Well, the self-righteousness has surely hit the fan. Self-proclaimed “Constitutional conservatism” is the hero of the Mount Vernon Statement; however obliquely details, specifics, policies, evidence, history and data enter into this equation.
For one thing, is this supposed to be news? Are we in the public supposed to respect or revere these folks who are indeed, not saying anything new or of substance, while they simultaneously make unsubstantiated claims about our country? While the statement reads as a high school report on conservative talking points through American history, it sure fails to offer itself in the context of our world today and the problems we face. The only effort made to contextualize this statement is provided as follows : “In light of the challenges facing the country and the need for clarity in the age of Obama…” These are somehow new problems for these folks? As opposed to the new challenges that these conservatives did not deem politically beneficial to enunciate during the last decade (aka the lost decade)?
It reduces complex policy debates to a false framework of being against the Constitution or for it, while implicitly targeting and labeling the last year under the Obama administration as not being “consistent with the American ideal,” and a “…movement away from…our founding principles,”.
Blanketed, unsupported claims such as this are necessary to further these “Constitutional conservatives” worldview. The empty rhetorical piece de resistance :
“A Constitutional conservatism unites all conservatives through the natural fusion provided by American principles. It reminds economic conservatives that morality is essential to limited government, social conservatives that unlimited government is a threat to moral self-government, and national security conservatives that energetic but responsible government is the key to America’s safety and leadership role in the world.”
Economic conservatives would probably like to be reminded that despite all the espoused morality of the Bush administration, our economy ran full speed into a brick wall. They would also probably like to be reminded that these “new challenges” we face in the “age of Obama” are a direct result of our economy crashing under Bush and the massive job losses suffered alongside said crash.
Social conservatives would probably like to be reminded that the greatest threat to moral self-government has come in the form of the exploitation of executive power by Bush/Cheney after 9.11 (think state secrets, executive privilege, and signing statements) and the subsequent relegation of habeas corpus (a Constitutionally guaranteed right) to a privilege that can be revoked at the whim of the executive. National security conservatives would likely benefit as well from the reminder that Obama is ending the war in Iraq and successfully turning the war in Afghanistan back toward our favor, most notably with the recent capture of top Taliban commanders. These same national security conservatives, which I hope is not just a term being used in lieu of the political impotence of neo-conservatives, would also benefit from the reminder that Iran is actually negotiating its nuclear enrichment program under 6 party talks that would result in them complying with the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty and allowing the IAEA (International Atomic Energy Agency) full access to all their nuclear facilities. Oh and about that whole “energetic but responsible government is the key to America’s safety and leadership role in the world” assertion : remind me what recent conservative was it that brought about the collective scorn of copious populations abroad because of its reckless, irresponsible, unilateral foreign policy regime? It starts with G and rhymes with shmorge shmush.
So are we to take this statement, if we accept it as news, as a repudiation of Bush’s legacy as none of the above-mentioned values? Or should we just take it as another empty rhetorical indulgence, carried out by conservative ideologues seeking to re-write history?
Somehow the latter option seems more in line with conservatism today.
