I recognize that sentiment at NRO is running pretty strongly in favor of Mike Pence in the race to fill the House GOP's minority leader post. Conservative readers tend to prefer Pence's more assertive ideology to the go-along-get-along practices of Boehner. They also feel that Pence's idealism and seeming guilelessness are the medicine required by a party that lost its majority in large part because voters perceived it as tainted by cynicism and corruption. Good arguments both.
And yet I am not persuaded. In the American congressional system, a minority party can exercise considerable power - if it maintains its unity and acts by careful plan. The minority leader's role resembles that of the coach of a weaker team or the general of a retreating army: it requires enormous discipline and skill to choose one's moments, target the opponents' weaknesses, avoid battle at the wrong time, seize opportunity at the right time. A majority leader can rely on brute weight of numbers; a minority leader must be nimble, shrewd, and alert to unpleasant realities.
That's why I find Mike Pence's past support for the so-called Pence immigration compromise so troubling. It's not that I demand perfect ideological orthodoxy from would-be leaders - far from it. But looking back on that strange episode I worry about something else: Pence got suckered.
Do I believe that the Pence plan was Pence's own handiwork? I do not. Somebody else devised it - and then persuaded Pence to adopt it as his own. Which would have been fine, if it really had been a compromise. But it wasn't. The Pence plan put a complicated unworkable conservative-sounding wrapping on the Senate/Bush plan. If the Pence plan had been adopted, that wrapping would very quickly have been shredded and the concealed object inside - amnesty plus guestworkers - would almost at once have emerged.
It worries me that Pence could be used in this way, contrary to his own principles and his party's interests. In what other ways might he again be manipulated and deceived? I agree wholeheartedly with him that the defeated Republican party needs to rediscover its principles. It also, in my opinion, needs to position itself to discredit its opponents swiftly and return to power before the glue of incumbency seals their Democratic opponents into their newly won seats. That task will require considerably more guile, forethought, and (yes) cunning than Pence showed in the immigration debate.
I am very alive to Boehner's imperfections too. But I am wondering whether this wounded party does not need a skilled if cynical doctor rather more than it needs an ardent but naive faith-healer.
PS - Mickey Kaus suggests that Pence was not a victim of the con, but a perpetrator of it. I almost wish I could believe that. But I don't.
I agree with Congressmen Shadegg but unfortunately electing Lott to a leadership position in the Senate shows that as usual the party leaders are not listening.
I do not SUPPORT this idea (which won't stop two dozen freepers from claiming I do, but I couldn't care less), but I simply acknowledge reality. We will never, ever see US troops rounding up 12-20 million illegals and sending them home. Never.
Those here legally are the ones getting screwed, but that's the way it goes. The MOST we can hope for is enforcing the border and pouring more money into tracking down illegals who are already here.
The Tancredo fantasies are just that. Pence simply lives in the real world, which some around here see as evil.
Frankly this is too deep for me.
I don't know which of the two would be better.
On the other hand I DO know how to watch for reuslts, and i DO know how to judge them.
Let the republicans set up whoever they wish, and they we'll see if they are worth our support.
What we're done with, is blind support.
Do Something. And it better be something i Like!
Or we'll get someone else.
And Do it Quick, cause i'm tired of waiting.
Pense's plan for illegal immigrants is going to be far better than the one Pelosi puts on the President's desk.
The Republican Party is broken.
I'm beginning to wonder if it's possible to fix.
Shadegg and Pence would both be great.
It looks like Boehner is new enough (since January) that he can stay, but at least get Shadegg to replace Blunt.
As for Trent Lott, people forget, he was railroaded out of his majority post over a 'macaca moment' type comment for an old geezer. I'd like to see more of Kyl, Coburn and Sessions, but Lott is a good whip, he did the job in the House many years ago. I dont understand the complaints about him. We thought he wasnt that good as majority leader, but he managed to screw fewer things up than Frist, so there ya go.
We have had some real dynamic take-no-prisoners policians on our side ... but curiously the media wounds or destroys them. (Newt, Delay, Santorum, etc.)
They let the GOP keep the Lamar! types.
How John McCain Will Save The GOP Lord, please save us from McCain?
An Open Memorandum to House Republicans {From Newt Gingrich]
The Right Coalition - Which bipartisanship will Bush choose? (Newt)
From time to time, I’ll ping on noteworthy articles about politics, foreign and military affairs. FReepmail me if you want on or off my list.
"That's why I find Mike Pence's past support for the so-called Pence immigration compromise so troubling. It's not that I demand perfect ideological orthodoxy from would-be leaders - far from it. But looking back on that strange episode I worry about something else: Pence got suckered."
BINGO BUMP!
Votes is today for minority leader. Last chance to contact you congressperson to state who you support.