Even in minority, GOP managed to get its way

Washington Times ^ | December 22, 2007 | By S.A. Miller

[JohnHuang2]

Republicans were accustomed to cutting deals to pass their agenda during the dozen years that they ran Congress but have made few concessions this session as the minority party. "Our members went home happier than they have in the 11 years I've been here," said House Minority Whip Roy Blunt, Missouri Republican.

"Our members went home happier than they have in the 11 years I've been here," said House Minority Whip Roy Blunt, Missouri Republican. "Our members felt like we've taken the weak hand you're dealt in the minority ... and got the maximum impact."

Democrats conceded to the Republicans' stand on approving war funds without restrictions, fixing the alternative minimum tax without raising other taxes, renewing the State Children's Health Insurance Program (SCHIP) without expanding the program to adults and wealthier families, and passing an energy bill without higher taxes on the energy industry.

Republicans fended off Democrats' plans to bust President Bush's budget cap by $23 billion, to pass a federal hate-crimes law and to roll back sanctions on Cuba and regarding the Mexico City rule barring federal aid from family planning groups that promote abortion.

[Gondring]

Four bright FReepers wrote:

• I'm becoming convinced that the GOP operates better when they are the minority party.
• Six basically wasted years; six years of missed opportunities.
• The "moderate" Republicans are especially clueless. They are playing checkers while the Marxists are playing chess.
• The first six years of GWB with a GOP Congress gave us... [depressing list snipped]

The GOP used to have a strong philosophy of smaller, limited government. I see the abandonment of this principle as the biggest problem with the GOP today. "Compassionate Conservatism" has turned out to be "Nanny-State Socialism."

Of course, Always Right is correct in pointing out...

Gridlock is better than the crap that went on when the GOP was in the majority.

Somehow, though, I don't want to hope for a GOP minority...I'd rather a re-energized conservative GOP, one that fights against neoconsocialism and returns us to a government that does what it needs to do or should do, not what it can or could do.

wolfpat pointed out:
I think we all are [annoyed at GOP majority lack of progress], and that's why in 2006 enough people voted with their butts to let the RATS in.

Do we think that the GOP got the right message from it all? At what point do we stop believing the "I'm conservative" mantra that is often unfulfilled once the candidate gets into office?

[Bigh4u2]

“Or you bump up against the American penchant for supporting “the underdog”..even if he’s dispicable.’

Yeah...

What he said..

[longtermmemmory]

I think the same elites are in charge.

beltway insiders doing business as usual.

[Gondring]

I think the same elites are in charge.

beltway insiders doing business as usual.

Bingo.

[samtheman]

Good post, Gondring. If only we could get as organized and energized behind a good conservative candidate (there are only 2, Hunter and Thompson) as we did to stop the MexicoAnnexationOfAmerica bill pushed by McCain, Kennedy and Bush.

If only.

[Gondring]

...good conservative candidate (there are only 2, Hunter and Thompson)...

I'd add Paul to that...maybe he's too conservative for most, but he seems to have the understanding of limited government better than the others.

It's nice to hear Sen. Thompson making Federalism the spearhead of his campaign...I just wish it were already a given!

[wolfpat]

The problem isn’t so much getting a good conservative in the White House as it is finding some for the House of Representatives and the Senate. If we have good people there, the President is almost irrelevant.

There are probably good people out there, but who in his/her right mind would want to undergo what Rush calls the Media Anal Exam that every candidate goes through.

[hocndoc]

None of these were as big as the Dems wanted. Our guys avoided back lash while passing good legislation like the Partial birth abortion ban.

Perhaps the GOP wouldn’t have lost the majority in 2006 if they had “gone nuclear” in the Senate and if they’d refused to make deals and pass legislation. However, if the Dems had the ability to break filibuster in the Senate with a majority vote - this year would have been disastrous.

What I want is the majority back - with a conservative prolife,profamily and proborders Republican in the White House. How are we going to do that?

[Gondring]

The problem isn’t so much getting a good conservative in the White House as it is finding some for the House of Representatives and the Senate. If we have good people there, the President is almost irrelevant.

I agree, wholeheartedly.

[The Ghost of Rudy McRomney]

You hit it right on the head-the cRATS are ALWAYS on the offensive, the Repugnants ALWAYS on the defensive. Look at the SCHIP fight. They lose, bill gets vetoed, they don’t have the votes to override-do they give up? No. They re-introduce the bill. And run millions of dollars worth of ‘republicans kill children’ ads. And it’ll be back, too, because they want it bad. You’d think the GOP would have learned by now, but they never do.

[VOA]

Even in minority, GOP managed to get its way

Just another chapter in Journalism post Nov. 2001 elections:
e.g., "Dubya Dumbest President Ever" then followed by
"Dubya Most Brilliant Evil President Ever"

For the MSM and their fellow-travelers of the Democratic Party,
Dubya and all Republicans are the Dumbest And Smartest Evil humanoids ever.

[RobbyS]

In the majority, each Party realizes that it is a coalition. The leadership can only get the minority of the minority to go along if it is able to give them more than the minority party.