The Elephant in the Room: Evangelicals, Libertarians and the Battle to Control the Republican Party (Hardcover)

~ (Author)
Key Phrases: Republican Party, White House, Religious Right (more...)

Editorial Reviews

Review

"...impressive.... The story of the impending break-up is excellent material, and the author tells it well." (The Economist, October 2006)

"fun and lively book that should be distributed to every card-carrying member of the GOP. " (New York Post, September 24, 2006)

Review

"Sager picks up where Bruce Bartlett left off with Impostor. The Elephant in the Roomtells us how libertarians and the Christian conservatives are at swords' point over Bush's 'big government conservatism.' Anyone who want to understand this important debate should get a copy of Sager's book."
—John B. Judis, coauthor of The Emerging Democratic Majority

"Ryan Sager offers an eloquent, elegant argument that the GOP has lost its way—an argument that even those of us who disagree with many of his criticisms and object passionately to many of his characterizations must take with the utmost seriousness."
—John Podhoretz, author of Can She Be Stopped?

"An insightful and eminently readable account of the current conservative crackup. Anyone who wants to understand American politics today needs to read Sager's chronicle of the ongoing civil war in the conservative ranks."
—Paul Begala, co-author of Take it Back

"This funny, sobering, smart book reminds Republicans that having beliefs isn't good enough. You have to act on them. Winning isn't enough; you have to win with a purpose in mind. Ryan Sager sounds a real call to arms. The party would be wise to hear it."
—Peggy Noonan, columnist, Wall Street Journal

"Two feisty American factions are at daggers drawn. No, the fight is not conservatives versus liberals. Rather, it is libertarian conservatives versus "social issues" conservatives. In this illuminating examination of the changing ideological geography of American politics, Ryan Sager suggests that the conservatives must choose between Southern and Western flavors of conservatism. He prefers the latter."
—George F. Will, syndicated columnist

See all Editorial Reviews

Product Details

• Hardcover: 256 pages
• Publisher: Wiley; annotated edition edition (August 25, 2006)
• Language: English
• ISBN-10: 0471793329
• ISBN-13: 978-0471793328
• Product Dimensions: 9.3 x 6.4 x 1 inches
• Shipping Weight: 15.2 ounces (View shipping rates and policies)
• Average Customer Review: 4.2 out of 5 stars  See all reviews (16 customer reviews)
• Amazon.com Sales Rank: #615,828 in Books (See Bestsellers in Books)

Customer Reviews

Most Helpful Customer Reviews

19 of 20 people found the following review helpful:

5.0 out of 5 stars New Wedding Vows for the GOP, November 9, 2006

By	R. Dailey (Durham, NC) - See all my reviews (REAL NAME)

Sager makes a clear and easy-to-follow argument for how to keep the GOP coalition together in the years ahead. As a Republican who has no memory of conservative icons like Barry Goldwater, I appreciate Sager's summary of the history of the modern conservative movement. From this historical perspective, he argues that the GOP has veered away from its previous commitment to small government and liberty.

At its core, the book primarily seems to address the question of how the GOP can retain social conservatives without alienating voters in the more libertarian regions of the country. He suggests that a consensual return to 'liberty' and 'federalism' as the GOP's core values can allow social conservatives and libertarians to get what they want out of the party. This would involve asking social conservatives to focus their attention on state-level politics rather than on national politics (judicial nominations excepted...maybe). This would position the GOP to strengthen its hold on the libertarian Intermountain West.

This approach seems reasonable. But the chapters on anti-Communism and anti-Clintonism left me with a nagging question: Had social conservatives and economic conservatives only been bound together by common enemies? After Communism and Clintonism both vanished, the two groups have awakened and realized that neither has much to gain from the marriage anymore.

Those of us economic conservatives generally expect social consevatives to conduct themselves in a pragmatic manner. We want them to barter their 'values' in the way that we make financial decisions. But I just don't think that the Religious Right operates in that way. And their fundraising efforts largely depend on having nationl visibility. Therefore, they may just view Sager's approach as a clever way of trying to get them to turn down the volume on the values rhetoric. Hence, maybe George W. Bush was just the accidental deliverer of our divorce papers.

Besides, I think many economic conservatives are starting to find that we have a lot in common with the Clintonite wing of the Democratic party. If this trend continues, the GOP may find itself asking how it can avoid becoming isolated to the South.

15 of 16 people found the following review helpful:

4.0 out of 5 stars Solid argumentation raises important questions, March 6, 2007

By	Andrew S. Rogers (Seattle, Washington) - See all my reviews (TOP 500 REVIEWER)    (REAL NAME)

In a 1975 interview with the libertarian magazine "Reason," Ronald Reagan said, "If you analyze it I believe the very heart and soul of conservatism is libertarianism. ... The basis of conservatism is a desire for less government interference or less centralized authority or more individual freedom and this is a pretty general description also of what libertarianism is." If you agree with Ryan Sager's argument in "The Elephant in the Room," you'd have wonder how at home Reagan would feel (or for that matter how welcome he would be) in the GOP of the late Bush-43 era. If, as the Gipper more famously also said, he didn't leave the Democrat party in the 1940s, but rather it left him, it seems pretty clear the Republican party has left his substance (as opposed to his image) behind too.

I think would be hard for any reasonable observer to disagree with Sager's basic thesis, which is that largely-irreconcilable tectonic forces are tearing Reagan's GOP coalition asunder. The small-government, low-tax, personal-freedom libertarian wing -- the wing of Goldwater, Reagan, and generally western Republicans -- is being steamrolled by cultural conservatism (aka "the religious right"), which the author identifies as primarily a southern-Republican phenomenon. In one of the most arresting political images I've come across in some time, Sager describes "the situation at home [within the GOP] looking like an episode of 'COPS,' with the shirtless social conservatives wrestled to the ground and handcuffed outside the trailer, and the libertarians deciding whether to press charges" (p. 183).

The problem as Sager sees it, of course, is that the social-cons aren't "handcuffed" at all, but in fact are still free to slap the western libertarian-conservatives around at will. And this is where "The Elephant in the Room" shifts from being a historic and sociological look at the GOP and turns instead into a passionate call for the Republicans to throw social conservatives over the side and return to their roots as the party of small government and personal freedom. I wasn't expecting the book to be as energetic an argument as it became, but I can hardly fault the author for his point of view. He articulates it quite well, has a firm grasp of both history and the current forces within the GOP, and makes his case with solid argumentation and a good turn of phrase.

What I found most interesting is the degree to which Sager is willing to assign blame to George W. Bush and to Karl Rove -- while these are the *betes noire* of the Left, it's only recently that Republicans have begun en masse to criticize them and their heretofore-winning political strategy (it's a shame this book was published before the 2006 midterms; I need to make a point of looking up what Sager may have written in the last few months). Bush and Rove, the author argues, have turned the GOP into the rightward half of America's Big Government Party, differing from the Democrats only in what they want to spend money and flex the government's muscles to achieve.

It's an important argument, and one that I hope presages a real attempt within the GOP to figure out what it stands for -- both in strategy and in tactics. Whether you're a Republican or an interested outsider ... a social-conservative, a libertarian one, or no conservative at all ... this is a book that should provoke a lot of thought about the future of the Republican party, and therefore of American politics.

50 of 64 people found the following review helpful:

5.0 out of 5 stars For those of us who miss Reagan, September 19, 2006

By	John - See all my reviews (TOP 1000 REVIEWER)

Great, funny, informative, witty book on what has happened to the Republican party since 1995. This book describes the history of conservatism since 1945, and how there used to be balance between the libertarians (who value individual freedom and limited government), and the social conservatives (who value tradition and religion). These two groups complemented each other and were like the yin and yang of the GOP: they kept the party in balance.

Since 1995 (roughly), the libertarians have lost power in the GOP, and the GOP is increasingly a party of: massive governmental spending (spending under Bush has mushroomed and is the worst since LBJ in the 1960s), southern Christian fundamentalism, and unlimited government that we all are supposed to "trust" (the Patriot Act, etc.).

Bush, DeLay and company have basically wielded power the way that liberals traditionally have (meaning: not trying to limit it, but trying to maximize the power of the federal government over society). Government spending and debt is out of control, and the government is increasingly playing "nanny" to us all (the Terry Schiavo case is a good example). Things like mandatory governmental counselling for any married couple with minor kids wanting a divorce shows the degree to which the GOP wants to use the federal government to intrude on all of our lives and play "nanny" to us all.

As a former Republican who voted for Reagan and who values individual initiative and choice, I am appalled by what the GOP has become. People like Tom DeLay cast aside 50 years of conservative distrust of government to declare that he was in essence put in power to enact the will of God. If that is not scary, I don't know what is. Unlike Ronald Reagan, who always tried to unite America and who had no mean words for others, and who did not believe in division, the new breed of GOP leaders are mean-spiritied partisans who believe in dividing the naition: on issues of gay marriage, abortion, and prayer in school. In Texas, where I live, the current GOP governor, Rick Perry, is contend to hold the 35 % of the Christian fundamentalist vote he knows he "has" and which he knows can get him re-elected (instead of trying to represent all Texans). The GOP in Texas is willing to represent this minority, and willing to pander to some really idiotic ideas of this group, such as removing the U.S. from the United Nations, and going back to the gold standard (if you doubt that, read the 2004 Texas GOP platform, which looks like it was written by fanatical morons). From forced marriage counselling by federal bureaucrats, to intruding on intimite family decisions on life and death (the Schiavo case), to tampering with the constitution (gay marriage bans), to out of control spending and "faith-based prisons", the GOP is clearly a party that has lost all grip on common sense. Thereby the notion of individualism and choice has gone out the window. Texas (Reaganite) Republican ex-congressman Dick Armey is quoted in the book as stating, "being Christian is no excuse for being stupid", and he refers to fundamentalist Focus on the Family leader Dobson as "a thug" (for trying to use threats against the GOP to get its agenda forced on the nation). Armey is smart enough to realize that a federal government that can impose conservative morality on us, can also enforce liberal/socialist morality on us, at some time in the future (indeed, liberals like Hillary Clinton are already using the rhetoric of the Christian fundamentalist right to cloak their moral initiatives in a "soulful banner").

The result is the split in the GOP that the author describes: the party is increasingly split between the southern Republicans, who want to impose their moral values on the rest of us, and "western conservatives", who want to preserve individual choice and individual freedom, and who realize that every power the GOP gets for government can in future be used by liberals to impose THEIR values on the rest of us (can you imagine mandatory liberal federal marriage counsellors ?). The ultimate result of all this is a lame GOP that cannot win. The party won't be able to satisfy the Christian Right fully (if it did, it would lose all the moderates in the party, and it will also not be able to jetison the Christian Right. The end result is a divided GOP that is increasingly partisan and strident.

As a Republican who loved Ronald Reagan, and for whom the GOP was about: a. individual freedom, b. strong national defense/anti-communism, and c. limited government, I feel that this book is excellent and is long overdue. The only option for us now is to vote Democrat for the time being to try to get gridlock in Washington, and stop this out of control spending and moralising. And then hope for something better in future.

Bush and Rove and DeLay and their ilk have sold out the Reagan Revolution.