Conservatives: Utterly unfit to govern.

I notice Cathie has also picked up on this -- you should make yourself comfortable and take the time to read Alan Wolfe's "Why Conservatives Can't Govern."

As did Cathie, I'm going to reproduce the critical part of the article:

Contemporary conservatism is first and foremost about shrinking the size and reach of the federal government. This mission, let us be clear, is an ideological one. It does not emerge out of an attempt to solve real-world problems, such as managing increasing deficits or finding revenue to pay for entitlements built into the structure of federal legislation.

That, in a nutshell, describes the entire life span of the administration of George W. Bush. We're talking about an administration that has never made even the slightest attempt to formulate policy of any kind, but has been driven utterly by politics. Don't believe me? Ask John DiIulio (emphasis added):

Domestic policy adviser John DiIulio, a political scientist from the University of Pennsylvania, who had accepted his position in the White House on the assumption that he would be working to give substance to the president's rhetoric of "compassionate conservatism," resigned in a state of shock. "There is no precedent in any modern White House for what is going on in this one: a complete lack of a policy apparatus," DiIulio told Esquire magazine. "What you've got is everything -- and I mean everything -- being run by the political arm. It's the reign of the Mayberry Machiavellis ... Besides the tax cut ... the administration has not done much, either in absolute terms or in comparison to previous administrations at this stage, on domestic policy. There is a virtual absence as yet of any policy accomplishments that might, to a fair-minded non-partisan, count as the flesh on the bones of so-called compassionate conservatism."

Put more succinctly, the conservative government has nothing to do with solving problems -- it has to do with pushing a nakedly ideological agenda, with absolutely no regard to what the problems actually are.

Consider the most recent atrocities coming out of Stephen Harper and his enthusiastic little crew of brownshirts. Cuts to Status of Women Canada. The abolishment of the Court Challenges Program. And the rationale?

Liberal programs axed under Tory spending cuts

... "Most of those cuts are designed to appeal to the Conservative base," reported CTV's Ottawa bureau chief Robert Fife.

"They have taken the axe to programs they've long regarded as slush funds for left leaning groups who don't vote Conservative."

These program cuts have absolutely nothing to do with fiscal management or whether these programs were "effective" (the catchword of the day, apparently). These cuts are driven purely by politics -- there's not a shred of policy to be seen anywhere. And now we're hearing that the CPoC might revisit the whole same-sex marriage issue. Why? Is it causing problems? Is it not an "effective" program? Is SSM somehow being fiscally mismanaged? Don't be silly, of course not. It has nothing to do with policy. It's naked politics, and nothing more.

In any event, go read Wolfe's piece. The parallels to the current group of fascists running things out of Ottawa should make you just a wee bit uncomfortable.

P.S. Like I said, politics, not policy.

SO MANY GREAT LINES, SO LITTLE TIME. There are so many delightful lines in Wolfe's piece, like this one:

Sure, the Bush administration has failed, all these voices proclaim. But that is because Bush and his Republican allies in Congress borrowed big government and foreign-policy idealism from the left.

Got that? Despite the fact that the GOP controls the White House, both houses of Congress, the Supreme Court and a whacking big chunk of the mainstream media, it's still the Left's fault.

This would be funny if it weren't so pathetic.