Pax Plena Takes Aim at Mark Steyn

Normally, I enjoy reading articles by Mark Steyn. He has a great way of fusing humor with common sense and making the left look even more ridiculous than their comments and talking points.

But for once, I have to take issue with Steyn's latest piece of punditry found above in this week's National Review. Steyn, following the popular thread of Bush and Republican bashing, wrote an article criticizing a paraphrase of Newt Gingrich's assessment of the Party's state of affairs which simply observed that Republicans were new to having a Congressional Majority.

Here's an excerpt:

That's it? The Iraqis are expected to pick up the ins and outs of this governing business instantly, but the Republican party can't get the hang of it after eleven years? Don't worry, I'm not predicting electoral disaster this November. It would be nice to think that the GOP might get to enjoy a Geena Davis-style "hiatus" while they "retune" their winning formula. But I doubt it will happen: Even losers need someone to lose to, and the Democrats have failed to fulfill even that minimal requirement for the last decade....But what happened to the other guys? "The Republican party," says Arlen Specter, "is now principally moderate, if not liberal" — and he means it as a compliment. "I'll just say this about the so-called porkbusters," chips in Trent Lott. "I'm getting damn tired of hearing from them. They have been nothing but trouble since Katrina." Well, to be honest, I'm a good half-decade past getting damn tired of hearing from Trent Lott. But the difference is that, as a member of the pork-funding sector of the economy, I pay for him; he doesn't pay for me. . . .

Aside from being short on substance and long on wind (Steyn was clearly writing to make a deadline), his article is hardly more profound than Gingrich's observation. One would think, for a world renown columnist, featured in British, Canadian and American publications in cities across the globe, that Mr. Steyn could offer some unique insight into the problems facing a party he presumably supports.

I had a football coach, years ago, who said "you're either part of the solution or you're part of the problem" and although Mark Steyn seems particularly loquacious in dropping loose "damns" and advocating a GOP "hiatus" he fails miserably at describing his view of the problem- much less in providing any cogent solution or alternative.

Steyn is quick to condemn Trent Lott, Arlen Specter and Newt Gingrich who arguably represent very different factions within the GOP. Given that Steyn has effectively alienated every major group within the Republican Party, who would he support in their stead assuming Steyn would not choose to defect and turn liberal?

While Steyn's article might strike a popular chord with the politically opportunistict, Steyn does little to meaningfully advance a solution. This seems very uncharacteristic for a normally insightful writer.

I'm going to hope that Steyn's aberration is due to tight deadline and one too many glasses of scotch at the Dartmouth Review Gala.