Mirror, Mirror, On the Wall

I've been reading the various posts around the blogosphere expounding on the attempts of the neocons to distance themselves from Bush because he has very methodically put their objectives into practice - and the public hates it. They claim he's not a true conservative, and that's why the public is turning their back on him. The doughnut hole of Medicare Prescription drug plan is kicking in, which will make even more people pissed off. No, guys, he's all yours and you're welcome to him. Couldn't happen to a nicer set of sociopaths.

Ed Kilgore adds a much needed caution to this analysis:

Chait doesn't generalize his argument into a broader meditation on the nature of ideological thinking, but there is a bit of an analog on the Left, where elite opinion about Bill Clinton's fidelity to Democratic principle has long diverged from rank-and-file progressive appreciation for the Man from Hope, and has also merged with a strange revisionist argument that Clinton's alleged heresies from The True Path were responsible for every Democratic electoral setback since 1994.

While Democrats can and should rightly enjoy and exploit the implosion within the GOP, what's sauce for the goose is sauce for the gander. A lot of progressives these days seem to think the rise of the conservative movement should serve as a template for Our Side, and if so, we should look at the self-deception going on in conservative circles with an occasional glance in the mirror.

Revisionist History in the Making

Kilgore says much more succinctly what I was getting at with my Bubba post last month - that thre is a drastic break between popular affection and respect for Clinton and elite hatred of him. And, no, hatred is not too strong of a word. Sen. Clinton is inheriting a large amount of left-over elite resentment at Pres. Clinton, which is itself bizarrely misplaced. The electoral setback of 1994 was, as Mark Schmitt pointed out, was part of the long-unfolding realignment of party composition, a shift that will probably be finalized in the next two national electoral rounds. It probably would have been worse without Elvis in the White House.

The only point of agreement left between the polarized parties, it would seem, is hatred of this utterly American figure. This will be a mystery that the historians will have to puzzle out. Why should a man who rose from obscurity to power through diligent use of intellect and empathy be so reviled by those (at least on the left) who should respect that achievement, even if they don't agree with the policy? That the socio-economic elitists of the Republican party, so perfectly represented by the Bushes, should hate this poor white upstart makes sense. The other fanatical hatred does not, particularly with the passionately personal nature of the revulsion. And perhaps that is the key.

But back to Bush. He is the neocons golden boy. He has done everything they wanted him to do, and seems poised to complete the job with more asinine governmental appointments and a secodn glorious little war, this time against Iran. The neocons are right to try to distance themselves from a loser. However, they won't acknowledge it is precisely because he is enacting their policies that he is hated.

Look in the mirror, guys.

Anglachel