by George Will
Hat tip: Dr. Carolyn Tal
Conservatives’ highest priority now must be to prevent Trump from winning the Republican nomination in this the GOP’s third epochal intra-party struggle in 104 years.
If you look beyond Donald
Trump’s comprehensive unpleasantness — is there a disagreeable human
trait he does not have? — you might see this: He is a fundamentally sad
figure. His compulsive boasting is evidence of insecurity. His
unassuageable neediness suggests an aching hunger for others’ approval
to ratify his self-admiration. His incessant announcements of his
self-esteem indicate that he is not self-persuaded. Now, panting with a
puppy’s insatiable eagerness to be petted, Trump has reveled in the
approval of Vladimir Putin, murderer and war criminal.
Putin
slyly stirred America’s politics by saying Trump is “very talented,”
adding that he welcomed Trump’s promise of “closer, deeper relations,”
whatever that might mean, with Russia. Trump announced himself flattered
to be “so nicely complimented” by a “highly respected” man: “When
people call you brilliant, it’s always good.” When MSNBC’s Joe
Scarborough said Putin “kills journalists and political opponents and
invades countries,” Trump replied that “at least he’s a leader.”
Besides, Trump breezily asserted, “I think our country does plenty of
killing also.” Two days later, Trump, who rarely feigns judiciousness, said: “It has not been proven that he’s killed reporters.”
Well.
Perhaps the 56 journalists murdered were coincidental victims of
amazingly random violence that the former KGB operative’s police state
is powerless to stop. It has, however, been “proven,” perhaps even to
Trump’s exacting standards, that Putin has dismembered Ukraine. (Counts
one and two at the 1946 Nuremberg trials concerned conspiracy to wage,
and waging, aggressive war.)
Until
now, Trump’s ever-more-exotic effusions have had an almost numbing
effect. Almost. But by his embrace of Putin, and by postulating a
slanderous moral equivalence — Putin kills journalists, the United
States kills terrorists, what’s the big deal, or the difference? — Trump
has forced conservatives to recognize their immediate priority.
Certainly
conservatives consider it crucial to deny the Democratic party a third
consecutive term controlling the executive branch. Extending from eight
to twelve years its use of unbridled executive power would further
emancipate the administrative state from control by either a withering
legislative branch or a supine judiciary. But first things first.
Conservatives’ highest priority now must be to prevent Trump from
winning the Republican nomination in this the GOP’s third epochal
intra-party struggle in 104 years.
In 1912, former-president Theodore Roosevelt campaigned for the Republican nomination on an explicitly progressive platform. Having failed to win the nomination, he ran a third-party campaign against the Republican nominee, President William Howard Taft, and the Democratic nominee, New Jersey governor Woodrow Wilson, who that November would become the first person elected president who was deeply critical of the American founding.
In 1912, former-president Theodore Roosevelt campaigned for the Republican nomination on an explicitly progressive platform. Having failed to win the nomination, he ran a third-party campaign against the Republican nominee, President William Howard Taft, and the Democratic nominee, New Jersey governor Woodrow Wilson, who that November would become the first person elected president who was deeply critical of the American founding.
TR
shared Wilson’s impatience with the separation of powers, which both
men considered an 18th-century relic incompatible with a properly
energetic executive. Espousing unconstrained majoritarianism, TR favored
a passive judiciary deferential to elected legislatures and executives;
he also endorsed the powers of popular majorities to overturn judicial
decisions and recall all public officials.
Taft
finished third, carrying only Utah and Vermont. But because Taft hewed
to conservatism, and was supported by some other leading Republicans
(e.g., Senator Henry Cabot Lodge, one of TR’s closest friends, and Elihu
Root, TR’s secretary of war and then secretary of state), the
Republican Party survived as a counterbalance to a progressive
Democratic Party.
In
1964, Barry Goldwater mounted a successful conservative insurgency
against a Republican establishment that was content to blur and dilute
the Republican distinctiveness that had been preserved 52 years earlier.
Goldwater defeated New York’s Governor Nelson Rockefeller for the
nomination, just as Taft had defeated TR, a former New York governor.
Like Taft, Goldwater was trounced (he carried six states). But the
Republican party won five of the next seven presidential elections. In
two of them, Ronald Reagan secured the party’s continuity as the
custodian of conservatism.
In
2016, a Trump nomination would not just mean another Democratic
presidency. It would mean the loss of what Taft and then Goldwater made
possible — a conservative party as a constant presence in American
politics.
It
is possible Trump will not win any primary, and that by the middle of
March our long national embarrassment will be over. But this avatar of
unfettered government and executive authoritarianism has mesmerized a
large portion of Republicans for six months. The larger portion should
understand this:
George Will is a Pulitzer Prize–winning syndicated columnist. © 2015 The Washington Post
Source: http://www.nationalreview.com/article/428906/donald-trump-threat-republican-party
Copyright - Original materials copyright (c) by the authors.
No comments:
Post a Comment