Although the headlines regularly trumpet President Bush's hideous approval rating (recently at just 36%), what they're not telling you is that Congress is even worse: as low as 19%. Why is this? Well, quite simply, neither party has been doing what they promised.
Kimberley Strassel writes in the Wall Street Journal about the Democrats' sinking ship. She writes about how the Democrats took control of Congress by capitalizing on Republican failures, but that they have been almost totally unable to accomplish anything themselves. They tried to make their anti-war base happy by forcing a pull-out of troops from Iraq but ultimately failed, giving Bush the funding he needed without any timelines. They tried to make their union base happy by removing secret ballots and ultimately failed (while in the process forcing Democrats to go on the record in favor of something that 90% of Americans don't want). They've tried their hand at tax increases and energy independence and have failed at both. The only thing they've truly accomplished is in bogging down the government and White House with over 600 hearings in the first 100 days of the term (that works out to one hearing every 1.5 hours), bashing everything about the Bush administration. Don't forget, of course, about the strong-arming Democrat leadership on the amnesty bill, which also failed. As Strassel says, these unsuccessful subpoenas and hearings have taken precious time, and their failures have allowed Republicans to correctly point out that "of the 17 minor bills signed into law, 10 focused on naming post offices and courthouses." Her summary is that the lesson of the past six months is that Americans want a mature party that leads, not angry liberals who investigate. I would agree with her.
On the other side of the aisle, the Republican party is in danger of fracturing, and has been for some time. It became clear in 2006, when Democrats took control of both the House and Senate on a campaign that amounted to little more than "we-hate-Bush" and "get-out-of-Iraq". Without a compelling reason to vote for Democrats, then, it came down to an even more compelling reason not to vote for Republicans. The Republican (and largely conservative) base wants less spending, less government control, and stronger defense. The Republican leadership since 2000 has become spend-happy (President Bush didn't veto a single spending bill until recently) and the federal government was expanded time after time. Bush has been solid on defense and the War on Terror, but the support from his party is eroding along with that of the American people in general, especially after six years of incessant smearing by the liberal leadership and the mainstream media. The reality is that the Republicans in charge have become very similar to Democrats on many of their policies, and let's face it - the Democrats are much better at sounding good. Without a clear policy difference, then, who wouldn't rather have someone who sounds good? That's why the Democrats made great gains in 2006.
The amnesty debacle serves as a vivid reminder of how some Republicans are perilously close to 'out-liberaling' liberals, supporting blatant amnesty and yet another empty promise of enforcement. By doing this, they have generated more anger and frustration from their base than (if several major conservative commentators are to be believed) any other time in decades. If the Republicans as a party don't get their act together fast, the 2008 elections will make 2006 look like an appetizer.
So what now?
Right now would be a great time for a true conservative to step into the leadership vacuum that is so clearly evident. The American public votes conservative (whether Republican or Democrat) because it's a philosophy that empowers the individual, emphasizes family values, and limits the government. Fundamentally, that's what Americans want. Although several of the current presidential hopefuls have pieces of that conservative ideal, no one has the whole package. Without that, the door could very well be wide open -- via low conservative voter turnout -- for a left-wing liberal to enter the White House.
Would that be so bad? Well, let's see. Liberals have promised larger government, massive tax increases, complete surrender in the War on Terror (which, according to John Edwards, is only a 'bumper sticker slogan' rather than a real problem) and an immediate withdrawal from Iraq, as well as a steadfast refusal to protect American citizens and interests.
I'll let you decide.
There's my two cents.
No comments:
Post a Comment