Self-Righteous Conservatives Attack GOP Leaders in Congress

George Will, a long-respected conservative intellectual and columnist, has called for Democrats to take over Congress in protest to the GOP leadership’s perceived unwillingness to confront Pres. Trump on his conduct.

In the view of The Sensible Conservative,  such conservatives (and he’s not alone) are being distinctly unfair and in fact are “self-righteous” as well.

There are, of course, plenty of reasons to criticize Donald Trump.  His off-the-cuff comments are frequently irresponsible and cause embarrassment for the White House and the country.  His conduct during the Helsinki press conference was worse; it was shameful.

So the condemnation expressed by George Will, for instance, is appropriate.  But what’s the purpose of Congressional leaders joining in the critical chorus?

They, unlike pundits, have positions of power and authority.  Their conduct should be guided by that which best serves their objective of shaping appropriate, conservative policies.

The president’s cooperation is essential to the attainment of such goals.  Yet, to put it mildly, Donald Trump does not take kindly to criticism.  His reaction is likely to be a counter-attack and a defiant opposition to his perceived foes’ wishes.  But he does love personal praise.  Those who provide it become presidential favorites.

Of course, one can say that the President shouldn’t act or think this way.  OK.  But Donald Trump is a known quantity and wishes by others that he were different are meaningless.

So Senate leader Mitch McConnell and his House counterpart Paul Ryan are faced with undesirable choices:  Follow Will’s current policy of lambasting the President for his conduct and earn Trump’s open hostility or   look for ways to minimize affronts and seek to commend the President when possible, giving him the benefit of any doubts as to intentions. 

The former course has its appeal.  Feeling self-righteous can be comforting.  But it is an irresponsible position for a policy maker to take.  It dooms any prospect of working with Donald Trump.

The latter choice has its drawbacks, too.  Who wants to be accused of being acquiescent to conduct which on a personal – and policy – level is deserving of strong condemnation?  What kind of an example is that to set for the country?  Not a good one.

Neither is attractive.  But in the real world, a choice must be made.

Choose to be totally ineffective from a policy accomplishment perspective, but morally upstanding or keep on the good side of Donald Trump and preserve the opportunity to make a positive difference.

It is regrettable that George Will, a seemingly sophisticated and worldly person, did not appreciate the Hobson’s choice presented to Republican leaders.