So Wrong, and Yet, So Right
by Emily Cadik on March 11, 2009 in Opinion
Early spring is the best. The snow is starting to melt, the trees look like they might someday sprout leaves, and inspired conservatives from around the country descend on Washington, DC for the best televised event of the year: CPAC. The Conservative Political Action Conference always promises hours of truly inspiring entertainment, and this year was no exception.
I was fortunate enough to attend CPAC as a wee undergraduate interning in DC. My mission: collect egregious literature for the progressive advocacy group I was working for. So I threw on some pearls and a George Bush button and set on my way. Several hours later, I walked out in a Reagan-induced haze, my bag brimming with exciting loot, like a fetus bookmark and a pamphlet on the woman’s role as homemaker. I also had new friends, like the two old white women manning the Black Republicans table.
While my experience was enlightening, it also induced an existential crisis. As absurd as it all seemed to me, it was the kind of place where President Bush felt right at home. At the time - early 2006 - the organizations and individuals represented at CPAC were the earpiece of the president, and they would stay that way for three more years.
Some things have not changed since 2006. They’re still angry about liberals trying to take their guns and their money. Ann Coulter is still somehow on the speaker list. They still wear a lot of Vineyard Vines. But this time they’re distinctly not in power. And not only do they lack power, they lack a sense of direction and a leader. Keynote speaker Rush Limbaugh made an attempt to redefine the message of the conservative movement: “We want the best: Happiness for everybody.” A noble sentiment indeed, but perhaps not the best vehicle to sustain the movement.
At the 2006 CPAC, there were already signs of trouble. In an immigration forum, for instance, the right wing was deeply divided. First Representative Tom Tancredo offered his standard invective about immigrants ruining America, to raucous applause. Then a business owner offered his views on the necessity of immigrant labor to keep his restaurant competitive - a stance far less popular at CPAC, but more in line with President Bush’s. At the time, they voiced concerns that their division on immigration would be an impediment to party unity. Today, the immigration schism is the least of their problems.
Not long ago, the Religious Right looked like it might take over the country, and possibly the world. But in an economic crisis, few care about gay marriage and abortion as much as they care about putting food on their tables and gas in their cars. Without social conservatism, and with the Iraq War hawks discredited, Republicans are only left with the economy and spending. But their attempt to take back the issue at CPAC was not exactly successful. Limbaugh’s dig at the “Obama Porkulus Bill” was not only the worst pun of all time, but also relied on Americans forgetting the past eight years of Bush budgets.
To be fair, CPAC does not represent the Republican Party as a whole, nor does Rush. In fact, RNC Chair Michael Steele had some strong words for Limbaugh. They are the base, and they’re naturally going to be a little more out there. But the base serves as a barometer of how the party is doing, and if this year’s conference was any indication, they’re not faring much better than the rest of America.
Perhaps America will forget Bobby Jindal’s patronizing (not to mention awkward) speech, Sarah Palin’s couture, or Mitt Romney’s past views on everything. But until then, they’re left with Limbaugh as their mouthpiece - a sad sign of the times.
CPAC attendees might have been heartened by coming together in their darkest hour. But from the outside, it looked like a party still lacking an answer to Barack Obama. Rush Limbaugh said it best himself, when shamelessly taken out of context: “Those of you watching at home may wonder why this is being applauded.”
I’m clearly in no place to give advice to the Republican Party, but I think both parties would appreciate it if they started to offer some ideas, rather than just obstructing the passage of Obama’s latest agenda item. If nothing else, it would make for a more spirited debate, and who knows - it might even lead to some sort of bipartisan solution.
For everyone’s sake, I hope they pick themselves up and dust themselves off. Take some time for self-reflection. Float a few policy solutions. Find someone who can articulate them without sounding like he or she is speaking to a kitten. Maybe even undertake a little internal community organizing.
By the time next CPAC rolls around, hopefully I can go back to just disagreeing with Republicans, rather than feeling sorry for them.
Comments
2 Responses to “So Wrong, and Yet, So Right”
Got something to say?
It is not possible to separate abortion, the contraceptive mentalitty, women’s role in society, divorce, gay rights, and pornography from the economic crisis, because the crisis is related to our plummeting world-wide birth rate and the demise of demand, and the issues named are life-style issues that contribute heavily to this crisis. We do not wish to face this. We do not wish to admit, for example, that the blatant encouragement of sterile ‘marriage’ is to deny the purpose of marriage stemming from past epochs: for the procreation of the human race. We wish to extend to all and any the protections historically and correctly afforded to the men and women who take the very difficult and life-long path of raising children of quality. I do not know anyone in the Republican Party saying this. Nor anyone, indeed, almost anywhere. Yet news reports are full of news that means the same thing: Europe has failed because it has no ‘internal markets.’ The US has failed because we need more new little ones to eat all those hamburgers and buy all those cars and live in those empty houses, but rather than say that outright, we say ‘the market is saturated.’ One must translate this phrase, and alas, we are tongue-tied.
Emily, your “sympathy” is obnoxious at best. How did someone so close-minded and arrogant get into an institution like Harvard?…oh right, you’re just another liberal. Think before you speak because you aren’t doing yourself, your cause, or your president any good.