Non-Bush Conservatives Fire Away!

I'm pretty sure others have talked about these articles, but I just got to reading them. It seems lately the in thing to say if you are a non-Bush conservative is, losing in November will make other Republicans more hungry and more focused for the 2008 Presidential election. Before we go on it should be noted that 3 years ago, most of these same people were the ones criticizing the people who criticized Bush. With that out of the way, the Washington Monthly asked seven prominent conservatives to write an article on why Republicans would benefit in 2008 if they lost in November.

Which brings us to MSNBC personality and former Congressman Joe Scarborough. Scarborough wrote this about being asked to contribute.

“Count me in!” was my chipper response. I also seem to remember muttering something about preferring an assortment of Bourbon Street hookers running the Southern Baptist Convention to having this lot of Republicans controlling America’s checkbook for the next two years.

Maybe that’s because right-wing, knuckle-dragging Republicans like myself took over Congress in 1994 promising to balance the budget and limit Washington’s power. We were a nasty breed and had no problem blaming Bill and Hillary Clinton for everything from the exploding federal deficit to male pattern baldness. I suspected then, as I do now, that Hillary Clinton herself had something to do with “Love, American Style” and “Joanie Loves Chachi.” And why not blame her? Back then, Newt Gingrich felt comfortable blaming the drowning of two little children on Democratic values. Hell. It was 1994. It just seemed like the thing to do.

"A nasty breed" and "had no problem blaming Bill and Hillary". Something every Republican should note when complaining about 'Bush bashers'. Christopher Buckley's article was very hard hitting. His undertone definately points out big differences between Bush 41 and Bush 43. Here is a snipet from his article.

George Tenet’s WMD “slam-dunk,” Vice President Cheney’s “we will be greeted as liberators,” Don Rumsfeld’s avidity to promulgate a minimalist military doctrine, together with the tidy theories of a group who call themselves “neo-conservative” (not one of whom, to my knowledge, has ever worn a military uniform), have thus far: de-stabilized the Middle East; alienated the world community from the United States; empowered North Korea, Iran, and Syria; unleashed sectarian carnage in Iraq among tribes who have been cutting each others’ throats for over a thousand years; cost the lives of 2,600 Americans, and the limbs, eyes, organs, spinal cords of another 15,000—with no end in sight. But not to worry: Democracy is on the march in the Middle East. Just ask Hamas. And the neocons—bright people, all—are now clamoring, “On to Tehran!”

If only they would have said this in 2004, who knows where we would be today. I know it couldn't be much worse than it is now.