Rethugs Face Specter of Death

I am apparently not the only one shocked by Arlen Specter's abandonment of the Republican party. Obviously, the first important consequence of this is that, with Al Franken's (basically inevitable) seating sometime in the next month or two, the dems will have a fillibuster-proof majority- though Specter has already made it clear that on some issues he will not vote the party line. More power to him.

The issue that is of greater interest to me, though, is what this says about the viability of the Republican party. I have occasionally commented that I felt the best possible outcome would be for "Republicans" to split into two parties: I refer to these as the Conservative party, those who adhere to the principles of conservatism as practiced by Eisenhower and Nixon (though without Nixon's psychopathologies), and espoused by Goldwater. The important feature with this party is that they would be willing to think and compromise, to make judgement calls based on the costs and payoffs to all constituents and their needs and wants. The other splinter of Republicanism I have referred to as the Rapture party. This party would base all decisions on delivered wisdom and faith. Black and white, with us or against us, there is no compromise and we take no prisoners. Clearly, based on this characterization, Bush II was our first- and hopefully last- Rapturist president.

I have more or less come to accept that there is a sizable fraction of the American public, maybe 15-20 percent, or 30-40 percent of the Republican party, who so reject rationality and careful thought and decision-making, that they simply cannot come to terms with the fact that many of us (most of us, thankfully) believe that the heart of being human consists of careful thought and the intrinsic uncertainty that goes with it. It is careful thought, judicious risk-taking, and sober analyses of and reaction to the consequences of decisions that have created the civilization and culture in which we now live.

The Rapture party does not and cannot accept this. As such, though they have been uncomfortably in bed with conservatives since the post-Carter era, they have never been a good fit with that party, and are now beyond reconciliation. Thus I have asserted that the best outcome I could envision was for the two groups to split.

Specter's renunciation of Republican political games does not imply a renunciation of conservative principles. His change of party does more to drive dems to the right, and Republicans away from the center, further to the right. In my amateur analysis (and considering Olympia Snowe's comments in the above article), this move suggests that Conservatives no longer see Republicans as a viable party, and are abandoning it to the Rapturists.

I think over the short term, this will allow Democrats to achieve some important, cheering and refreshing legislative goals- and I don't want to downplay the benefits, both human and economic, of instituting (for example) universal health care. Over the mid to long term though, I am concerned over several things: first, the concentration of power in a moderate "Democratic" party will come at the loss of strong liberal principles, ideas and agenda. Second, without a rational conservative core to the Republican party, and that party's defacto co-option by defacto theocrats, we can expect the persecution/martyrdom/martial jihadi noise machine of Beck/O'Reilly/Limbaugh/Coulter/etc. to ramp up even further than it already has. Expect new madmen to emerge, and because mainstream journalism is as lost as modern politics, garner a disporportionate and largely unquestioned amount of coverage and credibility. Finally, this makes me fear that instead of three parties, liberal, conservative and crazy, we could end up with only two: middle of the road and crazy.

And I don't think that's a good option.