Who's Government Is It, Anyway?

Take a moment to read this. It's part of a Victor Davis Hanson blog post from Works and Days.

The Furor Over Bush:

Spent a week with some die-hard conservatives, what one might call his hard-core base. All of whom seem to detest Bush. Part of it is immigration, big spending, federal programs, bad or rather embarrassing appointments, and Iraq. But part of it is simply piling on and hoping not to be seen as the lone nut who thinks Bush can pull off a successful presidency. I was very disappointed that we pulled back from Fallujah, let Sadr off, saw Franks quit almost as soon as the insurgency started, kept seeing Bremer everywhere on TV with his blazer and hiking boots, and all the other half measures that empowered the insurgency—but not to the degree that I lost hope we could win. The US military is too good for that.
So the real irony is that should Petraeus stabilize Iraq, if Korea really has given up its weapons, if the world comes together on Iranian proliferation, Afghanistan gets quieter, and either bin Laden or Zawahiri gets captured—while the economy stays strong and an immigration fence is built, then mirabile dictu Bush will leave office in a good position to be praised in 10 years for preventing another 9/11, removing Saddam and the Taliban, decimating al Qaeda, and stopping nonproliferation. He needs some luck, must not listen to his short-term politicos who always choose apparent advantage over principle, and must keep his resolve. I told all that to some prominent Republicans—and was laughed at for it.

He was laughed at for it! It is adding to a realization that I have been coming to lately, namely, that our elected officials, particularly at the Federal level, are more and more disconnected from ideology and principle. They are most concerned with winning and preserving their power. This is the only explanation for the massive GOP defections from the President over Iraq, despite more and more positive news about the effects of the surge. And it explains why Republicans laugh at someone who has an optimistic and hopeful view of the possible outcome in Iraq based upon evidence and philosophical convictions.

Certainly, our elected officials have little loyalty to party or political ideology. Instead, the politician's self-interest has become tethered to groups of special interests. The Democrats are slaves to the dictates of NARAL, the NAACP, Big Labor, especially, teachers unions, and groups like Move-On. The GOP jumps to the tune of the NRA, Big Business, and religious fundamentalists. But they don't do so for any principled reasons. Their only goal is to ensure the continuing financial and/or electoral support those groups give them.

Our Congressional "leaders" speak only in sound bites and virtually every position and vote for almost everyone of them is based on politics rather than principle. Every time Harry Reid speaks, every time he makes a policy statement, he includes a criticism of the President and the GOP. No one in Congress ever passes up an opportunity to pander to its interest groups and base or to criticize the opposition. The other side is never right about anything. Long held views about "sacred" prerogatives like the filibuster, change with the election of a new political majority.

Where are we headed with this? I fear this partisan and cynical rancor is blinding us to real threats and keeping up from dealing with serious problems. Time spent on political wrangles over matters like Global Warming, impeachment, the Patriot Act, etc., keep us from fighting al-Qaeda or dealing with the imminent collapse of Social Security and Medicare. Much of the heated rhetoric is merely intended to stir each party's respective base. That in turn is intended to help keep our elected officials in their comfortable jobs. Thus the special interests win out over the public interest. This piece by Mort Kondracke illustrates the point of how the goal of winning at any cost has lead both sides in Washington to take their eyes off the ball.

I cannot now name a member of Congress whom I believe places the public interest over his or her own personal or electoral interests. The last ones I actually knew were probably Barber Conable and Jacob Javitts. They actually did the people's business. Its a long way from those men to today's Congress.