Peggy Noonan is on to something

In her latest column, she looks at the utter failure of our government to adequately represent "the people" and concludes that it may be time for a third party.

Peggy Noonan's a good writer and is politically astute. She's also pretty solidly conservative, which is a good thing- the more well written, astute insight we can get from all across the political spectrum, the better.

But Peggy Noonan is grappling with the single most crucial problem our country is facing- the profound incompetence of our president and his party's inability to govern responsibly- and is drawing the wrong conclusions.

In August 2004, she stepped away from her column to dedicate her time to the re-election of George W. Bush and the maintenance of Republican governmental domination. A quote:

"Because I am a conservative I support the party that best represents conservative views, the Republican Party. Sometimes I get mad at it; often it disappoints me. It is imperfect, and not perfectible. But to a greater degree than in the past I feel an urge to help it. Since peace was wrenched off the tracks on 9/11, deep in my heart I have pulled for President Bush, Vice President Cheney, members of the current administration, and Republicans in the Senate and the House."

On November 4, 2004, she proclaimed "God bless our country" as her hopes were fulfilled.

A year later, when it had become clear even to conservatives that the Bush Administration was failing the country, she blamed the "elites". Quote: "[America is] Off the tracks and hurtling forward, toward an unknown destination." (I wrote about this column at the time.)

It's true that politicians from both parties have failed to exert leadership that resonates with the American people. It's true that the Democrats in particular have exhibited a shocking inability to mobilize and inform and inspire the electorate, and to defend the country from the serious damage the Republican controlled executive, legislative, and judicial branches are inflicting on our nation.

There's plenty of blame to go around, and I'm open to the idea of a third party. But this discussion cannot be had without illuminating the elephant in the room that Ms. Noonan is simply unwilling or unable to acknowledge.

George W. Bush is a terrible president. A strong leader up to our country's historic challenges would have been able to lead the country- both the "people" and our elected representatives- in a manner that united us (more or less), as opposed to letting everything spin so wildly out of control that we now do truly face a crisis of government.

A competent president would have capitalized on the passionate national spirit that all Americans felt after 9/11 and used that as the foundation for policies and actions that rivaled our challenges.

A competent president would have been able to navigate the political gauntlet thrown down by the extremists in his party. No one would argue that a Republican president is not entitled to govern with a Republican slant, but the hardcore appeasement to the hardcore right championed by people like Karl Rove- and blindly accepted by the president- does not constitute leadership.

A competent president would have been able to seriously address the fact that Big Oil's interests do not align with America's interests, and divorce himself of any potential conflict of interest inherent in his past, as well as the pasts of Dick Cheney and Condoleezza Rice. (Assuming those interests are truly in the past.) An administration beholden to Big Oil is fundamentally opposed to everyone else.

A competent president would be able to stand up at a press conference and answer questions in a lucid, forthright, and thoughtful manner, as opposed to stumbling through cheap cliches at best.

A competent president would stop at nothing to protect the American people- including possibly undertaking government actions that lead to serious dialogue about the balance between power and civil liberties- but would not outright lie to the American people about those actions(i.e. "Any time you hear the United States government talking about wiretap, it requires -- a wiretap requires a court order.").

A competent president would surely have handled Hurricane Katrina differently.

In short, a competent president most likely would have headed off the most serious misgivings many of us have about the competence of the entire government.

Of course, the issue is complicated. The fact that Bush is so incompetent should have lead to his replacement in the 2004 election, and no one is more responsible for that loss than John Kerry and the weakened Democratic Party. Republicans can't really be blamed for voting for Bush in 2004 (though I wish many hadn't).

Impeachment is not a viable option right now. While I think George W. Bush's performance in office is a textbook example of why impeachment should exist, the political environment is not such where it would be helpful or possible for the nation to undertake such an action.

Acknowledgement is what we need. We need to acknowledge that our system is not fundamentally broken- it's the leadership at the top that has allowed it to seem so. Republicans need to free themselves to criticize the president and his disastrous policies, and return to a more mainstream Republican agenda, outside of the illusion that the president's far right agenda provides adequate cover for true national guidance.

Peggy Noonan is right that things seem seriously broken in Washington. We may well end up needing a third party to help mend things, but first we need to honestly address the root of the problem, and that is our disastrous president.