I know it’s behind an annoying pay wall, but David Brooks brings up one of my favorite topics in his column today: a third party. It’s not one of my favorites because I think we need one necessarily; it’s because I’m yet to hear a coherent explanation of what this party is going to believe and stand for.<\/p>\n
In April, we had the “purple party<\/a>,” which apparently be Clintonian Democrats in everything but name. In June, we learned about “Unity08<\/a>,” which turned out to be long on rhetoric, short on specifics, and more pie-in-the-sky than substance.<\/p>\n Brooks, meanwhile, believes<\/a> there’s already a third major party: the McCain-Lieberman Party. Let’s take a look at the MLP’s agenda on the two big areas of interest: foreign policy and budgetary policy.<\/p>\n On foreign policy, [the McCain-Lieberman Party] agrees with Tony Blair (who could not win a Democratic primary in the U.S. today): The civilized world faces an arc of Islamic extremism that was not caused by American overreaction, and that will only get stronger if America withdraws.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n Oddly enough, this is characterized by Brooks as some kind of middle ground. I have no idea why. McCain is solidly on the right edge of the GOP on foreign policy, and as it turns out, so is Lieberman. As Matt Yglesias put it<\/a>, “The only way you can get McCain-Lieberman as representing a ‘center’ position on foreign policy is if you define<\/i> the extreme conceptual right-wing pole as ‘whatever George W. Bush happens to think,’ making any criticism of his policies a move to the left.”<\/p>\n And there’s the budget. On fiscal policy, the McCain-Lieberman Party sees a Republican Party that will not raise taxes and a Democratic Party that will not cut benefits, and understands that to avoid bankruptcy the country must do both.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n I suppose there’s a hint of middle-of-the-roadism in there — raise taxes, cut services — but it’s an awfully convenient one for the GOP. Those who rely on government services most have gotten nothing but a raw deal from the federal government over the last six years, while the wealthy have been lavished with multiple rounds of tax cuts the country can’t afford. After this extended period of “compassion,” Brooks thinks it’s time to cut services more<\/i> and call it “moderation.” Typical.<\/p>\n
\n<\/p>\n