Listen to the broadcast of You Tell Me on KTBB AM 600, Friday, September 13, 2013.
MP3 Download/Mobile Listen
One of my best friends laments that the jig is up for conservatives. He cites, using very convincing, non-hyped, non-emotional facts and figures, the demographics of both Texas and the nation.
My friend points to the fact that Hispanics and women as a percentage of the electorate are growing even as white men are declining. He cites the fact that close to half the population pays nothing or next to nothing in income taxes. He points to one in six Americans now receiving food stamps and he points to the coming collapse of the private health insurance market thanks to Obamacare, a collapse that will make everyone dependent on the government.
My friend’s thesis is simple: demographics and circumstances already in place so strongly favor the Democrats and liberals that the GOP and conservatives are now beaten before they even start.
His case is strong and he may be right.
But maybe not.
It took coming across this article by J.R. Dunn at AmericanThinker.com to give me arguments against my friend’s apocalyptic prophesy that go beyond simple wishful thinking.
As Dunn points out, Barack Obama will be the first truly liberal Democrat since FDR to serve two full terms of his own.
‘But wait!,” you say. ‘Bill Clinton served two full terms.”
Yes, but what we have in Barack Obama is something quite different from Clinton as we will explain in a moment. Suffice for now to say that for the first time in nearly three generations, we have a truly liberal president who will remain in office long enough so as to be forced to live with the consequences of his policies.
It is the living with the results that will make Obama unique.
Truman wrapped up World War II and started Korea. His domestic agenda was limited and, in any event, he served only one term of his own. John Kennedy was, at least by today’s standards, hardly a liberal at all. And the tragedy of his death cut his tenure to less than 35 months.
LBJ, though an authentic liberal, was hounded from office by the Vietnam War long before the malign effects of his Great Society became evident.
Jimmy Carter was one and out.
The next Democrat was Clinton. Clinton, by virtue of being a southern-state governor and by virtue of the push to the right that he received from the Newt Gingrich-controlled House in 1994, was something far short of a true liberal.
Which brings us to why all may not be lost for conservatism.
Barring a tragedy such as his death, Barack Obama will be around for another three-plus years. (As of this week, one can imagine that he, himself, wishes it weren’t so.)
By 2016, the chickens of Obama’s hard-left liberalism will have come home to roost. They are assembling now.
On the domestic front, the Affordable Care Act is coming unraveled right before our eyes. By election day, 2016, it will be well and truly the object of bipartisan loathing.
The economy remains persistently weak, disproportionately affecting the bright-eyed young voters that overwhelmingly supported Obama. Many of these young men and women are now coming to grips with the realization that the opportunities to earn as much and live as well as their parents are not going to be there. Part-time employment will not pay for the kind of house that mom and dad live in.
With respect to foreign policy, Obama’s position prior to his election was that the U.S. wasn’t liked by other countries. For most Americans, that is much preferable to being smirked at, as Vladimir Putin is doing right now.
Put simply, by the end of his so far star-crossed second term, Obama will have forced the country to drink so deeply of the liberal cup as to be sickened by it. For the first time in a lifetime, a liberal president will bear clear and undeniable responsibility for the results of his own liberal policies.
Republicans should wish it so, as painful as the next three-plus years will be. For in that pain could lie the seeds of a conservative renaissance.