In an article recently posted at The New Republic Bruce Bartlett discusses the rising tide of conservative support for the election of Barack Obama. This support reflects the deep divisions within various segments of the American conservative movement that have has little play in the MSM or in discussion forums on the political left.
What is becoming clear beyond my anecdotal discoveries is that there is a growing, almost viral discontent within the republican party and the conservative movement.
More below the fold.
As a retired knuckle dragger (hence my apologies up front for my less than perfect mastery of the written word) and convert to the liberal/progressive political philosophy during the 2004 election of Christine Gregoire for the governorship of Washington state I found this article to be both intriguing and insightful.
The one thing that has become more and more apparent as time has progressed this election cycle that many Americans have been called to question old belief systems and the means by which their agenda's can best be served.
This is especially true given the historic nature of this cycle. The elements of an impressively elongated time line of the nominating process, the breath of media outlets and reporting, research opportunities, the availability of a broad base of discussion forums coupled with the environment under which the election campaign is being waged have all combined for a never before seen phenomenon of social interaction and the surprising results from which this article represents an amazing portion.
In his article entitled "Mr. Right?" Bruce Bartlett discusses the phenomenon of noted conservatives of all stripes moving to the Obama campaign which converts he calls "Obamacons". In the final analysis Bartlett's discussion of the "crossing over to the Obama campaign" reminds me of friends coming out.
He sets the stage by acknowledging the deep sense of dissatisfaction within the republican party.
A broad swath of the movement has been in open revolt against George W. Bush--and the Republican Party establishment--for some time. They don't much care for the Iraq war or the federal government's vast expansion over the last seven-and-a-half years. And, in the eyes of these discontents, the nomination of John McCain only confirmed the continuation of the worst of the Bush-era deviations from first principles.
He continues with the obvious assessment that there were troubling signs of discontent within the conservative movement in 2004, but that did not translate into votes for Kerry. *I would like to note here that although the movement to Kerry may have been minimal, my movement to the political left had an impact upon the closest election for governor in our nations history.
So, what makes Obama and 2008 so different?
And, despite Ann Coulter's vow to campaign for Hillary Clinton over John McCain, the old bête noir of the right would have never attracted many conservatives. That's what makes the rise of the Obamacons such an interesting development. Conservatives of almost all ideological flavors (even, gasp, some supply-siders) have been drawn to Obama--out of a genuine affection and a belief that he may actually better embody movement ideals than McCain.
Then he gets to the meat of the discussion with the following transition.
There have been a few celebrated cases of conservatives endorsing Obama, like the blogger Andrew Sullivan and the legal scholar Douglas Kmiec. But you probably have not have heard of many of the Obamacons--and neither has the Obama campaign. When I checked with it to ask for a list of prominent conservative supporters, the campaign seemed genuinely unaware that such supporters even existed. But those of us on the right who pay attention to think tanks, blogs, and little magazines have watched Obama compile a coterie drawn from the movement's most stalwart and impressive thinkers. It's a group that will no doubt grow even larger in the coming months.
WOW!!
Bruce Bartlett continues to pile extra helpings of his observations of this phenomenon.
Scott Flanders, the CEO of Freedom Communications--the company that owns The Orange County Register--told a company meeting that he believes Obama will accomplish the paramount libertarian goals of withdrawing from Iraq and scaling back the Patriot Act
Did read this correctly?
The publisher of the Orange County Register is convinced Obama is the best choice for president? And Obama did not even go soliciting for these endorsements.
It gets better though when he folds in the Libertarian part of the conservative movement with the following.
Libertarians (and other varieties of Obamacons, for that matter) frequently find themselves attracted to Obama on stylistic grounds. That is, they believe that he has surrounded himself with pragmatists, some of whom (significantly) come from the University of Chicago. As the blogger Megan McArdle has written, "His goal is not more government so that we can all be caught up in some giant, expressive exercise of collectively enforcing our collective will on all the other people standing around us in the collective; his goal is improving transparency and minimizing government intrusion while rectifying specific outcomes."
Then Bruce turns to a core neoconservative theorist to help explain the movement of some within this community to willing Obamacon.
Francis Fukuyama, the neoconservative theorist, recently told an Australian journalist that he would reluctantly vote for Obama to hold the Republican Party accountable "for a big policy failure" in Iraq. And he seems to view Obama as the best means for preserving American power, since Obama "symbolizes the ability of the United States to renew itself in a very unexpected way."
Double WOW!
More of the Anti war movement on the political right. This time the support for Obama is being framed in almost life & death terms for the American conservative movement.
You can find similar sentiments coursing through the Boston University professor Andrew Bacevich's seminal Obamacon manifesto in The American Conservative. He believes that the war in Iraq has undermined the possibilities for conservative reform at home. The prospects for a conservative revival, therefore, depend on withdrawing from Iraq. Thus the necessity of Obama. "For conservatives, Obama represents a sliver of hope. McCain represents none at all. The choice turns out to be an easy one," Bacevich concludes.
Then comes voices from the mainstream of American conservative thought. Wick Allison's frames his Obamacon argument in the form of a quote from an article his wife wrote.
"He speaks with candor and elegance against the kind of politics that have become so dispiriting and for the kind of America I would like to see. As a man, I find Mr. Obama to be prudent, thoughtful, and courageous. His life story embodies the conservative values that go to the core of my beliefs."
The sandbag falls with this insight from Larry Hunter, a former head of the Chamber of Commerce and an ardent supply sider. Larry Hunter is quoted in one of the most blunt views of the current state of affairs within the republican party's economic wing when he is quoted as saying.
Of far greater importance, in Hunter's view, is that Obama has the potential to "scramble the political deck, break up old alliances, and bring odd bedfellows together in a new coalition." And, what's more important, he views the Republican Party as a "dead, rotting carcass with a few decrepit old leaders stumbling around like zombies in a horror version of Weekend at Bernie's, handcuffed to a corpse." Unless the Republican Party is thoroughly purged of its current leadership, Hunter fears that it "will pollute the political environment to toxic levels and create an epidemic that could damage the country for generations to come."
After reading this article the random noise that I have come across has been put into much clearer focus.
What is being made plain is that there are many on the political right that are making the case for their willingness to forge the governing partnerships necessary for us to govern effectively.
I do not believe that what is being discussed by these ardent conservatives is that Obama is a Manchurian conservative. What I do think is that the republican party has some real issues that with proper management and outreach could provide an essential part to our achieving a governing mandate come November.
Link to the article:
http://www.tnr.com/...
UPDATE:
As reported in The Hill via The Huffington Post there is a new "Gang of 14" that won't back McCain.
From The Hill:
At least 14 Republican members of Congress have refused to endorse or publicly support Sen. John McCain for president, and more than a dozen others declined to answer whether they back the Arizona senator.
It would appear as though there are some rank & file republicans that are in opposition to McCain's nomination.
In recent weeks, much of the discussion and debate about party unity has been on the Democrats’ side, amid their protracted presidential primary. Yet achieving harmony is a concern on both sides of the aisle this year.
The article continues with some names of lawmakers that have not endorsed or publicly backed McCain.
Republican members who have not endorsed or publicly backed McCain include Sens. Chuck Hagel (Neb.) and Jeff Sessions (Ala.) and Reps. Jones, Peterson, John Doolittle (Calif.), Randy Forbes (Va.), Wayne Gilchrest (Md.), Virgil Goode (Va.), Tim Murphy (Pa.), Ron Paul (Texas), Ted Poe (Texas), Todd Tiahrt (Kan.), Dave Weldon (Fla.) and Frank Wolf (Va.).
So, on top of some of the major figures from within the conservative movement that have decided to become "Obamacons" there are some others that have decided that McCain's flip flopping and other antics have made it difficult for them to endorse.
Deeper into the article is some spin on the matter.
In some ways, the lukewarm backing of some lawmakers could be a blessing, because congressional approval ratings are at an all-time low. And McCain himself has touted his independence, proudly pointing out that he has at times upset some of his Republican colleagues in Washington.
McCain campaign spokesman Tucker Bounds said, "John McCain has strong support among Republicans and even some others in the Congress for taking principled stands. While his support is rock solid, it also shouldn't be a surprise that Sen. McCain's bold record of independence on the issues isn't appreciated by every single Republican on Capitol Hill."
On the flip side there are some cold hard political realities being faced by the McCain campaign.
Though the vast majority of congressional Republicans said they endorse McCain’s presidential bid, many supporters were hesitant to answer the question. Some of the members’ spokesmen either confirmed or denied their boss’s support but declined to speak for attribution about the rationale behind that member’s decision.
A few Republicans would not go so far as to say they support McCain, only confirming that they will back the Republican nominee in the general election.
It would appear as though the McCain campaign is indeed facing troubles on multiple fronts as it continues its attempt to solidify support among the republican base that refused to provide the presumptive nominee 80% of the vote in several final primaries while attempting to hold onto many key party members and leaders within various segments of the conservative movement.
I must take note that it is only June and there is time for McCain and his campaign to mend fences and move forward.
However, if these issues continue to be unresolved three months after he secured the republican nomination then it must be noted and followed closely.
Perhaps McCain is actually considering attempting to move to the political middle without first securing his base. If this is what he is attempting then he may be placing himself in an untenable position.
The link to a list of GOP members not backing McCain.
http://thehill.com/...
The link to The Hill article.
http://thehill.com/...
The link to the Huffington Post.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com