IN the media’s telling, compassionate conservatism was cruelly abandoned by George W. Bush in his lurch to the right in South Carolina, trampled underfoot on the endless red carpet of the Bob Jones University stage. But it’s really the other way around: W. didn’t fail compassionate conservatism; it failed him. Not since all the early Gore slogans— “practical idealism,” “new horizons”—has a campaign theme flopped so utterly. The primaries have made it clear that Bush may yet win the White House, but only by running on the ideas and themes he developed after compassionate conservatism fell flat.
New Hampshire was compassionate conservatism’s Waterloo. The substance of compassionate conservatism—to the extent it has any—involves changing regulations and tax law to encourage charities and churches to care for the poor and the troubled. A fine, but picayune, idea. The real advantage of compassionate conservatism was always stylistic, and defensive: It would give Bush the same touchy-feely image as President Clinton. Early in the campaign, the media hailed this as a brilliant tactic, since they are so enamored of sensitivity in general, and of Clinton’s caring in particular.
Comments