Republican Nation?
October 20, 2003
by Bernard Chapin
With
Arnold’s significant victory in California and the surprising conservative
outcomes of the 2002 elections; many people have proclaimed that the
United States is now becoming a conservative country. I do not hold
this to be true. I believe that the Republican Party’s success cannot
be attributed to the presence of a more conservative population, but
that it is instead due to the rising chaos and radicalization of the
Democratic Party.
The evidence for the transcendence of the Republican Party is rather
convincing. Even if we exclude this year from calculation, it is
evident that Congressional Elections have been changing for the better
for sometime now. Fred Barnes documents this in the latest edition
of The Weekly Standard:
In 1992, Democrats captured 51 percent of the total vote in House
races to 46 percent for Republicans. By 2002, those numbers had flipped--Republicans
51 percent, Democrats 46 percent. And Republicans have held their
House majority over five elections, including two in which Democratic
presidential candidates won the popular vote. They won 230 House seats
in 1994, 226 in 1996, 223 in 1998, 221 in 2000, and 229 in 2002. They
also won Senate control in those elections. [October 27th
2003 online edition]
To all this I bellow “Wonderbar!” Yet, we cannot mistake Republican
success with being the result of the public’s conversion to conservative
ideology. No, if you ask me, this country continues to slide further
and further into relativism and libertinism regardless of who gets
elected. The recent court cases over sodomy, the pledge of allegiance,
and affirmative action are indicative of the fact that much of our
country, even if they don’t agree with it, are willing to negligently
endorse wrong over right on an ongoing basis. Further, due to the
power of political correctness, most adults are afraid to assert their
real views in daily conversation.
In interpersonal relations, the media’s constant celebration of sex
as “mindless exploration” is now a part of our daily lives, and it
is not going away anytime soon. Almost no television sit-com currently
on the air would have made it past the internal censorship of the
networks back in the seventies when I was a boy.
Recall Dan Quayle’s comment about Murphy Brown and her out-of-wedlock
child. Nowadays, no politician would say the equivalent even if Murphy
began working part-time as a lesbian bondage club. Nobody would say
a word (other than to nod affirmatively when informed that she practices
safe sex). We’ve all been pacified by a sexual revolution that continues
to revolt even though it decimated its opposition long ago.
This was most recently expressed in the Brittany with Madonna with
Christina Aguilera tonsil massaging on MTV. It’s gotten to point
where all we can do is to shrug our shoulders as there is little left
to be surprised by in our culture’s slouching decline. Indeed, one
can’t help but wonder what the public’s reaction would be to the making
of homosexuality compulsory. [I assume that before any such movement
begins it will coincide with a crusade to confiscate all of the nation’s
privately owned firearms, however.]
No, we are not more conservative in 2003. The reason why we are
increasingly becoming a Republican electorate is because the right
has not self-destructed like the left. The Democratic Party is no
longer populist at any level. To quote the brilliant Grover Norquist,
“they are a party of competing parasites and coercive utopians.”
Unless, you’re a spoiled adolescent, you have the wits to know that
utopia means “no where” and that social justice does not mean “robbing
your neighbors.” But the Democrats seem immune to reality at present.
Another writer summed up the Democrats current strategy as being
“Higher Taxes, Lower Defenses.” This sums up the donkey party’s void
of intellectual vision. The Democrats would fare even worse, than
they have in the last decade, if their supporters actually took the
time to examine exactly what it is that their candidates stood for.
One hears their lower rung constantly claim to be representative of
the little guy and their party stands as a bulwark against the powerful.
In fact, as most know, in 2003, the Democrats are the party of the
millionaires, and that most of the high-dollar political donations
are given to Democratic candidates. They represent a the rich elite
that is so well-off that they don’t care about how much suffering
they create for the rest of us.
It’s true that at one time America was a racist, oppressive state.
Now, however, it is the freest in the world (and you could argue it
was a whole lot freer than other nations even when it was oppressive).
Yet, the metamorphosis of our citizenry is lost on the group that
labels itself “progressive.” Ironically, the left still rallies its
storm troopers over claims that John Ashcroft is Bull Conner and that
questioning the media’s racial biases is equivalent to advocating
for the return of segregated lunch counters.
I have found that most leftists use their politics as a bull whip
to lacerate those who have slighted them. These individuals have
no concern for the common man. During an argument at work over Bush’s
tax cuts, a fellow employee stated that they only favored the wealthy
[yawn]. I answered him by pointing to another co-worker across the
room. The man I pointed to makes 48,000 dollars a year and supports
a family of seven. He received 2,000 dollars over the summer in the
form of a rebate check. I asked the anti-tax cut proponent, “Is this
the face of the rich elite that exploits us?” Without waiting for
a response I commanded, “Tackle him before he robs us all!”
Unfortunately, I changed few minds as, despite the evidence, the
lie that “Democrats help the poor” remains a truth to the majority
of my co-workers.
My place of employment aside, the polity is beginning to tire of
the endless ovulars in leftist dogmatics that the media and Democratic
politicians preach. It’s become clear that Americans are no longer
sexually repressed, and that the Republican Party does not exist to
foist its morality upon everyone else.
Further, 9/11 energized the majority of Americans. We were given
notice that our happiness will not continue absent military vigilance.
Meanwhile, the left was caught in the shower singing the same old
rap about imperialism– as normal, ethnically diverse workers plummeted
to their deaths while millions of their brothers and sisters watched
on the television.
The left has gotten “so far out there” that’s it’s impossible to
call ideological clash with them conservative. It’s more appropriate
to label anti-leftist thought simply “common sense.”
Do most Americans think that more racism (affirmative action) will
decrease overall levels of racism? No, but nearly every Democratic
politician does. Do most people think that we can only save our schools
with yet more huge expenditures? No, except for those on the political
left. Does the majority hold that we should only militarily intervene
overseas when it provides us with absolutely no advantage or benefit?
Of course not, but ask the Democrats and they’ll explain it to you
as they did when they advocated for troops in Liberia.
In summation, as it’s not in my nature to be coy, let me come out
definitely and state that Bush will win in November 2004. He’ll do
this without the help of dangling chads, Supreme Court justices, or
intervention by the hand of G-d. And his victory will not be due
to our country embracing the same ideology as conservative reservoir
dogs like me. No, Bush will win by default as the Democratic Party
has forfeited reason altogether. You see, reason, in their mind,
is just one of many equally valuable tools with which to examine one’s
problems. To them, rationality is not imperative and could well be
oppressive. They will never escape their delusions and hysteria in
thirteen months time. I would not be surprised if the party splinters
into three subgroups: the reds, the greens, and the still mentally
healthy. Luckily for the rest of us, the result of this implosion
may be that the Democratic Party will join Communism on the ash heap
of history.
Bernard Chapin
1. Fred
Barnes’ Column.
Bernard Chapin
is a writer in Chicago.