« The Bill Clinton Factor | Main | Mitt Mondale? »

David Frum And His Critics

16 Jan 2008 10:11 pm

Jim Antle reviews Frum's Comeback here; Ramesh reviews it in the latest NR (not online yet, alas); Frum responds at length here. The whole discussion is well worth your time.

Comments (11)

Well if the most important step conservatives can take to improve their appeal is to Be More Liberal, I'm all for that.

The biggest problem that the GOP has to overcome is the general perception that it is "the party with the mean people in it."

Yes, that is indeed the GOP's problem. Unfortunately, it's also the truth.

Right-o, David L. There's no one more kind than Republicans like Daily Kos and his minions.

David Frum wrote: "We in 21st century America live in a new era of increasingly radical inequality.

This new inequality pervades all aspects of American life. Yet our conservatism remains a product of the mid-century era of narrow differences. It has not seriously begun to take note of the fact that the society for which it was created has already faded out of existence. The Reagan Democrats - remember them? They are gone: they are retired to Florida, where they depend on Social Security and Medicare. Their children have either migrated up to the fast-growing new mass upper class ... or failed to make it, and are now suffering economic pressures and stresses very different from those that preoccupied their parents. "

Frum is in many ways a disgusting pig of a man, but this passage proves that he, unlike most current conservatives (and by "most" I mean 90% or so) does not have his head up his ass 24 hours a day.

And kudos to Seth R for the GOP as "the party with mean people in it." That just about says it all.

MLAJ, since you wrote this...

"Frum is in many ways a disgusting pig of a man, but this passage proves that he, unlike most current conservatives (and by "most" I mean 90% or so) does not have his head up his ass 24 hours a day."

... you must be a member of "the party with mean people in it," right?

Ramesh has the better of this argument. His remark that one always has to question Frum's facts is correct and devastating. Frum would have conservatives soften their pro-life position and incredibly find some sort of government solution to the obesity problem.

Conservatives need to keep their minds open, though they need not compromise regarding foolish big-government solutions to social and economic problems. I understand that at the practical level Republicans need such asinine slogans as "compassionate conservatism," though they need to be careful about actually pandering to short-sighted solutions to middle-class angst.

Edmund Burke, a classic conservative, spent most of his life in the political wilderness rather than pandering to the pieties of his time including that of the liberal/atheistic French Revolution and the autocratic English view that the American revolutionaries ought to be quashed.

Conservatives at their best offer tough-minded, realistic solutions to complex problems. Frum may not like the bracing criticism of Pommeru, Antle, and Lowry, though they are precisely targeted.

Cato asks: "... you must be a member of "the party with mean people in it," right?"

No, I'm an independent. I am, though, very pleased to say that I have no problem being mean to mean people.

I've enjoyed these comments-- and Moe, you never cease to make me laugh ;) My guess is that Frum is probably just annoyed that someone like Rudy could never win the GOP nomination. In this I am somewhat sympathetic-- we all love Rudy, he's got charisma and is really articulate. He was an extraordinary mayor and leader before and during 9/11 in matters of security.

But, two things--
1. As much as I think it's nice that the Republican nominee is not inevitable, I do find it comforting that our party process weeds out candidates who might be one-time (or one-issue) wonders. It's great that Rudy would be a proven war-time leader, but what would he do to our courts??? The party process takes this into consideration rather than giving into the temptation to crown him for a single event or issue (security). That's a reflection on the US's political stability (which has been tested by folks like Nader and Perot).

2. IMHO, Frum's dead wrong about abortion (and by extension, social issues)-- a good chunk of the reason Dubya got elected is because his brilliant campaign capitalized on voters' frustration with gay marriage initiatives (wasn't it Ohio that was the key against Kerry (and OH had gay marriage on the ballot)?) and the prospect of pro-abortion judicial nominees. When we elected Dubya, we got rewarded with Roberts and Alito, and for the most part, we whistled past the graveyard on all of his big spending proposals and open immigration stance. Analysts worth their salt know that it's the social issues that get out the vote.

MD wrote: "It's great that Rudy would be a proven war-time leader, but what would he do to our courts??? "

Saying Rudy is a "proven war-time leader" is as stupid as saying that the principal of Columbine High was one 6 years after those shootings.

Given Rudy's spectacular lack of decency, I'm guessing he started making plans for his presidential run 5 minutes after he heard about the attack. This makes him swifter to react than Dumbya Bush, but then there is no lower standard in American political behavior than Dumbya's.

MD, you shouldn't encourage MLAJ. Name calling is a playground activity, not an argument. Let me know when he says something of actual substance.