Larison: GOP Voters Have the Leadership they Deserve

[Winehole23]

GOP Voters Have The Leadership They Deserve (http://www.amconmag.com/larison/2010/11/03/gop-voters-have-the-leadership-they-deserve/)

Posted on November 3rd, 2010 by Daniel Larison


(http://digg.com/)
Before the election, I argued (http://www.amconmag.com/larison/2010/10/14/a-deceptive-comeback/) that “reformist” conservatives would likely wind up wielding inordinate influence on Republican policy thinking in the event that Republicans won a House majority. This seemed likely to happen because their arguments will seem more timely during a slow recovery than they did before the bursting of the housing bubble, and it seemed likely to happen because there will not be any serious competition from those conservatives that have sometimes been dubbed “traditionalists” or those conservatives who believe that there is no policy problem that a “return to first principles” cannot solve. However, looking at the sheer scale of Republican gains in the House, the political case for following reformist conservatives does not appear all that compelling.



It might be deplorable and maddening to watch, but what incentive do Republicans have to reflect on the errors of their former ways? None. What incentive have their supporters given Republicans to do this? None. What incentive do they have to abandon their tired refrains and formulate policies that address existing problems? None. Yesterday was a clear sign from Republicans’ core supporters that casting some symbolic nay votes and using the right kind of rhetoric are more than enough to keep them loyally voting for the very same people who just a couple years ago were seen (correctly!) as subverting and tainting the party and the conservative movement with their corruption and folly. There was a brief timeout followed by empty promises of doing better, and now one could assume that all or almost all is forgiven. Not only is there no reason why the Republican leadership would act differently this time, but they would be acting irrationally if they sacrificed the benefits of promoting corporate interests for the sake of principles in which they do not really believe.



The midterm results didn’t represent a dramatic shift in the overall public’s views, but they did confirm that rank-and-file Republicans and movement conservatives are quite happy to enable a party that badly disappoints them every time it is given an opportunity to govern. Four years ago, movement conservatives were looking for the exits and claiming that they as conservatives had nothing to do with those unpopular Republicans.

Today, Republican triumph is taken as conservative vindication, and the deeply dysfunctional, unhealthy identification of conservatism with the cause of the GOP has become stronger than ever. In a little while, maybe a few months or a year or two years, the people who made John Boehner the next Speaker of the House will be groaning and complaining that Boehner and his colleagues are reverting to their old ways. That is inevitably what Boehner and his colleagues will do, and why wouldn’t they? They have every reason to return to their old habits, and they have just been shown that change or reform is entirely unnecessary to advance their careers. For a while, the disillusioned movement conservatives may be receptive to critiques of Republican leadership, but as soon as the 2012 campaign gets going they will begin rushing back to empower another batch of Republicans so that their interests can be neglected some more.



The reformist case takes for granted that Republicans need to have relevant policy ideas to be able to compete as a national party with a changing electorate. The GOP has just won one of its largest midterm victories in the last century while having no relevant policy ideas (as opposed to slogans, of which it has many) and relying heavily on its traditional constituencies.


Yes, it was a midterm election and the electorate was more heavily slanted towards constituencies that tend to favor Republicans, but that isn’t going to register unless 2012 proves to be a particularly bad year. If the GOP’s overwhelming concern is to acquire and wield power, rather than actually serve the interests of its constituents, the brief four-year period in the minority would seem to be a small price to pay if the party can come storming back to better than 2004-era levels of control in the House without doing anything to earn it.



Reformists argue that Republicans have to be more than a rejectionist party, but rejectionism has resuscitated the party and undone most of the political losses of the last six years. It doesn’t matter that this is akin to the reanimation of a zombie.As long as there is some sign of life or undeath, that will be enough. hReformists and dissident conservatives alike have insisted that Republicans have to answer for their years of disastrous misrule and incompetence before they could hope to win back the public’s trust.


Granted, the GOP doesn’t really have the public’s trust now, but they have been entrusted with much more power anyway, and they did this with an unreformed, unchanged party leadership. The Republican Party that the public rejected and repudiated four years ago has not meaningfully changed, and all that it had to do to regain power was engage in reflexive opposition and wait. Even if one believes, as I do, that time is not on their side, and that they are throwing away their future with the next generation, why would the current Republican leadership care? Their preferred way of doing things is to reap the benefhhits in the present and defer costs and responsibilities until later.


During the last few months, I have been reading the argument that angry Americans want to restore some measure of justice and order in society so that rewards go to the deserving and failures are not bailed out. It is a significant problem that the chosen method to express this anger has been to reward the undeserving and promote the failures.

[Parker2112]

Look no further than Rick Perry's victory speech. Small government, predictable regulation, people's voice all get lip service....

all after he fattens his own pay and house allowance, tries to sidestep TCEQ at every turn, tries to implement a massive toll road infrastructure which will send revenues abroad, tries to seize voter's real property en masse, and refuses to engage in vital debate to inform voters prior to this election.

Lip service is worth more than gold in politics; Truth means shit. And Texas is a sailing ship of fools.

[z0sa]

Ah, the joys of the two party system.

[Homeland Security]

I could not agree more.

All this "Tea Party" agitation served to do was elect some wet-behind-the-ears neophytes who will head up to Washington only to get ground into the same old sausage factory of lobbyists, special interests, patronage, and corruption.

America is in a crisis, a crisis which cannot be solved by reverting back to the same old tired rhetoric, gridlock, and vapid "solutions" of the corrupt two-party parliamentary system. We require something more dramatic, more sweeping, more immediate, to put power where it belongs, to make swift, effective decisions on behalf of patriots' interests.

This is why I encourage true conservatives to support a temporary military coup of the U.S. government, and liquidation of the left-wing leadership and cultural elites. Hopefully, in two years' time, having seen the ineffectiveness and pointlessness of this "wave" election, America will be ready for what needs to take place.

[MannyIsGod]

I would scold Republican voters for believing in the GOP and their ability to change absent of proof but the truth is thats pretty much what I did in 2008 isn't it? Fuck it.

[Homeland Security]

To leftists who might be caught up in the necessary liquidation, look on the bright side: your carbon footprint will be reduced to zero.

[Parker2112]

To leftists who might be caught up in the necessary liquidation, look on the bright side: your carbon footprint will be reduced to zero.

To preach military coup is just silly.

1. you will be crushed.
2. you're counterparts will be crushed.
3. Sooner or later, you will be crushed.
4. American Security forces will crush you.
5. You will wind up looking like a silly old man firing a rifle at the white house: in cuffs, with a knee in your nuts and two on your head, looking all crushed.

[Winehole23]

To leftists who might be caught up in the necessary liquidation, look on the bright side: your carbon footprint will be reduced to zero.:lol

[MannyIsGod]

To preach military coup is just silly.

1. you will be crushed.
2. you're counterparts will be crushed.
3. Sooner or later, you will be crushed.
4. American Security forces will crush you.
5. You will wind up looking like a silly old man firing a rifle at the white house: in cuffs, with a knee in your nuts and two on your head, looking all crushed.

I don't know whats funnier. Obvious troll's awesome posts or the fact that you don't know obvious troll is a troll.

[Homeland Security]

To preach military coup is just silly.

1. you will be crushed.
2. you're counterparts will be crushed.
3. Sooner or later, you will be crushed.
4. American Security forces will crush you.
I agree that it would be very difficult to execute a military coup without the military. You notice I call out Augusto Pinochet as the exemplar of the new generation of American leaders.

In 1972, democratically-elected Chilean president Salvador Allende had completely destroyed the Chilean economy en route to installing communism in his country. The Chilean military intervened, overthrew the government, and installed Pinochet as leader.

Pinochet's agenda was twofold:
1) Hunt down and kill as many of the Marxist leaders as could be found. The junta went all over the world finding and eliminating their enemies.
2) Institute free-market reforms to stabilize and grow the Chilean economy. The impact of these reforms remains to this day as Chile has the most stable economy in all of Latin America.

After 15 years, Chile was ready to return to democracy. There is no risk of a Hugo Chavez coming to power there; Chile extricated Marxism at the root. Today Chile is a hidden gem, ready to punch far above its weight as the South American economy grows.

America thought it killed Marxism with the collapse of the Soviet Union in 1991, only to find a generation later that its intellectual progeny now controls much of the machinery of government, education, culture, and increasingly industry in this country. It is like cancer -- if you treat it but leave it unchecked, it comes back and metastasizes, and the next course of treatment has to be much more aggressive -- to the point of shedding blood. And even then, the patient might still die.

To be clear, I am not calling for my own installation as dictator. I would be loyal to whichever leader the military selected in the interim period until necessary purges were complete and new elections could be held.


5. You will wind up looking like a silly old man firing a rifle at the white house: in cuffs, with a knee in your nuts and two on your head, looking all crushed.
Your libertarian fantasies are so cute. Well, on the bright side, after this whole edifice of state collapses, probably there will be some isolated corner of the mountains you can find to be left alone -- if you survive the upheaval.

[Parker2112]

I don't know whats funnier. Obvious troll's awesome posts or the fact that you don't know obvious troll is a troll.

why do you give a shit if I engage this guy? I know his MO.

[Homeland Security]

bjrz7VOQ61Y

[Homeland Security]

Viva siempre mi General

[MannyIsGod]

why do you give a shit if I engage this guy? I know his MO.

Did I try to stop you?

[Spurminator]

The Beno mugshot avatar is still the funniest part.

[Winehole23]

America thought it killed Marxism with the collapse of the Soviet Union in 1991, only to find a generation later that its intellectual progeny now controls much of the machinery of government, education, culture, and increasingly industry in this country. It is like cancer -- if you treat it but leave it unchecked, it comes back and metastasizes, and the next course of treatment has to be much more aggressive -- to the point of shedding blood. And even then, the patient might still die.

[Parker2112]

To be clear, I am not calling for my own installation as dictator. I would be loyal to whichever leader the military selected in the interim period until necessary purges were complete and new elections could be held.

You sound like a slave in the making. Freedom is where its at

[boutons_deux]

"GOP ... having no relevant policy ideas"

We, The Smart American People, KNEW that, after 8 years of no policies, no governance, just All Politics All The Time.

The only thing has changed with the Repugs is their move to insane, unworkable extremism and purging any Repug politicians who are centrists or even right of center.

I expect no Repug legislation, no solutions for their economic disaster of the Banksters' Great Depression, nothing positive of any significance for the next two years, just more destruction and obstruction, to deepen and prolong their depression and pain for The American People until 2012 as use it again to achieve their stated priority of removing Magic Negro.

[Homeland Security]

You sound like a slave in the making. Freedom is where its at
That is fine; when you are starving you can eat some freedom, while I feast on what is taken from my enemies.

[Winehole23]

V30tyaXv6EI

[ElNono]

Right on cue... Christie announces layoffs...

New Jersey's Christie to Fire 1,500 Workers in 2011 (http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2010-10-26/christie-will-fire-1-500-new-jersey-workers-next-year-to-save-state-money.html)
By Terrence Dopp - Oct 26, 2010 4:42 PM ET

New Jersey Governor Chris Christie, a Republican who took office this year pledging to end chronic deficits without raising taxes, said he plans to fire 1,500 state workers starting in January.

Christie’s predecessor, Democrat Jon Corzine, included a “no-layoff” clause protecting employees until Jan. 1 as part of an 18-month wage freeze negotiated with unions. Christie, who closed an $11 billion deficit through spending curbs, has called that agreement “exquisite handcuffs.”

“The only way to save money in the budget over the long run, or the best way, is to get rid of personnel,” Christie said today at a town-hall meeting in South Brunswick. “We’re going to be getting more aggressive about that.”

Christie first proposed firing as many as 1,300 workers in his spending plan for the year that began July 1. He declined today to specify which departments would be included in the plan. New Jersey’s payroll is about 70,000, according to the state Treasury.

The nonpartisan Office of Legislative Services has projected a deficit that may be as much as $10.5 billion next fiscal year, which Christie said is too high.

[Cry Havoc]

Right on cue... Christie announces layoffs...

New Jersey's Christie to Fire 1,500 Workers in 2011 (http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2010-10-26/christie-will-fire-1-500-new-jersey-workers-next-year-to-save-state-money.html)
By Terrence Dopp - Oct 26, 2010 4:42 PM ET

New Jersey Governor Chris Christie, a Republican who took office this year pledging to end chronic deficits without raising taxes, said he plans to fire 1,500 state workers starting in January.

Christie’s predecessor, Democrat Jon Corzine, included a “no-layoff” clause protecting employees until Jan. 1 as part of an 18-month wage freeze negotiated with unions. Christie, who closed an $11 billion deficit through spending curbs, has called that agreement “exquisite handcuffs.”

“The only way to save money in the budget over the long run, or the best way, is to get rid of personnel,” Christie said today at a town-hall meeting in South Brunswick. “We’re going to be getting more aggressive about that.”

Christie first proposed firing as many as 1,300 workers in his spending plan for the year that began July 1. He declined today to specify which departments would be included in the plan. New Jersey’s payroll is about 70,000, according to the state Treasury.

The nonpartisan Office of Legislative Services has projected a deficit that may be as much as $10.5 billion next fiscal year, which Christie said is too high.

Nothing like saving the economy by putting more people out of work and dependent on welfare.

Fantastic fucking logic.

[diego]

I know this is a obvious troll post, but since he is going out of his way to appear factual, I'd like to give my input for the uninformed, since I live in Chile, have a business here, and my wife and kids are Chilean. In advance, I'll let you know I wont bother responding to any response from you Mr. Security.



In 1972, democratically-elected Chilean president Salvador Allende had completely destroyed the Chilean economy en route to installing communism in his country. The Chilean military intervened, overthrew the government, and installed Pinochet as leader.

Salvador Allende did screw the economy pretty good, but he had lots of help from Nixon, Kissinger, and Pepsi Co. It was pretty much the same story as every other socialist government of the time: the government wanted to redistribute idle lands so that poorer people could exploit it and so offered to pay the land's declared fiscal value, and the (mostly American) corporations who owned that land were under-reporting the value to pay less taxes so they were unhappy with the government pay out, and so the corporation uses its connections with the US government to buy a coup. (I'm not arguing that Allende was right to expropriate, or that he did it the best way, just clearing up why the US got involved in the first place).
The chilean military did not intervene until local elites, with the help of the CIA, assassinated the Chilean military's top general, who always insisted that his mandate did not include assassinating democratically elected presidents. The general who succeeded him as commander in chief fled to Argentina after the coup, but was also assassinated by Pinochet (with his wife). Also, the top air force general also disagreed with the coup and was imprisoned and tortured and eventually died in captivity. so you see, it is false to say that the Chilean military intervened because three of the top 4 generals were killed by the traitors who prepetrated the coup.



Pinochet's agenda was twofold:
1) Hunt down and kill as many of the Marxist leaders as could be found. The junta went all over the world finding and eliminating their enemies.
2) Institute free-market reforms to stabilize and grow the Chilean economy. The impact of these reforms remains to this day as Chile has the most stable economy in all of Latin America.

After 15 years, Chile was ready to return to democracy. There is no risk of a Hugo Chavez coming to power there; Chile extricated Marxism at the root. Today Chile is a hidden gem, ready to punch far above its weight as the South American economy grows.

1) Many of those "Marxist leaders" are still alive, some even occupy positions in government.
2) Chile has the most stable economy in all of latin america because the price of copper has spiked (even through the crisis) with the electronics boom, not because of those reforms. In fact, Chile had a banking crisis quite similar to the one in the US 2008 (in 1982, Pinochet's heyday), and was also hit quite hard by the Asian banking crisis in '97. The 2008 crisis didnt hit that hard because the democratic government (the opposition to Pinochet's party) was able to run a budget surplus, largely on the strength of copper prices. Also, income distribution became increasingly unequal during the dictatorship as private firms were basically gifted national infrastructure.

In any case if you think Chile is paradise, I welcome you to come here and see the glorious efficiency of Pinochet's legacy. I think you'll especially be impressed by the people's unity after 27 years of civil war :rolleyes

oh, and I find it pretty funny that "homeland security" idolizes a man who prepetrated a terrorist act on US soil (the capital no less) that killed an American citizen and injured another. Oh right, they were Marxists so its ok, good thing no real Americans were near the carbomb...

[ElNono]

Nothing like saving the economy by putting more people out of work and dependent on welfare.

Fantastic fucking logic.

Exactly...

[Wild Cobra]

Exactly...
But what choice do they have?

[ElNono]

But what choice do they have?

Not to lay off until the overall economic situation improves?

[Wild Cobra]

Not to lay off until the overall economic situation improves?
So you are authoritarian...

What happens when the tax revenue runs dry, or a business cannot pay the paychecks any longer?

[ElNono]

So you are authoritarian...

Why is that? Because I acknowledge there are different options? That's actually the opposite of authoritarian. Or you don't know what the word means (which wouldn't be really new).


What happens when the tax revenue runs dry, or a business cannot pay the paychecks any longer?

Uh? What business? Did you actually read the article or you're just talking out of your ass?

There's many ways to cut down on the state budget without raising taxes. There's a plethora of options, one of which is layoffs. Pushing for layoffs is being completely insensitive to the current economic situation, and as Cry correctly pointed out, only shifts the burden to welfare instead of actual cost savings.

[MannyIsGod]

:lmao

[Wild Cobra]

Uh? What business? Did you actually read the article or you're just talking out of your ass?
I was just adding business to the state issue. Paying unemployment and social programs are less costly than keeping people employed who are not needed. Government should not be employing so many to begun with.

There's many ways to cut down on the state budget without raising taxes. There's a plethora of options, one of which is layoffs.
You think they didn't already try?

Pushing for layoffs is being completely insensitive to the current economic situation, and as Cry correctly pointed out, only shifts the burden to welfare instead of actual cost savings.
I understand such concerns. But again, government is too big already. Almost in every state. Hell, in my city, we have more city planner fucking things up than we have police officers to control the gangs. They cannot afford to maintain a proper police force to secure the people, and favor their pet projects.

[ElNono]

I was just adding business to the state issue. Paying unemployment and social programs are less costly than keeping people employed who are not needed. Government should not be employing so many to begun with.

Do you actually have numbers backing that claim?


You think they didn't already try?

Sure, and they've done some pruning. But I live in NJ, and I know first hand there's plenty more things to cut if the political will would be there instead of being fascinated with layoffs at such a bad time.


I understand such concerns. But again, government is too big already. Almost in every state. Hell, in my city, we have more city planner fucking things up than we have police officers to control the gangs. They cannot afford to maintain a proper police force to secure the people, and favor their pet projects.

I'm not against trimming the budget. Heck, I'm not even against layoffs.
I'm simply against the timing, laying off people *now*. Again, we can talk philosophically all day as to the size of government and all that stuff. The guy that's getting fired doesn't give a shit though. He's gonna have to scramble looking for a new job in a shitty economy to support their family, and most likely going to end up sucking up money from welfare until he's able to find anything. And sometimes those welfare systems are the first cut by guys like Christie too, which basically mean people end up being SOL.
You can side with the philosophical side, but I'm with the little guy here.