]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]] BACK AT THE CLUB [[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[
By Tom Bethell, (11/11/1988)
Author, Commentator, Wash. Corresp. of the AMERICAN SPECTATOR,
and long-time AtE subscriber
[NATIONAL REVIEW, 11/7/88]
This spring I was the after-dinner speaker at a convention held
by one of the two main GOP clubs in California. Pat Robertson, still
in the race, was the main luncheon speaker. Perhaps a hundred
Robertson supporters had shown up. The word was they were trying to
take control of the club.
They failed--there weren't enough of them. But it was
interesting to note the discreet indignation of the party regulars; it
was obvious that they regarded the Republican Party as their party--
outsiders not welcome. If the event was any guide, the GOP is still
stuck with the problem that those who run it would rather lose the
election than lose control of the party.
At one point I quietly mentioned to one of the regulars that the
GOP should make it its goal to get rid of affirmative action. He gave
me a worried look, as though he feared that a federal judge might come
bursting through the door and throw us all in jail if I kept up that
kind of careless talk; perhaps we weren't sufficiently representative
of the community as a whole or something. (I doubt if we were.)
In my remarks I expressed sympathy for the Robertson people,
suggesting that the GOP was still dominated not so much by people who
didn't want to win the war as by people who didn't know they were in a
war. I added that the Democratic Party had been taken over by people
who no longer believed in the rule of law; their agenda was one of
unlimited government, and anti-American at its core. (Cheers from the
Robertson corner, uneasy looks elsewhere.)
Later I was invited to meet with the Robertson people. They were
younger than the regulars. It was clear by this time that their
efforts to pressure the club had failed. What should they do? They
couldn't bear to go home quite yet. I gathered their previous
involvement in politics had been minimal, although some were
disaffected Democrats.
These were the people the Vice President's son, Neil Bush,
referred to last fall as "cockroaches" who "issued from the baseboards
of the Bible Belt." They may have lacked sophistication, but their
great merit was that they did know there was a war on, manifested, for
example, in abortion and in the liberal hostility toward the idea that
the U.S. should be defended. Ready for combat, they were being kept
off the team.
If President Reagan's recent Cabinet appointees (cleared
beforehand with Bush) are any guide, a Bush Administration will be
business as usual for the GOP. The country-clubers will arrive in
Washington ready to take orders from the bureaucracy and
(unconsciously) the New York Times.
Most GOP appointees in recent decades have regarded Washington as
a place where they can improve their resumes and enjoy a change of
pace from Rotarianism and Wills & Estates. They see themselves as
managers--the Democrats being unaccountably short on management
skills. They accept a division of labor as though it flowed naturally
from the two-party system itself: the Democrats decide on policy and
the Republicans manage it. Businessmen see this as inevitable.
Unlike the Democrats, they "know how to meet a payroll." A handful of
Reagan appointees have shown that the agenda can be wrested from the
democrats. Bill Bennett and Jean Kirkpatrick come to mind. But few
Republicans who were not once themselves Democrats dare try anything
so risky.
In Washington (as your run-of-the-mill GOP apppointee has tended
to see things), underlings will tell you what has to be done day to
day. Tread carefully, however. Stray off the path of virtue and the
Washington Post will fire a shot across your bows. Always remember
you're a guest in the Democrats' town. Go to a Brookings seminar or
two, maybe even risk a rendezvous at the Heritage Foundation. (But do
steer clear of the Far Right---Richard Viguerie, Jesse Helms & Co.)
Maybe one day you may even receive a dinner invitation from Katharine
Graham.
The GOP has remained so immune to conservative influence for so
long because there have been so few politically active conservatives;
not enough to attain critical mass within the party. In the Nixon
years, when Howard Phillips was battling the Office of Economic
Opportunity and Pat Buchanan shocked Washington with his back-talk to
the Ervin Committee, conservative activists in the Washington area
could easily fit into one room and sometimes did--usually in outer
Arlington. Today the conservatives, at full strength, could fill a
house or two in McLean, Virginia.
Assistant Attorney General Stephen J. Markman, hunting in recent
years for candidates for the federal judiciary, concluded that there
was a "missing generation" in American political life. Within a
certain age group (approximately 45 to 65) it has been hard to find
qualified Republicans who understand the difference between limited
constitutional government and goal-oriented judicial policy-making.
Probably we are looking here at the long shadow of the Depression and
World War II, which in succession delegitimized conservatism and
encouraged the belief that good policy is by definition bi-partisan.
The good news is that the younger generation moving into the
party is much more conservative than the get-along businessmen they
are supplanting. This is true even of the baby-boomers. Those who
have abandoned the leftist causes of their youth have retained the
enthusiasm of their youth, and many are now disposed to give battle to
their former Sixties comrades.
The next generation includes a large number of conservative
activists. I suspect therefore that it is only a matter of time
before they take over the Republican Party and, at last, take on the
Democratic Party. But it hasn't happened yet. Dare one hope,
nonetheless, that the end of the Reagan Era will also be the end of
the Eisenhower Era?
* * *
Return to the ground floor of this tower
Return to the Main Courtyard
Return to Fort Freedom's home page