Posted on 01/10/2013 7:02:10 AM PST by SeekAndFind
The 2012 elections showed that the American people don’t like clueless conservatism any better now than when they were getting it in massive doses from George W. Bush.
If the electorate really favored progressivism, they would have given the Democrats control of the House of Representatives, and they did not. Instead, the voters used the election to deliver the biggest jolt to the Republicans that they could without giving the Democrats complete control of government.
The 2012 election amounted to a desperate attempt by the electorate to purge the Republican Party of clueless conservatism. Clearly, the people are trying to force the GOP to come up with new candidates with new ideas. Actually, what the voters really want are new Republican candidates with old ideas—the ideas that produced two landslides for Ronald Reagan.
When choosing a presidential candidate, Republicans have a tradition of nominating whoever is “next in line”. In 2016, this will be Paul Ryan, who was the Republican candidate for vice president in 2012.
Paul Ryan is a brilliant, hard-working, and very nice man. And, he is the very model of a modern clueless conservative.
In his interview on Hugh Hewitt’s show on January 2, Ryan touched upon all of the core principles and beliefs of clueless conservatism. Now, all the Republicans have to do if they want to lose the House of Representatives and 60+ seats in the Senate in 2014 is to follow the precepts that Ryan so earnestly laid out in his conversation with Hewitt.
(Excerpt) Read more at forbes.com ...
"Permanent" tax cuts would've been subject to the Byrd Rule and thus the cuts would've never been passed in the first place.
Alternatively O is getting the sole credit for the >=$400K income tax increase by the MSM and most Americans as he ran on it and won. And then he whipped that GOP and got what he demanded (MSM theme).
so when the economy dives into a major depression due to these job creators paying more taxes then voters will demand that Obama pass a massive tax cut fot the >$440K, maybe to zero rates, or risk a major loss in 2014, .
this is perfect, Obama is in a lose-lose and the MSM is helping
So when is the depression starting that the GOP promised us for the past... years if this happened ?
I cant wait till we get to do the gloating for a change.
Well said.
To subscribe to the uninformed electorate, a sophistication necessary in their voting to send messages, indicates to me the author doesn't know the voting public.
Poll after poll of the voting public shows how ill informed they are about Government and the candidates. - Tom
I agree--and frequently posted articles to that effect at my Conservative Intelligence Center, in the previous decade--that George W. Bush was "clueless." But he was certainly no Conservative. Calling oneself a "Conservative," is not, after all, the measure.
On the other hand, Ryan has some superb qualities. Does he sometimes makes mistakes? Yes. He is still developing. But rather than denounce him, personally, for making a mistake in common with many others; why not simply explain why what you believe was a mistake, was--in fact--a mistake?!
The essential point is that we have to persuade many millions of Americans, that we are on a totally disastrous path; that we must reverse that path--either by political or other means--or we are going to lose the heritage that all true Conservatives cherish. Can't we concentrate on the issues for a time, rather than denouncing those who while not perfect are still 85% on our side? Have we forgotten the brief surges of those changing their perspectives, after the Reagan victory in 1980--something reversing the shifts against us, after the Roosevelt shift to the Left in 1933; or the LBJ use of the Kennedy Assassination in 1964?
With the right formulas for persuasion; people can be converted, either in a good or bad way. Constantly attacking those not quite completely on our side, is rather a precise way not to aid the path to benign conversion.
William Flax
P.S. Check out Whither American Conservatism.
Do they really?
We had popular Government from 1776. No one is attacking the idea, now--certainly not I. But we did not make the idea of universal suffrage any type of goal until the 1820s. It is time we reconsidered the merits of that latter "goal." It has none.
William Flax
This author and this article are DEAD ON right!!!
If you stop and think about it, most of the ‘clueless conservatives’ do have been sold on the belief that the economy depends on what the government does or does not do. This is what it’s come down to.
Yes, the govt can ‘incentivize’ or ‘penalize’ by way of the tax code, but all this talk of “STIMULUS” (govt spending)...starting with BUSH...was nothing but ‘political’ shenanigans, that ultimately cost the taxpayers (the ‘hardworking’ ones).
And, yes, the Paul Ryans out there are nothing but ‘GOVT’ solutions politicians. Sadly the Republican party is now dominated by these so-called ‘clueless conservatives’ (i.e. Keynesian types).
The debate, sadly, has been - and continues to be - shaped by the ‘socialist’ ideology of GOVT can control the economy.....and the ‘clueless conservatives’ have bitten the bait to engage in debating ‘the degree’ of that ‘involvement’.
Wake up! Smell the bacon!!!!
RE: And, yes, the Paul Ryans out there are nothing but ‘GOVT’ solutions politicians.
I gather you are not a fan of Ryan’s PATH TO PROSPERITY and his solution for our imminent Medicare bankrupcy...
This is true, the 2005 to 2006 GOP congress under GWB left this time bomb and O was smart enough to get Pelosi House to extend it exactly two years till now when he was safely re-elected,.
The reason why Bush settled for tax cuts that were temporary is because it was passed ~ 2003 in the Senate using budget reconciliation rules which bypasses the 40 vote filibuster, they only needed 50+Cheney instead of 60, but that puts an expiration date on them UNLESS the CBO scores them as deficit neutral or deficit negative, more taxes than spending as O-care was. And of course it was scored as adding deficits as the GOP position in those days was that deficits are great for the economy, so they expired.
Hell, Bush couldnt get McCain to vote for them.
So the date was Dec 2010 and as I said, O being much moe clever than Rs got Pelosi House to extend them exactly 2 nmore years with GOP Senators help..
A shame we have to keep stating the obvious.
The WH released a CBO score that claims that this bill HR 8 cut the deficit by $737B over 10 years even compared to the higher Clinton rates that went into effect Jan 1 after the extended Bush tax cut expiration, and it gave a detailed breakdown of the CBO estimates.
Have you seen anything posted here like that?
Agreed.
As I have said for many years, the problem the Republicans have is they run against people whose appeal to the electorate is: "Vote for me and I'll get you someone else's money." And they do just that. -tom
Looking at the WHs CBO score #s closely they get the $737B surplus deficit reduction by comparing HR 8 with the 2012 tax levels not the Jan 1 2013 higher Clinton tax levels, so they claim it cut the deficit by not scoring HR 8 as a tax cut.
This is still interesting because those here cursing this bill here call it both a tax increase and claim it adds to the deficit at the same time.
I’m not a member of any party, though I once donated to a Republican candidate and I once voted in a Republican primary - only once in both cases. I’m convinced the entire political class at every level is rampant with crooks, shysters, thugs, vapid liers and traitors.
I’ve come to the realization that similar to how the Democrats co-opted the term libralism about 100 years ago the Republican Rinos have been worked to co-opt the term conservative.
I’ve decided however with this co-opt that I will only profess my political belief in one way. I’m for Freedom and Liberty. If you want my vote you must show me how you will protect or expand my freedom and liberty.
No values discussions, no financial discussions, no explanations or reasons or excuses. If you decrease the freedom and liberty of me or mine you are the enemy - end of story.
In other words, Ryan decided to play the GOP-E game of “voting for a tax cut”, vs. fighting tooth and nail against the enemies of us all...
I learned that people do what they mean rather than say what they mean, and this is especially true with politicians.
What I see is a party suffering with the same internal progressive takeover the country is suffering. The eGOP types would much rather lose to their kindred spirits across the isle than have a true Reaganesque conservative in the party win.
What else explains their abandoning Palin and her family to the attacking left, including McLame's lack of effort? They want to eliminate that threat? I think so.
They don't believe the words conservatism makes them say, economically or otherwise. Those thoughts and ideas, along with those who speak them from the heart, make them uncomfortable.
So...they sell out. They compromise instead of take the win, lose instead of fight, and all while they search for tested sound bites they can use to cover their tracks to what appears to be their deliberate loses.
Maybe McLame was right when he said we had nothing to fear from obama. It's the eGOP sellouts we should be afraid of.
When the people have a choice between Obama and Obama Light, they go for the real thing. Simple as that. Maybe next time the GOPe will run a conservative.
JUST WORDS!!! and no “action”...where is the legislation put forth to get a vote on this so-called “PATH TO PROSPERITY”???
Why did he sell out and vote for this “DEAL”, when even Cantor voted against it?????
Explain that one to me? One is just words, the other one is putting your ‘vote’ on the line.
Enlighten us then, Oh wisest of us all
(wouldn’t that have been more helpful in the first place too? unless you enjoy name-calling much more than being helpful to fellow conservatives)
SeekAndFind wrote:
“If the electorate really favored progressivism, they would have given the Democrats control of the House of Representatives, and they did not.”
and Longbow1969 replied:
“Very deceptive. The reality is that the majority of the American people DID vote for a Democrat House of Representatives - by over 1.3 million votes actually. The only reason the Republicans hung on was through skillful gerrymandering.”
Longbow, I think you’re right.
But let me present you with an analogy, if I may try.
Think back to California of, say, 10-15 years ago. Even by then, it had become a solidly “blue” state (Schwarzenegger notwithstanding), but still had an effective Republican voice and representation which provided a measure of a “firewall” in the state legislature. That is to say, whatever legislation got passed (fiscal, etc.), had to “get through” the Republicans first. There were still enough of them there, elected by the conservative regions of the state to block the ‘rats from running roughshod over them.
We are at or near that same situation today, in the federal government. The Republican/conservative voice is still there (we hung onto the House), but it’s grip is tenuous. With the next election, the Republican House majority may be wiped out.
If that happens, expect the nation to go in the same direction as has gone California.
Off the cliff!
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.
