The GOP's Misplaced Rage by Bruce Bartlett

[LnGrrrR]

That's the problem. Conservatives are a 3rd party. Between the two, they support republicans as the lesser of two evils. Conservatives are a large part of the voting block for republicans, so republicans lose when they ignore conservative principles.Why does their have to be a counter proposal? The problem is current regulations and laws, not the current health care system.

Then why not come up with a plan to get rid of current legislation and laws? Tell us what legislation they would like to cut, and the saving/benefits enacted, as well as the potential negative consequences.

[LnGrrrR]

Also, all the whining about, "They've TRIED to fix it, really, but the evil media and Democrats won't let them!"... isn't really effective. If Republicans have a plan that's good enough, then it will find a way out. Last time I checked, there's this thing called the "internet". And on this internet, there are right-wing websites. And sometimes, when a news article gets posted to a website, like, say, the Drudge Report, it gets picked up by the TV media.

But, I mean, they ARE only Senators and representatives. What power could they possibly hold to combat the vast network of liberal evil media?

[DarkReign]

You know, reading some of these reponses are rather ridiculous.

The RNC and DNC are not, I repeat NOT, subject to media suppression.

I know, my mind was just blown too.

Youre ing lying, straight-faced if you think either party can be suppressed by the ing media. Youre either lying or an idiot.

The RNC and DNC are all-powerful political vehicles in this country. What MSNBC/CNN/Fox/radio wont report, they'll post in on their webpage and take the floor of the House and Senate live! on ing CSPAN with graphs, charts and a draft bill.

ing suppression...give me a god damn break...

That dumbass line may work on the tinfoil hat brigade, but try and raise your argument above the level of "The Republican Party is being suppressed! They actually have a draft Bill to address allllllllll this , but the media wont talk about it!!!"

Such ing bull of the highest degree. Prepostorous, outlandish and juvenile to even think that line of argument would even work in this age of the internet, blogs, CSPAN, radio, newspapers, offical party websites and oh- ing-yeah...they're elected officials of the United States.

If a fringe Consitutionalist like Ron Paul can be a media darling for 2 months, I am quite ing confident the RNC could muster enough media nutsack long enough to push an alternative plan to any current event possible.

Ludicrous, seriously deficient thinking.

[ploto]

Republicans to gain votes became alot more about being socially and morally conservative than about being fiscally and governmentally conservative. They have no problem with the government telling consenting adults what they can and can not do when supposedly they are for smaller government and less government intervention. They are so wrapped up in their supposed superior patriotism and higher family values that they forgot for what they are supposed to stand politically.

[Wild Cobra]

You're aware that Bush supported it, and that McCain did as well, right? So even if Obama wasn't elected, that bill was going to pass.

Here is a perfect example why I call you guys lib s! You and ElNono...

Do you remember me ever supporting this decision of President Bush and Senator McCain? If you go back, you will see I was never in favor of this and talked bad about these policies. In fact, you will see I stated I would not vote for McCain because of his liberal views. That only changed when Palin was his running mate.

Buy a clue please.

[Wild Cobra]

Then why not come up with a plan to get rid of current legislation and laws? Tell us what legislation they would like to cut, and the saving/benefits enacted, as well as the potential negative consequences.

You think that hasn't been attempted?

[Wild Cobra]

You're aware that Bush supported it, and that McCain did as well, right? So even if Obama wasn't elected, that bill was going to pass.

Please go back and read my prior statements before the primary and general elections. You will see that one point I made that appalled other conservatives was that I would rather see Clinton or Obama win over McCain. My reason was that who ever got elected, we would have this nation in some kind of destruction mode. That liberals would do it faster, and the public would see it, swaying voters back to more conservative politicians in 2010. If McCain was elected, it would still happen. It would just be slower and unnoticed by the public at large.

Believe me, I was aware. I am rarely ignorance when it comes to politics.

[ChumpDumper]

I am rarely ignorance when it comes to politics.

All those simultaneous sig updates are going to crash the server.

[Wild Cobra]

All those simultaneous sig updates are going to crash the server.

Chump being ignorant again...

[ChumpDumper]

Chump being ignorant again...

And you are being ignorance again.

[Marcus Bryant]

More useless blather from those who think they know what's best for the Republican Party. I wish they'd all just switch over to being Democrats because their beliefs are more in line with liberals than conservatives.

Nice. If you are dissatisfied with a GOP which consistently expands the federal government at the expense of individual liberty and whose powers that be managed to position the party to lose the two elected branches of government within two years, then you are the one who has betrayed the party, instead of the party betraying you. Great ing logic.

But I will grant you that it shouldn't be that difficult for Republicans to shift to becoming Democrats and vice versa, for there really isn't that much of a difference between the elected officials of either side at the federal level. The present administration has engaged in a rather continuous transition from the previous administration. Even this awful nationalized insurance scheme is merely picking up where the last administration and its Medicare Part D en lement expansion left off. The Secretary of Defense is the same as the last administration, which is rather curious given the degree to which we were told the last administration had screwed up on the military front. The Treasury Secretary continues to carry water for Wall Street, just like his predecessor.

Meanwhile the unwashed masses yell at each other in "town halls" (what a synthetic techno-democratic cluster those are) and on the internets as if there is really a stark fundamental difference between the establishment of either major US political party. The joke is on us, but we're too caught up in the partisan label political circle jerk to notice.

[dimsah]

Nice. If you are dissatisfied with a GOP which consistently expands the federal government at the expense of individual liberty and whose powers that be managed to position the party to lose the two elected branches of government within two years, then you are the one who has betrayed the party, instead of the party betraying you. Great ing logic.

But I will grant you that it shouldn't be that difficult for Republicans to shift to becoming Democrats and vice versa, for there really isn't that much of a difference between the elected officials of either side at the federal level. The present administration has engaged in a rather continuous transition from the previous administration. Even this awful nationalized insurance scheme is merely picking up where the last administration and its Medicare Part D en lement expansion left off. The Secretary of Defense is the same as the last administration, which is rather curious given the degree to which we were told the last administration had screwed up on the military front. The Treasury Secretary continues to carry water for Wall Street, just like his predecessor.

Meanwhile the unwashed masses yell at each other in "town halls" (what a synthetic techno-democratic cluster those are) and on the internets as if there is really a stark fundamental difference between the establishment of either major US political party. The joke is on us, but we're too caught up in the partisan label political circle jerk to notice.

Good post.

[Nbadan]

Just a few short years ago you couldn't win to be the local dog catcher if you ran as a Democrat in Tx.....things change...if your dissatisfied with your representatives then vote for someone else....this 'they are all the same' is just scape-goating..

[LnGrrrR]

Here is a perfect example why I call you guys lib s! You and ElNono...

Do you remember me ever supporting this decision of President Bush and Senator McCain? If you go back, you will see I was never in favor of this and talked bad about these policies. In fact, you will see I stated I would not vote for McCain because of his liberal views. That only changed when Palin was his running mate.

Buy a clue please.

Hey, I'm just saying that both Obama and McCain were going to push this, so it didn't matter which President Congress sent it up to.

If Bush wanted to take a stand against it, he could have. He was a lame duck by then anyways. But he actively lobbied for it. (Now, you might not AGREE, but it's not just Obama who was for bailouts, and that's my point.)

[LnGrrrR]

You think that hasn't been attempted?

They certainly haven't done a good job of promoting their own unified plan.

[LnGrrrR]

Nice. If you are dissatisfied with a GOP which consistently expands the federal government at the expense of individual liberty and whose powers that be managed to position the party to lose the two elected branches of government within two years, then you are the one who has betrayed the party, instead of the party betraying you. Great ing logic.

But I will grant you that it shouldn't be that difficult for Republicans to shift to becoming Democrats and vice versa, for there really isn't that much of a difference between the elected officials of either side at the federal level. The present administration has engaged in a rather continuous transition from the previous administration. Even this awful nationalized insurance scheme is merely picking up where the last administration and its Medicare Part D en lement expansion left off. The Secretary of Defense is the same as the last administration, which is rather curious given the degree to which we were told the last administration had screwed up on the military front. The Treasury Secretary continues to carry water for Wall Street, just like his predecessor.

Meanwhile the unwashed masses yell at each other in "town halls" (what a synthetic techno-democratic cluster those are) and on the internets as if there is really a stark fundamental difference between the establishment of either major US political party. The joke is on us, but we're too caught up in the partisan label political circle jerk to notice.

I'd say there's a difference in the people following the parties, but not the actual politicians.

[Yonivore]

I'd say there's a difference in the people following the parties, but not the actual politicians.

Point taken.

Michael Barone addresses an open letter to young people who voted for Barack Obama last November. His approach is interesting; you should read it all:

You voted, as your candidate and our president said, for Hope and Change. But I ask you to consider whether the policies that the president has proposed and in some cases pushed through really amount to that.

I ask you to examine them through the prism of a book published in 1999, when most of you were too young to vote: "The Future and Its Enemies," by Virginia Postrel (an Obama voter, too, by the way). Postrel assesses policies based not on whether they are liberal or conservative but on whether they are dynamist -- promoting or leaving room for change -- or stasist -- tending to freeze ins utions and people in place.

By my reckoning, the Obama policies are more stasist than dynamist. ...

The larger point is this: You want policies that will enable you to choose your future. Obama backs policies that would let centralized authorities choose much of your future for you. Is this the hope and change you want?

[LnGrrrR]

Not a bad article. I thought his Iran jab was a bit false though.. I think the people that want us to stay out of Iraq are the same people who want us to stay out of Iran... I could be wrong though.