Wading through the thicket of responses on National Review’s group blog, The Corner, to President Obama’s State of the Union was a dispiriting trudge. The sheer volume of words from conservatives reacting to the scary-Black-Kenyan-Muslim-Socialist-coming-to-take-your-guns-and-force-you-into-gay-marriage Obama of their fevered imaginations was simultaneously mind-blowing and exhausting.
But, having made the journey (so you don’t have to!), I did manage to pick up one post of value (a semi-precious stone, at least) by Pete Hegseth, titled “A Speech We Can’t Afford To Dismiss“. I don’t know if it’s because of his relative youth (age 32), his military experience (Army National Guard, with service in Iraq), or some other combination of factors, but Hegseth gets at some of the fundamental strengths of Obama’s speech, and the corresponding weaknesses of conservative reactions, and is willing to express them clearly and concisely to his fellow conservatives:
“The fact of the matter is — policy substance aside — the president delivered yet another effective and persuasive political speech.“
[—snip—]
“He gave a speech — as he regularly does — that meets people where they are, regardless of the policy reality that follows ….
Unfortunately, conservatives have yet to fully internalize an alternative approach that doesn’t play into the president’s political strategy. He has mastered the art of grandstanding on “common sense” issues while accusing his opponents of perpetual obstructionism. And then we obstruct, on his terms. Conservatives also optically obsess over tax rates and spending cuts, while ignoring the fact that most voters don’t draw a direct connection between these issues and jobs. When the president says he wants to “invest” and we say we want to “cut,” he is wrong on the substance but right on the politics.” (emphasis added)
[—snip—]
“...(W)e can’t afford to dismiss the president’s rhetorical approach. It’s politically effective and meets much of the electorate where they’re at . . . whether we like that fact or not.“
Based on this post, Hegseth appears to be one of a small minority of Republican pundits, politicians and party activists that is actually both willing and able to deal with the world as it is in 2013. It’s a long way from there to actually constructing a set of governing principles and policies for conservatives in the 21st century, but it’s a start.
crossposted at: http://masscommons.wordpress.com/
