Posted on 11/08/2006 8:14:07 PM PST by Checkers
The post-mortems are accumulating, but I think the obvious has to be stated: John McCain and his colleagues in the Gang of 14 cost the GOP its Senate majority while the conduct of a handful of corrupt House members gave that body's leadership the Democrats.
The first two paragraphs of my book Painting the Map Red --published in March of this year, read:
If you are a conservative Republican, as I am, you have a right to be worried. An overconfident and complacent Republican Party could be facing electoral disaster. Hillary Clinton, Howard Dean, and a host of others could be looming in our future and undoing all the good we've tried to do.
It is break the glass and pull the alarm time for the Republican Party. The elections looming in November 2006 are shaping up to be disastrous for the GOP as the elections of 1994 were for the Democrats. Most GOP insiders seem unaware of the party's political peril. Some are resigned to a major defeat as the price we have to pay for a decade of consistent gains, which, they think, couldn't have gone on forever.
As cooler heads sort through the returns, they will see not a Democratic wave but a long series of bitter fights most of which were lost by very thin margins, the sort of margin that could have been overcome had there been greater purpose and energy arrayed on the GOP's side. The country did not fundamentally change from 2004, but the Republicans had to defend very difficult terrain in very adverse circumstances. Step by step over the past two years the GOP painted themselves into a corner from which there was no escape. Congressional leadership time and time again took the easy way out and declared truces with Democrats over issues, which ought not to have been compromised. The easy way led to Tuesday's result.
The criminal activities of Duke Cunningham, Bob Ney and Mark Foley were anchors around every Republican neck, and the damaged leadership could not figure out that the only way to slip that weight was by staying in town and working around the clock on issue after issue. The long recesses and the unwillingness to confront the issues head on --remember the House's inexplicable refusal to condemn the New York Times by name in a resolution over the SWIFT program leak?-- conveyed a smugness about the majority which was rooted in redistricting's false assurance of invulnerability. Only on rare occasions would the Republicans set up the sort of debate that sharpened the contrast between the parties. In wartime, the public expects much more from its leaders than they received from the GOP.
In the Senate three turning points stand out.
On April 15, 2005 --less than three months after President Bush had begun a second term won in part because of his pledge to fight for sound judges-- Senator McCain appeared on Hardball and announced he would not support the "constitutional option" to end Democratic filibusters. Then, stunned by the furious reaction, the senator from Arizona cobbled together the Gang of 14 "compromise" that in fact destroyed the ability of the Republican Party to campaign on Democratic obstructionism while throwing many fine nominees under the bus. Now in the ruins of Tuesday there is an almost certain end to the slow but steady restoration of originalism to the bench. Had McCain not abandoned his party and then sabotaged its plans, there would have been an important debate and a crucial decision taken on how the Constitution operates. The result was the complete opposite. Yes, President Bush got his two nominees to SCOTUS through a 55-45 Senate, but the door is now closed, and the court still tilted left. A once-in-a-generation opportunity was lost.
A few months later there came a debate in the Senate over the Democrats' demand for a timetable for withdrawal for Iraq led to another half-measure: A Frist-Warner alternative that demanded quarterly reports on the war's progress, a move widely and correctly interpreted as a blow to the Administration’s Iraq policy. Fourteen Republicans voted against the Frist-Warner proposal --including Senator McCain-- and the press immediately understood that the half-measure was an early indicator of erosion in support for a policy of victory.
Then came the two leaks of national security secrets to the New York Times, and an utterly feckless response from both the Senate and the House. Not one hearing was held; not one subpoena delivered. A resolution condemning these deeply injurious actions passed the House but dared not name the New York Times. The Senate did not even vote on a non-binding resolution.
Nor did the Senate get around to confirming the president's authority to conduct warrantless surveillance of al Qaeda contacting its operatives in the United States. Weeks were taken up jamming the incoherent McCain-Kennedy immigration bill through the Judiciary Committee only to see it repudiated by the majority of Republicans, and the opportunity lost for a comprehensive bill that would have met the demand for security within a rational regularization of the illegal population already here.
And while the Senate twiddled away its days, crucial nominees to the federal appellate bench languished in the Judiciary Committee. The most important of them --Peter Keisler who remains nominated for the D.C. Circuit-- didn't even receive a vote because of indifference on the part of Chairman Specter.
(The National Review's Byron York wondered why the president didn't bring up the judges issue in the campaign until the last week, and then only in Montana. The reason was obvious: Senators DeWine and Chafee were struggling and any focus on the legacy of the Gang of 14 would doom DeWine's already dwindling chances while reminding the country of the retreat from principal in early '05.)
As summer became fall, the Administration and Senator Frist began a belated attempt to salvage the term. At exactly that moment Senators McCain and Graham threw down their still murky objections to the Administration’s proposals on the trial and treatment of terrorists. Precious days were lost as was momentum and clarity, the NSA program left unconfirmed (though still quite constitutional) and Keisler et al hung out to dry.
Throughout this two years the National Republican Senatorial Committee attempted to persuade an unpersuadable base that Lincoln Chafee was a Republican. For years Chafee has frustrated measure after measure, most recently the confirmation of John Bolton, even after Ahmadinejad threatened and Chavez insulted the United States from the UN stage. Chafee was a one-man wrecking crew on the NRSC finances, a drain of resources and energy, and a billboard for the idea that the Senate is first a club and only secondarily a body of legislators.
It is hard to conceive of how the past two years could have been managed worse on the Hill.
The presidential ambitions of three senators ended Tuesday night, though two of them will not face up to it.
The Republican Party sent them and their 52 colleagues to Washington D.C. to implement an agenda which could have been accomplished but that opportunity was frittered away.
The Republican Party raised the money and staffed the campaigns that had yielded a 55-45 seat majority, and the Republican Party expected the 55 to act like a majority. Confronted with obstruction, the Republicans first fretted and then caved on issue after issue. Had the 55 at least been seen to be trying --hard, and not in a senatorial kind of way-- Tuesday would have had a much different result. Independents, especially, might have seen why the majority mattered.
Will the GOP get back to a working majority again? Perhaps. And perhaps sooner than you think. The Democrats have at least six vulnerable senators running in 2008, while the situation looks pretty good for the GOP.
But the majority is not going to return unless the new minority leadership --however it is composed-- resolves to persuade the public, and to be firm in its convictions, not concerned for the praise of the Beltway-Manhattan media machine.
Hugh Hewitt is a law professor, broadcast journalist, and author of several books including Painting the Map Red: The Fight to Create a Permanent Republican Majority .
I think most around here are Conservatives first and Republicans second. The majority of average people just do not support Libertarian philosophy, and Libertarian candidates (as well as other alternative party candidates) come across not a whole lot better than do UFO conspiracy theorists. Banging the Libertarian Party gong is useless as far as any likelihood of getting a Libertarian government installed is concerned. Chances are slim to none, if not less; at least not the way it's been being done.
Cott, now what is that link again?
Shut up, Twinkie.
Also don't forget Tom "there is no fat in the federal budget" DeLay.
Twinky- that would be http ://sacredscoop.com incase you forgot- Cripes- Newsbusters has clickable link signbatures right in their posts- don't see obssessed peopel complaining ovwer there & they manage several tens of thousands of visitors every day- get over it poeple
Someone needs to give Hewitt an award.
He nailed it.
...Polls? ...You want polls...? ...How about *THESE*...???
"Americans also have concerns over actions the new Democratic Congress may take, according to the Newsweek Poll. Fifty-one percent are very concerned that Congress might push too hastily for the withdrawal of U.S. troops from Iraq; 27 percent are somewhat concerned. Only 20 percent say they are not too concerned or not at all concerned.
And 43 percent are very concerned and 26 percent somewhat concerned that the new Congress may keep the Bush administration from doing what is necessary to combat terrorism. Twenty-nine percent say they are not too concerned or not at all concerned.
Sixty-six percent are very or somewhat concerned that Congress might spend too much time investigating the Bush administration and Republican scandals; 32 percent are not too concerned or not at all concerned.
Fifty-four percent of Americans say they are very or somewhat concerned that lawmakers might unfairly block qualified Bush appointments to the federal courts; 43 percent are not too concerned or not at all concerned."
http://biz.yahoo.com/prnews/061111/nysa005.html?.v=79
"I think most around here are Conservatives first and Republicans second. The majority of average people just do not support Libertarian philosophy, and Libertarian candidates (as well as other alternative party candidates) come across not a whole lot better than do UFO conspiracy theorists."
Ironically, many -- if not the majority -- of Libertarians I know don't support all facets of Libertarian philosophy.
I don't!
The dirty little secret is that many "Liberdopians" are former Republicans, and that's my point.
And even more relevant to this community (which, with the notable exception of so-called "Bushbots", is indeed more Conservative than Republican), is the fact that people like me represent a growing protest against betrayal of true Conservatism not only by the Republican Party, but by the Conservative movement itself.
That's the foundation of my protest, and why I'm no longer a Republican.
For me, the cliche applies: I didn't leave the Republican Party, the Republican Party left me.
And now I see "Conservatism" going down the same road.
The Scourge Of Liberty
"Banging the Libertarian Party gong is useless as far as any likelihood of getting a Libertarian government installed is concerned. Chances are slim to none, if not less; at least not the way it's been being done."
If you review my posts, you'll find that I'm not calling for people to become Libertarians. I don't expect or even want the Libertarian Party to run the country.
Rather, I'm calling on those who have been disastrously promoting a herd mentality here and elsewhere in the Conservative movement to stop behaving like a bunch of mullahs and respect the concept of free Americans having different opinions yet sharing common goals.
In particular, the goal of limiting the federal government instead of actively transforming it into an oppressive, authoritarian superstate to dictate all aspects of our lives to us.
Somewhere along the line, the Republican Party abandoned that goal, and in doing so betrayed us all.
Now, you could repeat the writings of the Founding Fathers on the subject of Liberty in these forums and be mocked for it.
Why? Because Liberty is no longer fashionable here.
In fact, it is actively maligned on a daily basis by the "faithful", with very few left to stand up on its behalf.
What pride can be taken in such a sad state of affairs?
Free No More
The cult-like mentality which drove me from being a regular and contributing member of this community to a "voice in the wilderness" didn't used to exist here. It represents a devolution of the community.
It also represents an abandonment of the intellectual strength which once graced Conservatism in favor of a repressive regime of mindless conformity.
It is against this alarming and sorrowful trend that I am protesting.
That so many who style themselves "Conservatives" can't be bothered to consider the possibility that they could ever be wrong about anything and continue to isolate themselves into shrinking circles of back-slapping insularity only accelerates the process, which may already be unstoppable.
I know quite well that not every FReeper is the kind of jerk who shouts down dissent, and I still count many FReepers among my friends.
But abusive behavior and troll-gang tactics dominate the discussion here, and to the extent they are tolerated, they eat at the soul of this place.
A Cure For Cancer
It amazes me how many FReepers have developed the fine art of shooting messengers. Such skilled marksmen are they that very few messages get through.
Someone disagrees or says something you don't like? Call him names! Shout him down! And for the love of God, don't let him discuss the topic!
It's a damn disgrace.
I promise you, members who do this are the enemies of free discussion and the enemies of the Free Republic.
Mark my words: Every insult against any FReeper is an insult to all FReepers. They are a cancer on this community.
Once upon a time, I remember when Republicans were civil and polite, and Democrats were obnoxious and rude.
The insults that FReepers like myself face whenever we post our honest opinions here prove that this is no longer the case. There's no meaningful difference.
Change a few words around and you have a mirror image of DU.
It breaks my heart to see it happen, but there's nothing I can do about it except oppose it, and reject it.
P.S. Twinkie, I know my words are harsh, but thank you for being polite and treating me like a human being. I pray that FReepers like you are the future of this community, because the alternative is unbearable to contemplate. God bless you.
weird - FOXNEWS was just spouting about this poll as I read your post - general Howard is on....
and this concerns me...
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1736539/posts
George Allen - he forgot he had to win as SEnator before he could run for the Presidency. Or he should have resigned and left the seat empty for somebody else to run, as Mitt Romney did. Allen shot himself in the foot - of course, the Washington Post was gunning for him but he should have known that.
If the Republicans are to win, they must confront the Democrats.
I agree totally... that, I think, was the largest mistake of them all - not confronting the Democrat lying and vicious tactics HEAD-ON, from the bully pulpit, using zinger soundbites that would guarantee attention on the liberal networks that the brain-dead masses get their voting guides from...
I don't blame Bush for trying the bi-partisan efforts in the beginning, but once we saw that it was continually thrown in our faces and Democrats were continually lying to the American public and risking America's safety for political leverage, Bush and all prominent Republicans should have taken the gloves OFF!!!
While I agree that those things were promised and not delivered, I would point out that the President can't do those things by himself, the Congress must do the work. The Republican Congress, particularly the Senate, failed miserably to do so.
In no small part because so many of them think *they* should be President. Ignoring the fact that no Senator has been elected President since John F. Kennedy in 1960.. and I don't know how long it had been before then. I'm old, but not that old. (Johnson had been a Senator, but was elected after inheriting the Presidency after Kennedy was killed. He beat a serving Senator, Barry Goldwater, Similarly Harry Truman had been a Senator before being tapped as FDR's VP in '44)
Both are fairly likely.
I'm curious though, why "The lower 48"? Don't you think an attack on Alaska and or Hawaii would be just as serious?
The Republican Congress, particularly the Senate, failed miserably to do so.
------
Yes, we can thank the RINOs for their undying loyalty to liberalism and socialism. Washington quit working FOR the American people quite a while back and now focuses on personal empowerment at any price to the American citizen, their freedoms and taxation. We worked hard to give a President and a Congress a two-term majority after decades of socialist domination and look at what we got. Our majority betrayed by RINOs (McCain etal for example) so that we were hamstrung on getting very serious issues worked on like tax reform, SS reform --- all the things that the socialists hold dear for their empowerment.
Such a tragic picture we are looking at now.
I had forgotten the "William Jefferson, D-LA" blow up when the feds raided his congressional office. But I recall my own anger at Hastert at his reaction and the reaction of the other Pubbies. That was such a stupid "we are above the law" reaction that burned a lot of Americans.
Yep, Pubbies done shot themselves in the proverbial foot. So many missteps and misreading of the American people.
I have looked at the demographics. Hispanic Americans don't vote like their self-appointed leaders (there is no one "Hispanic" group, but many, each with its own agenda and politics). But how they vote is almost immaterial, because they are such a small slice of the electorate.
For every La Raza vote you think you can gain by pandering to Hispanic identity politics, three or four whites and maybe a black stay home.
The only folks pushing the hispanic-vote canard are left-wing wishful thinkers and bought-and-paid-for hacks like the WSJ's Tamar Jacoby, who's utterly in the pocket of agribusinesses seeking slave labor.
d.o.l.
Criminal Number 18F
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.