Erick to House GOP: Suck Eggs

... - - - ... ... - - - ... ... - - - ... ... - - - ... ... - - - ... ... - - - ... ... - - - ... ... - - - ...

By Erick Posted in Comments (48) / Email this page » / Leave a comment »

Poor Tom Cole. It's not his fault. He just happens to be in charge of the NRCC this year. But he and the House GOP leadership have been unwilling to repudiate troubled members of the House GOP caucus. They have failed to lead on tough issues. And they have no money and are about to be swept out to sea. I'll shed a tear, but just so I can help add a few more drops to the tidal wave.

Yes, yes, they are in a difficult position. But, and I don't know about you, but I expect a leader to lead in a tough situation and take bold action to correct the problem.

And let's be clear: the problem is not that the GOP is in the minority. The problem, well, let me give you a visual on the problem and make of it what you will.

image image image image image image image


Remind Dave Camp About Joe SchwartzComments (3) »
Erick to House GOP: Suck Eggs 48 Comments (0 topical, 48 editorial, 0 hidden) Post a comment »

Why is Congresswoman Ginney Waite pictured?

what did Kay do? I heard of all the rest but not her no no?

Wubbies World, MSgt, USAF (Retired):
public static void main(String[] args) {
System.out.println(""The only reason that some people get lost in thought is because it's unfamiliar territory.")

Told Jeff Flake she'd rather have a Democrat on the Appropriations Committee than him.

Fight On!

stands for nothing but reelection. The entire leadership should be run through a dull shredder.

FWIW I view the current state of the GOP - standing for nothing, fighting for nothing, believing in nothing and doing nothing - is the legacy of GWB and Rove. They won and then stood for Democrat's ideals (except for the War), and prized NewTone and bipartisanship above all.
____

CongressCritter™: Never have so few felt like they were owed so much by so many for so little.

That the graphic in your signature line is much too much too large.

Fight On!

____
CongressCritter™: Never have so few felt like they were owed so much by so many for so little.

Wubbies World, MSgt, USAF (Retired):
public static void main(String[] args) {
System.out.println(""The only reason that some people get lost in thought is because it's unfamiliar territory.")

There are things to criticize, but you're leaving out a lot: judicial appointments, tax cuts, CAFTA, personal retirement accounts, and recognizing and treating terrorism as a war not as a crime.

I was never a big Bush fan, but did not put this mythical NewTone nor bipartisanship "above all." If anything Bush and Rove focused on how to create a partisan majority. They saw reaching out to Hispanics, getting more people into the "ownership society" that has a stake in the stock market and isn't relying on government for support and taking the education issue to make it something Rs can campaign on.

Each was calculated to grow the party. An unpopular war and totally forgetting about fiscal responsibility destroyed that effort, but it was not an effort to create a "bipartisan" utopia. It was trying to create more Rs.

______________________________________
Donate to the Rs in Close Senate Races through Slatecard

GWoT is his strongest point, but even there I believe he continues to make the Johnson mistake of not pursuing the supply lines to their source. Yes, it's a hard sell and people are tired of war, but the simple fact is that the only way to win the war is to break the enemy's will to fight. This is usually done most effectively by destroying his base of operations, not killing the people on the front line. We didn't win the Pacific war in WWII by Island Hopping, brilliant strategy that it was and as necessary as it was to striking the final blow, we won it by destroying two cities in the enemy's base of operations and making it clear the rest would follow. Yes, he's been better than the Surrender Now! people, but is it enough to be willing to lose 4 years from now instead of immediately because we aren't willing to undertake the necessary fight?

Next best point is Judges. Here he nominated Harriet Miers before we in the grassroots demanded Alito. Also, he hasn't pushed to confirm as many lower level conservative judges as is needed. Having almost enough jurists who don't believe their version of morality is written into a living Constitutions is a good thing, but having them AND up and coming jurists at the lower levels to hand them good groundwork for future decision is where we need to be. Frankly, I find McCain weaker on this point than Bush is.

Tax cuts are frankly a wash. He's lowered taxes temporarily, but the cost of doing so was taking more people off the tax rolls. This plays into Democrat class warfare schtick whenever they want to sock it to the rich. The fewer people paying taxes, the fewer people who are going to stand up and say "Not out of my wallet you don't!" Lowering taxes on everybody while keeping most people on the rolls to protect everybody's liberty.

Personal retirement accounts we had before he came into office and I'm not sure how much he's really responsible for expanding them.

As for trying to create the partisan majority, if he had been focusing entirely on creating a partisan majority, he might have succeeded. But like politicians everywhere, for every partisan building action he took, he took an equal (at a minimum, too often they were greater) and opposite action for bipartisanship by teaming up with Ted Kennedy, et al. to sponsor legislation. He tried to have it both ways and forgot the other side are unforgiving b****rds who have become accustomed to 'bipartisan' meaning 'we win and you lose.'

I still agree he's miles better than John Kerry would have been, or Gore before him. Just like McCain is miles better than Obama or Clinton. I'm just doubtful either Bush or McCain get us miles enough away from ground zero to survive the detonation.

But the focus should be off McCain and on the Party!


Help!!/
CFR, Amnesty, Spending, Corruption,
Earmarks, Socialized Medicine:
”Your Silence Is Your Consent!”

No, they do not even stand for getting reelected. If they did they would be out campaigning hard for themselves.

P.S. Eric Cantor might be an exception.

...a long habit of not thinking a thing wrong, gives it a superficial appearance of being right...

---Thomas Paine---

Right now the Republicans in Congress are defined by the corrupt "I want mine" mentality of the Leadership and especially by the Republican members of the Appropriations Committee.

This is where the house cleaning needs to begin - NOW!!!

Wubbies World, MSgt, USAF (Retired):
public static void main(String[] args) {
System.out.println(""The only reason that some people get lost in thought is because it's unfamiliar territory.")

Translate this into some meaningful action for me Erick?

I was literally stunned that almost everyone I met in D.C. last week views next election day as the coming Republican disaster. This group spans MSM correspondents to House and Senate members, both sides of the aisle.

Paul Ryan (R-WI) framed it somewhat as "moving the old guys out" in order to get the American people's agenda moving forward. But this appears much more endemic and destructive.

"Nec Aspera Terrent"
bene ambula et redambula
Contributor to The Minority Report

We need to, whether you like him or not, support John McCain because he's serious about fixing earmarks, which is the problem that led to GOP corruption in Congress.

Likewise, we need to support people like Pete Olson (TX-22), Tom Rooney (FL-16), Chris Hackett (PA-10), Tom McClintock (CA-04), and Paul Broun (GA-10).

Fight On!

If we had forty more people that campaigned like Paul Broun the GOP would still be in the majority in Congress.

P.S. Did this site endorse the Chris Hackett campaign?

...a long habit of not thinking a thing wrong, gives it a superficial appearance of being right...

---Thomas Paine---

...a long habit of not thinking a thing wrong, gives it a superficial appearance of being right...

---Thomas Paine---

I have been thinking about sending the Hackett campaign a sizable portion of my income tax rebate.

...a long habit of not thinking a thing wrong, gives it a superficial appearance of being right...

---Thomas Paine---

Paul Ryan (R-WI) as McCain,s VP.

My ultimate support for McCain relies very heavily on his VP choice. Ryan is a solid conservative, young, reliable, energetic and a bastion of good ideas. He also is determined to tackle the earmark issue as a poster child for everything wrong with Congress. That said, Ryan also know the real change will be achieved via the other much more substantial part of our budget; entitlements.

"Nec Aspera Terrent"
bene ambula et redambula
Contributor to The Minority Report

But I think there are better ones. I agree, though, that I'd cool quickly on McCain if he got a squish as his running mate. He needs a good conservative.

Fight On!

I'd rather see Ryan stay in the House and run for a leadership position. It's time for some new blood at the top of the GOP Caucus. Maybe Ryan for Minority leader!


Help!!/
CFR, Amnesty, Spending, Corruption,
Earmarks, Socialized Medicine:
”Your Silence Is Your Consent!”

I know a lot of people think that. I think they are wrong. Statistically speaking, I don't think the Republican congress was more corrupt than we ought to expect from a normal distribution of human beings. I believe we booted more corrupt Republicans from our midsts than Democrats have from theirs in a similar time period. I also believe it doesn't matter to the Dems and the MSM, they are only looking for the biggest stick they can find to beat us with, facts be damned as long as they can create the perception.

Would I have been happier if more had been booted? You bet. Do I think leadership had a tin ear on the issue? Again, without a doubt. But I think placing the emphasis on the earmarks rather than on correcting the process of booting corruption out of government is a huge mistake. When the corrupt find a new way to loot the village coffers, we'll still take a beating for not having seen the obvious loophole and closing it. And you can never close all the loopholes, which are always obvious after the fact.

Why is it that almost ANY thought I have sounds like something the good Rev Wrong would say?

The long-time GOP policy of copping a squat on top of the conservative base, of selling their souls to "electability" (which I dispute vehemently as being accurate), of compromising principle for expediency, well.......\

Conservatives and GOP activists are alot smarter now, alot more well-informed (a big THANK YOU to Rush, Powerline, RedState, FNC, and the rest of the new media).

So to the NRCC, I add my crocodile tears to Erick's, to better facilitate you being washed out to sea. Gum-bye, girls!

Kill the terrorists
Protect the borders
Punch the hippies
-- Frank J


Help!!/
CFR, Amnesty, Spending, Corruption,
Earmarks, Socialized Medicine:
”Your Silence Is Your Consent!”

Amen by peg c

Couldn't agree more.

You may not be interested in war, but war is interested in you.

The problem with Bush and Rove was not necessarily their ideals, but their utter inability to communicate the virtues of conservative government.

They operate on an assumption that America is naturally conservative, but they never thought the assumption could change. But it has because we have abandoned original principles. Bush has utterly failed to educate people to why socialism crushes individuals.

Leading a Conservative movement...

Its not his job to educate people on socialism ..

"The problem with Bush and Rove"..GAK I'm so tired of this
Bush bashing...he'll be gone to Crawford soon and then you'll have nothin'..get over it

"The entire leadership should be run through a dull shredder."..mbecker908

compassionate Conservative movement...

Freedom of Religion not Freedom from Religion

Less filling than your regular Mod

"The entire leadership should be run through a dull shredder."..mbecker908

HTML Help for Red Staters
"If we want to take this party back, and I think we can someday, let’s get to work." – Barry Goldwater

Saying stuff like that is going to make some of these threads Long and Skinny...I understand...

Unless your kidding?

"The entire leadership should be run through a dull shredder."..mbecker908

Let's just not pick any faction fights unnecessarily :-)

thanks,

HTML Help for Red Staters
"If we want to take this party back, and I think we can someday, let’s get to work." – Barry Goldwater

Bush drasticaly increased expenditures, and before you blame this on necessary wars don't forget that the Prescription Drug Bill cost some $600 billion. Combine some of Bush's policies with his tax cuts and you have the largest increase in deficit spending in history.

I prefer fiscal conservatism, so all of that deficit spending seems like nothing so much as amassing a huge bill that must come due at some point. I'm all for tax cuts, but I think they must come with associated decreases in government spending.

The problem is that there was never the political clout to take on Social Security (how do you tell people who've been paying payroll taxes their entire life that they won't get benefits?), welfare and Medicaid (god how I wish we could cut these entirely for everyone over the age of 18).

Here is the definition of conservative

http://www.conservative.org/about/principles.html

...a long habit of not thinking a thing wrong, gives it a superficial appearance of being right...

---Thomas Paine---

America is a center-right country, not a right-wing country. There was no popular support for wholesale dismantling of entitlement programs, or even sharp cuts to them.

Conservatives may have gotten turned off to Bush because of his "Big Government Conservatism," but that's not why moderates and the so-called "Reagan Democrats" got turned off to him.

For them, it was the usual reasons: the Iraq War and the economy.

One thing that we conservatives, "Reagan Democrats," and just about everybody else can agree on, is that the Bush-Bernanke policy of allowing the dollar to decline has hit all Americans right in the pocketbook. Due to the weak dollar, both food and fuel are costing a lot more (in dollars). That's a hidden tax of stagflation, something Reagan campaigned against in 1980.

Conservatives may have gotten turned off to Bush because of his "Big Government Conservatism," but that's not why moderates and the so-called "Reagan Democrats" got turned off to him.

Also, most of the country thinks Bush is TOO conservative (I know, hard to believe for many, but it's true). Not that I agree; it's just the way it is.

------------
~ Beth ~
John McCain

and these characters in the House and Senate and to a good extent, President Bush, haven't done a good job of modeling the philosophy.

The reason for our party's unpopularity (and Bush's in particular) is the Iraq War and the economy; any other purported reasons is flatly false.

Bush's perceived stances on social issues is NOT what is causing his low poll ratings. The American people do not disagree with his perceived opposition to homosexual marriage, support for gun rights and embracing of religion (i.e. Gods and guns). Although many on the left would like to argue that is a reason, it simply is not so.

I think it would be a huge mistake for McCain to run away from the one part of the equation that Bush is popular with the American people on (social issues) and that is a weakness of Obama, while fully embracing the other 2 sides of the chair where Bush is weak (Iraq and the economy).

If the gun rights case comes down to a 5-4 or 6-3 decision in favor of gun rights, McCain would be crazy not to campaign on the fact that 3 Obama SCOTUS nominees would force homosexual marriage on the American people and take away gun rights.

I read - I think either at NRO or something that they linked to at the Corner (I can't find it right now), that if the disaster materializes that the leadership "might" be ousted in the 111th Congress.

MIGHT?! If the GOP loses more than 10 seats in November they NEED to be ousted. The best way to insure that 2010 is as bad as 2006 and 2008 is for the caucus to think that there's nothing wrong and that Boehner and Blunt are doing just dandy jobs. Personally, I think that any loss of seats (especially if it is accompanied by a McCain victory) should result in the removal of both from leadership.

An increased Democrat majority will make it harder for Republicans to have any leverage (already small, as is the leverage of any minority party in the House). The only way to "right the ship" so to speak will be for our leadership (the official leadership and not the people running the RSC) to start to set out an alternate vision - not just sit and gripe about how bad liberal policies are (though they are, by all means bad) but actually set out an alternative. We don't have that now, and I don't believe that Boehner and Blunt are capable of that kind of leadership - they have been there too long and are too comfortable with the way things are. Boehner is shaping up to be the new Bob Michel - nice guy, but not willing or able to do the things necessary to break out of the status quo.

The thing I find most troubling about the article you site is the statement that Republicans have a 24% approval rating while Democrats have a 44%.

Given the fact that the country was split 50/50 since 2000, the approval ratings for Congressional Republicans should be closer to the remaining 56% that aren't in the Dem collumn.

There is only one conclusion to be drawn by this and that somewhere around 25% of the traditional Republican constituency has been driven off the reservation by the intransigence of our Party Leadership.

Yet we are still patting ourselves on the back and telling ourselves that the Dems are so bad that we can't lose!

I't's time for all the Republican Leadership, not just McCain, but all of the Republican Leadership to pull their heads out of their collective back sides and mend some fences!


Help!!/
CFR, Amnesty, Spending, Corruption,
Earmarks, Socialized Medicine:
”Your Silence Is Your Consent!”

What are you doing about it? Personally? Are you running for local party leadership offices? Who are your local party leaders? State leaders?

HTML Help for Red Staters
"If we want to take this party back, and I think we can someday, let’s get to work." – Barry Goldwater

Exactly.

Sooner or later we've got to focus on the local party levels as much as the elected offices if we really want conservative government. Does no good to put a pretty hat on a snake.

I participate in my local and State Conventions. I've served on the credentials committee at my district convention and I've been precinct chair for my conventions for the last 3 election cycles. I originally supported Huckabee because I considered him the least of 8 evils. I'm off his bandwagon now because he's come out and defended a Jerehmiah Wright who I consider to be a heretic.

I'm supporting McCain and intend to vote for him but I'm not a mind numbed robot and I won't ignore him when he's wrong. I'm supporting Cornyn for US Senate, I'm supporting Robert Litoff for the house though he is running against Charlie Gonzalez who will spend over forty million dollars this year when we'll be lucky to raise four hundred thousand for Litoff.

We elect our governor in off years buy I will be supporting David Dewhurst for Governor in 2010.

Now...my question to you neil...what have you done?


Help!!/
CFR, Amnesty, Spending, Corruption,
Earmarks, Socialized Medicine:
”Your Silence Is Your Consent!”

I've done hours of development on a new website coming online soon, to help coordinate conservative activists in every state in the nation. We call it RedState 3.0.

HTML Help for Red Staters
"If we want to take this party back, and I think we can someday, let’s get to work." – Barry Goldwater


Help!!/
CFR, Amnesty, Spending, Corruption,
Earmarks, Socialized Medicine:
”Your Silence Is Your Consent!”

 
Redstate Network Login:
(lost password?)


©2008 Eagle Publishing, Inc. All rights reserved. Legal, Copyright, and Terms of Service