Bob Inglis, Sour Grapes
Posted on 07/09/2010 10:35:41 AM PDT by C19fan
Too many Republican leaders are acquiescing to a poisonous "demagoguery" that threatens the party's long-term credibility, says a veteran GOP House member who was defeated in South Carolina's primary last month.
While not naming names, 12-year incumbent Rep. Bob Inglis suggested in interviews with The Associated Press that tea party favorites such as former vice presidential nominee Sarah Palin and right-wing talk show hosts like Glenn Beck are the culprits.
He cited a claim made famous by Palin that the Democratic health care bill would create "death panels" to decide whether elderly or sick people should get care.
(Excerpt) Read more at washingtonpost.com ...
Useful idiot for the commies.
Mr. Inglis is just mad because now he'll have to actually work for a living.
Who cares what Vichy Republican scum like Inglis has to say? He’s had his day.
It’s a beautiful thing to see these lame-ducked “leaders” like Inglis and Bob Bennett showing their distaste for real conservatism. The wool has been lifted from the eyes of the people, the charade is over and they’re being shown the door.
It’s a beautiful thing to see these lame-ducked “leaders” like Inglis and Bob Bennett showing their distaste for real conservatism. The wool has been lifted from the eyes of the people, the charade is over and they’re being shown the door.
Crybaby sore loser.
The loathsome Fritz Hollings called Inglis a “g*ddamn skunk” when Inglis unsuccessfully challenged him for his Senate Seat in 1998. He was right.
I could see him voting for Cap and Trade and any number of other things in a lame duck session after November's election.
he’s right about the GOP tolerating demagogues- he’s just wrong about which demagogues
obama being the worst, yet still treated with gentlemanly civility
FReepers should know Bob Inglis was utterly wiped out in the primary, he was a RINO cut from the mold of Lindsay Grahannesty (maybe WORSE) and he his lashing out because the people of his District in South Carolina told him to sit down and SHUT UP.
Oh, and did I mention he is a MORON, a useful idiot, and a RINO? Oh, yeah, I did mention RINO....Sad — because when he started out 14 years ago and first ran for Congress as a member of the freshman class of 1994, he was a STAUNCH Conservative. He was a member of the “Class of Limbaugh,” as that 1st Republican Congress in 40 years was called. but after 3 terms, he sat out 2 years, and he MISSED the Washington perks — and he came back, wanting the power, the attention — he’d become a RINO... How SAD...
Bob Inglis is a poster child for term limits — 3 2-yr. terms for for the House of Reps, 2 6 year terms for Senators. Anyone for Amendment 28? How’s this for the text of a Term Limits Amendment proposal?
Section 1: No one shall serve more than three concurrent two year terms, or six years, as a member of the House of Representatives; and no one shall serve more than two concurrent six year terms, or twelve years, as a member of the Senate.
Section 2: No individual may serve 18 years in total federal elected office in the Legislative branch of the Federal Government; excluding partial terms appointed by Governors to fill vacated seats until the next regular or special election for the seat filled.
P.S. 71-29 Bob, 71-29. You only won three precincts in your home county.
Well, why do you say, “Good riddance”? Inglish was part of the Gingrich “Revolution” in 1994, and a very prominent leader of the GOP throughout the Clinton administration. He did everything in his power to bring the impeachment effort to victory. He succeeded, in that he led the House to vote forward articles of impeachment of which he was one of the primary authors.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/politics/special/clinton/stories/impeachvote121198.htm
Now he says that he was “self-righteous” then, and that his current attitude is more informed by his re-discovered Christian beliefs. His votes and positions have remained pretty ferociously Conservative:
http://www.ontheissues.org/House/Bob_Inglis.htm
Is the problem with him now that he calls current GOP party leaders “demagogues”? Perhaps that is his educated view based on his experience after laboring in the Conservative GOP fields for almost two decades. Considering his Conservative bona fides, do you believe that his statements should be given any respect or thought?
What about his argument that the current “approach is dividing the country into partisan camps, making it difficult for people to work together and find solutions to problems.” Do we wish to find solutions to problems? Do we need to work together as a nation to do so?
Or do you believe that it is possible to seize complete control of Congress, impeach Obama, and eradicate all Democrats and liberals? How do you honestly believe that such a plan can be carried out?
Does the Right simply want to refuse to work with the Dems on solving ANY problem, no matter how pressing, in the hopes that the collapse of the US will result in the utter abolition of liberalism and the Democratic party? How does the Right propose to deal with those who are “true believers” in Progressivism?
Take the topic of continues involvement on Afghanistan, for instance. The Right were the primary supporters of Bush’s “surge,” arguing that we needed to be committed to winning there in order to defeat the Taliban. Ann Coulter is right now mixing it up with Bill Kristol for continuing to support that position after two years, claiming that he should resign for supporting “Obama’s war.”
I’m not raising this issue to debate who’s right - just that there will continue to be people that argue over the most useful ways to handle very important issues regarding our nation’s welfare. And there are debates even within the Right! How much more firmly Conservative, circa 2005, can one be than Inglis and Kristol, who were both heroes on FR during the Bush administration.
If you say “good riddance” to them after decades of diligent service, without even giving their ideas a hearing, then I believe that you are pursuing an ideological purity that is doomed to failure. It will not win continued elections across the ballot boxes of the US. You will *never* get Conservative representatives elected, without fail, in the Northeast and the West Coast. How are you thinking that we can all untie as a nation to solve these problems?
Are you planning to just inflict your policy decisions on the entire country, whether they agree with them or not? How does that make the Right any better than Obama? Wouldn’t we just see Tea Parties of the Left rising up in 2013? After all, their believers are just as fervent.
This is a very serious question. How do we unite as one nation to solve our problems? How do you propose it can be accomplished? Do you outlaw liberal ideas, and thus force them underground? Do you physically detain and segregate Progressives? How do you see the future of our nation actually working?
Ironically, Inglis made a term limits pledge, and honored it, when he first ran for and was elected to Congress in 1992. He served three terms and then ran for Senate (and lost).
He is serving his third term now after returning to Congress after the 2004 election - no terms limits pledge this time, though he will be involuntarily retired.
FReegards!
You're kidding right? These guys are like retired Generals, they become lobbyists, they never leave the DC beltway, to many network connections.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.