Death of a Moderate

If you are in the Bush White House and you're not a signatory to the PNAC document, you're an endangered species. Robert Zoellick became the latest casualty in the Death of the Moderates today:

Deputy Secretary of State Robert Zoellick, the department's No. 2 official, is resigning, Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice announced Monday.

Zoellick, who served six years in the Bush administration, said he would join the Wall Street investment house Goldman Sachs Group Inc.

In his resignation letter, dated June 15, Zoellick, 52, did not say why he was leaving. A former U.S. trade representative, Zoellick reportedly wanted to be promoted to treasury secretary to replace departing secretary John Snow, but President George W. Bush nominated Goldman Sachs executive Henry Paulson instead.

I find it worrisome that at this sensitive time, the leading US diplomat dealing with the crisis in Darfur is leaving. I also find it worrisome that Zoellick was marginalized because of his moderation, apparently, showing that this weak White House cannot brook any difference of opinion that might send tumbling their house of cards. Think Progress finds a few choice quotes from newspaper accounts of Zoellick's departure:

In addition, friends said, Mr. Zoellick had at times felt marginalized at the State Department, where his subordinates, including R. Nicholas Burns, an under secretary of state, manage most of the major issues.

Zoellick has told administration officials he will leave, probably to a Wall Street firm, if he isn’t named to replace Treasury Secretary John Snow, two persons familiar with the matter said.

From his first days at the State Department, Mr. Zoellick has chafed at his subordinate position, frequently remarking that he was finding the adjustment difficult after running his own office during four years as United States trade representative, which is a cabinet position.

As Paul Krugman noted earlier today, there are no more moderates left. This latest purge serves as a dangerous reminder. The reason pragmatic Democrats like the online community are so often tarred as being "radical extremists" is because that's the only way Republicans, who've marginalized dissent in their own party for years, can understand inter-party differences in opinion. I wish the big tent still existed, but it's flown away, at least in the Republican Party.

Today a Democratic governor signed a law that would ban almost all abortions in the state of Louisiana if Roe v. Wade was overturned (an excellent use of the legislators' time in that well-functioning state with no problems to speak of on the horizon... like cleaning up and rebuilding its most populous city, etc.) Yet conservative organizations still put out books called "The Party of Death" (no link needed) because calling the other side extremist, and indeed being extremist themselves, serves their needs. The Republicans don't have a big tent and they don't want the other side to have one either, as it would mean a long, slow electoral death. I wholeheartedly condemn Gov. Blanco's decision. But in the final analysis, it doesn't matter to conservatives what she did. The Democrats will be seen as baby-killers anyway. And this long slow death of the moderates has not only damaged any ability to govern this country, it's distracted politicians from doing anything to move America forward. It's poisonous to the process.