Waiting for the Huntsman Surge

So, it's now official. With the quick rise and fall of the Ron Paul campaign, and the recent rise in the polls of Rick Santorum, every candidate on the official GOP stage has surged to the front with the exception of Jon Huntsman. What gives?

Why are GOP primary voters so completely opposed to, or uninterested in, a strong conservative governor from one of the most conservative states in the union. Is it really about his two years as an ambassador to China under the Obama administration? Would it be that petty?

It can't be that they find him boring or un-engaging because even Tim Pawlenty was topping the polls for a while.

Strange.

Cain Still Not Able

While Herman Cain became intriguing to GOP primary voters, the national media played its inevitable role in digging up the dirt. Certainly, the bizarre rendition of John Lennon's "Imagine," with Cain lamenting a "world with no pizza" is fodder for the late night comedians as well as Jon Stewart and Stephen Colbert. Though, GOPers will point to Clinton playing the sax on Arsenio as just as embarrassing. And we won't even talk about Howard Dean's primal scream.

But, it's the policy questions forthcoming that reveal a tale that unnerves me. Cain seems so clearly aloof to basic issues in the world, that I simply can't imagine even considering him as a candidate. And, of course, I am not talking about the "gotcha" questions of the Prime Minister of Sweden. Candidates need advisers to provide all the details on the myriad of national issues. But knowing the term "neoconservative" would seem like a pretty basic question for the GOP candidates. Maybe not. And there is plenty to criticize about the knowledge of many former presidents and candidates. But knowledge really should count for something. And Cain hasn't shown a lot.

This apparent shameless ignorance of the world baffled me with the GOP support of Palin, and it's happening all over again with Cain. I just don't get how reasonably educated and informed people can overlook such vast ignorance in others when it comes to picking presidential candidates ... or even congressman.

Weird.

S&P Blames GOP

Interesting insight in a quote from the S&P Ratings Board on why they downgraded US Treasury debt - "Compared with previous projections, our revised base scenario now assumes the 2001/03 tax cuts, due to expire, now remain in place. We have changed our assumptions because the majority of Republicans in Congress continue to resist any measure that would raise revenue."

Strangely, that hasn't been getting much press. I would have guessed the liberal media would have heavily promoted that. And, it looks like a moot point anyway, because in the sell-off investors continued to go to T-bills, even though other countries still have AAA-ratings. Guess we still are the big dog. At least the market got up today and regained some sanity. Overall, the Dow has way too much influence on our psyche anyway. Even as the market moves along - fast or slow - wild swings in daily trading bring about talk of doom and gloom. And even as the Dow was rising the last two years and companies were posting record profits - which in turn drove up their stock prices - unemployment and the misery index remained high.

Thus, I am curious the proposal to put a minor - like .0025% - tax on stock transactions? Some are proposing it as a way to cut down on speculation and the wild swings in the market. It could raise some revenue at the same time it regulates the uncertainty. Ultimately, it'll be a no-go - but it's a reasonable idea.

GOP and the Party of Crazy

According to former Colorado Republican congressman - and occasionally ranting lunatic - Tom Tancredo, President Obama withheld his birth certificate on purpose to "make the GOP look nuts."

Hmmm ... ya' think?

Then again, I don't think the GOP has needed any help looking like the "party of crazy." They've been handling the nutcase side of politics rather well on their own. Though, even if it wasn't intentional, once the nuttiness began, I wouldn't doubt Obama was shrewd enough to allow it to happen. Yet, if he really wanted to go that route, he would have let the whole thing run throughout the primaries of 2012.

Tom Tancredo continues his analysis by exclaiming that Obama pulled the ultimate Muhammed Ali "rope-a-dope." I wouldn't disagree, though the most amusing part is Tancredo identifying the GOP as "the dope." He, of course, would be leading candidate in that race from his extreme comments and rather pathetic runs for president and governor of Colorado in the past few years. I mean, seriously. Anyone who identifies President Obama as "a greater threat to the United States than Al-Qaeda" is either a truly extreme politician, or a conspiracy nutcase who is holding on by a very thin thread.

And, so we're left to continually ponder where this stuff comes from. A decade ago, I was completely comfortable dividing my vote between the Democrats and the GOP, always choosing the most moderate and pragmatic leader. Alas, it has become increasingly difficult to walk that line. From seemingly aloof and misguided positions on tax rates and foreign policy to education and immigration reform to clear naivete about foreign policy and the true costs of government to intentionally ambiguous takes on labor, the "free market," and health care, I just can't find common or moderate ground with the GOP.

I have hope .... but it's wearing thin.

Primary Boredom

Democrats hold Senate 52-48 (with two Ind.) In the House the Dems lose 20-25 overall after picking up a few unexpected. It will be pretty standard for a first term mid-term. Of course, coming off an economic catastrophe and into two unfunded, poorly run wars, that'd be a pretty impressive showing.

I concede many criticisms of the Democrats and the Obama Administration. However, as an independent, I don't see the reason for overwhelming faith that the GOP can effectively run the government, especially with the loss of people like Bennett in Utah and Crist in Florida. At least they still have people like Lindsay Graham and Olympia Snow, and someday Paul Ryan will be worthwhile when he grows up.

I'm no apologist for Pelosi or Reid, but McConnel and Boehner bring nothing to the table.

"Republicans run on the premise that government can't work, and then they get elected and prove it." - PJ O'Rourke

Responsible Republicans

Great piece by Jacob Weisberg in Slate today about the loss of responsible government among Republicans. It was last prominent in the early days of the Reagan presidency and last practiced by the responsible Bush presidency - that was the first one.

Responsible conservatism is so important in our democratic republic, and it is a shame that the moderate voices of the GOP have been so crowded out. Hopefully, the Lindsay Graham's and the Judd Gregg's become the new leaders of the party.

Hopefully.

Conservative Decline

The drumbeat continues of the GOP's conservatism marching toward the grave. Of course, that is hyperbole, though they've definitely lost their way when the conservative voices are turning on the GOP. They will still vote that way, as they don't want to be in the Libertarian Party, and the The Libertarian Party doesn't want them. Though some may become Obama Republicans. One notable voice - an older version who echoes some of what Brooks and Parker have been saying - is Richard Posner, whose new book decries the GOP's naive understanding of capitalism. I really enjoyed the insight in his latest blog post:

The following comments, I found particularly insightful:

By the end of the Clinton administration, I was content to celebrate the triumph of conservatism as I understood it, and had no desire for other than incremental changes in the economic and social structure of the United States. I saw no need for the estate tax to be abolished, marginal personal-income tax rates further reduced, the government shrunk, pragmatism in constitutional law jettisoned in favor of "originalism," the rights of gun owners enlarged, our military posture strengthened, the rise of homosexual rights resisted, or the role of religion in the public sphere expanded. All these became causes embraced by the new conservatism that crested with the reelection of Bush in 2004.

My theme is the intellectual decline of conservatism, and it is notable that the policies of the new conservatism are powered largely by emotion and religion and have for the most part weak intellectual groundings. That the policies are weak in conception, have largely failed in execution, and are political flops is therefore unsurprising. The major blows to conservatism, culminating in the election and programs of Obama, have been fourfold: the failure of military force to achieve U.S. foreign policy objectives; the inanity of trying to substitute will for intellect, as in the denial of global warming, the use of religious criteria in the selection of public officials, the neglect of management and expertise in government; a continued preoccupation with abortion; and fiscal incontinence in the form of massive budget deficits, the Medicare drug plan, excessive foreign borrowing, and asset-price inflation.

By the fall of 2008, the face of the Republican Party had become Sarah Palin and Joe the Plumber. Conservative intellectuals had no party.

I hope for some pragmatic discussion by people in the GOP, but first they must turn down Hannity/Limbaugh/O'Reilly, and start reading instead.

Country More Centrist Than Before

Well, so much for "Painting the Country Red," as a moderately-selling conservative tome claimed just a few years ago.  Surprisingly, for all the criticism, the results of a new broad survey from the Pew Research Center, the country is becoming more centrist and more independent.  And, those independents are, for at least the time being, siding with the Democrats.  So, again I note, so much for the claims that the GOP lost in the state level, in Congress, and the White House because they weren't conservative enough.

According to the Pew analysis:

On issues, independents' viewpoints don't fit neatly into liberal or conservative frameworks.

This group hews more closely to Democrats than Republicans on social values, religion and national security. But it also is more conservative on several key issues including the economy, partly because of steady defections from the GOP, and more skeptical than two years ago of expanding government assistance, a typically Republican position. More in line with Democratic thinking, most independents support expanded government intervention and regulation in the private sector, albeit reluctantly.

In another GOP trouble spot, the economy has overtaken social values among voters' most pressing concerns. The recession has essentially robbed Republicans of a potent political weapon. The survey also found that the percentage of Americans holding conservative views on family, homosexuality and gender roles has steadily declined over the past decade because younger people are less conservative than older people.

As one of those independents - and one who would have voted for John McCain had he been the nominee in 2000 (potentially the worst GOP decision in a century, if not ever) - I can assert that these comments from Pew are precisely the situation in contemporary politics.  And the GOP simply can't figure this out.

Why Doesn't the GOP Get It?

Will someone please tell my why the Republican Party continues to believe they lost control of Congress and the Presidency because they weren't conservative enough? The Gallup poll shows the party was losing significance in nearly every demographic group. The most significant place were the GOP lost votes - especially here in Colorado - is among moderate independents. And, the moderate independents switched their support because, in the words of Dan Haley of the Denver Post, the GOP has "become the party of crazy." There is no evidence of the GOP losing support because they had turned their back on conservative ideals. Granted, they did expand government under Bush. But they also stuck with all the same mantras of cutting taxes, neo-con pursuit of a hegemonic agenda in response to 9/11, "family values" which translated to anti-gay and rigidly Christian and pro-life and anti-regulation of business. The American voters saw them as corrupt in terms of their conservative values. But they also saw them as clueless on health care and the problems created by the Iraq War. Clearly, all the polls and research shows they GOP lost no significant votes among the conservatives and reactionaries. They lost among the people who thought they were too right-wing "crazy" and insensitive, or clueless, to the concerns of ordinary working Americans.

Feeling Good About Conservatives

With the seemingly lemmings-off-a-cliff mentality driving the agenda-less GOP these days, it's tough to feel good about conservatism. As they seek to "re-brand" the party on the way to "returning to its ideals," it's just been tough to defend, or even look at, conservatives lately. Thankfully, we still have people like Kathleen Parker and David Brooks to remind us that there can be good, logical, practical, rational conservatism at work in the Republican Party. I've praised Brooks for educating people about "Burke-an conservatism," and I can always count on Parker to take the hot air out of conservative hot-button issues and offer a rational critique, as she does today with her piece on the comedienne Wanda Sykes' comments at the Correspondents dinner. Three cheers for common sense and pragmatism.