Conservatives in Crisis

bill buckley

William F. Buckley

As conservatives prepare for an urgent meeting this weekend to discuss their options in the 2012 campaign, they face an epic crisis of identity and electability that creates rising odds for the reelection of President Obama.

Throughout the 2012 campaign, there has not been one credible conservative candidate for the presidency.

Conservatives now face a choice between a front-runner of no lasting convictions — who has lost campaigns for two out of three major offices he has previously run for and who champions a predatory capitalism that applauds layoffs when jobs are the primary issue —a gainst a divided group of second-tier candidates that may be the weakest field in the history of presidential politics.

To explain why this has happened, consider William F. Buckley:

I knew William Buckley. I admired William Buckley. Conservatives today are not William Buckley. Without Buckley in the 1960s there might not have been President Reagan in the 1980s.

I met Buckley when I was too young to vote, drink or shave and worked for the great liberal congressman Allard Lowenstein, a close friend of Buckley. Buckley was often at Lowenstein’s home when I was present. He believed Lowenstein was a great man and despite their different views, supported Al for Congress.

Buckley believed in creative conservative ideas. He fought hard to banish hatred and extremism from the conservative movement. It was this vision, which promoted the rise of Jack Kemp and Ronald Reagan, that is absent today.

Conservatives leaders today have supported or tolerated invective, ugliness and at times, pure hatred of the president that Buckley, Kemp and Reagan would have ferociously condemned. This attitude of poison and venom that dominates much of our politics led the most qualified conservatives (especially Mitch Daniels) to refuse to even run for the nomination and prevents the most electable conservative (Jon Huntsman) from being nominated.

Allard Lowenstein

Allard Lowenstein

As conservative leaders prepare to meet in emergency session, they are faced with a divided field of lightweights, big-government conservatives, crony capitalists, a conservative who debates whether three people should be married, a candidate who demands advocates of Freddie Mac go to jail after taking huge money from Freddie Mac and fibs that he earned it as a historian, a candidate who proposes re-invading Iraq, an 18th-century conservative, and a very electable conservative who reluctantly says he is conservative.

Conservative leaders should have long ago denounced attacks against the president’s Christianity and Americanism, united behind a credible conservative candidate and stopped making excuses for lightweight vanity players or vindictive venom players who are unfit to lead and unable to win.

Conservatives might soon look like North Korean mourners showing exaggerated emotion for their dear and deceased leader, if they must champion Mitt Romney as the last best hope for those who despise the president.

President Reagan and Prime Minister Thatcher were conviction politicians; Romney is America’s conviction-less politician. He has treated ambitions to be governor, senator and president as corporate takeovers, claiming he believes whatever will get him a majority of stock in whatever he wants.

Romney’s conviction-less politics have usually failed. He was soundly defeated by Ted Kennedy for the Senate, defeated by John McCain in 2008, and so unpopular as governor that he probably would have been defeated had he run for reelection.

Brent BudowskyThe GOP battle will not be decided until Super Tuesday at the earliest. Even then, a majority of delegates might still favor someone other than Romney.

Conservatives should remember their great moments in history and leaders such as Buckley, Kemp and Reagan.

If Republicans run a candidate like Thomas Dewey in 1948, or Barry Goldwater in 1964, America will reelect President Obama in 2012. I must admit this is an outcome I favor, which looks more likely to me every day.

Brent Budowsky
The Hill 

Published by the LA Progressive on January 11, 2012
Related Posts Plugin for WordPress, Blogger...
About Brent Budowsky

Brent Budowsky served as Legislative Assistant to U.S. Senator Lloyd Bentsen, responsible for commerce and intelligence matters, including one of the core drafters of the CIA Identities Law. Served as Legislative Director to Congressman Bill Alexander, then Chief Deputy Whip, House of Representatives. Currently a member of the International Advisory Council of the Intelligence Summit. Left government in 1990 for marketing and public affairs business including major corporate entertainment and talent management. He can be reached at brentbbi@webtv.net.

Comments

  1. harry wood says:

    Gee Dusty, did you not just do the very thing you put down in your response? I had no position of left or right until I came home from a war in Asia in 1972. The things spoke to me remind me of things you just wrote. You were not able to spit on me through email, but maybe that will be in the future.

    The folks abussing me wore the peace sign with pride and I came to hate that symbol. They only wanted a one sided peace. Having lived when FDR was in office, I see the left as misguided friends.

    • Gee Harry, I worked at the Brentwood VA during ‘Nam providing care for men and women coming back suffering from war, Indo-China, Korea, WW2 and so on, and I never spat on one nor would I have allowed anyone around me to spit on a veteran. And I was in hundreds of anti-war demonstrations and never, ever saw any demonstrator spit at veterans. I believe that is a right wing myth that is pure garbage started to hurt the antiwar movement. Notice it grew as a myth after active duty soldiers began to question the war and backed away from fire fights etc. The right felt that the our military might be lost. As a last thought, then as now the Right supports our soldiers and vets until the vets need long term care and other help because of injuries or PTSD and then see how they run away — it has been liberals and progressives that have made sure of provision for vets.

      Oh, if you notice my wording I didn’t spit at the right wing politicians — I said they weren’t worth spit. That is an ol’ expression meaning that something is worthless and that was my opinion of those three right wing opportunists. Thanks for commenting.

  2. Friend Brent, neither of the reactionaries: Buckley, Reagan, or Thatcher were worth spit — their policies were based in attacks on the poor and the working people. Reagan was not intelligent enough to have any kind of position on anything, the chimp in his movie was smarter than he was. Ronny was a cheap hired gun for the right, traveling the country caring on anti-union activities for his bosses. Reagan also hurt his friends in the movie and TV industry by helping with the purging of progressives from their careers not to mention his attack on the Air Traffic Controllers — the first big step using the government to destroy the union movement and impoverish the middle class.

    One time I heard WF Buckley debate Sydney Lens, an intelligent and progressive leftist, and when Sydney had him hurting, Buckley responded in cowardly fashion with ad hominen attacks on Lens, accusing him of being a communist, a labor supporter and so forth rather than answering the propositions put forth. This was just toward the end of the McCarthy era and these smear tactics used to cover a paucity of thought enabled Buckley look good to a conservative audience.

Speak Your Mind

*

Visit us on Google+