. Now, it’s like the Clinton days. When I see him on the tv, I just turn the channel. I don’t like McCain, Huckabee or Romney. The only repbulican canidate I respected was Duncan Hunter and he never had a chance. I don’t know what to do. I think of how many thousands of men and women died for this country and my right to vote. Not to vote is almost not an option BUT my party has left me. I am 40 years old and I honestly don’t know what to do. I am truly sadden and I could almost cry for my country.
Clinton agreed to reform welfare at the end of a shotgun pointed at him by a Republican Congress. It wasn’t his choice. As for his ability to balance the national budget, he did, at the expense of slashing our military defense, that is why we had to actually make bombs before bombing Afgh. in 2001. You can’t even begin to compare Bush and Clinton. Clinton had it so easy, he found time to get blow jobs in the Oral Office. No, Bush is not perfect, but he leads from his heart, not polls, and unfortunately, that is not necessarily the best way to lead. Head would be good. All in all, the country is in pretty damn good shape, despite the medias dying desire to continually scream, “THE SKY IS FALLING”. Quite frankly, as long as people are paying $5.00 for a damn cup of coffee, and spending $20,000 to $30,000 (or more) for a piece of metal that depreciates while it rolls down the highway, my heart pumps pigion piss for them. Gee, if the dollar falls, just maybe some of them manufacturing jobs will come back to the U.S.
January 26th, 2008 at 6:25 am*hugs* Irishgal
“my heart pumps pigeon piss for them” Seriously, you are my sarcasm hero for today!
On the other hand, you’re also completely right … The Republican Revolution that Gingrich carried on throughout the 90s is pretty much responsible for the crap that the Clintons are taking credit for now…
Think about it on the opposite. Reagan had just him in his little corner, with a democrat congress, and voila, he’s the man. Bush is no Reagan, but for the love, he’s kept us focused on this war on terror and hasn’t wavered. When I think of that man (whom my twin knows personally) I imagine him saying “Not on my watch, not again.” and I know he’s the best man we could have for the job, all things considered.
I do kind of wish I could vote for him again, seeing as I’m too young to run myself.
January 26th, 2008 at 7:05 amPiggy Noonan is a Bush-hating bitch!
January 26th, 2008 at 10:06 amShe’s not worthy to lick his shoes clean.
Not only do I think that President Bush didn’t “destroy” the GOP, I think it’s stronger than it’s been since President Reagan.
If we can get this election race down to Romney and Rudy, we’ll be looking good for a major win in November.
What Ms. Noonan and the mass media is propagating to the masses is absurd. But people buy into this folly hook, line and sinker. If I discuss politics with friends all I hear is how ‘Bush fucked up this country’ and how they are going vote for a democrat next time.
Even when I bring up the fact that there are hundreds of Congressman and Senators that carry far more power, and are more to blame than the President,those words go in one ear and out the other.
Not to say Bush has done a absolute stellar job of what he has done….but he is only ONE MAN. It took more than Bush to make the mess we have.
The failure to acknowledge that, show you how lazy, self-interested and dis-associated we have become.
January 26th, 2008 at 10:54 amClinton did the things repub’s like when forced by a GOP congress. But they were still done during his admin, so he gets to claim credit. Just like Bush did the ethanol subsidies and earmarks and prescription drugs and amnesty bill with the congressional dems, and so he gets to “claim credit.” He allowed the GOP congress, before 2006, to do things GOP congresses shouldn’t do. He didn’t pull out his veto pen, until too late. The SCt did not “hand” Bush the election in 2000. Even the MSM media syndicate that did a study of the FLorida vote said Bush would have won, by any measure/recount. So there. It was a dirty tactic of the dems to pull the Florida shenanigan–they were geared up before the election. They knew it would be close. They tried to get the military ballots tossed because they knew they would fall Bush’s way. They only wanted certain Dem county ballots “re-Counted.” Yeah, right. Bush is a decent man, but he’s made some bad decisions. Clinton was an indecent man, and he’s made bad decisions. Oh, and by the way–yeah, Sadaam had it coming. But history will judge whether the price paid was worth it. No need to rehash the management of the war from after the initial capture of Bagdad to the surge. The buck stops at the Pres.’s desk.
January 26th, 2008 at 12:35 pmBush Admin idiots have also supported gun restrictionists in the Sup. Ct. against the DC Circuit Court decision that struck down the DC restrictive gun law. So, they AREN’T defending the 2nd Amendment. Can you believe this from a GOP Administration? This month Bush Admin also came out with a veiled reference to pre-67 borders for Israel, and reparations for Pali’s. So…there’s no reason to take these stupid positions, especially when you are a lame duck.
January 26th, 2008 at 3:09 pmWhat does the article have to do Bush Destroyed the Republican Party? Did I miss something? Did I fall asleep while reading about the Clintons? In my honest opinion the Republican party self-destructed when they let Bill Clinton off the hook at impeachment and then abandonded Trent Lott over the Thurmond tribute. They continually throw each other under the bus. Livingston, Gingrich,Hassert,….need I go on. They appear very disorganized and not on the same page. The Democrats are more united and it has shown over the past few years.
January 26th, 2008 at 4:16 pmCome on, Peggy. Don’t be so melodramatic, and pessimistic, and critical. When you do those things, YOU help destroy the Republican Party.
Everything will be fine.
January 29th, 2008 at 8:16 am