As the Buddhists say, karma is a bitch...
Newt Gingrich is one of those who fear that Republicans have been branded with the label of incompetence. He says that the Bush Administration has become a Republican version of the Jimmy Carter Presidency, when nothing seemed to go right.
"It's just gotten steadily worse," he said. "There was some point during the Iranian hostage crisis, the gasoline rationing, the malaise speech, the sweater, the rabbit" -- Gingrich was referring to Carter's suggestion that Americans wear sweaters rather than turn up their thermostats, and to the "attack" on Carter by what cartoonists quickly portrayed as a "killer rabbit" during a fishing trip -- "that there was a morning where the average American went, 'You know, this really worries me.'" He added, "You hire Presidents, at a minimum, to run the country well enough that you don't have to think about it, and, at a maximum, to draw the country together to meet great challenges you can't avoid thinking about."
-- Jeffrey Goldberg interviews former House Speaker (and current presidential hopeful) Newt Gingrinch in his "Letter From Washington: PARTY UNFAITHFUL, The Republican implosion," from the June 4th issue of The New Yorker.
[S]ome big money players up from Texas recently paid a visit to their friend in the White House. The story goes that they got out exactly one question, and the rest of the meeting consisted of The President in an extended whine, a rant, actually, about no one understands him, the critics are all messed up, if only people would see what he’s doing things would be OK…etc., etc. This is called a “bunker mentality” and it’s not attractive when a friend does it. When the friend is the President of the United States, it can be downright dangerous. Apparently the Texas friends were suitably appalled, hence the story now in circulation.
Today you disparage us for opposing a massive amnesty program that endangers our economy and national security. Today you even embrace the religion of global warming, a stunning shift from prior policy (your administration even went to the Supreme Court and argued correctly that carbon dioxide is not a pollutant).
What's a conservative to do?
-- Paul Gigot of the Wall Street Journal's famously conservative editorial board, addressing the board on May 22.
The other thing that's interesting to me is the degree to which the Right isn't even rational about this anymore. It doesn't even make arguments anymore about this or that part of the bill, it's just "We don't want any kind of immigration reform because it's going to legitimize 12 million people who are here and, oh by the way, aren't leaving. So let's just build a fence, and that's it." That seems to be the essence now of the conservative majority's immigration policy.
-- The editors of the National Review call out their Wall Street brethren for an East Coast Establishment conservative smack-down, May 31...
We hereby challenge the Journal’s editors to debate the immigration bill in a neutral venue with a moderator of their choosing ... It shouldn’t be a problem for the Journal’s editors to take up this challenge, since opponents of the bill aren’t “rational” on the question, have no arguments, and are “foaming at the mouth,” as they explained in a videotaped session of one of their editorial meetings last week.
-- Michelle Malkin, treating the WSJ with a tone of scorn usually reserved for The New York Times. According to a poll on the post, 95 percent of her readers think the National Review editors would win.
Longtime readers of this blog know that the Wall Street Journal is notorious for refusing to acknowledge its factual errors in editorials about immigration policy and for tarring its opponents as anti-immigrant racists. Will they rise to NR's challenge or continue to smear amnesty opponents from the safety of their Manhattan offices?
-- Conservative pundit Andrew Sullivan, blogging for The Atlantic, May 31
Laura Ingraham "takes the gloves off." Doesn't she want to "do what's right for America"? Finally, conservatives get mad at this president - for all the conservative reasons we're now familiar with. It only took six years of betrayal to get there, but, hey guys, welcome aboard. I find myself echoing Glenn Reynolds:
Heck, I'm basically pro-immigration and I find the Administration's arguments for the bill sufficiently unpersuasive and insulting that I'm leaning against it on that basis alone.
It's the arrogance and condescension that finally makes your blood boil.
-- Conservative blogger Ace of Spades sums up his feelings about the president, May 31.
Message To The Left: I'm not saying you should impeach him, I'm just sayin', you know, go with your hearts.
This is his legacy. Even his own supporters now despise him, even his own samurai are deserting him, even the people who could aid him are pushed aside. And we've got 19 months to go before January 2009.