Medic! Someone get the detox team, stat!
Posted on 01/22/2010 10:25:12 PM PST by pissant
Golly, I wonder what the reaction in the comments to this bon mot will be.
Gingrich sees the Massachusetts as a boost for his party, but also as a renunciation of go-it-alone by either party, and thinks Republicans would be “clever” to pass a series of relatively non-controversial measures with “huge bipartisan majorities.”
That said, he thinks many Republicans disdain Pelosi so much they simply won’t go along with anything with the speaker’s name on it, even if it serves the party’s larger interests.
“If you are a House member in the [GOP] caucus, I suspect we are about to have a huge argument. We could get clever and work with her…And I think people should work with her… But at that point it becomes a huge problem because nobody trusts her, they distrust her ideology and distrust her because she has run over them so hard…
Insane? Eh, not really. It all depends on how inoffensive the new stripped-down ObamaCare bill is and whether it looks like the Dems really do have the votes this time. If it’s a fait accompli and the reforms are minute, why not take a free kick by voting yes and blowing a hole in the left’s “party of no” crap before the midterms? Then the GOP could boast that not only did it help kill the awful first iteration of ObamaCare, but that when they finally got a good-ish bill, they proved themselves to be “Scott Brown Republicans” or whatever. The problem is, the left is already worried about precisely this scenario and is whining about it to HuffPo:
That the latter strategy [of passing a pared-down bill] is being seriously considered by progressive lawmakers is a testament to how large an albatross health care reform has become for the party. But the worry, for some, is that it could lead to Republicans claming victory.
Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell “will have his whole caucus vote for it and make it a political win for the Republicans,” one well-connected Democratic health care strategist said. “They’ll say, ‘This was the Republican plan from the beginning. We’re glad the Democrats joined us.’ And take all the credit for passing reform.”…
Alternately, some Democrats might welcome such a move. “Hell yeah,” a Democratic congressional aide said. “We would have created a bi-partisan bill. We would have shown leadership. And we’d get credit for that.”
They would get some credit for it, which is the main partisan objection to it on the Republican side. It’s also hard to imagine the circumstances in which Pelosi would need a bunch of GOP votes for a health-care bill. Is she really going to float something that’s so centrist and modest that House progressives would walk away from it, leaving a vacuum for Boehner to fill? I’m skeptical, but if this drags on another week or two and there’s still no clear path ahead for Dems, they might just be desperate enough to try it. The urgent question right now: Should McConnell and Boehner approach Reid and Pelosi with their own compromise plan? At the moment they have as much leverage as they’re every going to get. If they think some sort of legislative accomplishment is important before the midterms, there’s no time like the present to strike.
Elsewhere, my lefty pal Michael Roston is horrified that the Democratic strategist quoted by HuffPo would reduce the health-care issue to such pure partisan politics. To which I say: But why? Hasn’t the goal from the beginning been simply to pass something to placate the left and preserve the Dems’ electoral viability? Politics has always been job one here. Effective health-care reform is an afterthought.
Newt-—you just jumped the shark. Go home and say some southern-fried Baptist novenas.
And Newt is a contender for the Republican nomination?
I think he’s playing and cheering for the wrong team.
no Newt...no, no, no, no. After the NY23 debacle, you’re persona non-grata.
Here are the Republicans, throwing away victory. Sometimes I wonder why we fight so hard.
Forget it, Newt!
"Show me just what Mohammed brought that was new, and there you will find only things evil and inhuman, such as his command to spread by the sword the faith he preached." - Manuel II Palelogus
the gop is irrelevant and so is this Gingrich.
Medic! Someone get the detox team, stat!
When’s Newt making his switch to the Democrats official?
I can’t believe I used to like this putz.
: (
I am not for Newt. But, the GOP should offer an alternative health care plan that simply includes TORT reform and inter-state health plan competition. They can tell Obama - take it or leave it.
I bet Obama will take it. He is that desparate.
Newt wont hear you. Just like an arrogant president we know of who’s clueless of his surroundings, the same applies to this RINO.
I’m fine if this boob keeps flapping his gums as long as doesnt get this idiotic notion that he can win the GOP nomination. Are you listening Mitt?
F*** the GOP. The O is the operative letter. The WTFU Party would be better. WAKE THE F*** UP!
I here he's giving a seminar on the advantages of forced collective farming.
The RATS cant pass tort reform, they are a wholly owned subsidiary of the Association of Trial Lawyers.
Gingrich is not a man of principle. He just rambles all over. My first clue that he was less than ideal as a party leader is when he took up with those goofy Toffler people.
Wasn’t Pelosi involved in getting him fired as speaker. Hey Newt, didn’t you cut a Global Warming commercial with her. 1994 Newt would kick 2010 Newt’s ass!!
Angry alone might not get candidates elected. The reason McDonnel, Christie, and Brown were elected--apart from the angry votes--was they offered some thing, which gave people reasons to vote for them, not simply against their opponents.
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.