Where are the conscientious conservatives?

[lwcon]

O to have political opposition worthy of debating, people with honestly differing opinions!

Tristero from the Digby's Hullabaloo blog writes about John Brady Kiesling, "the career diplomat in Greece who dramatically resigned in 2003 rather than continue to support the Bush/Iraq war":

Given both his pragmatic approach to diplomacy and the overall tenor of his writing, Kiesling is the kind of person who, at one point, would probably have been labelled a conservative. Quiet, principled, uninterested in revolutionary change, loyal to his country, aware of America's foibles, but never seriously questioning its core ideas. I used to meet people like him, registered Republicans, people who I strongly disagreed with on many, many issues but whose basic decency and integrity was simply beyond question. That was a very long time ago.

Those who call for "civility" in modern politics don't seem to have noticed the death of the conscientious conservative. They reliably blame today's dreaded "partisanship" on the shrillness of us rabid hippies. How dare we not respect the clear thinking and values of loyal Bushies and their Texan hero who saved the twin towers, New Orleans, Baghdad, the surplus, and the Constitution?

There is nothing to gain from listening to any of the so-called conservative voices, be they Kristol, or Perle, or Wolfowitz, or Rumsfeld, or Cheney or O'Reilly...well, you can list them as well as I. There is no there there, intellectually or morally. There is only the will to power and the willingness to say anything, do anything, to seize power and wield it beyond oversight or question. There are no real ideas, despite their pretensions otherwise, and there are no fine minds; Wolfowitz's academic credentials merely recalls to mind one of Frank Zappa's funniest lines from Roxy & Elsewhere: "You get nothing with your college degree."

I was stunned when entering the blogosphere about a year ago, that it was well-nigh impossible to find right-leaning writers who were more than illogical, knee-jerk apologists for Bush's misbegotten authoritarian regime. Or, at least as bad, apologists who try to cover their tracks with the stray complaint about the way the Iraq war was conducted.

I had hoped to find ideas and narratives that merited thoughtful argument, one-half the stuff of a good debate.

Instead — excepting the occasional disillusioned Kiesling, Kuo, or Iglesias — all one can find are enablers for a president who is equal parts sociopath and fool.

Any points wingers make about "conservative principles" are discussed on a fantastical plane, completely divorced from the reality of their beloved rights-usurping, treasury-squandering, environment-despoiling, homeland-unsecuring Drinkin'-Buddy-in-Chief.

Imagine how much harder Diogenes's quest would have been, if he were searching for an honest Republican in the age of Drudge.


___

Hey, the liberal light is always on at the Vast Left-Wing Conspiracy. Please stop by and say "hi!"

[bread_and_roses]

1. Because this administration is the apotheosis of Conservatism, and so reveals it for what it is

I don't believe this mantra about "real" conservatives we keep hearing. Conservatives have always espoused the virtues of capitalism and the "Free Market," always opposed safety net programs, always fought progressive taxation, always favored union-busting and cheap wages and de-regulation of everything. And if they were Isolationist in Foreign Policy re: war, they had no problem with the exploitation of Third-World people by US Corporations. If they were "environmentalist" about US National Parks, they had no problem with polluting the rest of the world with industrial pollutants.

Even where their "Libertarian" leanings should - or even occasionally did a very, very few of them - lead them to ally with Progresives on issues of personal freedom, are they or have they ever been on the forfront of those fights? Did they lead the fight to de-criminalize abortion? Are they on the front line demanding an end to the insane and racist "Drug War?" Did they lead the effort to get prayer out of schools, even? Where were they in the Civil Rights movement? In women's fight for equality? Did they even cringe at the unholy alliance of "Conservatism" with the Religious Right? No.

No, this Administration is the very apogee of De-Regulated Free-Market Capitalist exploitation, greed, and Social Darwinism which has always been the basis of Conservatism.

This is not an attack on the OP, btw - if your point is that there is an occasional Conservative who occasionally acts in accordance with some actual principle I won't quarell with that. But I keep hearing this blather about "real" Conservatives as if they have ever stood against any oppression except "oppressing" unlimited profit via regulation or taxation or spending on social welfare?

*edit to clarify last sentence

[lwcon]

2. You make some very good points

Certainly, though, turning a record surplus into a record deficit in a heartbeat should have sent shockwaves through a legitimately conservative party, and it did nothing of the kind.

Likewise, the gross incompetence and fraud of the Bush administration should have been quickly seen and roundly criticized if there were truly conservatives of any conscience.

The only conclusion I can draw is that today's conservatives are, as John Dean has described them, without conscience. That being the case, any arguments for respectful debate with these people are totally absurd. People who gleefully rape the country and the world deserve our condemnation, not our hushed "civility." Like Tristero, I remember Republicans of the Nelson Rockefeller and Bill Weld variety, who didn't play the game the way these bastards do today. Even Nixon wasn't as hell-bent on unmitigated profiteering.

___

Hey, the liberal light is always on at the Vast Left-Wing Conspiracy. Please stop by and say "hi!"

[bread_and_roses]

5. This is why I despise "Centrism." "Third Way Is the Wrong Way"

What is it but acquiescence to a "kinder, gentler" oppression and exploitation? What is it but a leaving of the field, to use a military metaphor, to your opposition?

It is why "Centrism" is a dead-end road, guaranteed to continue to alienate the Democratic Party's natural base and strengthen the Right. It offers enough scraps and bones to quiet the populace when they begin to question where their interests really lie, but cedes the terms of the debate to the Right Wing, thus setting the stage for the next ascendance of the Right as soon as the worst excesses of Free-Market Social Darwinism are moderated.

An article today over at Alternet addresses this:

http://www.alternet.org/story/51840/?page=1

..."The Politics of Polarization" and Third Way essentially accept and "lock-in" the conservative/liberal status quo disparities. What "The Politics of Polarization" and Third Way choose not to do is precisely what made the conservative movement so effective: Challenge the existing status quo and educate the public about a new vision. What "The Politics of Polarization" and Third Way fail to do is precisely what progressives need to do: change the underlying terms and norms of political discussion...

...a strategy to move toward the "center" clashes with the investment in civic engagement and voter mobilization, particularly in minority, women and working class communities. Such a strategy is particularly risky for Democrats because Democrats have a much greater potential for base mobilization growth than do conservatives because a larger percentage of the conservative base already votes, while a far greater percentage of the progressive base does not vote. In fact, as Schaller notes, the only demographic on the Democratic side which are relatively better mobilized are women relative to men and union members relative to non-union voters. Every racial minority -- with the possible exception of Cuban-Americans -- and non-union working class voters are under-mobilized, as are unmarried women and especially working class minorities: African-Americans reliably vote 90% for Democrats; Native Americans 80-90%; Latinos 55-65%; even Asian-Americans, whom Bill Clinton lost by 24 points, voted for Kerry in 2004 by a 17-point margin. The Democrats' "evangelicals" are working class minorities, particularly unmarried women, but all are short-changed by Third Way's theory of centrist-driven change.

edit to add link

[Skittles]

3. you know it, kenzee

some conservatives would have you believe the GOP has only sucked for the past couple of years when in truth they have been anti-America for DECADES

[w4rma]

4. At least since the Great Depression, which the Republican Party is responsible for. (nt)