Redstate

I think Boehner's pretty darn scandal-clean by House standards--not quite as many privately-paid trips or lobbyist buddies--less than other GOP leaders anyway. And, he did once have the Gingrich reform fire-in-the-belly, and I think he could get it back, if given the chance. I really do.

I would propose that the Democrats saw the iceberg first. Remember all that complaining they did about the ethics committee and Tom DeLay's shenanigans?

They bought the icemaker.

"John Boehner's not that bad either"....That is really funny.  The first headline the MSM media are going to write about if Boehner becomes ML will look something like "New House GOP Majority Leader Handed Out Tobacco Lobby Checks On the House Floor".  Is that the kind of "leadership" we need?  I didn't think so.

Powder Blue Report

We have two who can raise the bucks and one who can claim he's clean.

A difficult choice.

Yeah. Ten years ago he did something stupid, and he apologized for it. But look at the amount of lobbyist money he gets, compared to what others get. He's on the low end--certainly on the low end for a party leader. He takes trips to events, but they all do. He doesn't seem to have any Abramoff problem, from what I've read. And Shadegg's problem will be that he's NOT a money guy. This is an election year, after all. I think the House members attitude still is, if you think this is a "climate of corruption," you should have been here 25 years ago. This is nothing.

I assume that you are being sarcastic...  But I think that you have unintentionally touched on an important point.  I don't think the Republicans have to worry about money this year as much as they did in 2004.  The Reps came late to the 527 game in '04. We will not make the same mistake this year.  

I am an unapologetic Shadegg supporter.  While he probably can't raise as much money from K Street as Blunt or Boehner can, I don't think that will matter.  As a grass roots Conservative, he will get money (in lots of small donations) from people like me.  If the party elects a K Street leader, many small donors will pass--not only in donating money, but also in voting.

As a party, we must mobilize the base to get out and vote in 2006.  I don't believe a politician whose main draw is an ability to raise money from lobbyists will mobilize the base.  A true clean--and smaller-- government conservative can.

The Abramoff scandal is a lot like hitting an iceberg. The question, I have to paraphrase, is whether the House GOP caucus retains the crew of the Titanic or looks for some new leadership. I do not know which saw the iceberg first, Roy Blunt or John Boehner, but it's time for a new skipper. It is time to change course, steer clear of this field of icebergs,

Sure, if the crew of the Titanic made the iceberg themselves, threw it overboard on purpose, and then when the impact was felt said "what bump?  I didn't feel anything..."

This is not a case of a party just floating along and hitting something.  This is a case of corrupt politicians acting unethically and they need to be called out and held to account publicly and politically.

for quite some time.  Where's he been on this stuff, did he just wake up and notice it?

In "normal" times, whatever those are, he would be an OK candidate.  In "these" times, we need an outsider to come in and bring the perception of change to the Party.  Bohener's elevation to ML will be viewed as same-old-same-old.

Your keynote is this: ...he did once have the Gingrich reform fire-in-the-belly, and I think he could get it back, if given the chance.

He was once "part of the solution" and then he became "part of the problem" is the literal translation of that statement.  That is exactly his problem, or at least my problem with him.  

Shadegg is the only ML candidate who has a shot at deflecting the "culture of scandal" screed that's on it's way as I type.  We'll be listening to that for the next 11 months if something radical doesn't happen - like replacing the whole leadership.  I would advocate replacing Hastert as well but that's not going to happen.  And while some may view this as "not fair", we're not doing fair, we're doing politics.  Don't confuse the two.

I think this party definitely needs reform and certainly needs some courage.  I've been ranting for some time about "where are all the Shadegg supporters" and why dont more rebel conservative members come forward.  and I do believe that.

that said, one iceberg ahead is that we are ripping the hell out of each other in a way the msm or dems havent yet... ok, what makes us stronger...blah, blah... may have some truth in it.

but, I back to the words of Mike Pence and ask that we all take a bit of a breather here...just the other day Pence said "all of these guys are pretty conservative" when talking of the leader's race - and added "there are no black and white hats here"

that is true.  all 3 in the ML race are pretty good conservatives and all three are pretty good guys.  I love the level of activity and passion here, but sometime think we may be acting a bit too much like Kos and the loons over there...

So, it might be Shadegg. It might be Blunt.  It might be Boehner or it miht be someone else.  Whatever happens we need to commit to reform, we need to embrace our small govt principles and we need to stop the bloodshed.  Otherwise, we have a one way ticket to Chairman Waxman, Rangle and Speaker Pelosi.

But the cleaner the break, the better for the near (and far) future.  Most importantly, there needs to be hard rules, and hard promises, made by the new leadership, whoever it is, that this will not happen again.  As in "anyone on my staff who does xxxx will be fired," or "anyone found to have engaged in xxxx will lose their position/commmittee chairship/etc."  That's what I'm looking for.

But you are right that there is no need for internecine disputes, that only emboldens the Dems.  A fast, clean break -- like a Band-Aid ;)

whoever wins.  we gotta get them to commit.  like the proposals we are seeing out of hastert and drier.  absolutely on the firing of staff who break the rules.

bottom line: we can have favorites and internal disputes, but lets remember what Pence said, lets remember what Reagan always said.  Divided we will get crushed in nov.  Principled, Couragous, and United is the only way we can win.  

I agree with your analysis that Boehner went from part of the solution to part of the problem.  We're talking about a guy who lost his job as the #4 guy in the Republican leadership.  Now he wants to ascend to #2 after losing his #4 position 8 years ago?

because he's not part of the club.  Which is EXACTLY why he should be #2.

But I see no evidence that there is any appetite for real reform of Congress. I see some window dressing, some bold statements, not much else.

Real reform will only come when the people demand it. The only tool they have is to vote against incumbents who are caught up in these scandals. Given the rigged gerrymandered districts (on big difference between 2006 and 1994) I don't see that really happening either.

Heck, Traficant would still get elected today if he were able to run.

It's easy to lose your way in the "get along, go along" atmosphere of Congress.

I can't believe they're all irredeemable, though. I think the secret vote for ML will be revealing -- if they opt for Shadegg on the last ballot, despite the fact that they can safely vote for the status quo, I'll put some measure of my doubt aside.