Their Own Worst Enemies - A bad midterm outlook for the GOP

National Review ^ | May 29, 2002 | Deroy Murdock

[Austin Willard Wright]

Am I upset at Jim Jeffords? Jim Jeffords (a mushy, dull, and hollow moderate) isn't worth that kind of energy. If I spent my time wringing my hands about the Jeffords of the world (their ranks are legion), I wouldn't have time for anything else.

Dubya isn't a dictator but he does have the constitutional to veto. He also has the constitutional authority not to propose more government programs. BTW, what does "not being a dictator" have to do with Dubya's recent initiatives to *increase* the size of government. In fact, I thought that a dictator (your word) would like such big government initiatives.

[rdb3]

Your thinking in one word: myopic. If it is not obvious to you the damage that was done by the Jeffords defection, then there's no hope for you. You simply refuse to consider all factors, yet you will whine constantly about what you want.

Grow up!

Chalk it up as another unappeasable.

Good day to you, sir.

[Austin Willard Wright]

I love you too. If it gives you some small measure of comfort to blame Jeffords for Bush's actions (including his refusal to veto, his budget busting farm bill, his call to increase foreign aid by 50 percent in three years, his call for mental health parity, his call to end drilling in the Gulf), I say more power to you.

[samtheman]

Your critique of Reagan ignores a couple of rather important facts:

1. Reagan won the Cold War and buried the Evil Empire.

2. Reagan's tax-cuts laid the groundwork for the greatest peace-time economic boom in global history.

I never said he was a god. He was just a president, just a politician. But I know one president who could --- and still possibly might --- learn from President Reagan.

[samtheman]

The GOP should "take the Senate" to do precisely what? Enact Dubya's budget busting (non-veto program of more welfare, higher tariffs, farm aid, and "mental health" parity...or are you claiming that Dubya (and his GOP Senate yes men) *really* have different views?

You and I are probably a lot closer in opinions on the issue than you think. I too would love to see a Republican President ride in on a White Horse and smite all Liberalism everywhere. But it's not going to happen.

Meanwhile, back in the real world, a Republican Senate will give us lower taxes, stronger military and better judges than a Democratic Senate will. That's not perfect conservatism... but it's worth working for... worth voting for... worth sending in campaign contributions for.

[samtheman]

Texas... what post number are people talking about, the one in which you list "references"... I can't find it. Thanks.

[alpowolf]

In many, many nations, what Jeffords did would have caused a civil war!

What incredible nonsense. Show me just where in the Constitution it says that a politician isn't allowed to change parties. Oh, I know, he was elected essentially under false pretenses. That's true; but if you sacked every politician who did that, neither party would be able to fill a city council.

99% of the Congress, including your precious Republicans, violate their holy oath on a daily basis to support and defend the Constitution. I don't hear you calling for civil war about that!

I wonder if you would be so upset if Jeffords had switched from Democrat to GOP and gave them control of the Senate. I bet I wouldn't hear the word "illegitimate" come out of your mouth then.

This is all about Party over country. You think I'm too hard on Bush? Take this crap over arming pilots. John Magaw (who made this ridiculous decision) is in the executive branch of govt. OK, pop quiz, who do people in the executive branch work for? Ding Ding! That's right, the President. So why hasn't he done anything about this?

I'll spare you the trouble of answering, I've heard the line from the apologists so many times I know it by heart. "Gee, he has to do that, because if he upsets the Brady Bunch that'll upset the soccer moms, and Representative Zoop will lose his seat. So it's just tactics, comrades, tactics." In other words making sure that the guy who's polishing the seat of that chair with his butt is wearing a lapel pin with a picture of an elephant on it is more important than the lives of the taxpayers riding in those planes.

[Texasforever]

#243

[samtheman]

Texasforever, is it ok to use a link to your post in other threads, other discussions in which 3rd-party-advocates try to deny the difference between Republicans & Democrats?

#243: Texasforever On Republicrats

(I put the #243 in the title because some browsers seem to get hung up on #242, which contains a photo.)

[Texasforever]

Sure if you want.

[Texasforever]

Can I copy it and use it?

Sure.

[Edmund Burke]

Bush is pulling out all stops to win firm control of the House and Senate. Once the Republicans are in charge, they will reduce farm spending by 90%. That's the plan. Trust him. Vote Republican and just wait and see!

[Stultis]

Beyond speaking softly in his bully pulpit, Bush never has touched his veto pen.

Reagan was brandishing his veto pen before he was even sworn in. Jesus, George, VETO SOMETHING!

[Texasforever]

Reagan was brandishing his veto pen before he was even sworn in. !

Examples please.

[Native American Female Vet]

BUMP for a great reply

[Zack Nguyen]

[Snicker]

[texlok]

Bush is pulling out all stops to win firm control of the House and Senate. Once the Republicans are in charge, they will reduce farm spending by 90%. That's the plan. Trust him. Vote Republican and just wait and see!

Heh. Too bad the only things either major party cares about is re-election or the status quo. Once upon a time, Republicans cared about trimming the budget and the size of the government, but....with various elections every other year and their move towards the middle, that is holding true less and less.

Don't get me wrong, I would love to see either a Republican or a third-party candidate that would put their election on the line and say they were going to trim the government (and reign it in) at all levels, and I think they would do well. But the party leadership probably wouldn't let that happen.

[galt-jw]

statism vs. statism lite. I'll vote libertarian, thank you, since my vote didnt get me what I wanted or was promised, anyway. No kool aid for me, thanks, I can think for myself.

"Popularity in the realm of fools is impotence in the realm of values."
L. Peikoff