-
How Mitt Could Be Beat
February 8, 2012 | 12 comments
-
Charmaine Yoest's Victory for Life
February 2, 2012 | 0 comments
-
Florida Republican's Ad Depicts Children Enslaved by Obama
January 24, 2012 | 3 comments
-
Rick Perry Declares 'Strategic Retreat,' Endorses 'Visionary' Gingrich
January 19, 2012 | 7 comments
-
Former Perry S.C. Supporter Switches Endorsement to Santorum
January 14, 2012 | 20 comments
The Spectacle Blog
Striving diligently to become an even worse columnist than David Brooks, former Bush White House speechwriting chief Michael Gerson endeavors to secure his berth on the Jeb Bush '12 juggernaut:
The party, says Bush, faces "dramatically changing demographics, especially Hispanics in swing states," the "alienation of young voters" and an unprecedented drop in support among college graduates.
"Trying to be all things to all people isn't going to work," Bush contends. The goal is "not to redefine our beliefs, but to recognize challenges and adapt," particularly on the issues of national security, health care, education, the economy and the environment. Republicans need to "focus on creating policies relevant to today -- not things relevant 20, 30 or 40 years ago."
This column -- as usual, no brief excerpt can capture the absolute wretchedness of large-scale Gersonism -- is based on Gerson's "recent conversation" with the former Florida governor. Given what his former White House colleagues say about Gerson, we can be sure that his primary interest was to offer himself as a 2012 campaign operative for Jeb.
And given what wonders the Bush family has wrought for the GOP over the years (among them, boosting the insipid Gerson to the Washington Post op-ed page) the only reasonable response for conservatives is the firm resolution: NO MORE BUSHES!
View all comments (46) | Leave a comment
Leave a Comment
More Blog Posts by Robert Stacy McCain
http://spectator.org/blog/2009/05/13/the-deadly-virus-of-gersonism
Follow us:
ADVERTISEMENT
Current Issue
- Madison vs. Obamacare
- Strange Newt Respect
- Useless Wonks
- Digital Subscription (Save 78%)
- Buy a single issue (Save 50%)
- Send Spectator as a gift
Clip of the Day
ADVERTISEMENT
Tim| 5.13.09 @ 4:23PM
George the First was always reckoned
Vile, but viler George the Second.
And what mortal ever heard
Any good of George the Third,
But when from earth the Fourth descended
God be praised the Georges ended
-Walter Savage Landor
Pingback| 5.13.09 @ 4:23PM
The Deadly Virus of Gersonism | But As For Me links to this page. Here’s an excerpt:
Jefferson Sanders| 5.13.09 @ 4:43PM
I don't really disagree with your take on Gerson, but can we please end this stupid battle for the soul of the GOP. The GOP is on life support, and worrying about Gerson and Brooks (a former TASer who is actually a pretty interesting writer) is a luxury the right does not have. Let's quit fiddling around with junior-high bullsh*t as Rome, or Washington, burns ...
Pingback| 5.13.09 @ 5:09PM
Ed Driscoll » Still, The Soundtracks By Herbie Hancock and Jimmy Page Are Pretty Cool links to this page. Here’s an excerpt:
Daisy| 5.13.09 @ 5:47PM
NO MORE BUSHES!! EVER!!!
Tom Paine| 5.13.09 @ 5:51PM
What? Now Gerson is bad?
You guys are dwindling in number by the day. Brooks, Frum, Noonan, now Gerson.
I miss anybody?
Why is it that you run from any conservative thinker who -- thinks?
DougN| 5.13.09 @ 6:30PM
Tom Paine, you left out a few words in your query to conservatives. If you had asked, "Why is it that you run from any conservative who -- thinks LIKE A LIBERAL?," then you might have been closer to the mark.
Tom Paine| 5.13.09 @ 7:32PM
DougN --
Peggy Noonan and David Frum think like liberals?
No wonder the number of people identifying themselves as Republicans keeps going down.
You guys are becoming puritans. Who'd want to join if it means you have to mouth the party line at all times?
DougN| 5.13.09 @ 9:29PM
Tom, let's say that Noonan and Frum aren't liberals. They're just...squishy. Philosophically, they are much more acceptable than, say, David Corn and Helen Thomas, but they certainly aren't as reliable as Ann Coulter or Bob Tyrrell.
What Jeb Bush and other like-minded GOPers don't understand is that we don't need to abandon our core principles of limited government and personal freedom in order to attract Hispanics and other minorities. I find it so condescending to minorities when people in power think they can win their hearts, by promising sugar daddy government! It is ugly pandering, simply put.
MT| 5.13.09 @ 10:09PM
Ugly pandering defines democrats. Ugly pandering, tax cheating democrats.
Louis Neyer| 5.13.09 @ 11:33PM
Can someone tell me why RS McCain et al are focusing on a column by Michael Gerson when there is trash like Maureen Dowd's ad hominem against Cheney and Limbaugh in today's Times. Like a previous post mentioned, conservatives can't focus on these small battles when they're losing the war. Stop fighting Frum, Brooks, Gerson, Noonan, etc., and start focusing on the war. If you would take the time to get out of your little sandbox, you'll notice that it's a real bloodbath right now ...
Basil Plumley| 5.14.09 @ 1:05AM
I am sorry Mr. Neyer but sometimes you have to put your house in order before you attack the enemy. With the possible exception of Gerson, the other folks you mentioned supported Obama or did serious damage to McCain because they disliked (hated) Sarah Palin.
It is the same w/r/t Colin Powell. It is pretty rich of him to endorse Obama last November and now tell the GOP how to function.
The problem with these folks is that they see Conservatism as an opportunity to gain power. Once they gain power, Conservative principles be damned.
I think (I hope) that many are whistling past the graveyard. I agree with the sentiment--NO MORE BUSHES!!!
tonypal| 5.14.09 @ 1:17AM
Basil, you hit it right on the head. The republican party is not affected in any way by what a clown like Maureen Dowd writes in her column about Dick Cheney and Rush Limbaugh. But when a nominal republican like Colin Powell goes on the attack, that's a different matter.
As for someone like Peggy Noonan, the woman gets wet in the pants every time she hears Obama speak. Why? Who the hell knows. But any republican that is getting all hot over Obama needs to be dealt with.
As for Tom Paine, you have a fantastically short memory. How long ago was it that the democrats were completely out of power in DC? Not very long ago. It doesn't take much for the balance of power to swing. Besides, democrats aren't in power because of anything they did. They are a bunch of buffoons. Recall that after they won back the House and Senate in '06, their approval ratings hovered around single digits for nearly 2 years.
The last election was a rejection of republicans because they did not stay true to their core beliefs. Of course, Tom Paine will reject this because he's convinced himself that he's in the majority of thought in this country. I say enjoy yourself and keep thinking that way. Hubris is always the one of the main ingredients in failure.
ruth| 5.14.09 @ 3:53AM
I get your sentiment, tonypal--but what an unartful way to word it. Eww. Tom Paine is Jeremiah; he gets wet in the pants every time he thinks of Obama, too.
L. Neyer| 5.14.09 @ 9:55AM
You make a good point Basil. I just don't like throwing David Brooks overboard. Fine and appropriate to disagree with him, but I think he's still an interesting writer. And, I do remember his American Spectator work fondly ...
james wilson| 5.14.09 @ 11:40AM
It is regrettable that Tom Paine cannot meet Tom Paine. I'd volunteer to clean up the mess.
Sanders: A battle for a soul can't be a stupid thing, it is the first thing. I wouln't drive this jalopy around the block.
Tom Paine| 5.14.09 @ 12:44PM
Peggy Noonan's major sin, I take it, was to be skeptical of Sarah Palin.
So is Palin the ultimate conservative litmus test now?
In order to be conservative, you must agree that Sarah Palin was the right person to be vice president (or president)?
I just want to get this straight.
Noonan also wrote a book last year in which she questioned the conservative "strategy" (a la Ann Coulter) of accusing Democrats of being "traitors" and "terrorist sympathizers" every five minutes.
But maybe you'd do well to listen to Ronald Reagan's former speech writer. She may have a point.
If conservatives spent more time thinking about ideas and policies and less on labels to appy to the Democratic party ("socialist," "fascist," and other stupidities) maybe you'd be competing better.
One thing I've learned reading the Am. Spec. is that conservatives like to call people names. I'll probably be called names by people who read this. But arguments? Not so much.
John W.| 5.14.09 @ 1:15PM
Tom Paine,
No name calling from me. You raise some good points. I think our point of disagreement is that there are some (Noonan, Frum, others) who are perceived (fairly or not) as advocating the creation of the Republican wing of the Democratic Party. The perception of advocating that course of action is what causes the harsh reation.
Angel| 5.14.09 @ 2:37PM
TP/Jeremiah, you whine about being called names after you've repeatedly told us to go f*** ourselves? Buzz off, bozo.
biniki| 8.27.09 @ 9:34PM
bikini
bikini swimwear
candyxiaoxiao| 8.28.09 @ 3:56AM
Ugg Boots UK
Buy Ugg Boots
micky&vicky;| 9.4.09 @ 11:03PM
ghd Hair Straightener
Bose headphones for sale