GOP sinking on a ship of timidity, squandering historic win

The Washington Times ^ | Tuesday, December 9, 2014 | Charles Hurt

[quesney]

Barely one month ago, the party sailed to victory in one of the biggest rout election waves of the past century. They ran the board and took control of the U.S. Senate. They grew to historic levels in the U.S. House. The Democratic Party was left in tatters in state, local and governor races across the country.

But today, just a few weeks later, before GOPers even take hold of their new reins of power, the party is crying poverty. They are stricken with paralysis. House Speaker John A. Boehner, known for his weeping, begs powerlessness.

“Frankly, we have limited options and limited abilities to deal with it directly,” Mr. Boehner said last week when asked about President Obama’s unconstitutional executive action to grant amnesty to millions of illegal aliens presently living illegally in the U.S.

“Limited options?” “Limited abilities?” We have an unbridled madman in the White House right now taking a machete to the U.S. Constitution and the leader of the opposition party that was just thrust to power in a historic rejection of the president and his cleptocratic policies is now talking about “limited” options and abilities?

Funny, I don’t recall a single Republican running in a single race this year on a campaign that Republicans in Congress have only “limited” options and abilities to stop Mr. Obama. No, in fact, every single one of them ran their entire campaigns on the singular promise that we have to vote for Republicans so they could stop Mr. Obama. And Americans voted.

[Tolerance Sucks Rocks]

I thought that you would have Boehner helping him out.

[pfony1]

Hi Ohioan,

You said, let’s “...rally around the most articulate Conservative inside the Beltway, who can explain the whys...” and I agree with you 100%. We need to teach more Americans to respect what we have.

It looks to me as if Ted Cruz is the best “articulator” we have now, but I like a few others too. I expect to be contributing to a strong Conservative’s campaign for President in 2015.

I prefer Grant to Custer because I remember that Custer was so sure of “winning” his battle against the Lakota that — even though he was in hostile territory — he DIVIDED HIS COMMAND. That was his last tactical mistake...

[JRandomFreeper]

Right this minute. The same Republican House that must pass the CR can choose to not pass it.

Nothing else is needed. No senate, nothing.

The same Republican house that is passing it can stop it. Now.

It is a lie to say that the senate is required for this.

/johnny

[Theodore R.]

This may not make sense, but to me the failure of Boehner also explains the tragic collapse of Richard Nixon. There’s not “there there”, or they are just Democrats in disguise. Nixon was a huge admirer of Woodrow Wilson the way Boehner is of Obama.

[Kenny Bunk]

Billy, you say The answer is always to persist in the arguments that are actually relevant--the arguments for which the Left has no answer.

Well young fellow, that approach is going to sway about 35% of the electorate at best ... and that % sinking fast. Start talking to the really significant electorate. That is the urban dwellers in the big states. Talk to the tattooed fatsos in the Wal-Mart parking lot. Talk to young women (with a chaperone present and a cop cam running). The Single Moms. The LGBT "community." Those Ferguson Feral Fellows. Talk to illegal Latinos. That's who is electing our representatives. They want more of what they think they are getting and much more of what they think they should get.

The only way out of this IMNVHO, is a "power grab" by state governments under strong governors and legislators. Can that still happen? How do we do that?

Today, Black Wednesday, showed that the two party system has now broken down beyond repair. There's the real people, now a minority. There's the people who want the government to give them what the real people have. There's Government, elected and otherwise.

[Ohioan]

You could not be more wrong. I have applied my own advice, back in the days when I challenged the local Republican establishment in the Primaries, and got 4 1/2 times the vote per dollar spent, as the organization endorsed candidate. Unfortunately, he spent 5 times what I did, so with the organization endorsement, he won the Congressional seat, the only time I spent more than a pittance.

However, here is the more essential point. I had very strong support among those who later were known as the "Reagan Democrats," precisely because I knew how to define the issues in ways that cut through the propaganda, to which they were being subjected in their own party.

Many of the people whom you suggest are the "significant electorate," only vote at all because we have allowed the unprincipled Leftists a free, unchallenged reign to demagogue certain issues. There are ways to destroy their effectiveness; but not by treating nonsense as somehow one side of an intellectually acceptable debate.

William Flax

[Kenny Bunk]

I pray that I am wrong. In essence, however, you seek to have a Federal System gone wrong right itself. I think if there is any righting to be done, it will have to come from the state capitals.

First order of business IMNVHO, is the repeal of the 17th Amendment. Popular election of Senators has led to lopsided over-representation of the Left in the Senate.

I had very strong support among those who later were known as the "Reagan Democrats," precisely because I knew how to define the issues in ways that cut through the propaganda, to which they were being subjected in their own party.

Naturally, the tactics you developed are of great interest and value. However, whatever their efficacy, they did not result in an electoral victory. Is your point that with more resources behind the methods, they would have proven successful? You would certainly have my support.

[Ohioan]

I agree that there is merit in going back to the original way of electing Senators--one which more clearly underscores their duty to their States, rather than to special interests--such as those which seem to control much of the Senate today.

As for my campaign budget? There is no doubt but that funds properly spent in a campaign--that is ones that get a persuasive message out, increase support. The tragedy of the last few Presidential elections, is that rather than seek to persuade those who are not already with us, by intelligently discussing the issues, in terms that the particular audience in any instance can relate to; we have people who simply engage in endless blather based upon what "gurus" like Karl Rove, tell them will appeal to the bias formed yesterday, in any particular group, influenced by bogus arguments, made by shallow, corrupt or intimidated public personalities.

Of course, this simply results in a continuous movement to the Left, regardless of which Party is in power, because it leaves the fallacious babble of the Academic/Media complex, which plays on ignorance & envy, but never reality, unchallenged.