Has conservatism changed?

Eric Scheie asks the right questions:

Has conservatism changed? Is it the kind of change that “change” produced?

I don’t have to go along with Obama’s form of change, I don’t see any reason why I should have to go along with conservatism’s form of change. If I don’t like left wing Alinskyism, why should I like right wing Alinskyism? If I don’t like left wing ends-justify-the-means, by-any-means-necessary dishonesty, why should I like right wing ends-justify-the-means, by-any-means-necessary dishonesty? If I don’t like left wing identity politics, why should I like right wing identity politics?

Why indeed. “Ends-justifying-the-means” plays by the Republican Party are what led to the party’s losses in 2006 and 2008. The temptation is to go back to that playbook, this time finding fault with every single move made by the President and Democrats, crying foul at every little slant, and getting angry beyond what’s necessary, which lends too strong a voice to the wingnuts, conspiracy theorists, and stagemen. How did Reagan present himself? What would Reagan do with an Alex Jones, Glenn Beck or protestors playing the Nazi card with President Obama?

Don’t misunderstand me, it’s not that the GOP can’t play hardball. But there’s a line into wackiland that can’t be crossed if credibility in the electorate is to be kept. We can call the President an arrogant narcissist whose resume is thin. Portraying him with a Hitler mustache is not acceptable or excusable. We didn’t like it when it was done to President Bush, we should be adults and not do the same.

If the principals of self-determination, self-reliance, smaller federal government, a respect for the Bill of Rights, and less government spending aren’t enough to attract voters, then we’re simply not doing our job. Screaming, hysterical rants on cable television and Hitler comparisons won’t do it, either.

Related posts:

1. Reagan on Nationalized Medicine
2. One head rolls at the NEA – sort of
3. Gonna be a long term, O.