Because it's the truth, that's how.
Posted on 04/25/2005 12:07:45 PM PDT by Choose Ye This Day
ANGER ON THE RIGHT
There is an undeniable fury building among Republican voters coast to coast. It has now been almost six months since that euphoric day last year -- November 2nd -- when Republicans stunned Democrats across the board. Not only did President Bush handily beat John Kerry, but the GOP did what few predicted -- it managed to pick up four seats in the Senate. John Thune's victory over Senate Minority Leader Tom Daschle in South Dakota was extra sweet.
That seems like six years ago, not six months ago. Talk to your average Republican voter today and you will find a mood that ranges from anxious/concerned to enraged/frustrated. Yes, the Iraqi elections were amazing. Yes, the President's commitment to the spread of liberty is stalwart. Yes, his European "Unplugged" tour was a necessary step. The focus here is not President Bush (although in an ideal world he would be stronger on the stump on issues beyond social security reform). After the mid-term elections, President Bush will be on his way out, a "short-timer." The future of the Republican Party depends more on what happens now in Congress.
So what has our Republican majority in both houses of Congress gotten us lately? Well, the Terri Schiavo bill-regardless of what you think about its merits -- was at least bold. Then there was the bankruptcy bill. Good stuff, though hardly the legislation that will get voters running to the polls next election.
Of course being in the majority sometimes requires deal-making. Sometimes it requires delaying victory on one issue in order to win support on another more important issue. But sometimes being in the majority just requires that you act like you are in the majority.
This year, with a Republican majority in Congress, we have watched as 20 percent of the President's appellate court nominees are left twisting in the wind. With a Republican majority presiding, we have watched as John Bolton, the President's nominee for U.N. ambassador, has been personally and professionally maligned. With a Republican majority, we have seen spending skyrocket to obscene levels. With a Republican majority, we have seen the Democrats out-maneuver Republicans in the public-relations game with lame lines and gross misrepresentations.
Okay, the Senate did pass tort reform.
But a bill here or a bill there is simply not going to be enough to stem the tide of Republican voters' righteous anger about what many are calling "Creeping Wimpiness." Did thousands of volunteers work tirelessly to give the GOP this majority only to allow the minority to roll them on judges, policy, and other nominations? Did millions of generously open their wallets to the RNC only to see John McCain, Chuck Hagel, Lincoln Chafee, and George Voinovich help the Democrats when we needed them most?
Now is not the time for Republican Senators to cling to niceties. It is not the time to call for more discussions or negotiations. Now is the time for action. Allowing the Bolton nomination to be delayed was unforgivable. (Chairman Richard Lugar was caught totally off-guard by Voinovich's joining the Dems push to delay the Bolton vote.) Allowing Chuck Schumer and Barbara Boxer to brand nominees such as Janice Rogers Brown (an African American California Supreme Court justice) "extreme", was a colossal mistake. Most of the country still does not know that never before in the history of this country has the filibuster been used to block a vote of an appeals court nominee!
The frustration felt by many GOP voters has created a unique, once-in-a-lifetime opportunity for conservative politicians. For the first time in decades, we have no clear front-runner for the next GOP nomination. For the first time since George W. started his presidential campaign in the late 1990s, there is no clear standard-bearer for conservatives to rally round.
If a senator or governor can seize this moment, and create the type of bond with conservatives that Bush created during his nomination battle with McCain, that person could be on his way to the White House. If no one steps forward, and conservative voters increasingly watch their party kowtow to the McCains, Hagels, and Chafees of the mushy middle, then those voters will disengage from this party, meaning that the mainstream press will enjoy covering the elections of 2006 and 2008 a lot more than they enjoyed the election 2004.
Because it's the truth, that's how.
Now that they're relying on "international" law instead of constitutional law, can we really expect them to do what they're supposed to do?
And congress and the Prez are far from blameless in enacting some of this bilge.
The backruptcy bill was NOT "good stuff". It was big money lobbyist payoff through and through. In the long run it will hurt then GOP.
Otherwise, this article is very much on target.
The backruptcy bill was NOT "good stuff". It was big money lobbyist payoff through and through. In the long run it will hurt then GOP.
Otherwise, this article is very much on target.
The backruptcy bill was NOT "good stuff". It was big money lobbyist payoff through and through. In the long run it will hurt then GOP.
Otherwise, this article is very much on target.
You're just being intolerant and reactionary. The wheels of progress grind slowly in Washington. All in good time. Just let our wise leaders do what they know is right. They're much smarter than we.
< /sarcasm>
Sadly you are correct. If the Republicans do not deal with judges, voting systems, estate taxes, and the UN like they were elected to do, my checkbook is going to be cloased and my car will stall on the way to the polls in 2006!
I, for one, am very angry with the foot dragging the Republicans are displaying.
We didn't vote them into power so that they could play nice with the liberal democrats. They're our political enemies and they need to be treated as such. The sooner we put them out of power completely, the better for America.
Unfortunately, we'll never defeat them if we worry about what they think and say about us.
Is FR running slowly for you, too? I thought it was just my computer, when I double-posted earlier in the thread. Maybe the server is pokey today.
If we've treatied into international law into that situatin, how then would the court rule. The Constituion, or would a treaty enacted after the writing of the Consitituion supercede?
1) Investigating Delay
2) Snubbing Bolton
3) Social Security Reform is dead
4) Getting rolled on judges
5) Inacted a stinker of a bankruptcy bill that punishes Americans
6) Ignored the illegal immigration issue
Whiskey tango foxtrot?
agree 100%...time to take the gloves off and grow some testicles, GOP officials. Glad to see I'm not the only person sick and tired of elected officials acting as if the office serves their needs, not the peoples'.
But you did bring up law enacted by our elected representatives and signed by the President in our representative democracy. Yet when it's something you disagree with, it's bilge that needs overturned. You want judicial activism when it serves our purpose?
The bankruptcy bill is supposed to close a solvency loophole used by 'players', i.e. people that obtain unsecured debt that they never had any intention of repaying. The change in the method by which solvency is determined will, in theory, raise the bar for Chapter 7 (debt forgiveness) high enough that people that have sufficient income vs. their debts to repay at least a portion of it will be restricted to filing Chapter 13 (debt consolidation) instead. People filing because of overwhelming losses, unanticipated catastrophic events, and other circumstances that render them completely wiped out should still be able to qualify for Chapter 7.
The major effect this would have on consumers is that lower losses to creditors will translate into a lower burden the people paying for their loans have to carry. In other words, people who have the means to at least partially shoulder the repayment of their loans will no longer have the option of shunting the full load onto other consumers, while those totally buried under insurmountable debt (usually medical bills) can still find relief.
I'm getting offers for 15-20K Credit limits.
Luckily i aint no dumbie
Yes, sorry for the multiple posts.
Delay and those who have done similar need investigated. Remember, what a little land deal in Arkansas openned for us investigating on a whim. Bolton does need examined. If he is not going to not only represent us, but simply be a thorn in an organization that is in a mess anyway, then he shouldn't be approved. I don't think the private accounts is what's going to save SS anyway. The bigger issue is we are going to see fewer people working and wages declining to keep up no matter what. I'll go with you on the judges issue, but I want us silent when the pendulum swings and some leftists are in control of the white house and congress and our minority is holding up some crud. Agree 100% on #5 and #6.
And here I thought the 'You aren't smart enough to decide for yourself what's best for you, so I'll force you to do as I think best. For your own protection, of course.' mentality was the domain of elitist liberals.
Hmmm. No mention of our porous borders.
Private accounts will help the real solvency, more real money will be made for the consumers of Social Security, and therefore there will be a lower burden on the treasury to bail people out.
The reason the President has to say they won't help the solvency is that the stock market is not guaranteed to grow. But it always does. People want something guaranteed but there is no guarantee no matter whose name is on the chits.
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.