Slowly but surely, former Bush speechwriter David Frum has been working to restore some semblance of credibility. After his White House stint — he is often credited for helping coin the “axis of evil” phrase — Frum remained a loyal Bushie in the conservative media for quite a while, until a few months ago, when he started to voice restrained concerns about today’s Republican Party.<\/p>\n
In August, for example, Frum wrote a piece<\/a> on Karl Rove’s tenure, which argued that Rove crafted a White House political strategy that was predicated on helping Republicans, instead of helping the country.<\/p>\n Last month, Frum went even further, publishing a piece<\/a> accusing conservative Republicans in general of embracing an unhealthy, anti-intellectual worldview.<\/p>\n Today, he tells the NYT’s Deborah Solomon that he’s considered the Republican Party’s standing in the current political landscape, and he’s “terrified<\/a>.”<\/p>\n NYT: As a resident fellow at the American Enterprise Institute and former speechwriter for President Bush, you’re surprisingly critical of him in your new book, claiming he has appointed “consistently mediocre people” to important jobs and made “a shambles” of the Iraq war. Do you see the book as a mea culpa?<\/p>\n DF: No. Mea culpa is a kind of hand-wringing, breast-beating, woe-is-me attitude that I don’t share. What I am saying is that there is exhaustion, intellectual exhaustion on the part of Republicans and conservatives.<\/p>\n NYT: And that their long winning streak in Congress has ended? <\/p>\n DF: What I am terrified of is that the Republican Party is heading into a period of political defeat. We lost the election in 2006. I am terrified that we can lose the election in 2008. We can lose in 2012, and it will take us half a dozen years to do the rethinking we need to do.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n With any luck, it’ll take at least<\/i> that long. Politics is not rocket science. You have one party led by a deeply unpopular, unapologetic right-wing ideologue whom its presidential candidates nevertheless decided to embrace. You have another party that has spent most of the past quarter-century undergoing the painful but necessary process of taming its own ideological excesses and tacking to the center. As a result, it now boasts appealing, mainstream candidates with pragmatic policy proposals for addressing real problems. What, exactly, did people think<\/i> was going to happen? “Nature cannot be fooled,” said Richard Feynman. Nor can the median voter.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
\n
\nI can say agree with the entire sentiment, but Josh Patashnik’s assessment after the Iowa caucuses raised a valid point<\/a>.<\/p>\n