Behind the B.S. Wall

Via Postmodern Conservative (home of James Poulos and the big honkin' Elvoid sideburns), here's Daniel Koffer:

Campaigning on xenophobia, guilt by association, and red-baiting has desperate and unintentionally self-parodic qualities this year that it didn't have as recently as 2004. The likelihood is that John McCain will lose; if and when he loses, the multilateral truce among neos, paleos, reformists, and GOP hacks --- which is about as fragile as the truce in Basra to begin with --- is going to shatter before Obama's victory speech ends.
The neocons are in a decidedly weak position. Fairly or not, it's their foreign policy more than anything else that has made the name of the GOP radioactive --- and even worse for Republican partisans, has destroyed the party's nearly 40-year-old, frequently decisive advantage on national security. And though the Republicans somehow stumbled into nominating their only candidate with a prayer of victory, they exposed the neocons to even more risk by choosing, in John McCain, the most prominent exponent of their philosophy in American politics. Honest neocons like Lawrence Kaplan readily concede that neoconservatism's future rests on McCain's shoulders. Kristol, on the other hand, is trying to reframe the debate to obscure its ramifications for his ideology in case McCain loses.

Very perceptive, Mr. Koffer. Neoconservatives have, indeed, been adept at blame-shifting. The fact that Bill Kristol is still a regular at Fox News -- and that both he and his protege David Brooks landed full-time op-ed gigs at the New York Times -- suggests how successful they've been at this "It's Not Our Fault" Jedi mind trick.

I hasten to add that Koffer is dead wrong about one thing: There is not, never has been, and never will be, any truce between neo- and paleoconservatives. Going back to the earliest days of the Reagan administration, the necons have shown a zealous determination to hunt the paleos to extinction. Someone (me?) could write a book about this. Suggested title: "First They Came for Mel Bradford."

Of course, I'm a "Rodgers & Hammerstein Conservative": I believe that the farmer and the cowman can be friends, so to speak. But in the Neo-Paleo Wars, there can be no doubt that the neos have been the aggressors.

The root of the problem is the neos' insistence that they, and they alone, are fit judges of what is "acceptable" conservatism, and that no one may present himself as a conservative without their permission. They have relentlessly purged so many people -- Bradford, Pat Buchanan, Peter Brimelow, Sam Francis, Paul Gottfried, Thomas Woods, to name but a few -- from the ranks of "acceptable" conservatives that it's hardly surprising that now the Big Tent is looking kind of empty.

Perhaps worse than that, the neocon "Urge To Purge" creates a fear-based vibe within the GOP coalition. Who will be next?