The American Spectator : Liberalism Is Dead

Text Size

Liberalism Is Dead

By R. Emmett Tyrrell, Jr. from the February 2011 issue

An intellectual autopsy of the movement.

IN THE TUMULTUOUS HISTORY of postwar American Liberalism, there has been a slow but steady decline of which the Liberals have been steadfastly oblivious. This pose has called for admirable discipline, for the evidence was all around them. Yet Liberals, who began as the rightful heirs to the New Deal, carried on as a kind of aristocracy, gifted but doomed. They dominated the culture and the politics of the country unchallenged from the beginnings of the Cold War to the first Nixon administration. With the general populace, however, they increasingly faltered. Now they are down to around 20 percent of the electorate. They have the nation's librarians, most of the professoriate, students so long as they remain relatively untaxed, labor leaders, and career Democrats. After that it gets tricky. Conservatives accounted for 42 percent of the vote in the recent election, maintaining roughly a 2-1 margin over liberals, which has been true for decades. In the last election, the independents, the second most numerous group, voted with conservatives. They were alarmed about the economy, and will probably remain alarmed for a long time.

Liberals are going the way of the American Prohibition Party. It is time for someone to tell them: "Rigor mortis has set in, comrades." They could be oblivious during the Nixon Crisis or while Ronald Reagan sleepwalked through history, as many Liberals still say; but today their obliviousness amounts to a kind of madness. The house is afire, but there is a whole string ensemble madly playing their fiddles.

AT FIRST GLANCE, the decline might appear to have begun with the 1961 inauguration of President John F. Kennedy when historians noted the first sightings of what was to become Liberalism's distinctive trait, overreach. At times Liberals promise too much. At times they attempt too much. Occasionally, they actually achieved too much, and many Americans fear for their wallets and their liberties. As a consequence larger numbers of the electorate have been voting for conservatism, a movement that began in the 1950s when anti-communists combined with proponents of limited government and advocates of American traditionalism. For years it was a small, struggling movement, challenging Liberalism intellectually until Richard Nixon availed himself to parts of it. Then in the 1970s it became an intellectual and electoral force, and with the presidency of Ronald Reagan it became the dominant force in American politics. The Liberals remained oblivious.

Kennedy's soaring oratory frequently attained the sublime meaninglessness of romantic poesy. It was lovely, but it roused the Soviets, led to the Vietnam quagmire, and put America in the role of Doctor Democracy to the world, not leaving us with much room to maneuver. It was, in truth, an extension of President Franklin D. Roosevelt's Four Freedoms. Even further back it echoed President Woodrow Wilson's Fourteen Points. It was infectious and admirable and it even impressed later generations of conservatives, but it was susceptible to overreach and of course it was a bit dishonest. For instance, there never was a missile gap, as Kennedy claimed, or any other cause for his histrionics. Moreover, on the domestic side the oratory set in motion what was to be catastrophic overreach, President Lyndon Johnson's War on Poverty.

In a way JFK's stirring language represented a break with the Burkean understanding of President Dwight Eisenhower. Ike, whether he articulated it or not, wanted to put the Great Depression and the dangerous confrontations of the early Cold War behind us. He wanted to return to "normalcy." Yet JFK departed from Ike's more prudent course when he said in his first Inaugural, "Let every nation know, whether it wishes us well or ill, that we shall pay any price, bear any burden, meet any hardship, support any friend, oppose any foe to assure the survival and the success of liberty." He kept up the rhetorical barrage. Then on April 12, 1961, the Russians sent Yuri Gagarin into space. A week later Kennedy betrayed ambivalence at the Bay of Pigs and immaturity at his June summit with the Russian leader Nikita Khrushchev, who told his aides that by comparison Ike "was a man of intelligence and vision." Kennedy was inert as the East Germans built a wall around Berlin in August, and only reacted vigorously when he had the Cuban missile crisis on his hands in fall of 1962. Then the Great Blah began, as Richard Rovere wrote in the New Yorker that the showman in the White House had achieved "perhaps the greatest personal diplomatic victory of any president in our history." Perhaps! Now, however, the Russians were roused, and America was on a path much more perilous than that which Ike had envisioned. It led to a red-hot Cold War in Kennedy's day and to Vietnam. It fixed America's stance in the world as defender of democracy. It led to the inevitability of war in Iraq and Afghanistan. Domestically it set us on the path to a behemoth Big Government.

STILL, IN LOOKING FOR Liberalism's decline the historian's eye falls on an earlier event as a precursor to Liberalism's present entombment: the civil war that broke out in the aftermath of World War II between what we might call the radical Liberals led by Henry Wallace and the advocates of what Arthur M. Schlesinger Jr. would call in his book "The Vital Center," more practical Liberals like Hubert Humphrey, Joseph L. Rauh, and Walter Reuther. They were hard-headed and patriotic, and their desiderata for their constituents were reasonable by comparison with the radicals' wild ideas.

Yet, even here in 1947 they introduced the excesses that were to grow much worse. They instilled their Liberalism with a disturbing moralism and even worse, the first Big Lie of modern American politics. Others would come, for instance the allegation that anyone who questions their most recent panacea for racial relations is a racist or for alleviating poverty hates the poor, and that Bill Clinton was virginal. When he, as president, dissembled about Monica Lewinsky under oath it was a minor offense. The Big Lie was that Alger Hiss, Dexter White, and the other security risks were not Communists. We now know with the opening of the Venona files that they were. We further know from a careful reading of history that in the late 1940s such figures as Dean Acheson and Secretary of State James F. Byrnes knew that they were. Yet these Democrats thought the truth did not matter. Hiss was an eccentric or an idealist. What mattered was keeping the Republicans out of government. Maybe they were right that Hiss's communism was a harmless thing, but they did not have to lie about it. The Hiss debate envenomed our politics right up to the present and brought discredit to Liberalism.

The practical Liberals won in the late 1940s, but in 1972 civil war broke out anew. This time the radicals won with the Democratic nomination of Senator George McGovern for president. The radicals had changed the rules of the Democratic Party, thus ensuring their victories in subsequent conventions. Simultaneously with this radical takeover of the Democratic Party, radicals took over the universities, bringing in nonsense studies and idiot enthusiasms. In the meantime, LBJ's Great Society was an egregious instance of overreach, causing even some Liberals to warn against the "unintended consequences" of government programs. These straying Liberals were to be the first new recruits to modern conservatism, which was now growing fast. The radicals' conquests of the Democratic Party and of the universities hastened the straying Liberals' journey to conservatism. Such Liberals as Jeane Kirkpatrick, Irving Kristol, Norman Podhoretz, and, for a time, Daniel Patrick Moynihan were in Kristol's words Liberals "who were mugged by reality."

Meanwhile, the radical Liberals became more self-indulgent. They were of two types, the aging students who had in the late 1960s been called Coat-and-Tie Radicals and the more serious ideologues. The first became Delusional Leftists. The second either were or became socialists, though they dare not use the word -- even social democrat was out. Only a crisis in the leadership of President Nixon allowed the electorate to ignore these transformations.

How grave Nixon's misbehavior was in Watergate, I leave to history. I shall only say this. There is a formal and informal politics. In the formal politics we play by the rules. In the informal we break the lesser rules from time to time. Everyone in Washington suspected, when informed of Watergate, that Nixon had suggested sotto voce to his lieutenants, "Rid me of this problem." LBJ had done it with such rogues as Bobby Baker. Truman had done it with numerous scoundrels, and FDR did it with a wide array from Maurice Parmelee, a practicing nudist, to Jesse Jones, his secretary of commerce. Most modern Big Government presidents say, "I don't want to hear about it," and the thing is dealt with by others. Perhaps it was the moralism of modern Liberalism that would not allow it in Nixon's case.

At any rate, "Worse than the lie is the cover-up" became the new Washington truism, and in the subsequent cleansing much of Southeast Asia went Communist. It became dangerous to be numbered among America's friends. By now Liberalism was becoming lost in its fantasies. Conservatives became evil while each Liberal became a moral colossus, a truth seeker, a poet. Possibly the first attempts at windsurfing were undertaken. More on this later. The Liberals began to confer with only the like-minded. They lost touch with America. They almost never establish communication with the American conservatives. When they were beaten by conservatives they really never knew what hit them.

CONSERVATIVES HAVE HAD Edmund Burke, the Earl of Beaconsfield (Benjamin Disraeli), and the Founding Fathers as their cynosures. Sometimes they have provided conservatives with discipline and direction. Sometimes the conservatives have followed their own star. The problem for Liberals is they have been denied a cynosure. Some had looked to the British Fabians and some to Karl Marx, but since the late 1940s and the recognition of the Soviet Union's costs in liberty (and at times lives) and social democracy's costs to GDP, people like John Kenneth Galbraith became coy about their intellectual heroes. Some pointed to John Stuart Mill, but so did some conservatives. John Maynard Keynes was useful but too narrow. So the Liberals really have no formidable ancestor to claim -- certainly no Burkes, not even a couple of the Founding Fathers. Maybe Jean-Jacques Rousseau or more recently Saul Alinsky, but the first is lost in dithyrambs and the second stole hubcaps or maybe whole cars.

Actually around the 1970s I can hear some clarions of the dead Liberalism claiming the Beatles as Liberal philosophes. After all since the 1960s rock 'n' roll had a special place in the Liberals' Weltanschauung. Sean Wilentz, the modern-day heir to Schlesinger, has even written a scholarly study of Bob Dylan. Did Schlesinger ever write a book about Frank Sinatra or earlier Glenn Miller? As I say, Liberalism is dead.

By the 1980s the leadership of the Liberal cause could be divided into two types, the Delusional Left and a smaller camp, the socialists. The Delusional Left talked of global warming, some sort of government health care, and increasingly one world under one law -- that sort of thing. They did not talk of socialism, but doubtless if the wind came up and filled out socialism's sails, they would gladly be swept along. The true socialists lay low until very recently and even now they are not very candid, adopting a pose of "Read my deeds" rather than "Read my lips." The Delusional Left have provided me with a lot of laughs: Al Gore's historic kiss at the 2000 Democratic Convention, Jean-François Kerry the Vietnam war protester claiming to be the war hero. By contrast President Barack Obama is not so funny, though occasionally he comes up with such lines as "We are the ones we've been waiting for. We are the change that we seek."

FROM THE NIXON ADMINISTRATION on the numbers have not been good for Liberals. In 1972 one state went for George McGovern, and that was not even his home state. He even lost the youth vote, though one would never know it from reading the press accounts. In 1976 Liberalism did better, but Jimmy Carter ran as a moderate and God gave him Watergate. Then came 1980. Reagan benefited from the ongoing electoral accretions that modern conservatism had attracted: the neocons, the evangelicals (aka the Christian Right), the Reagan Democrats. The Liberals could only claim feminists, gays, blacks, and Latinos. In other words, nothing new -- just perpetrators of what we call Masked Politics. When the Mask slipped one could see all had been Liberals all along. During the eight years of Reagan, he changed the political center for years to come. His policies worked. As the Old Cowboy headed back to California, the political center was center-right: vigilance about big government; balanced budgets, low taxes, and peace through strength.

Page: 1 2 >

About the Author

R. Emmett Tyrrell, Jr. is the founder and editor in chief of The American Spectator. He is the author of the forthcoming The Death of Liberalism, published by Thomas Nelson Inc. His previous books include the New York Times bestseller Boy Clinton: the Political Biography; The Impeachment of William Jefferson Clinton; The Liberal Crack-Up; The Conservative Crack-Up; Public Nuisances; The Future that Doesn't Work: Social Democracy's Failure in Britain; Madame Hillary: The Dark Road to the White House; The Clinton Crack-Up; and After the Hangover: The Conservatives' Road to Recovery.

Letter to the Editor View all comments (140) | Leave a comment

Bill Hussein O'Stalin| 2.21.11 @ 6:32AM

Liberalism in America was actually an instrument of both political parties who both supported ever larger government with more power given to the federal government.

You mention Nixon several times with an allusion to his conservatism. Actually, in many ways, Nixon was a liberal and started a legacy of liberalism with the E.P.A. which has driven millions of jobs overseas and and destroyed millions of businesses and business opportunities.

Although Reagan talked a good game, he was another big spender who should have stuck to this guns. In essence, what we have had is an age of liberalism sprinkled with big government promoters from both parties.

The public, who sat back for years and watched this spectacle of bipartisanship develop, finally came to their senses and realized they would have to get involved to break the march to financial insolubility.

Don't count liberalism dead yet. There are still way too many supporters of Washington, D.C. INC. inside the beltway who are bragging about 62 billion dollar cuts in a 3.7 trillion dollar budget.

This indicates that it's not liberalism we need to be worried about, it's political deceit.

And Washington is still afloat in deceit.

Timothy L. Pennell| 2.21.11 @ 10:35AM

This can all be rationalised, if you just know a coupla statistics.
There was a Study, recently, that concluded that 20% of the American Population, suffers from a MENTAL DISORDER.
Why is that important?
Well........According to Polling Data: 20% of Americans identify themselves as LIBERALS. And, in 2008, Barack Hussein Obama/Barry Soetoro/Abu Hussain received votes from, roughly, 20% of the American population.
Proving, once and for all, that LIBERALISM is a MENTAL DISORDER.
But, you already knew that.
So, is Liberalism dead? NO. It will NEVER Die. Liberalism is EVIL. And EVIL will always be around. Till the end of time.
The "Difference" is OBAMA. The son of a Marxist Muslim and an Atheist Communist, who spent his childhood in FOREIGN LANDS, and educated in a RELIGION OF BLOOD.
His COMING has been Prophesised.
"And I saw the BEAST rise from the Sea. And he was given a MOUTH to speak Haughty and Blasphemous words. And he was allowed to exercise authority for forty two Months." Revelation 13-5.
I know that I write this all the time.
LOOK AROUND. See what's happening. These aren't DEMOCRACY movements. These are CONSOLIDATION movements. We are witnessing the assemblage of the CALIPHATE. Mexico is a Failed NARCO STATE. South America's Dictators are on the march. The Economy in this Country is being DELIBERATELY DESTROYED. And NOBODY on the planet FEARS US, anymore.
42 Months is JUNE 2012.
You might wanna think about making preparations.

Shamus| 2.21.11 @ 1:28PM

Liberalism's not dead, it's just really sick.

R Martin| 2.21.11 @ 4:25PM

Let's hope it's nothing trivial.

Alan Brooks| 2.21.11 @ 5:30PM

The worst thing I've seen this year is the Feb 21st pub date of NR: a photo of Jeb Bush on the Presidents Day issue.
You say liberalism is dead but NR, the world's premier "conservative" (Rightist) magazine, is promoting Jeb Bush-- as crypto-statist as anyone.
What is the purpose of being opposed to liberalism if the GOP is now as statist as Nixon & Ford rolled into one?
Thanks for nothing, NR.

coal carrier| 2.21.11 @ 6:05PM

“it's political deceit.”

The very first post nailed it. Our entire political system is wrought with deceit. Every candidate that has run for president has done so from the middle and then changed direction. Except one, Ronald Reagan.

Camelot’s Kennedy was young, exciting and a family man, until we found out about he and his brother tag-teaming Marilyn in the Malibu beach house. If he were alive today, where do you think he would stand on the issues? Would he be closer to his brother Teddy or would he be quoting Reagan?

Johnson was a dyed in the wool racist with a grandiose progressive plan for more power. Also, don’t forget what he said when running against Goldwater, “we’ll leave the fighting to the Asian boys”. And we can’t forget his famous political ad with the atomic bomb going off next to the little girl holding the flower in her hand. It was touted as “political genius”, but it was a lie.

Then we have Nixon, a “conservative”. Who took us off of the gold standard and instituted wage and price controls. I don’t remember that being in my instruction manual on how to be a good conservative.

Next we had Ford. Remember “WIN”, Whip Inflation Now. That worked out. Let’s continue to manipulate the money supply through the FED. Yeah, that’s how to do it.

Then Carter ran as a farm boy from the South. An Annapolis graduate who was a moderate, until he got into the Oval Office. Then his progressive agenda took over and we wound up with double-digit inflation, double-digit interest rates and double-digit unemployment.

After Reagan we got HW Bush. Portrayed as a conservative but we know different. Remember “Read my lips”. Another progressive Republican who couldn’t say no too more spending.

Now it was Clinton’s turn to claim he was a moderate as he ran for the White House. I’ll bet he lies awake at night thanking God for Newt and the “Contract with America”. His wife’s healthcare plan almost did him in.

Then W. Ran as a conservative, governed as a progressive. Took the Clinton 1.5 trillion in revenue and ran it up 2.5 trillion. I didn’t think a conservative could spend money that fast.

Then we have Hope and Change. Well, what did he run as? A moderate? Yes, with an open and transparent administration. Well we all know how that worked out.

Is Liberalism dead? Not in the last 50 years. In order to kill Liberalism there will have to be unprecedented cuts in spending. I really don’t think Washington DC has the spine to do it.

Alan Brooks| 2.21.11 @ 6:33PM

"he and his brother tag-teaming Marilyn"

Who wouldn't want to have a threesome w/ Monroe, 'cept eunuchs? Call it the Monroe doctrine.
Seriously, Robert Kennedy was so good he would have made Reagan seem like Warren G. Harding.
But God had other, mysterious, plans.

W| 2.22.11 @ 6:11PM

Brooks, you are a loon. Did God tell Sirhan Sirhan to kill Bobby Kennedy?

Torstin| 2.21.11 @ 6:29PM

I agree with Bill - it was just 2008 when MSM and liberals in general called the death of Republicans for generations. They were partially right in that the last 2 years has purified the (R's), somewhat, with the extreme need to ramp up to a new reality quickly with a titular head that can beat the socialists.

Alan Brooks| 2.21.11 @ 7:49PM

This is how bad NR is getting, all LBJ did was facilitate the passage of the Civil Rights Bill that JFK had got the ball rolling on:

"By Linda Chavez
Conservatives revile Lyndon Baines Johnson, the 36th president, for his massive expansion of federal power and the welfare state. But he deserves credit in my book for two important accomplishments of his five years in office. After becoming president when John F. Kennedy was assassinated on November 22, 1963, Johnson used his considerable influence with his former colleagues in the U.S. Senate (he had been majority leader before Kennedy tapped him for vice president) to secure passage of the 1964 Civil Rights Act. That law transformed the country, largely bringing to an end nearly 200 years of state-supported discrimination on the basis race. Without Johnson’s support — a former opponent of civil-rights laws — the bill would never have passed in its current form and the nation might have endured decades more struggle to realize the principle that all men are created equal and endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights.
But Johnson also deserves credit for his willingness to fight the expansion of communism in Southeast Asia. Historians can argue with his tactics and his micromanagement of the Vietnam battlefield from the Oval Office, but he was a fierce opponent of communist tyranny, something that cannot be said of many liberals in his era and after. The disgraceful scenes of Americans fleeing South Vietnam on helicopters, abandoning their allies on the ground, occurred not during LBJ’s tenure, but during his successor’s, Richard M. Nixon."

Vietnam?? oh that was a big success, uh. And Chavez blames Nixon for LBJ's war? we ALL owe Nixon an apology.

carnot| 2.21.11 @ 8:41PM

but...but...Nixon inherited that war!!!!

sound familiar?

Alan Brooks| 2.21.11 @ 9:11PM

Nixon wasn't a monster as LBJ was, Nixon was-- like Bush-- in over his head. And I think Clinton was exponentially better than Bush- both of 'em.

JmsA| 2.21.11 @ 9:13PM

I, for one, don't give a crap about anything Linda Chavez says or writes.

Ret. Marine| 2.21.11 @ 6:40AM

We should all be mindful of our history. Was it not a 19th Century Democracy that too had low numbers to a particular new party (National Socialist/Nazi) that took over the German Nation. Look how well that turned out. Am I the only one who sees similarities here.
As long as the liberal rot in this country has the media (pravda) and the seat of power, Senate as well as the pretender and fraud kenyan on their side, they are not dead at all, they have just steered too far on the left turn for the rest of this center right country but, somehow the R's will find a new way to crew it up, that I am sure of. History is very revealing on all things political. One man's opinion matter very little in the vast stretches of human behaviours.

mames| 2.21.11 @ 1:53PM

We will know when liberalism is dead; we will bring home 10-25% more income every week. Until then its this is just a hope.

Alan Brooks| 2.21.11 @ 9:12PM

No, that 10- 25 % is going to guns-- not butter.

JimH| 2.21.11 @ 6:47AM

The label may change. But the notion that the state can be used to take from some to give to others goes on forever.

MikeD| 2.21.11 @ 7:38AM

Never count out true evil; especially when that evil not only is completely convinced that they are SO righteous that ANY tactic is acceptable to defeat the hated 'other side'; even though that 'other side' is the majority in their own country. I have been stating that liberalism is a disease and an evil for many years, while those on the other side have been insulting and excoriating me the whole time.

It is imperative that nothing be assumed because these people who have destroyed the democratic party are truly evil and so driven by hatred that they will do ANYTHING to get, and keep power. It was bill and hillary that gave us the 'permanent campaign' and the 'politics of personal destruction'. Barry the muslim has raised it to an art form. (BTW, where DID all that money come from to buy your election, barry? Oh, and, WHO ARE YOU?, we have to wonder because you won't tell us.)

Regarding Nixon, LBJ was a REAL thug, and he epitomized the "Win at all costs" democrat. The difference between LBJ and Nixon was only that the idiot republicans went along with the corrupt media to destroy one of their own in an astounding example of GOP weakness and their need to 'get along' with the democrats. Before you all start your campaign of terror against these comments, let me remind you that, compared to barry the muslim and HIS crimes, Richard Nixon was an altarboy! Applying the usual litmus test of "What if a republican did it?" to barry and his band of thugs, the media whould be foaming at the mouth if any republican ever did anything like this current band of liars and traitors in Washington.

As on final reminder, remember that all the problems with federal employee unions was given to us by JFK, who issued an EXECUTIVE ORDER his first day in office. Americans never had the chance to vote on it, either directly, or through their elected representatives. This is how the democrats work, knowing anybody with a brain would never go for their policies, they either jam them through in the middle of the night, or sneak them through as a presidential 'fiat'. We've had enough. I just wonder if the GOP has finally grown a spine. Madison is ground zero; what an amazing place to start the demise of liberalism!

Mimi| 2.21.11 @ 7:56AM

Great post..(as usual) Mike. We need to get the unions out of the PUBLIC work-place. The law must be changed back and soon...they are bringing the country over the CLIFF! it looks like we now have the consensus and WILL to get it DONE. Keep up the good posts..GOD -BLESS.

MikeD| 2.21.11 @ 2:28PM

Mimi,
Are you married? Do bald old guys make you weak at the knees? Can you overlook physical infirmities? If you answered yes to any of these questions, you must be the most magnificent woman in the world! (And probably happily married to a really good guy!) Thanks for the post. We're all in this together.

Mimi| 2.21.11 @ 7:42AM

The hour has finally arrived....for " The Primary Parade " of the 2012 Presidential election. It is critical that we have upon that STAGE strong Conservative thinkers. And I don't mean "NEWBIES" to the cause....Why???
The hour has come for this NATION...To present our case, To EDUCATE....To GIFT the people the GOODNESS and value and strength and security of the LIBERTY cause and path to enduring FREEDOM via the truly CONSERVATIVE path. Let the SHOW go on and may the BEST we got be our nominee!!!
Liberalism and it's evil way has a way of appearing out of nowhere and popping right back up...literally from the dead!!! you can't give these people an "INCH".....Bring on our strongest to lead this ongoing BATTLE!

Dixie Pixie| 2.21.11 @ 12:36PM

Bring our Strongest into Battle.
That would be Mitt Romney, Jeb Bush and Donald Trump.

Mimi I like your enthusiasm, but I am not that optimistic.
Not with the choices the Republican is inflecting on the conservative populace.

Grzmlyk| 2.21.11 @ 12:45PM

Romney, Jeb Bush and Donald Trump?

God, that is depressing.

A proven loser, an incipient Rino and a certified whack job. Eesh.

Dixie Pixie| 2.21.11 @ 1:09PM

Monday mornings and the Republican Leadership always bring me down.
For that group its not Liberalism Lite but the word Conservative with a noun or verb added.

What the Conservatives need is a Martin Luther not a palliative.

Grzmlyk| 2.21.11 @ 1:25PM

Yes, Dixie Pixie, the fact is, the political will does not exist to do what needs to be done; our political class, as a group, would rather we all go over the cliff together than introduce reality into the proceedings.

You can fiddle around at the edges, but, to appropriate Everett Dirksen, a hundred billion here, a hundred billion there, and you STILL ain't talking real money.

We need to cut TRILLIONS. And, since the Fed is obliging us by running the printing presses 24/7, every day the dollar loses a bit more value. It's like we're in a frenzy.

I'm reminded of the death spiral JFK Jr. went into in his plane - he became disoriented and, instead of pulling out of his dive, he actually exacerbated it in his panic.

I simply cannot believe anyone thinks Romney, Bush or, heaven help us, Trump is the answer.

The sad truth is, there isn't a single conservative out there who will be the Superman this country needs.

MikeD| 2.21.11 @ 2:42PM

Going out on my usual skinny limb; I'll state for the record that the nominee will be nobody we're even thinking of today. And I sure hope I'm right! I think Mitt Romney is a good man, but he will forever wear the albatross of "Romneycare" around his neck. Huckabee seems like a good ole boy who has never demonstrated the spinal fortitude to make the difficult decisions. Palin has within her the potential to be another Meg Thatcher, but there's just something lacking. But, there must be SOMETHING to the fact that she strikes complete fear into the dems and their willing lackies in the media. Daniels isn't all that well known...yet; and Jindal is not experienced enough...yet. Newt forever lost my support when he actually tried to compromise with algore and the whole stupidity of glo-bull warming. (I do actually have an academic background in meteorology and climatology plus experience when working for my favorite uncle...) Let's see, mmm, who's left? Aye, that's the rub...

There's always Rick Santorum, but he's a little hard to take sometimes and the dems are almost as terrified of him as they are of Sarah Palin. Gov. Barbour looks too old and heavy, and Christy looks too heavy. (I know it shouldn't matter, but the mediamorons will make it an issue.) I LOVE what Scott Walker's doing, but he might need a little more time in grade before he gets thrown in with the sharks. (But he's sure learned how to tell barry the muslim to 'pound sand' in a relatively nice way...) Same with Rubio, but keep your eye on him. He's a keeper.

Finally, I think that Herman Cain is a real possibility; maybe Cain/Jindal, or Cain/Daniels; something like that. Then there's always DeMint, who I think lots of, but he needs more national exposure and more 'charisma' to build a following. However, he'd team up very nicely with Cain or Jindal or Daniels. As we say down here in the south: "Jes Thinkin' is all..."

Deborah D| 2.21.11 @ 4:12PM

I love the Cain/Jindal or Cain/Daniels (or the other way around). I also appreciate DeMint -- not sure about the top of the ticket, though. We've also got the lady from SC (but, like Walker, she might not be ready for the national stage). In the next few months, someone will pop up ... and do or say something that makes perfect sense. Then, we'll all smack our heads and say, "Of course!"

Oh, and MikeD, I love smart, straightforward, balding men (I'm married to one!) :)

MikeD| 2.21.11 @ 7:08PM

He is a VERY lucky, and obviously, brilliant, man!

Occam's Tool| 2.22.11 @ 3:16AM

Don't forget the most wonderful reindeer of all---John Bolton. He's gonna run.

Dixie Pixie| 2.21.11 @ 4:13PM

Greetings Grzmlyk and MikeD.

Here are a few quick numbers for your consideration.
40% of all spending is borrowed money so for a $3.7 trillion dollar budget, $1.48 TRILLION needs to be cut from the current years budget.
$61 Billion cut from the budget by the Republican Leadership is only 4.12% of cuts needed to balance the current years budget.

The above Republican Presidential possibilities would not hesitate to betray the conservatives with Donald Trump the fastest. No candidate is pushing the necessary cuts just to slowdown Liberalism.
Forget about a rollback with this bunch.

????Is Liberalism Dead????
A parasite is the healthiest just before the host expires.
Liberalism has never been wealthier or as healthy than it is now.

MikeD| 2.21.11 @ 7:16PM

Very astute observations. What it means, of course, is that we will do nothing by nibbling around the edges; we must cut fundamentally. Both Social Security and Medicare started off with good intentions (It's about the road to hell...) but the idiots in D.C. just had to keep adding more and more to serve special constituiencies to grab votes to the point that they are simply unsustainable. And; we cannot be guilted into backing off. I can see the headlines and screams now: "What about the children?" "Granny's gonna eat dogfood!" "The poor kids need new $200 sneakers!" And on and on and on.

What part of being broke doesn't anybody get? We are out of money and we must make fundamental changes. Frankly, we could easily cut the federal budget by 30% IF THE POLITICAL WILL AND COURAGE EXISTED IN EITHER PARTY. But don't expect the democrats to do anything but scream and cry and point fingers. We are so close to a total breakdown that nobody will believe it. These are dangerous times; times that demand real heroes and statesmen. (Yes, and stateswomen too!)

Mimi| 2.21.11 @ 7:37PM

Look guys, I said no NEWBIES ... I'm looking for tried and true Conservative. Mark levin type would fill the bill!....I'm thinking TEACH, TEACH and DEBATE the "O". If not, a John Bolton could run the show. to heal and strengthen the people and fiscal problems...Itis back to plain.....BASICS!!!
Oh Mike I am WIDOWED...was very Blessed!

MikeD| 2.21.11 @ 7:55PM

For one of the very few times in my life I don't know what to say; except that you must have made him a very happy man. He was truly blessed.

Occam's Tool| 2.22.11 @ 3:17AM

Indeed, Mimi, he was fortunate. I have always admired Mr. Bolton.

Jack| 2.21.11 @ 3:50PM

We need an M.D..

Dixie Pixie| 2.21.11 @ 4:27PM

Greetings Jack
Let me repeat myself.
What we need is a Martin Luther.
What we have are "Sister Sara" and a bunch of Disney dwarfs.

Occam's Tool| 2.22.11 @ 3:17AM

Sorry, I don't want to run. I prefer Bolton.

martin j smith| 2.21.11 @ 7:45AM

Its not Liberism but Socialism --Marxism-Leninism-Stalinism that has now become the political standard of the LEFT ( or Liberals ). The Liberal movement has morfed from kumbaya to hate,instigate,agitate, and isolate,& humiliate!!!!!!!!!!
Class warfare, Anti-Americanism and MSM Pravda-like propanda.
These groups will always be around, they will make every effort to disrupt,to sabotage and to take over however possible. To these groups, its power-no matter what means.
That means: Be vigilant always. Do not assume anything. Be on guard .
Those who fail to learn from history are doomed and that applies to Conservative types as well.

Deborah D| 2.21.11 @ 4:18PM

They did what they said they were going to do: March through the institutions. We cannot allow the president to get a "kill switch" for the Internet (Susan Collins needs her head examined!) That's like a kill switch for electricity or gasoline -- our country would be immobilized.

Just always remember Nancy Pelosi's promise when it came to Obamacare -- "We'll go through the gate, if the gate is closed we'll go over the fence, if the fence is too high we'll pole vault in, if that doesn't work we'll parachute in, but we're going to get health care reform passed for the American people." That right there is their creed...they'll do whatever it takes to maintain their power all the while saying they're doing it for us. They'd be laughable if they weren't so dangerous.

Grzmlyk| 2.21.11 @ 7:39PM

Deborah, I’m curious – why should Susan Collins get her head examined? She thinks with the other end. I say let’s send her to a good proctologist to understand what makes her tick.

Also, you inadvertently revealed liberals’ uber-strategy – indeed, that’s exactly what they want – a “kill switch” for electricity and gasoline – and the Internet, and our health care and our diets and our jobs and our disposable incomes and everything else we touch, think, feel or encounter.

I love your comment about Nancy Pelosi – it sure does crystallize the credo of liberalism. That’s why they will never be stopped – I mean, they go to the voters for mandates. If the vote goes against them, they don’t respect the will of the voter, they just take it to the courts. If the courts rule against them, they just do it by regulation. If a higher court rules against the regulation, they simply ignore the ruling. That’s where we are with offshore drilling, and that’s where we’re about to go with the EPA and cap-and-trade. After all, the rule of law means nothing to a corrupt tyrant.

I mean, this Wisconsin thing is blowing my mind. When Dems win, it’s “screw you, Republicans! We won and you have to get in the back seat!” When Republicans win, it’s, Wah!!! Wah!!! Wah!!! I want my democracy!!!

Liberals: Assholes, thieves, liars, parasites, fools and perverts. And that’s just our elected officials.

You are also right on the money when you say liberals have permeated all of our institutions. I knew there was no uninfected quarter of American society left when our own military genuflected at the altar of political correctness after the Fort Hood shootings by an Islamist on a rampage. General Casey essentially said that a few mass killings were a small price to pay for an army that embraced “diversity."

No, liberalism is not dead; it’s alive and well and not even on the ropes. It’s simply ducking a punch and will be on the attack again before you can say “Newt Gingrich.”

Deborah D| 2.22.11 @ 9:11AM

Grzmlyk ---Hahaha! Love the bit about getting Collins a proctologist! Truly, that's where her head and many of the so-called "moderate" (aka "liberal") Republicans' heads are located.

Yes, it's obvious that through cap and trade and bans on offshore drilling in the Gulf, among other things, Obama and company want a kill switch for everything that makes America work. And, if they can't get it by legislation, they just go ahead and do it anyway. "Well, we'll just have to win, then," in Bill Clinton's famous words. They keep telling us who they are, so we'd best listen.

Fortunately, (scarily so) they are showing us not just telling us in Wisconsin. This is the fight, and they know.

Grzmlyk| 2.22.11 @ 9:53AM

Well, Deborah, let's hope they lose the Wisconsin fight. I'm hearing some conservatie pundits saying they're overreaching and this will blow up in their mendacious faces. I don't know.

Once again, because the mainstream media is portraying this as "freedom fighters" (i.e., the union parasites) vs. tyrants (i.e., the true freedom fighters), most of America is not getting the accurate facts.

As usual. I mean, someone pointed out last night - I think it was Bernard Goldberg on O'Reilly (Goldberg got a word in when O'Reilly had to stop talking for a second to clear his throat) - that the media echo chamber curiously has not reported how lilly-white the rent-a-mob is in Wisconsin. But when the TEA parties hold protests - which do include "people of color," by the way - all we hear from the MSM is that the TEA Party protests are really KKK rallies in disguise.

And, once again getting back to the incredible naivete of this Tyrell's premise in this piece, if liberalism were truly dead, the media would have already failed at putting wind in the sails of this hijacking of the rule of law by liberals in Wisconsin. The incident would be over.

But it's not, and the union thugs and parasites might win. Why? Because liberalism is NOT dead.

Mimi| 2.21.11 @ 7:40PM

GOD DEB...You nailed it with that last line!!

MikeD| 2.21.11 @ 8:04PM

Liberals will not be stopped until they run out of other people's money. Oh! Wait! that's where we are now! We're broke! But, no worries, barry and his thugs will just print more. By the way, have you seen the collapsing dollar lately?

I went to Australia in late 2008 to write a book about sailing around Australia, and the Australian Dollar was 60 cents against the U.S. Dollar. It was 74 cents as recently as last summer. Then barry and bernancke did their "Quantitative theft" and the dollars are NOW AT PARITY. That means they are worth the same. I'm sure glad I opened savings accounts down there. By the way, it IS still legal for Americans to have foreign bank accounts; at least so far. (Although barry is trying hard to make it illegal.) Did you know that Australian banks are paying 6% on savings accounts and 7% on C.D.s? And you don't need a ton of money to open an account. Just a thought.

Occam's Tool| 2.22.11 @ 3:24AM

I think the Kiwis are paying more. Just beware the tax man.

Deborah D| 2.22.11 @ 9:13AM

Thanks, Mimi!! By the way, I love John Bolton too!

JP| 2.21.11 @ 7:48AM

Liberalism died, and Nietzsche killed it. Almost all of the bad thought, and ideas today's liberals use and espouse can be traced to him.

Mike Hawk| 2.21.11 @ 8:34AM

The Leftists have an Icon in John Lennon. Their political anthem "Imagine" was from his drug addled brain (in his post Beatles life). Listen to it if you don't believe me. It is one of the most lame cynical compositions ever penned by a deluded anarchist.

cuban pete| 2.21.11 @ 8:45AM

If the goof ball Perot was not in the '92 election George H.W. Bush would have won.
PS
Great insights as usual by the early posters.
Thanks

MikeD| 2.21.11 @ 2:48PM

Pete,
That is one of the most forgotten facts I've ever read here; and I've been at it a long time. You're absolutely right! If that mental midget perot (Who was as much a traitor as barry and the rest of his thugs) hadn't screwed things up, Bush I would have won a landslide. As it was, bubba clinton got 43% in 1992, and a little better in '96. Hardly a mandate. Who knows what could have happened if bush I had done two terms. Maybe the media might have gotten tired of their vendetta against Dan Quayle; who was certainly much smarter than that moron in the White House now. Barry is either the single stupidest sentient human being to ever slither into the presidency; or the most deeply evil. One or the other.

Wayne | 2.21.11 @ 8:48AM

"... but today their obliviousness amounts to a kind of madness. " - great line. Right now I feel like Alice in Wonderland or is it OZ. Where we are actually told to ignore the man behind the curtain. Where socialized medicine masquerades as comprehensive health care, and cronies get exemptions, so that only those against it have to pay for it.

I do see this as a last breath in a way. They are stuck in the wrong century. They are stuck in the 19th century. Talk about unions and they talk about child labor (huh?). They certainly don't talk about how unions sent jobs packing to Mexico.

But I discovered their theme song, and I think we should adopt it ourselves. It goes like this: "Union Busting, busting, busting, Union busting, busting, busting, union busting, busting, busting. ..."

Get rid of the unions and you end liberalism.

logmank| 2.21.11 @ 8:53AM

No, it's not. As another poster has correctly stated, not as long as we have folks seriously excited about $61 billion in "cuts" from a federal budget of $3,700 billion.

Mattled| 2.21.11 @ 9:03AM

To slay liberalism, we must defeat the media. Think about the "soft" morning shows. They disguise liberalism in segments about human interest, food, children safety, psychology, etc.

Mr. Tyrell, you have the resources and contacts to start a campaign against the liberal media anchors and reporters----- not the network logos, they are faceless.

But the Matt Lauers, Robin whatever her name is. Stephanopoulos, etc.

Want to End liberalism? Cut off the energy supply---- it's the media who cloak and disguise the agenda as "mainstream" . The media is the gasoline that fuels that agenda. Let's put them on billboards and other ads. Cut off Katie Couric and you cut off gasoline to 5 million people----and they aren't all Democrats watching her.

Grzmlyk| 2.21.11 @ 1:15PM

Mattled, I think you are right on the money about the media - however, it's not just the media, of course; it's also our entire, kindergarten-PhD education system, our scientific institutions and, of course, government as well (as Limbaugh succinctly puts it, the "four corners of deceit").

Personally, I think it's too late for this country. I think all representative republics eventually collapse because of the corrosive nature of fiscal irresponsibility. And indeed I believe we are in the final innings.

However, if we are to have a prayer of salvaging this country, it isn't enough to call out the liberal media - we have take over huge swaths of liberal institutions; Hollywood, a major network or two (or three), the NY Times, the Washington Post, The Chicago Tribune, the LA Times and, of course, we must cut funding for PBS (let it live or die on its own).

Until we change the popular culture in this country - which, contrary to Tyrell's premise, has been going in exactly the wrong direction without a detour for the last 75 years - conservatism will never be the dominant ideology - I don't give a damn how many polls say otherwise.

After all, conservatism only becomes popular when liberal bloodletting has been so egregious that the "silent majority" finally speaks with one voice. But then, once the patient is up and moving again, the bloodletting only resumes at a faster pace.

And look at what's happening in Wisconsin - all of these teachers, good liberals all, call for sacrifice for you and me - but when it's their ox that's gored, look at how they howl. I thought they were good little socialists; what happened to "from each according to his needs?" Doesn't apply to people who are in line for the gravy train.

And it's going to be impossible to put the genie of the free lunch back into the fiscal bottle.

Harry the Horrible| 2.21.11 @ 9:12AM

Suuuure it is...

Folks need to understand - nearly half the population DOES NOT PAY INCOME TAXES. And they get to vote. And lots of them are willing to vote for "Free Stuff" and to heck with the consequences. So what if the government goes broke - they're not the ones paying for it...

So long as this situation endures, "Liberalism" (aka Socialism Lite) will do just fine.

Spoonman| 2.21.11 @ 11:39AM

Working, taxpaying folks are indeed the slaves for those liberals (and please don't anyone call them Progressives) and their base. Your stolen earnings are the root of their evil.

MikeD| 2.21.11 @ 3:02PM

Which requires the following changes:
1. Nobody votes unless they pay income taxes or owns property.
2. Everybody pays income tax, no matter how much (or little) income they have. Say, a straight 10%. No deductions or exemptions, no nothing. No pay taxes, no vote. (Pardon the grammar.)
3. Every voting roll is destroyed on March 1st, and the only people who vote after that date must re-register with a photo ID card.
4. All voting instructions are in English only, and everybody who wants to vote must pass a simple test, in English, about our system of government, our constitution, and history.
5. Voting age is 18, but only with proof of full time employment. If somebody is not employed, or in school at 18, they get to vote when they get a job that pays income tax. No exceptions. No trust funders, no welfare kings or queens, no permanent student agitators.
6. No person is elegible for elective office unless, and until, they have spent 10 years in gainful employment. (Practicing law does NOT count as gainful employment!)
7. No public employees may vote in any election that involves the governmental level that employs them; ie., municipal employees cannot vote in municipal elections, fed. employees cannot vote in federal elections, etc...

I'm sure I've missed some, so I heartily encourage you all to add to the list.

Harry the Horrible| 2.21.11 @ 4:00PM

Much as I like the idea of a limted franchise, and the security of the ballot, you are assuming the electorate will actually vote to limit the franchise.
I don't see that happening outside of an armed revolution. Heck, we have enough trouble getting the voter ID requirement.

tallMel| 2.21.11 @ 6:36PM

8. Election day is April 16th

MikeD| 2.21.11 @ 7:31PM

EXCELLENT POINT!!!! With one addition: Do away with witholding tax and force every American to write a check to the federal government on, or before, April 15th. Think that'll get their attention?

Occam's Tool| 2.22.11 @ 3:19AM

Actually, Mike, I think they should have to be ex-volunteer Vets, although Vets who were drafted and saw the elephant are acceptable...;)

Louis Jenkins| 2.21.11 @ 9:13AM

"They almost never establish communication with the American conservatives. "

And yet there are Conservatives who have established communications with those people. We often call them RINOs. Snarlin Arlin for instance, or how about Mrs. Snow? Even Obama thinks himself the new Reagan although it doesn't fit the thought. The leftists continue to chip away at the Conservative base; if only we were that consistent.

VBMax| 2.21.11 @ 9:18AM

Liberalism is merely the vehicle being used by the current cadre of anti-social personalities to expand power and control over the rest of us. We elected the perfect storm of these types and now we are in the fight of our lives to regain our freedoms. In another time or place these types would have no compunction about shooting protesters or executing dissidents as "enemies of the state". The good news is that we vastly outnumber these types, but it is imperative that we re-educate the useful idiots who are unknowingly aiding and abetting their own demise.

bobmontgomery| 2.21.11 @ 12:42PM

Perhaps a chilling example of the types you mention and their mindset, was the former Communications Director for the White House rhetorically waving around a copy of the Thoughts of Charman Mao.

Chalkdust| 2.21.11 @ 9:33AM

If the dreaded polio of the 1950's had a liberal face, the disease many mothers saw in their nightmares, would still be around today selling used Iron lungs.
I remember last great people's uprising, mocking called the "Moral Majority" (as if one set of morals for all could be a goal of the governance ) by the liberal state owned press. At some point in the future, the economy will flourish again and good times will roll. I hope the "Tea Party" members will still remember how close America came to the liberal abyss by not adhering to our founding principles of; Smaller government, lower taxes is better.

Dave| 2.21.11 @ 9:34AM

As one who tries finding truth by simply following the raisin trail, sometimes the first clues are followed by ... suspicious smoke.

Examples:

(a) Liberals are now ... Progressives.
(b) Government spending your tax dollars is ... Investment. (And) ...
(c) Global Warming has been relabeled ... Climate Change.

I supposed you gotta be a pretty dull knife not to be able to follow the dots and connect the clues. But that legendary ol' ballplayer named Satchel Paige left us a pretty good piece of advice: "Don't look back, somethin' might be gainin' on 'ya."

Stay alert, kids ... don't be fooled, and keep a forward eye on them raisins. You never know when they're a sign of Progressives in the area, or just a little something the rabbit dropped.

MikeD| 2.21.11 @ 3:18PM

Remember Mike's Law of Liberal Duplicity: "The banality of the name used by liberals to describe an act or way of life is in inverse proportion to the desirability of the deeds or lifestyle." For example:

"GAY": Sounds like happy folk having a good time. WRONG! You all know what it really means; homosexuality.

"CHOICE": It sounds like people making decisions based on deliberate thought and analysis. WRONG! It means sucking perfectly healthy human beings out of their mother's womb and then, if they had the temerity to actually WANT to live, for their efforts they get to have their spines 'snipped' or their brains sucked out by a syringe.

"MULTICULTURALISM". Sounds like valueing all the great things we did to make our home, or tribe, or area somewhat special. WRONG! It really means that anything we established of value here in our own Country, the United States of America, is evil and should be suppressed viciously and ruthlessly.

"DECONSTRUCTIONISM" Sounds like tearing down old buildings and building new shiny towers and monuments. WRONG! It means destroying EVERYTHING of value that we cherish in our country that has been built by tradition over the years; and punishing those of us who value our past and remember the great things we, and our forbears did.

"AFFIRMATIVE ACTION" Sounds like people deciding what has to be done and going after it. WRONG! It means that it has become MORE important to be what you ARE rather than what you have DONE. Accomplishment is mistrusted because, if you're white, you only succeeded because you were given unfair advantages. But, if you're Black, you only succeeded because you were given unfair advantages. (Hmmm... That's strange...)

I'm sure I've missed some, but you get the idea. any other thoughts or examples? I'm running out of my own. Help!

Anthony| 2.21.11 @ 9:47AM

Wow Bob, you read my mind this morning.
All weekend long, and just before firing up the ole computer to get my morning dose of TAS, I was watching Gov. Walker dismantle the CNBC schmos, who were desperately clinging to the sclerotic Democrat line.
Yes indeed liberalism is dying. Sixty years of undisciplined spending along with a distain for the engine of production, the private sector, has finally come home to roost.
And all the mighty Obozo can do is whine like the petulant child that it's union busting. In addition, that old fool, Jessie Jackson, flies to every situation that needs a rabblerouser, while he screams his really, really, old cant, "It's Selma!!!"
No you old fool, Wisconsin ain't Selma, and your glory days are long over, just like the political party you belong to. Look to who really loves to relive the tumult of the '60s, it isn't us conservatives, it's old radicals like Jackson still living in ages past.
Well good riddence to all of you '60s type. And thanks for the mess you left the rest of us to clean up.
I can see Nov 2012 from my house!!!!

Anthony| 2.21.11 @ 9:51AM

Sorry, I ment MSNBC.

Mimi| 2.21.11 @ 11:31AM

"No you old fool ..Wisconsin ain't Selma, and your glory days are over"

Heh Anthony...You hurt my ribs from laughing so hard. That line of yours should be framed..for posterity...oh so true.

Anthony| 2.21.11 @ 3:55PM

Hey Mimi, I got another one for you. The real reason why Jackson spends so much time on the road rabblerousing is because " he don't sleep too well at home".
Seems after he fathered that child with one of his workers, when Jessie does spend the night with the Mrs., he sleeps with one eye open.
Rumor has it, late at night, Mrs. Jackson snugggles up to Jessie and whispers, "mister, I'm still gonna do to you what you threatened to do to Obama."
No justice, no peace!!!!

Mimi| 2.21.11 @ 7:57PM

Ant...thanks!

simon templar| 2.21.11 @ 10:04AM

I am sure your intentions are good, Mr. Tyrell, but you are dead wrong. No amount of wishful thinking is going to push the facts and reality out the window here. By the way, you failed to mention the progressive control of the media and their complete control of the education system. The most important areas you failed to mention was our fedral governement and to a large extent our corporate economic structure. Think Gates and Jobs. The elite in this country sold out to the progressives around the turn of the century and have been driving this country away from a constitutional republic towards globalization, world government, and socialism for nearly a century. America has been on a course of deconstructionism for nearly a century now. The progressives are winning and slowly advancing at every turn. They have established some very strong beach heads throughout the culture ranging from our views on family, sexuality, morality, to our identity and the history of the nation itself. My advice is not to forget this but be steadfast and continue to build an alternative to the progressive prevailing culture, reach out to what's left of the independents, and take back these institutions as best we can before its too late. I think these reports of liberalism being dead are quite exaggerated...and rather ridiculous.

WRJonas | 2.21.11 @ 10:30AM

Great article. We know they are weak but until we have some actual victories it is wiser to keep the pressure on and destroy them.

j bagdan| 2.21.11 @ 10:31AM

Mr. Tyrrell,
I agree with you on most points. You left out an important point that all conservatives should remember. Both H.W.Bush and G.W. Bush deserted conservative principles on taxation and spending , to overlook that is to repeat it. Also, while H.W. Bush was smart enough to keep us out of an extended war in Iraq, G.W. Bush forgot why we were in Iraq and Afganistan. Eliminate weapons of mass destruction and get out, and get revenge for 9/11 and get out. Instead we are in another extended losing war , and wasting our assets, when our attention is needed elsewear.

Martin Owens| 2.21.11 @ 10:32AM

Liberalism dead?

Don't cheer up too fast - so's Dracula, and it made him more dangerous than ever.

buckeyeman| 2.21.11 @ 10:33AM

So this article was meant as a joke, right? I mean, it reads like science fiction from an alternate universe. Liberalism, by which I infer that you mean collectivism, is the strongest it has ever been in this country and getting stronger by the minute. Half the populace is directly dependent on the government for sustenance. Almost everyone accepts the proposition that the government is responsible for providing food, shelter, internet services, cable TV and health care. Mr. Tyrell, what have you been smoking?

Grzmlyk| 2.21.11 @ 10:36AM

Hmmmm. Wouldn't it be pretty to think so?

On the other hand, with successes like the conservative ascendance, who needs failure?

Please. Liberalism is not dead. I don't care what the polls say, we all know how mindless and liberal-leaning independents are. If liberalism is dead, why are the TEA partiers routinely excoriated, reviled, ridiculed and threatened by all corners - academia, science, media and the political class? Gee, it sure doesn't feel to me like conservatism has prevailed.

And even if that were true - which it is not - one other thing is axiomatic: If, by some miracle, our economy were to gain traction again and unemployment went down and tax receipts began piling up again, in ONE nanosecond liberalism would be marching aggressively, more pervasively, once again (and I contend that it has barely lost a step in any case).

Liberalism is not a static philosophy; it constantly moves ever leftward and constantly metastasizes, infecting and destroying ever-larger swaths of the body politic even as it reflexively expands its outrageous boundaries. If 8 liberal programs were good yesterday, you can be sure that 10 will be required today and 12 will be absolutely necessary tomorrow. If 25% of GDP was good enough to support The State in 2011, then we know that we can't get by with less than 27% in 2012. And 29% in 2014. If homosexuality was to be embraced and deemed "perfectly normal" by liberal elites in 2007, then "transgendered" individuals have to be everyday “heroes” in 2010, and can we doubt that bestiality MUST be enshrined as a healthy expression of love by 2015?

Why do we see ever-more left-leaning Democrat nominees for president? Because conservative is winning? If liberalism is dead, how the hell can you explain Obama's rise? Hillary Clinton's "gravitas?" Al Gore? John Kerry? John Edwards? Nancy Pelosi? Harry Reid? Barney Frank? Keith Olbermann? Chris Matthews? George Soros? Frank Rich? Paul Krugman? The NY Times? PBS? CBS/NBC/ABC? MSNBC? CNN? Time? Newsweek? Hollywood? Media Matters? The Daily Kos? The Huffington Post? The Daily Beast? I could go on and on.

Tyrell's argument reminds me of the fate of the Black Knight in “Monty Python and the Holy Grail” - in the Black Knight's mind he is the victor in a mano a mano contest, even after his opponent (the protagonist) shears off first his right arm, then his left, then both legs. As the unscathed victor rides past the dismembered Knight into the Knight's former turf, the Knight - what's left of him - taunts the pristine protagonist from behind, claiming victory - even after he has been reduced to a bloody, useless, irrelevant trunk.

But the disintegrated Black Knight lives not in a world of "seeing is believing," but the alternate universe of "believing is seeing." Which is a hallmark of liberalism, and it is unfortunate to me that so many conservatives are apparently falling prey to this delusion and dancing on liberalism's grave - failing to notice that it is empty.

It's called wishful thinking. Liberalism is always on the march (look at Wisconsin, for chrissakes!), and, aided by our decadent, selfish, preening pop culture - and its herders, the mainstream media (which is NOT dead, despite premature pronouncements of its demise) - as long as there is one dollar out there that is not in the hands of the bureaucrats, liberalism will not be dead. Hell, it's not even out of fashion.

The only thing that will kill this parasitic cancer is when the host dies. And then liberals will be dancing in the streets, having finally attained their ultimate victory. The fact that their euphoria will be short-lived indeed is a very small consolation.

simon templar| 2.21.11 @ 11:44AM

GMZ, Glad to see your back! I have missed your insight and wit. I still say that AS needs to hire you! Man, loved the Black Night analogy..I am going to steal that one!

Grzmlyk| 2.21.11 @ 11:49AM

Thank you Simon! I thoroughly enjoyed your post as well.

Well, if AS wanted to hire me, I wouldn't say no!

Sometimes I don't understand Emmett Tyrell. How many declarations of the death of liberalism have we heard in the last 25 years?

It's an aspect of HUMAN NATURE - granted, a very ugly aspect of human nature, but it has to do with the human weaknesses of greed, vanity and denial, IMHO.

You might as well declare that jealousy, or greed, or foolishness no longer exist. Which, in a way, is what Tyrell is doing!

Anthony| 2.21.11 @ 12:52PM

Grzmlyk my man, I don't usually disagree with you, but I do take exception to the premise that liberalism is part of human nature.
Unlike the emotions of greed or envy, I don't think liberalism is rooted in our DNA per se.
Liberalism is a diseased philosophy, for sure, a warped way of thinking that plays to the baser elements of human nature, as you have pointed out, unlike conservativism that seeks to elevate all to the best of their potential, but it is a learned philosophy nonetheless.
It may be a distinction without a difference, but I refuse to believe a tainted political philosophy is a basic premise of human nature.
You can learn through reason to reject liberalism, granted, difficult with many folks, but still possible. I don't believe one learns not to be envious or greedy, at best, we learn how to overcome those feelings.
Oh well, how bout those Yankees!!!!

Grzmlyk| 2.21.11 @ 2:34PM

Well, Anthony, I don't think we are that far apart; I can't say I necessarily disagree with you.

My point is this: I believe that what lies at the heart of liberalism is greed, envy, sloth, lust, gluttony, wrath and pride.

Which, of course, happen to be the seven deadly sins, characterized originally in early Christianity because they are foibles to which it is all too easy for any of us to succomb.

Human nature has remained remarkably constant from the time immemorial. I believe liberalism embraces a false consciousness that indulges these baser human frailties; the inversion of good and evil are a nifty way for libs to exempt themselves from a true reckoning of the measure of their own souls and, in their minds, inoculate themselves against any negative judgment.

That's why I believe liberalism is an expression of human nature - abeit human nature at its worst.

It is a false idol whose siren song of easily-achieved, worldly virtue has proven irresistable to the foolish, the vain, the criminally minded, etc.

And so we have all of these proud secularists genuflecting before a god of destruction, hate, nihilism, vengeance, etc. in the name of creation, love, ecumenism and forgiveness.

Grzmlyk| 2.21.11 @ 2:38PM

BTW, I'm a Cubs fan.

Talk about human foibles!

Anthony| 2.21.11 @ 3:03PM

Points well taken. A draw between gents.
But, oooh you are a glutton for punishment!!! A Cubs fan!!! My admiration and my sympathy.
You see, underneath that gruff exterior of yours, lies a soft touch, that or true love.
My Yanks were, for a while, the door mat of the American League, but then, a steely determined winner with the right philosophy came to the rescue, and took control from those pansy lefties at CBS. Hmmm, a political lesson found in baseball.
Hey, is Steve Bartman still in the witness protection program or have you guys recinded the contract on him? The replay shows the guy next to Bartman doing the exact same thing ,BTW, bad rap for this poor kid.

Grzmlyk| 2.21.11 @ 3:33PM

Well, I lived in NYC for 10 years - the Steinbrenner hayday - and I enjoyed them immensely - although back then, Don Mattingly was as close as they came to a perennial superstar. Ouch.

As for Steve Bartman, all I can say is that, the next time I visit Chicago, he will sleep with the fishes.

Truth be told, I think he's more a part of the lore now than a villain in the Cubs' sorry history. Kind of like that black cat who crossed the late (great) Ron Santo's path back in '69 - which, if memory serves, happened at Shea.

As for the Bartman's ill-timed catch: I wouldn't have done it - I know it was a reflex on his part. But you can't blame the Cubs' loss and subsequent early exit from the playoffs on Bartman.

I blame Sammy Sosa. Never like him or his juiced muscles.

But THIS years the Cubs are going to do it. I hear they want to sign Betty White as their go-to mid-reliever. That is, if the Bears don't sign her as their new quarterback first.

:-)

Anthony| 2.21.11 @ 4:26PM

Yeah, that poor kid got the bum rap. The Cubbies choked, not Bartman.
But hey, ole Betty will indeed put the Cubbies over the top. Good pick up.
What the hell, she'll pitch more games for the Cubs than Pavano did for the Yanks, and she has a better moustache.

Occam's Tool| 2.22.11 @ 3:25AM

I'm 48. Will they go to the World Series in my lifetime?

davelnaf| 2.21.11 @ 5:28PM

Such creatures as self-hating liberals walk upon this Earth. Can Grzmlyk be a self-hating conservative? There’s an idea for a horror flick.

Grzmlyk| 2.21.11 @ 7:29PM

I'm a self-hating conservative because I see what liberals have done to this country and I don't like it?

Yeahhhhhhh - that makes sense, Dr. Freud.

Don't quit your day job. I understand you're a top-notch ball washer. Next step: Get a job at a golf course.

Occam's Tool| 2.22.11 @ 3:26AM

No, being a Cub fan simply reinforces the underlying principles of Conservatism. At least, it does for me. Now Mr. G, remember what my day job IS.

Grzmlyk| 2.22.11 @ 9:06AM

I doubt you'll get this, Occam, but I thought I'd pick over the remains of yesterday, and saw your post(s).

1) I agree, being a Cubs fan reinforces conservatism; in that light, I cannot be a self-hating conservative. But I do think being a Cubs fan makes me a de facto self-hating baseball fan.

2) the Cubs may go to the world series in your lifetime, if you live to the age of 968 years old.

I kid. I think they'll do it - the year after the earth stops spinning in its orbit.

I'm sorry, but I do not recall your day job. At 48, I'm assuming you might be a rookie at the Cubs' training camp. Seriously, what is your occumpation.

Anthony| 2.21.11 @ 11:11AM

Simon's post is well worth contemplating, and perhaps our exuberance is a tad premature, but not by a lot.
Just like the seemingly impregnatable Berlin Wall, that looked to stand for a thousand years, detante, they told us, we have to learn to live with this stalemate, don't you know. So said the wise men. Yet the moral and intellectual rot that made that wall also made the wall easy to dismantle. The rot was there, just nobody man enough to put their toe to it and kick it in, until Reagan.
Yes, the left have formidable institutions under their control still, and men of immense wealth that prop up the party line, but the rot is too far advanced and despite these men, the money is gone for repairs, as in 10 states on the verge of bankruptcy. Even with money humpty dumpty can't be put back together again, hell, you could have bought Newsweek for $1.00. 6 months ago. So much for the mighty left!! The lies have been widely exposed, so much so, that even the weak men in the Republican Party now feel enboldened enough to come from behind the skirts of the conservative women that are leading the charge.
Like the Berlin Wall, the institutions under the control of the left are now paper mache and are under severe pressure. The leftist hegemony is cracking everywhere you look. Gone are the days of controling the lies. Obozo the great looks like a 4th rate circus act.
This new generation of female leaders of the conservative movement won't need bulldozers to tear down what's left of these rotting leftist enclaves. No, a few well placed kicks with stiletto heals will do the trick.

Don L| 2.21.11 @ 11:21AM

As an arch conservative, God-fearing family man, who believes in the constitution, the bill of rights, the right to use resources wisely, own property, vote - if a citizen - etc:
I think this is a deadly naive and foolish mistake. (Rush declared it dead years ago)
Liberalism -the anti-God, anti-life and and anti-good impulse won't ever die, it'll just morph into another deceitful name and ideology. To assume so is to fail to understand fallen man and the powers and pricipalities.

Don L| 2.21.11 @ 11:33AM

They control half the dependent nation?

Remember, liberalism is never about enhancing people's lives. It is but the pervert using sufficent government candy in the process of seducing us to join with them in destroying our lives, our familes, our goodness, our nation and mostly - their real goal - our God, for they are but the epitome of evil, politicized.

NaturalBorn Texican| 2.21.11 @ 12:14PM

Evil is evil..............no matter what kind of lable you put on it.

simon templar| 2.21.11 @ 12:21PM

Mr. Tyrell..something else you fail to observe and mention is the powerful allure of progressivism and the illusion it presents to those lacking the wisdom, experience, and understanding necessary to not fall under its spell. There is a sort of spiritual dimension, if you like, to this conflict. The fact of the matter is there are real social issues and problems of injustice, unfairness, inequality, exploitation, etc. This is the rub. So, being human beings and Americans who want to be good citizens and desire equality and fairness for all, we are led to believe that government is the way to solve these problems and that something must be done to correct these inequities. Understandable and normal impulses. This is also the trap...and its been used and exploited again and again by the progressives. Like the snake in the garden, we are lured into believing that we can create the utopia, solve these problems, build the new world, and rule like gods with great care and wisdom. If only we could spend just a little more money, build a better initiative, just a little more effort, maybe more control and regulation, a bigger and better building or organization....this is an age old lie and illusion. Our founding fathers had it right and knew and understood this dilemma. They understood the conflict and both the good intentions and flaws of men. They knew that it was about freedom and liberty and creating a world of equal opportunity not equality. That if you wanted to change the world and help your fellow man it started with you, the individual, and that these problems could be fixed in large measure by individuals, by the local, by charity, and by the family. No government, no party, no revolution, no collective has ever solved these issues.

Oldefarte| 2.21.11 @ 12:34PM

Bob's editorial and the above comments are simply outstanding and extremely intelligent. I'd argue against some of your pessimisms that in my lifetime, liberalism [as Bob proclaims] is dying, though maybe not dead yet. The MSM has gone from being dominated by Murrow, Cronkite, Brinkley, Huntley, etc; to currently Limbaugh, Hannity, Bortz, Beck,etc. The Democrats domination of Kennedys, Humphrey, Jackson, Johnson, etc is slowly being replaced by a contrarily conservatism today from Palin, Walker, Bachmann, Kascich, etc. The problem areas are still the complete domination within academia and Hollywood, which effectively brainwash/propagandize our nation's youth with their radicalized teachings, movies and TV shows. No, liberalism is not dead, sadly, but IT IS SLOWLY DYING, thank to writers such as Bob Tyrrell, Quin Hillyer, David Limbaugh, etc [and we certainly owe to them our complete THANK YOU'S for their efforts]!!!!!!!!!!!!

Wayne | 2.21.11 @ 12:38PM

You one place where liberalism is dying is in the states. And it will be the states who finally regain their rights.

Chalkdust| 2.21.11 @ 4:04PM

In my opinion Terrell was confusing the Democratic Party of LBJ liberals of the early 20th century ( before 1976) with the current virulent strain of progressives/Trotskyites. A relative small group of Jim Jones type adherents, who will drink the kool-aid if required and are also equipped with a large anti-America strain. They can also be seen towing a large group of the parasitic Dependant class in their wake. Together they make up about 45% of the voting public and will always be tough to defeat.

Missouri David| 2.21.11 @ 12:44PM

What caught my attention to the evils of Liberalism, was a man by the name of Larry McNickols? who, under guise of Bill and Hill's Arkansas Feduciary Fund laundering Coke money with aide of Tyson-Chicken. Larry McNickols sought to expose evils of Clinton's pre-whiteHouse years... (Almost murdered three times...) Clinton who on arrival from England's shore, Rhodes scholar Bill, had, after graduation from law schoo,l had onehundredfifty cash to pay for Atty.Gen run, ?from Jackson Stevens? Jimmy Carter's classmate at Navy! Oh the dirt the Media never reveals unless you 're motives are good decent and pro America! Keep ,writing EmmettIII, love your stuff! Merry Christmas America! PS Unions ain't bad, just greedy and dumb!pps How come when I write letter to congressman and mixup in e-mail, e-mail deleted, but not here! Thanks and Merry Christmas!!!

Yosemeti Sam| 2.21.11 @ 12:55PM

" Liberalism Is Dead ...."

Do that apply to re-education camps - er, poison ivy league colleges - as well?

I Survived Arlen Specter| 2.21.11 @ 12:56PM

Liberalism is not dead Mr. Tyrell. Liberalism will not be dead until GOD casts Satan, the original leftist into the Lake Of Fire. As long as The Lord Of The Air & Father Of All Liars walks this Earth the mental disorder known as modern liberalism isn't going anywhere. Only The Holy GOD can permanently declare evil dead.

Mike D.| 2.21.11 @ 3:12PM

Right on. Evil IS evil. The Godless leftist that is now our president and those who are his minions, will when cornered, do all in his power to bring down and destroy this country. One of the true litmus tests to determine evil from misguided fools is when evil is cornered and defeated, it will do all in its waining power to destroy and bring down everthing around it before it is terminated.
This fight is coming to a head. It will be a matter of not just a battle for the country we call home but for our souls. Truly evil men are having their sway over this earth, it will be a time to test our courage and faith.

MikeD| 2.21.11 @ 3:24PM

Mike! Great to see you're back. It has been a while. We need your thoughtful analysis and insightful comments! .besides, lots of people think you're me! (I'd never take credit for your posts, would I?)

Mike D.| 2.21.11 @ 3:53PM

Greetings my brother. I would like to post more, but time plays a factor.

MikeD| 2.21.11 @ 7:40PM

Yeah, this working for a living has its disadvantages. Amazingly, when I was diagnosed with a variant of ALS (More than 7 years ago!) I was forced to retire on disability; but, my employer let me help from home for a while until they were forced to declare me fully, permanently disabled. (Apparently, it had something to do with my non-functional limbs.)Then, I found I was pretty good at photography, so I took pictures till I couldn't get around any more; so I started selling my pix in a gallery my dear wifey managed. When I could no longer lift my telephoto lens, I found I could write. (Well, sort of...) So, I began to write books, seven so far, and I'm selling them on the internet. There's always something we can do to support ourselves unless the government gets in the way... (Some people actually buy my books and, gasp! Read them!

I'm still glad you're back! Every good mind adds to the TAS site. Keep it up.

George S| 2.21.11 @ 1:32PM

I am trying to think of how Liberalism has affected my freedom but I cannot get past the most obvious: the right to travel without having to be radiated or molested. I have actually thought about visiting relatives in Europe over Christmas but declined to do so mainly because of the TSA. Yet it was George Bush who handed us this monstrosity.

Five years ago, travel was freer. Fifteen years ago, I could rent a Cessna 172, fly to Washington DC National airport, park at the Signature Aviation ramp, walk out the airport gate, walk up the steps to the DC Metro and spend the day at the Smithsonian. All without encountering anybody except the cashier to whom I paid the gas bill. Think you can do that today?

Liberalism dead? Yipee. I would trade a liberal program and higher taxes in exchange for the return of my right to travel unmolested any day. Because what Liberal program has ever been retired or rescinded? Even if Liberalism dies, nothing will change (see: Republican Budget 2011). At least let me have some freedom back.

If you do not have the experience of freedom, you will never know what you are being denied. So it matters not if Liberalism is alive or dead -- what matters is what it left in its wake.

Anommynous| 2.21.11 @ 1:45PM

I wish. You should know better, TAS, than to make such a headline.

How many times have we heard that liberalism, or conservativism, or Reaganism, or whateverism is dead? Liberals may have to crawl back into their rathole for a while and lick their wounds, but they always return and every new generation always seems to have to learn the hard way what scumbags they are and what liberal rule really means (Carter, Clinton, now Obama).

Death Be Proud| 2.21.11 @ 1:56PM

Yes, Liberalism cum socialism is dead.

What ever IS begins, continues and ends. There is birth, sustaining and death.

The essence of Liberalism IS death, since it’s always all about—DESTROYING.

Those old enough may remember a couple of hoary and then-famous phrases from songs.

The first perfectly encapsulates what’s happening in America, epitomized by the battle in Madison, Wisconsin---“They’re coming to take me away, hey, hey”. For those too young to recognize this, it refers to “they” as attendants in an insane asylum.

Si, mi amigos---the life-affirming majority of Americans IS coming to take away the Liberals!

Pertinent to what’s sweeping the Middle East and Africa, do you remember the Folk Music era, when the phrase, “They’re rioting in Africa, duh dud da ta duh” was on most everybody’s lips?

So, fifty years later, what do you know?

Maybe the cold war between lovers of life and death desirers is finally heating up enough to clarify the issue, and relegate the Liberals aka destroyers to the ass heap of history!

Gold ore must be purified by fire.

Just so, mankind’s mental “gold ore” absolutely requires the FIRE of truth, and it just could be that with the connectivity wrought by high technology, the very few controllers of the hierarchical machinery of all dictators will be overwhelmed by their awakened slaves, who vastly outnumber them.

The TRUE vast right wing “conspiracy” is coming out of the closet, right before our eyes!

Dixie Pixie| 2.21.11 @ 1:57PM

??Liberalism Is Dead??
Gentlemen, May I respectfully disagree.

A correct analogy of the role Liberalism plays in today's America is the same role the Roman Catholic Church played in early Medieval Society.
Consider Liberalism has its own Philosophy, Theology, Bureaucracy, Rites, Rituals and sources of Temporal Power and Funding.
Like the Early Catholics, any deviation from Liberalism is considered and treated as Heresy.

Liberalism dominates all sources of Temporal Power such as Police, Military, Prosecutable Powers, Legal and Commercial Powers.
With the exception of a few elective officials Liberalism is the dominate philosophy throughout all branches of government.
It is also the dominate Theology throughout the upper levels of the Commercial Management Class. Liberalism owns outright the majority of the Academic Literary, News and Entertainment Sectors.
If the current spending trends continue, then Liberalism will own 100% of GNP.

We are the serfs of Liberalism just like the serfs of the Roman Catholic Church.
Why else would the liberals boast that every source of wealth in America is owned by Liberalism and is only temperately granted to the public for limited conditions.

Tim the Enchanter| 2.22.11 @ 12:37PM

Your ignorance of the Roman Catholic Church is truly breath-taking, as is your slavish devotion to Martin Luther, the original left-winger and one of the most evil people ever to soil the face of the earth.

davelnaf| 2.21.11 @ 1:57PM

Very good article; but the author leaves out the contributions to liberalism’s rise from the grave by the bumblings of the two Bushes. We would not have the problems we now have if only these two under qualified people had never become president. Their RINOism allowed a mediocre Clinton and the Bamster, the worse president in US history, into the Oval Office. Clinton and Obama should have been nothing more than footnotes in the history of American politics. And the same should have been the case for the Bush father and his son.

Anommynous| 2.21.11 @ 3:04PM

President Bush always did what he said he would. I agreed with him 90% of the time. For the other 10%, where were the majority Republicans in Congress to stand up to him? Why did they so enthusiastically go along with the Prescription Drug Plan?

Even worse, when Bush did try to push conservative policies, such as reforming Social Security, why did the Republican Congress leave him hanging? I am so sick of people blaming Bush for everything. He gets it from the left and he gets it from the right. (Well, if he has inspired such hatred from the left, I think he must have done SOMETHING right.) The biggest RINO infiltration of our government was in CONGRESS. Thank God most of them have now been purged.

talkradio55| 2.21.11 @ 10:36PM

Anommynous is absolutely right. Why is Bush the scapegoat for the failure of Congress? Most of the time, when Bush was pushing for conservative ideas, it was killed by the "Republican" Congress. Social Security reform and judicial nominees come to mind immediately. The Republicans were just as anxious to kill SS reform as the Democrats were. And the Gang of 14 was designed to undercut Bush's excellent federal court selections. They weren't willing to go to the mat for the ideas they were elected for, but apparently, only Bush gets the blame. He couldn't have signed any of the legislation without it being voted for by the Congress that would eventually run away from him. Which explains why no matter how unpopular Bush was, Congress was always worse in the approval ratings.

stmichrick| 2.21.11 @ 4:45PM

Mr Tyrell
Liberalism may not have the numbers or the policies; they still have the lies and the media to amplify them and repeat them, over and over again.

I fear it is like stepping in dog doo doo; you can scrape it of but it is newver really gone.

emo| 2.21.11 @ 4:59PM

liberalism is dead (for now) because we've finally run out of other people's money.

The end of the stimulus has caused a crisis at the state level. Next will be once the Fed and Ben stop buying treasuries and try to wind down and eventually reverse QE. Not only will there be no one to fill the Fed's role of buying treasuries but the Fed will begin selling treasuries that they have accumulated in an attempt to shrink their balance sheet and prevent run away inflation. That starts late in 2011 or early 2012.

emo| 2.21.11 @ 5:04PM

problem with liberalism is that it is utopian and can never achieve its lofty goals. I think the official beginning of the end for liberalism was the recession of 1973-75. That recession with 9% unemployment and 10% inflation put an end to liberalism tool of creating inflation to reduce unemployment. Liberals believed there was a trade off. Friedman, Hayek and Von Mises knew there wasnt. By 1975, most American voters knew there wasnt either.

David| 2.21.11 @ 5:19PM

Liberalism is not dead and will probably never be as long as most of us are educated in public schools and the ruling class media continue to have the influence they do.

Liberals GIVE things to people. Conservatives are always painted as TAKING back from people what Liberals have GIVEN them. Conservatives simply can't win that battle with public school educated citizens and a media vehemently opposed to everything conservatism is.

Want proof? Watch what happens, even in this current climate that favors conservatism, when we start saying that insurance companies WILL be able to deny coverage for pre-existing conditions, or that the insurance companies will NOT be required to insure 24 year olds on their parents' insurance plans.

As I've said many timse before, as long as we have in place legalized theft by our fed government in the form of the EITC (Earned Income Tax Credit), not much will change other than tinkering around the edges. I wonder how many people still DO NOT know what the EITC is?

It is flat out theft from those who actually pay fed income taxes and given to those who pay ZERO fed income taxes (now 40+% of workers). It is not a targeted gift for specific necessities such as food stamps, housing assistance, medicaid, etc. It is a cash gift (in the thousands) every single year, to a family who pays no fed income taxes, to buy whatever it is that they choose to buy with the cash government has stolen from actual taxpayers. Televisions, stereos, another car, drugs, booze, prostitutes, cigarettes, etc. All life's necessities - right?

If we can't stop the EITC, then there is no hope we will ever make a significant dent in any other program. Liberalism ALWAYS marches on - ALWAYS. Even welfare reform the repubs forced Clinton to sign is now moot thanks to Bam Bam. Bam Bam got away with sending poor inner city kids back to shitty schools right after he took office by defunding the charter school vouchers that so many poor BLACKs depended upon. The program was a great succes for those kids and their families, and Bam Bam and the dems/libs got away with crushing a couple of thousand poor kids. How? The media and spineless repubs for not harping on what he did day after day after day. You know, like the dems do. We all know repubs are dumb because Dan Quayle misspelled potato 20+ years ago. But hey, Bam Bam can visit all 57 states with 2 more to go and no one remembers that or any of his other moronic statements.

It makes me sick when repubs hold the libs to only 10% of what they wanted on any issue, and then celebrate as if they had WON a victory for conservatism. They are idiots and morons - they don't realize they just LOST another 10% to the libs. They didn't and almost always don't WIN anything from the libs. And on and on it goes, and I suspect it will always be so.

Richard Baker| 2.21.11 @ 6:02PM

Maybe not yet but the irony to me is that the vaunted internet and computers have de-centralized information and made it very difficult for the lefties to hide their agenda and ulterior motives. This allows the average guy to know the truth about their intentions. I guess the computer IS good for something, after all. Who'd a thunk it?

Thom| 2.21.11 @ 6:03PM

Someone is going to have to help me here. If Liberalism is “dead” then how did the 20% that claim to be Liberals get control of 60 % of Congress, the Presidency, 80 % of the media content, the same or better of academia/education system and have control of the House of Representatives before 1994 for 40 straight years? They have about 4.5 Supreme Court Justices on any given day and control a nominal 40-45% of the State governments even now with the largest populations. I really don’t see north of the Mason-Dixon Line and the left coast being anything but hard core Marxist states for the next generation if not longer. That they will fail is not the question at hand but the damage they do to the rest of the country which can’t succeed I’m told is now written in the Constitution somewhere I can’t find it. Furthermore, one of the central tenets of all forms of Marxism is lying and deceit coupled with the “end justifies the means” methodology. Islam and so called Liberalism have a lot in common where as peaceful co-existence is concern.

While I don’t want to be on the wrong side of history here and go against the man who said the Republicans would be back in 2008 after their slap down in 2006, just who voted for Al Gore, John Fake Kerry and King Obama in 2000, 2004 and 2008 respectively if they weren’t “liberals”, the Presbyterians? If some people can believe “muslins” aren’t responsible for the violence going on in Egypt and elsewhere then I guess it is ok to deny the obvious close electoral results of the last 4 presidential elections where popular vote is reflected in the outcome of all 50 states or is that 57 states? What next, a man becoming President that can’t produce a certified birth certificate to prove he was actually a natural born citizen? I could pick up the phone and call the local paper announcing a new born tomorrow, show a picture of the new born and you wouldn’t believe how many people would accept that without a single certified medical record in existence (in this country). Those who think this or any other form of Marx’s nightmare is dead had better reread their history and of particular note how such ideologies normal expire. Like a dying predator they are most dangerous when they have nothing left to lose.

Unlike Ronald Reagan I don’t see opponents where as those that embrace Marxism is concerned. There is nothing benign about Marx’s theory and while some may choose to invest in self delusions about who the enemy within is and what they are willing to do to keep their power and live off the fruits of other people’s labor I shall not. Compromising with the devil’s hand maidens doesn’t change the outcome of the dirty deal. This nation is already looking down into the abyss and half of Congress and the Presidency are still in the hands of those that will sell out anyone that doesn’t tot the Marx line. I’ve said this before, the “moderates” genuine or not have had their day in the sun. Compromise is not going to save this Republic and two more years of the current crop of Marxist in power in Washington could easily carry us over the edge. Be it our own internal power struggles or external events we have little power to control at this point in time the next two years are going to be a very dangerous time for this Nation.

Self delusion about who the enemy is, is normally fatal in warfare. Those Germans that did not support the 72+ % that voted for the National Socialist Movement, the Communists or the middle of the road Socialist in 1932 were delusional too until it was too late to do anything about it. The people who brought Al Gore within a few hundred votes of the presidency, the complete fraud John Kerry within a few millions out of over a hundred million votes and gave such an obvious Marxist Puppet like Barack Obama nearly 53% of the vote out of a record number of votes cast weren’t “liberals”? If they say they aren’t “liberals” and vote for liberals perhaps we should judge them by what they do rather than what they say they are? It is the “liberals” that have to pigeon hole everyone into labels and class to pit them against each other for political gains. I only look at the character of the person and their actions define their true characters if you simply observe. A deft, dumb and blind termite could have figured out who Barack Obama was just by looking at this voting record, when he bothered to vote on anything of consequence.

This nation is locked in a long and I suspect costly battle for its soul and far too many people are focused on labels or the smiley face façade that hides the same evil that has been around since the beginning of time. Which one of the seven deadly sins does the Democrat Party not embrace, subsidize or champion?

Is Liberalism dead? No. By its very nature the legacy of what 100 years of accumulated damage to this Republic has done, it will continue to sink this nation under a mountain of debt it cannot pay while half or more of the able bodied adults in this nation continue to get a free or subsidized ride through life at someone else’s expense. It would take political fortitude like this nation has only seen twice in our history to reverse enough of this to save this Republic. Like Rome we will bumble along until we collapse from within because there aren’t enough “good men” to speak truth to evil and evil is at the root of what is laying waste to this nation. The ash heap of history is full of nations that embraced “good intentions” and then couldn’t get loose from the monsters they let loose upon themselves. We will be no different if enough people don’t step up to the plate and rise to the occasion. At this junction the signs aren't hopeful in this regard. We’ll know if we have a chance as a republic come the first week in November 2012. The Welfare state mindset either loses or this republic ceases to exist in any form most of us will want anything to do with.

Richard Baker| 2.21.11 @ 6:18PM

Thom:
By craft and skullduggery is how the lefties achieved their "successes." The point is that the "great unwashed" are starting to figure it out. It may take time but remember, no lie lasts forever.

Thom| 2.21.11 @ 6:37PM

Agreed but we don't have forever to last..... the center piece of lie is this belief that future generations can be forced into slavery to pay for the promises of the past. For each person that carries the weight of this coupled with the sloth that bought into the lie you have two slaves and only one can survive if the other does not carry their own weight. I don't think you are going to see enough unwashed movement to overcome the 2/3rd Congressional thing and ultimately overturn some admendemnts to the Consitution that stand in the way under normal operating SOP. Just my take but everything in my life politically speaking as been half way measures with not legs. Somebody's Ox is going to get slaughtered.

weaverofdreams| 2.21.11 @ 6:54PM

Greetings from Canada! I worry a lot about you folks down there. In part because I just care, but also because I fear that you are about to bring the entire world crashing down, and you will land on Canada big time, despite our behaving in a very prudent manner the past 15 years or so to get a grip on our problems.

Lots of belly aching and finger pointing going on in here. I'm wondering if anyone actually has any ideas as to how to get you folks out of the colossal hole you have now dug yourselves? Left and right both bear blame (I won't try to apportion it). Medicare and Social Security were never set up properly to begin with, and has just become worse since with rising life expectancies and the progress and cost of modern medicine (getting serious would require some solid actuarial accounting, rather than political fantasies!). Tax cuts in the '80's compounded things. Lack of proper financial regulation and stupid policies to encourage home ownership created a looming disaster. Two wars (at least one of which was a totally phony, as even now Rumsfeld concedes) blew a hole in the budget that was fatal, and then more tax cuts on top of that proved the final shiv (although your corpse is still trembling). That broadly covers the gamut of fatal left-right combinations Americans have allowed themselves to absorb.

The question is, do any of you REALLY have the stomach to endure the pain that is needed to get yourselves back on your feet? Unless you folks take a real strong dose of hard medicine very soon. And the real s**t hasn’t even really started, as this is YEAR ONE of when the baby boomers hit 65 (and let’s not even ponder the disaster of interest rates rising just 2 or 3 points, as they are likely to do, which will double or triple interest on the debt). Egads!! America will be a basket case in 10-15 years, making Greece and Ireland look sound. Unless you get serious. That will require big sacrifices and the abandoning of political icons and shibboleths on both sides of the ideological/partisan divide.

Will you actually have the courage to swallow medicine like the "bi-partisan" commission offered up? That is tough medicine. It is also sound and balanced.

If you really care about getting your books in order, will you accept, e.g.:
 doing away with mortgage deductability (we have no such thing -- alas -- in Canada, yet our level of home ownership is as high as yours. Some of you may consider this a tax increase, but it is tax code simplification that just gets rid of the sort of silly inducements to silly behaviour created by such things as nothing down sub-prime mortgages that finally unleashed chaos a couple years back. At least limit it to the first $200,000 of a mortgage. Why should you be subsidizing – giving a tax break to-- someone who owns a $3 million home with a $2 million mortgage?? From the comments here, I bet there aren’t many of you types in here).
 counting health benefits paid by employers as part of the total wage packet (as is done here in Canada -- employer paid benefits are just another form of income, after all. The unions will hate that. Good. They need to take a hit too).
 Somewhere, someplace, tax rates need to increase, at least for some people. You can’t just keep believing that you can have your cake and eat it too – at least not anymore! Without such tax code changes and increases for some (unlikely to include many in here) the numbers just don’t add up (if you don’t get it, consider that Social Security, Medicare/Medicaid, Interest on the Debt and National Defense account for more than 100% of current government revenues. Cutting just won’t get you there, at least not without major changes to the “BIG 4”. As Joan Rivers used to say, “We Really Need to Talk”!). See http://www.usdebtclock.org/

Speaking of which...
 Do you REALLY need to spend as much on defense as most of the rest of the world combined?? Maybe you really need to take a look at your priorities. This isn’t really something new, but has certainly been “blown up” over the past 10 years or so. Are you really any safer today than you were in 2000. I think not. And without strategic re-prioritizing, given what is going on now in the world’s most sensitive region, it is about to become a lot more interesting)
 Social Security needs an overhaul. I don’t know how you have messed this up so bad. In Canada our max. Contribution tops out at about $45,000k per year. IN US at over $100k. Our benefits are a bit lower, but we have lots of other stuff that you don’t have that equalizes things. And our system is guaranteed actuarially sound as far as anyone can see (at least 75 years). We increased premiums and allowed the fund to do proper private market like investments. Maybe you want to look at that if you believe in the free market, since your fund can only hold government debt, as I understand it . Keep those printing presses rolling!
 Do away with early retirement (we need to do that too in Canada– and I say that as someone with about 20 years still to go to hit 65, and I have already kicked in for 25+years). Why should someone who has already had it all be subsidized by the state (my apologies to the handful of you in here who may have already accumulated a fortune and want more of what you don’t need from the state!). You are just making your kids pay, literally!
 And raise the retirement age (again, as above – I don’t relish that thought either). When Social Security was introduced, most people didn’t live to 65 (that worked well). Now if you hit 65, actuarially, you are likely to live for about 12 more years or so.
 And means test Social Security. Kind of a double whammy, I admit, but tough times, etc...If you are earning $200,000 a year on your investments and private IRA’s/401k’s and whatever, do you really need a more from the state??!!
 Roll Medicare and Medicaid in together. Take the latter off the hands of the States. They are going bankrupt too. BO missed a great opportunity there to get the States to buy into reform. Doing so would remove some of the stigma on poor folks and create a bigger pool that would allow for some efficiencies in dealing with a larger single system. No need for State bureaucrats there padding the State payroll. Would bring great relief. And efficiency.
I could go on forever with suggestions. No doubt many of you gave up as soon as I said I was a Canadian (our buck beats yours now :-) and we have lots of oil :-)).

Or suggested anything that indicated you would have to pay more.

For those of you who made it down here, I would welcome anything that adds useful ideas to the above and provides ideas for how you can help yourself!

Cheers!

Occam's Tool| 2.22.11 @ 3:30AM

We protect your beer swilling hides. Without us, you would be speaking Russian and eating borscht thrice daily. By the way, your medical system sucks---I TREAT a LOT of Canucks that come over the border.

Grzmlyk| 2.22.11 @ 9:12AM

Now I know you are a doctor!

I remember now.

You may be able to treat a Canadian's malady, but, unfortunately, he/she will still be a Canadian.

I kid! I love Alanis Morissette and William Shatner!

Thom| 2.21.11 @ 7:17PM

Weaverofdreams,
Your nation has the population of California, a fraction of the GDP of same, no military capability what so ever, your economy is tied to ours at the hip with the bulk of your population living within 150 miles of the northern US border and much of your population seeks medical care in our nation because they can’t get it in yours.

If Mexico was on your southern border rather than ours you would be a third world country that depends on your oil exports for ist only source of exportable wealth. A good portion of your population speaks a completely foreign language refuses to assimilate into a majority English speaking culture and has tried more than once to succeed from Canada.

You threaten fine and jail people for the things they say that offends you. We fought a war to get away from people who think that way.

We have many problems but you don’t have any solutions to ours or your own. If you had any solutions the 307 million people that now live in the US would live in Canada instead of 30 some million…….that live right across the border from seveal major US population centers.

JmsA| 2.21.11 @ 9:26PM

Ouch!

Occam's Tool| 2.22.11 @ 3:28AM

Please keep in mind Mark Steyn is being persecuted in Canada. Free speech no longer truly exists there.

albert constantine, jr.| 2.21.11 @ 7:25PM

I think it might more appropriately be written that liberalism is undead, i.e. it wanders the countryside like the zombie creatures in the “of the Living Dead” films and video games. They feed upon the flesh of the unsuspecting, and usually are only stopped by visiting extreme force upon them.

David| 2.21.11 @ 7:47PM

Thom, the Canadian does make a lot of good points, and so do you. Most of our problems have been self-inflicted, such as our refusal to enforce immigration laws (ON THE BOOKS) on our southern border. I have to consider viable much of what the dreamer had to say. I agree that Canada is screwed up in the ways you stated. They would be speaking German, forget the French debate, if is were not for the good 'ol USA.

Thom| 2.21.11 @ 9:06PM

David, the problem with Canada is the same as you find in say Maine. You can't compare Maine to New York City, LA, Chicago, Boston, Washington, DC etc because the make up of the population of Maine is starkly different than that of our large urban population centers. Canadains can't really relate to much of the US because we are demographically diverse and they are not. They have the population of Califorina spread out over a very large geographic rural area.

You will get no arguement from me that our problems are self induced but our core problem has a consistent basis in Marxism which puts the State as supreme over the individual and their worth. Canada is a blend of both US and left over English Torry with some French thrown in for flavoring but it still leans to the European Socialist model. It lives under our protection which probably doesn't sit too well with many Canadians but that has been a fact for several decades now. Just as location is important to business and real estate, Canada's location provides them a unique set of properties that would not exist if they were as I said the northern border of Mexico.

As for imigration, by our own standards Canada is even more lack than ours. Again if they had Mexico on their southern boarder they would be worse off than we are proportionately speaking. Canada could be our 51st state tomorrow and very little would change in much of greater English speaking Canada because they are already intergrated into our ecomony on many levels for both goods and services. They would enjoy freedoms they now don't for the most part however and would find out what not being a "subject" of their government really means.

Marc Jeric| 2.22.11 @ 3:53AM

This fellow Emmett Tyrrell writes so well. However, if it is true that the liberals or progressives (previously known as s=communists an socialists) are in decline, let us not forget that now we are dealing with professional marxists: Abu Hussein al-Mombassa, a marxist Muslim, is in the White House; his 35 advisers or czars or, rather komissars, all of them professional marxists, are directing all federal departments. His use of executive orders are waiting for the amnesty of 15 million illegal aliens; then comes the arming of his system of local soviets (aka community organizations) when he stated that the country needed a domestic military with a budget equal to that of the Pentagon. He is following the precepts of the modern day Lenin, i.e., Saul Alinsky step by step. His program of massive nationalizations is well underway: automible industry, many banks, mortgage companies, student loan industry (only politically correct multicultural candidates accepted) and pretty soon insurance companies, hospitals, oil & gas companies, coal mines, transportation companies, electric utilities (you know - globaloney warming hoax)...
Liberalism may be dying but hard-core communism is in full power and swinging hard.

Derek Leaberry| 2.22.11 @ 10:58AM

I wish the gentleman was correct but I see liberalism as triumphant. Liberalism controls the culture and all its institutions, even the military and business. Think of the acceptance of homosexuality and all its manifestations like "gay" marriage and open homosexuals in the military. Or the rise of abortion, illegitimacy and divorce. Fifty years ago, all would have been considered either ridiculous and/or evil. But today, to be against any of those is to find oneself cast into the outer darkness of American culture.

william kotcher| 2.22.11 @ 2:57PM

Liberalism is dead, I could not read the article, all I could think is the author must be rich because the only thing I see that is dead is me. I can not afford my electric bill let alone my registration on my truck. If I wish to open a business, I have not the thousands of dollars in fees to pay the government, hell I do not have the money to repay and start over all the money I have paid to the government to get my Brazilian wife to the USA. My kids are stuck in Brazil because of Government incompetence.

I used to be a fan of the American Spectator, when I was young and naive.

Write about what matters, not this garbage. No need to point out the garbage, plenty others already have.

My life sucks because this "Magazine" fails to address the hard facts in politics that have destroyed the country.

Democracy is dead.

roadmaster| 2.22.11 @ 5:05PM

I appreciate Mr. Tyrrell's piece, but I'm wondering, IF liberals are DEAD and STINKING, how come we're stuck with the horrors listed above by Mr. Leaberry? This leads me to believe they aren't dead, just stinkers. They've stolen the minds of our youth and turned them against us.
Was listening to a local radio show last week here in Tucson and some lib/dork called in during a discussion of the 2nd Amendment. This idiot liberal's point was that the Constitution was written at a time when firearms meant a flintlock rifle, which in his loony interpretation, would only allow citizens to bear arms using same. Good grief!
I own a .54 caliber Hawken, and it's great fun to shoot, but when it comes to home defense, I have the choice to wield the latest technology available (as the flintlock was in the late 18th Century).
You can't fix stupid.

ProudLiberal| 3.11.11 @ 11:17AM

Conservatism will never die because it is a natural human instinct to resist change. Liberalism will always persevere because progress of the human mind is eternal.

weddingdress| 7.15.11 @ 5:26AM

I wish the gentleman was correct but I see liberalism as triumphant. Liberalism controls the culture and all its institutions, even the military and business.