Congressman Roy Blunt elected Minority Whip
I guess the building's not on fire after all
By krempasky Posted in Congress — Comments (25) / Email this page » / Leave a comment »
Congratulations to Represenative Roy Blunt on his re-election to the Whip post. May he be as effective in stopping bad Democratic bills as he was in pushing bad Republican ones.
UPDATE BY ERICK: So much for the power of blogs! Heh. Said one friend on Capitol Hill, "This is like 1976. Reagan was the guy, but the votes went to Ford." I suspect that in two years, if the GOP does not make gains, both Blunt! and Boehner! will be in trouble. Until then, we're going to rally around the leaders and prepare to fight Nancy and her nattering nabobs of negativism.
« Rep. Capuano's Newspeak for Censorship — Comments (5) | What is unforgivable? — Comments (23) »
Congressman Roy Blunt elected Minority Whip 25 Comments (0 topical, 25 editorial, 0 hidden) Post a comment »
Roy did his job, thank you very much.
Maybe RS should ask Delay about Blunt since they had him here the other day.
Remember what the job title is. Whip.
Gingrich was the whip at one point too, but he still managed to work for conservatism in a way that Blunt hasn't.
Outside of votes he was whipping for leadership (delay and hassert at the time), prove to me where Roy has failed in his ability.
Prove to me where he failed his job as whip.
Perhaps more importantly, prove to me where Shadegg could have filled in those failings.
Again, his colleagues gave him a wide wide margin of victory. He is doing somthing right.
I would encourage you to listen and read the text of his Heratige Foundation speech, or at least check out his ACU ratings.
Prove to me where he failed his job as whip.
The Republicans lost their majority on his watch.
Next question?
You have an odd definition of the role of the whip.
--
If you're seeing shades of gray, it's because you're not looking close enough to see the black and white dots.
I'm not unsympathetic to the notion that the whip post could be evaluated absent ideology. But it still burns me to see people who claim to "always be on the side of limited government" (and yes, that's a quote) put so much energy into whipping votes on AWFUL - and I mean AWFUL bills.
At least Boehner was willing to say that the Medicare vote was the one he cast in 15 years he was unsure of.
Roy also said NCLB was a mistake.
I agree. I also agree with you on the medicare vote. That thing will be costing us for years.
Still, I try to look at the wide variety of issues and what was done since then and perhaps what is more important in the whip position, can the person get the job done.
On a personal level I am smarting from Pence losing. Imo, that is where we got hurt the worst.
After getting to meet Pence briefly during the Blog Row session this last January I can see how he can not just articulate positions well, but formulate a strategy and project our vision.
It hurts not to have him at the big wheel steering us through the 110th, imo.
Look, you might not like a couple of the bills Roy Blunt whipped through the house as Majority Whip - but it was his job and he did it darned well.
One of the things I will not understand about this whole race was why other conservative blogs did not judge Roy on the job he was doing and endorsed Shadegg simply based on a few litmus votes.
When someone considers Roy's style of leadership and what the job title is there really was no other choice in my view. It looks like his collegues agree with him.
It also puzzles me how you can congradulate Boehner, who will be responsible for shaping the vision and is no where near level of a leader as Pence, then pull this on Roy.
Thats not right.
If you want to may back-handed comments about someone who has just been elected to a leadership post, then I would offer to do it on someone who isnt doing their job. Blunt has.
I'm done holding my nose and carrying water for these people. When you lose, the leadership has to go, that's the way it is supposed to work.
I could care less that Blunt can count votes. He represents everything that is wrong with congress today.
Look, it matters a lot that Roy can count votes, hold the caucus together and pick off Democrat votes - because thats the job.
You dont replace someone for the sake of replacing someone.
Rush is right to a point.
If there was to be someone replaced, imo, it should have been Boehner. The Minority leader post with Pence at the helm could have set the vision we needed.
he is a typical golf course appropriator who doesn't even bother trying to articulate a conservative message.
He doesn't deserve a leadership position because he is part of the problem.
That sir, is not true.
Did you even bother to listen to his speech to the Heratige Foundation last week?
Have you bothered to note his ACU score is 94?
How much do you really know about Roy?
I might also add that you still are not addressing the fundamental question of how Blunt does the whip job, and that is because he does it well.
He is effective at the job because he listens and is very low key and persuasive.
He is very deserving of leadership.
Paul, I think the reason some of us are unhappy is that when it comes to leadership, we're looking for more than making the right speeches and casting your own vote the right way... we're looking for someone who will the the rest of the party to vote the right (i.e. conservative) way as well.
Saying the right things and casting your vote the right way is one thing.
Actually leading others in establishing conservative public policy is something else.
Hopefully I'm wrong, but I just haven't seen this from Blunt yet.
Until we replace the head of the party in the 2008 primary season, it doesn't matter who we have as minority whip. The President's bully pulpit will dominate.
--
If you're seeing shades of gray, it's because you're not looking close enough to see the black and white dots.
Reread your statement.
Look. Roy is not Newt. Roy is a very low key kinda guy, but he has established conservative principles. I know, I have seen Roy display them for years here in Missouri.
I have also seen him display them in Washington.
More importantly as whip, though, I have seen Roy be able to work to get a number of things (like the border fence, tax cuts, the budge reduction bit earlier this year) done.
Maybe its just my out of the beltway common sense, but that says a lot. Especially when our goal as a minority will be to hold the line on Pelosi's desire to ram a left wing agenda through.
Who do you believe has the best shot of being able to bend the ears of some of those Blue Dogs?
Roy didnt run against no one, he ran against someone for the whip position and you must consider that.
Is that the blogosphere is not a proxy, online, realtime, never closing, electoral system.
kos got got slapped down over Lamont.
I would say we have been shown as well.
Learning and learning from this should be very important.
The only thing more painful than defending the GOP leadership the last two years was seeing FNC and CNN declare the Democrats in control of Congress last week. Enough is enough - we needed new leadership in Congress to work with our top-of-the-ticket candidate in '08.
But complaining about this ad nauseum now will get us nowhere but further in the minority. Let's just pray that Boehner, Blunt, and whoever wins the primary for POTUS bring with them a formidable New Contract for America. Our future doesn't have time for us to wait.
Guillaume Buell
Boston College Law School '09
gb2040@gmail.com
Attacking Roy Blunt now? And Boehner?
It seems to me that some of the people who are so upset over their leadership are suffering from a delusion that the Republicans/Conservatives *won* this election, that they defied the "midterm itch" and that they increased their majorities in both houses and thereby won a mandate to push for even more conservative policies in the next two years.
That's not what happened. The Republicans got jackslapped in this election. It was a thumpin'. And if James Carville is to be believed in his criticism of Howard Dean, it would have been even worse if Dean hadn't left $5 million in money "on the table" to use his words.
My feeling philosophically is that Americans weren't prepared to vote for a new "Contract With America" class. If they wanted a new Contract with America, they would have voted for one -- they would have at least kept more Republicans in the House. You can argue until you're blue in the face that Republicans should have articulated that as their strategy but my guess is that if they had, instead of looking at a loss of 28 seats you would have been looking at a loss of 40 or 50 seats and a Democrat majority in the House for the rest of the decade. I hate to say it, and I'm going to offend some people, but I think Carville is correct about that. If Dean had been anything other than an incompetent they would have cleaned our clock in this election.
Americans aren't yet ready to vote for a Conservative Austerity congress. Maybe after watching what Nancy and Harry try to do for the next two years, they will be. But this wasn't our hour.
Good luck to our leadership in the House. I hope you'll take the advice of the Base a little more seriously on defense in the next two years than you did while you were on offense. Maybe then we can get somewhere together.
Perhaps I am mistaken, but the Republicans were NOT running on ”…a new ‘Contract With America’…” this year. In fact, I cannot recall Republicans running on anything even remotly approching the "Contract With America” since the 1990’s. The Republicans did take a “thumpin” this year, but this was the result of the abandonment of very fundemental principles and issues. The very same issues that created the Republican majorities in the 1990’s.
The cold hard reality is that the leadership of the Republican party has abandonment principles like limited government and fiscal responsibility. The party leadership has instead tried in recent years to out democrate the democrates, through massive new intitlements not limited to NCLB and the expansion of Medicare. The 2006 election was a rebuke to the leadership’s “big government” policies. If the party’s leadership does not wake up or change then the 2006 election results will only repeat themselves 2008.
Why did they elect John Boehner? Why did they elect Roy Blunt?
Isn't this all, more or less, inside-the-House stuff?
There is no Ronald Reagan about, there is no healing personality, so I'm going to watch the stuff these people do. If Boehner and Blunt are willing to do the right stuff, and I think we can make known what that right stuff is, things will be okay.
I don't expect much of this Congress, anyway, what with Pelosi and Hoyer set to run the place. Our guys can show up and try to make a difference. A lot of that difference, a lot of the stuff, is internal to the House and to the caucus. I hope Boehner and Blunt are able to put aside their dreams of personal power, visions of position, and do stuff.
No wonder these idiots lost so many seats this year.
Ever have the feeling when in the first half your team is down by a touchdown, having stupid interceptions and fumbles, not tackling well, but you feel like you still have a shot and keep cheering for them - That was last January.
Then by the third quarter your team is continuing with the fumbles and stupid mistakes to the point that you get more angry at them than you are cheering for them - That was November.
Then by the fourth quarter, your team is down by 30 points, and they are playing so bad that you actually take joy in the fact that there stupid decisions and stupid play are leading to what you knew would be an inevitable result - That is Now.
Republicans are staying with the same leadership that just got them tanked in the elections. The same leadership that ran away from Nancy Pelosi when she started talking about Foley and went to their districts and blamed it on Hastert instead of taking control of the situation. The same leadership that pushed through medicare reform, no child left behind, and pork spending What will it take to have a true cleaning of house?
Not sure, but right now I am cheering against them
Well...I predict the loss of at least another 10 seats from the House GOP column for 2008 thanks to the promotion of incompetent insiders like Boehner and Blunt.
[There is nothing wrong with your monitor.
Do not attempt to adjust the content.
We are now controlling the transmission.
We control the horizontal and the vertical.
We can deluge you with a thousand channels or expand one single image to crystal clarity and beyond.
We can shape your vision to anything our imagination can conceive.
We can boot stoopid freakin moonbats so fast that it makes their head swim.
Look, there goes "Cal Patriot"]
It's all enough to dissolution people who previously thought that principles should be a top priority in politics.