(Jay Cost) Bush and Congress: What Went Wrong?

Real Clear Politics ^ | December 31, 2005 | Jay Cost

[Hank Rearden]

What went wrong?

Americans put a party with no core, unwavering, non-negotiable principles in charge.

[stylin19a]

What went wrong ? President Bush thought veto was a mafia hit man.

[RoseofTexas]

"What went wrong?"

WHAT went wrong?!!! Just one word....RINOS!!

[GonzoGOP]

What went wrong was the first time the RINO's opposed Bush, he did nothing. What went wrong was that when the Democrats started to demagogue every issue Bush did nothing. When a minor congressman or back bench senator can tweak the president's nose and get away with it, they will never be afraid to do it again. The RINOs have nothing to fear so Bush faces a party that changes course with every popularity poll

[deport]

People will read ......

Comprehension is another matter....

[CBart95]

Dear Jay. How was your coma? Your little "essay" is sweet precisely because it is so amusing.

Congress abandoned itself in the year past. Everything imaginable except for unity happened this past year.

Most experienced observers feel that there is really nothing left except leftist thinking in what remains of the former Demoscats.

[dagnabbit]

Amnesty.

[plain talk]

Sounds like you would have preferred the dems. Better luck next time.

[Hank Rearden]

Sounds like you would have preferred the dems. Better luck next time.

For decades, Republicans have been blathering about how they'd implement limited government, lower taxes, balanced budgets, "fixed" Social Security (as if you can fix a Ponzi scheme) etc. etc., if only they had a chance.

Given the chance, the Republican Party's blather was revealed to be just another con-job by professional politicians.

We have two Big Stupid Government parties, and America deserves better.

[Ninian Dryhope]

There are too many democrats and rinos in the Senate.

[Reagan Man]

What went wrong?

Better question is. What's been wrong?

Both the President and the GOP controlled Congress have swept aside any notion of advancing a conservative agenda.

[Cicero]

If you don't punish people for crossing you on important issues, they will continue to cross you.

Also, it was a mistake to start off with Social Security. Sure, it needs to be fixed, but there were other more important issues to use his muscle on first.

[PStone]

The problem is due to a lot of RINOs.

The fact is that RINOs will continue to be a pain, unless they are sent a messege that they will be held accountable by Republicans for their Democratesque votes.

Another huge problem is the fact that the Senate Republican leadership is inept at putting RINOs in line. As well, the antidemocratic filibuster is a huge problem for advancing business in the Senate.

[LS]

You are so far off as to be funny.

Can you even read? Cost makes perfect sense: you need a 3/5s majority in the Senate, and not just "Republicans," but of conservatives.

At best we have 40 conservatives in the Senate, and that fluctuates issue by issue. DeWine, as good as they come on pro-life, is useless on energy bills. Craig, reliable on defense, is so "rights conscious" as to be a problem in actually securing the Patriot Act.

So the down-the-line conservatives, who would score close to 100 by the ACU, is probably in the low 20s.

That's not the kind of "majority" that allows you to change policy. Now, it does allow people like you---self-styled "Libertarian" complainers---to criticize the GOP at every opportunity without ever really DOING anything to improve the situation.

Cost remains one of the best political analysts in the country.

[LS]

You got it---the first three posters are so far out to lunch as to seriously question as to whether they can even read.

It is far, far more than "party discipline." It requires an ideological shift of hundreds in the House and dozens in the Senate. We have, at best, 20 die hard conservatives in the Senate, and no amount of "discipline" or vetoes is going to bring the rest into line, because the VOTERS OF THEIR STATES keep electing them (can you cay McLame and Arizona?)

[LS]

Certainly not the idiot Libertarians who won't protect either the unborn or the national defense. Spare me. You're just a whiner. As long as I've been on this board I've never seen you offer ONE SINGLE positive suggestion or plan for anything.

[bennowens]

I put the blame on Bill Frist. He had the opportunity at the begining of this congress to change the filibuster rule. When he tried later, he was frustrated by the "gang of 14". Now the filibuster is there to delay legislation at the last minute by any whim of the RATS. He should start in January by killing this nefarious senate rule.

[PStone]

Indeed. As I've already stated, RINOs should be sent a messege. Either a messege of "Vote like a Republican" or an eviction notice in a primary.

I'm sure that if one checks a list of close votes in the House or Senate, he'll find that the same core group of Republicans are voting with the Dems.

For example, 14 Republicans voted against the Deficit Reduction Act (which passed 217-215): Jim Gerlach, Tim Johnson, Nancy Johnson, Walter Jones, James Leach, John McHugh, Robert Ney, Ron Paul, Jim Ramstad, Christopher Shays, Rob Simmons, Christopher Smith, John Sweeney, and Heather Wilson

13 Republicans voted against the Gasoline for America's Security Act (which passed 212 to 210): Sherwood Boehlert, Jeb Bradley, Michael Castle, Michael Fitzpatrick, Tim Johnson, Walter Jones, Ray LaHood, James Leach, Frank LoBiondo, Jim Saxton, Christopher Shays, Christopher Smith, Curt Weldon

18 Republicans voted against renewing the Patriot Act in the House: Roscoe Bartlett, Rob Bishop, John Duncan, Vernon Ehlers, Michael Fitzpatrick, Tim Johnson, Walter Jones, Frank Lucas, Connie Mack, Donald Manzullo, Robert Ney, Butch Otter, Ron Paul, Tom Price, Dana Rohrabacher, John Sweeney, Charles Taylor, Don Young

And the Republicans who voted against renewing the Patriot Act in the Senate are well-known.

Club For Growth has the right idea in their effort to remove Joe Schwarz.

[Democrat for Bush]

Jay Cost had the most accurate and interesting blog in the two months before the 2004 election. The Horserace Blog was spot on time and again. When the phony exit polls were put out on election day afternoon, Jay Cost was the calm in the middle of a storm pointing out clearly and concisely why the exit polls had to be wrong. When he suddenly discontinued after the election, I for one, as were many others, disappointed. You can still read his writings leading up to the Bush reelection at: http://jaycost.blogspot.com/ Also, you can email him at jay_cost@hotmail.com to encourage him to bring back The Horserace Blog. It was far more insightful than what was written by the high paid muckity mucks. Happy New Year everybody.