PDA

View Full Version : Buchanan: Wanted a fighting Party.



behindmydesk
05-12-2009, 12:34 PM
http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=97847

Wanted: A fighting party
Posted: May 11, 2009
10:12 pm Eastern

2009

As was evident at the White House Correspondents Dinner, it is deja vu, 1961, all over again. We have a young, cool, witty, personable president and an adoring press corps.

"I am Barack Obama," the president introduced himself. "Most of you covered me. All of you voted for me. (Laughter and applause.) Apologies to the Fox table. (Laughter.)"

What is also evident is that, without its new superstar in the lineup, the Democratic Party is a second-division ball club. Harry Reid and Nancy Pelosi are not terribly formidable. Last fall, the Congress they ran had an approval rating below Vice President Cheney.

Why then is the Republican Party agonizing publicly over what it is supposed to do? If history is any guide, the pendulum will swing back in 2010.

After all, in 1952, Eisenhower was elected in a more impressive victory than Obama's, and ended the Korean War by June. And, in 1954, he lost both houses of Congress.

Lyndon Johnson crushed Goldwater by three times the margin of Obama's victory. He got Medicare, Medicaid, voting rights and a host of Great Society programs. And, in 1966, he lost 47 House seats.

Ronald Reagan won a 44-state landslide in 1980, cut tax rates and proceeded to lose 26 seats in 1982.

Bill Clinton recaptured the presidency for his party in 1992 after 12 years of Republican rule. In 1994, he lost 52 seats and both houses of Congress.

(Column continues below)




Though, demographically, the nation is tilting toward the Party of Government, the GOP must remain the party of free enterprise, and should follow the counsel of Australia's Robert Menzies, long ago:

"(T)he duty of an opposition ... is to oppose selectively. No government is always wrong on everything. The opposition must choose the ground on which it is to attack. To attack indiscriminately is to risk public opinion, which has a reserve of fairness not always understood."

Rather than debating what the national party position should be on foreign policy, health care, education, or social issues which the party will decide when it chooses a nominee in 2012 the GOP should focus now, and unite now, on what it will stand against.

Here the party has a good start. With the exception of Specter the Defector and the ladies from Maine, it united against the $800 billion stimulus bill. And as it is impossible to shovel out an added 6 percent of GDP in two years, without vast waste, fraud and abuse, this stimulus package is going to come back and bite Obama by 2010.

And, recall, in his address to Congress, Obama assigned Joe Biden to see to it there was no waste, fraud or abuse in spending the $800 billion: "And that's why I've asked Vice President Biden to lead a tough, unprecedented oversight effort because nobody messes with Joe."

Joe has been set up to take the fall.

The next place to take a stand is against "cap and trade."

More and more Americans are coming to conclude, after the record cold temperatures in many cities this winter, that global warning is a crock that there is no conclusive proof it is happening, no conclusive proof man is the cause, no conclusive proof it would be a calamity for us or the polar bears.

But cap and trade would mean a huge hike in the cost of energy for all Americans, the shutdown of fuel-efficient U.S. factories, and their replacement by dirtier and less fuel-efficient Chinese plants.

And we do know the agenda here is a vast transfer of wealth and power from U.S. citizens to government bureaucrats, and from the U.S. government to global bureaucrats who will run the oversight and enforcement machinery set up by the Kyoto II conclave in Copenhagen.

A third issue on which Republicans ought to stand and fight is health care. For the end goal of Obamacare is the same end goal as Hillarycare: nationalization, bureaucrats deciding what care each of us shall receive, when we may receive it, and whether we even ought to have it.

If the Republican Party remains the party of the individual and the private sector, does it have any choice but to fight?

For if cap-and-trade passes, and Obamacare becomes law, the government share of GDP rises to European socialist levels, and, as we saw after the Great Society, there is no going back.

A party defines itself by what it stands for, and what it stands against. After the Bush era, the Republican Party has been given the opportunity to redeem and redefine itself in opposition to a party and a president who are further left than any in American history.

A true conservative party would relish such an opportunity.

After all, the Goldwater young did not lie down and die after a defeat far more crushing than the one the party suffered last fall.

Is this Republican Party made of similar stuff?

poodski
05-12-2009, 01:11 PM
Yeah this is why I dont get the whole "Republican party is dead" talk.

The GOP will gain seats in the next election. I doubt they take over the House, but they will gain ground. That I am confident of.

behindmydesk
05-12-2009, 02:04 PM
I honestly think 2010 might be a bit early, but i'm not sure. It wouldn't surprise me if we gained in 2010, but I'm more confident about 2012.

cabernetluver
05-12-2009, 02:12 PM
The average gain in the off year election for the party out of power is 30 seats. I am confused about your confidence. It appears that by 2012 the economy will have been well into a slow but steady recovery. Other than blind hope, what is your confidence based on?

behindmydesk
05-12-2009, 02:15 PM
What was the optimism for the examples Pat provided. Not to mention their will be other things that aren't even brought up yet to run on. Budget Deficit, National Deficit, If we aren't out of Iraq by then just to name a few.

ari1013
05-12-2009, 02:23 PM
I can pick and choose as well. In 2000 Bush won a victory that was smaller than Obama and then in 2002 his party picked up seats. In 2004 they picked up even more seats.

Buchanan's looking at the wrong people. In 1954 the economy was slowing down from its war time levels of production. In 1966 there was the beginning of anti-war backlash coming down the pipelines and isolationist Republicans were the beneficiaries. In 1982 we were in the heart of the worst recession in the 50 years leading up to then. Finally in 1994 Clinton was looked at as a below-average one-termer who only won because of Perot. He hadn't done a thing in office. It's no surprise the GOP was able to out-message him.

Does today's political climate measure up to any of those cases? I'm going to say not at all.

hoosiercubsfan
05-13-2009, 11:08 AM
I can pick and choose as well. In 2000 Bush won a victory that was smaller than Obama and then in 2002 his party picked up seats. In 2004 they picked up even more seats.

Buchanan's looking at the wrong people. In 1954 the economy was slowing down from its war time levels of production. In 1966 there was the beginning of anti-war backlash coming down the pipelines and isolationist Republicans were the beneficiaries. In 1982 we were in the heart of the worst recession in the 50 years leading up to then. Finally in 1994 Clinton was looked at as a below-average one-termer who only won because of Perot. He hadn't done a thing in office. It's no surprise the GOP was able to out-message him.

Does today's political climate measure up to any of those cases? I'm going to say not at all.

I have cautious optimism that seats can be picked up as soon as 2010 by the GOP. That is assuming they actually find people worth running not the same old retreads the parties keep running out there. The reason for my optimism rests on the fact that by 2010 this economy is not going to be back on track. We are doing absolutely nothing different than before so I don't see any reason to believe that it is gonna start trending upwards any time soon. And now that Obama is over 100 days into his presidency this is now his baby no matter how many times he tries to point his finger at Bush. I believe we will see a backlash against the Democrats that are up for re election if the economy is not noticeably improving which I just don't see by 2010. Does this mean it will be sweeping changes? Absolutely not at best this early it is going to be modest gains in the Senate and House leaving the Democratic Party in charge of both but lacking the ability to ram any legislation they see fit through. The only way I honestly see the GOP not picking up seats in 2010 is if they continue to flounder like they are now. Which is as likely a possibility as them picking up seats so that is why I am cautiously optimistic.

ari1013
05-13-2009, 11:14 AM
And if all of the economic forecasts are correct and the economy does begin improving sometime between October and December? What then for the GOP?

I agree that if the economy is still down in 2010 then the GOP should make some headway, but that's really the only way they can win -- by hoping the economy fails.

behindmydesk
05-13-2009, 11:16 AM
Ehh, you know well, Ari, there's always something to campaign on.

Heads up Hoosier, it'd be easier to read your posts if you wouldn't do block style posts. Like throw some separation lines in between posts. Just a bit hard to read!

cabernetluver
05-13-2009, 11:26 AM
I also want to add that the improvement that people are looking for is first, a stop of downward trend, and then, a slow improvement. No polling shows that people are demanding a v shaped recovery, but in fact are looking for any improvement.

hoosiercubsfan
05-13-2009, 12:48 PM
And if all of the economic forecasts are correct and the economy does begin improving sometime between October and December? What then for the GOP?

I agree that if the economy is still down in 2010 then the GOP should make some headway, but that's really the only way they can win -- by hoping the economy fails.

Problem is only the White House seems to putting out these rosy forecasts for the economy. Again I don't see how we are doing anything different than we where before but are expecting our economy to just all of the sudden get back on track? That means that they absolutely have to get what they are doing now right in order for it to work in time to filter down to main street USA.

We seem to be going farther and farther towards nationalization of the auto and banking industries. I believe Obama is gonna take a pretty good lump if/when General Motors files bankruptcy. It was said that we HAD to give them all of this stimulus money to keep them out of bankruptcy. Now it seems very likely both of them will in fact file with all of our tax dollars being handed over to them.

Then you can also take the massive stimulus bill that has not been terribly popular either. That is just another item for the GOP to bang on during the mid terms. It will be up to the people to decide who should ultimately share the blame for the status of our economy. You can bet that the GOP will also use the fact that the Democratic Party has held both houses of congress for 4 or 6 years (I forget and don't really care when they took power).

Again I am not calling for huge gains or the retaking of either house. Nor am I gonna go as far as predicting how many. I just believe that the country as a whole tends to be more for divided government. And if/when Franken gets seated and their is a 60 seat majority they better be careful how much they bite off in the next year. If they start ramming through huge spending programs there I believe will be a forceful backlash in 2010.

BMD suggestion noted and will try and break it up more. I agree block text can be hard to read at times.

cabernetluver
05-13-2009, 01:01 PM
Problem is only the White House seems to putting out these rosy forecasts for the economy. Again I don't see how we are doing anything different than we where before but are expecting our economy to just all of the sudden get back on track? That means that they absolutely have to get what they are doing now right in order for it to work in time to filter down to main street USA.

We seem to be going farther and farther towards nationalization of the auto and banking industries. I believe Obama is gonna take a pretty good lump if/when General Motors files bankruptcy. It was said that we HAD to give them all of this stimulus money to keep them out of bankruptcy. Now it seems very likely both of them will in fact file with all of our tax dollars being handed over to them.

Then you can also take the massive stimulus bill that has not been terribly popular either. That is just another item for the GOP to bang on during the mid terms. It will be up to the people to decide who should ultimately share the blame for the status of our economy. You can bet that the GOP will also use the fact that the Democratic Party has held both houses of congress for 4 or 6 years (I forget and don't really care when they took power).

Again I am not calling for huge gains or the retaking of either house. Nor am I gonna go as far as predicting how many. I just believe that the country as a whole tends to be more for divided government. And if/when Franken gets seated and their is a 60 seat majority they better be careful how much they bite off in the next year. If they start ramming through huge spending programs there I believe will be a forceful backlash in 2010.

BMD suggestion noted and will try and break it up more. I agree block text can be hard to read at times.

Hoosier, first much easier to read, thanks.

Second, way more than the White House is predicting improvement. The markets are predicting improvement. The markets hit bottom and have been trending up. The markets are actually nothing more nor less than collective opinion of the peoples predictions of that improvement in the future.

The shape of the collective opinion is that it will be a slow but perceptible improvement.

hoosiercubsfan
05-13-2009, 01:49 PM
Hoosier, first much easier to read, thanks.

Second, way more than the White House is predicting improvement. The markets are predicting improvement. The markets hit bottom and have been trending up. The markets are actually nothing more nor less than collective opinion of the peoples predictions of that improvement in the future.

The shape of the collective opinion is that it will be a slow but perceptible improvement.

First let me say that i absolutely hope you are correct. That the economy is on the way back up. But I just don't believe it is.

I believe that whatever rally you see on Wall Street will be nothing more than fools rallies. Our economy is built currently on a service basis. Our manufacturing base is all but gone. Two of the three major automakers will have filed bankruptcy by the 2010 elections. And we are spending money as fast as we can print it.

With so many MAJOR spending programs there is little doubt in my mind that we are in store for crippling inflation. Without the ability to grow our GDP with manufactured goods we will soon have massive amounts of our dollar on the open market with nobody to buy them.

And it seems that every time we turn around we are throwing massive amounts of money at this that and the other. Then throw in Universal Health Care as another HUGE expense that will be ripe for rampant corruption. I honestly believe we are bringing this country to its knees with the amounts of spending we are doing. We are bankrupt and both parties just want to keep spending more. Depending on what party your talking about determines what they are spending on.

That is why I hedge my bet on the GOP gaining seats on the fact that they very rapidly have a come to Jesus meeting within the party. Because right now in my opinion and i think it is shared by many that the current GOP is nothing more than Democrat light. The Democratic party has moved towards the progressive movement and the Republicans have followed along with the me to attitude with becoming the progressive light party. They have completely abandoned the idea of fiscal responsibility.

cabernetluver
05-13-2009, 02:11 PM
First let me say that i absolutely hope you are correct. That the economy is on the way back up. But I just don't believe it is.

I believe that whatever rally you see on Wall Street will be nothing more than fools rallies. Our economy is built currently on a service basis. Our manufacturing base is all but gone. Two of the three major automakers will have filed bankruptcy by the 2010 elections. And we are spending money as fast as we can print it.

With so many MAJOR spending programs there is little doubt in my mind that we are in store for crippling inflation. Without the ability to grow our GDP with manufactured goods we will soon have massive amounts of our dollar on the open market with nobody to buy them.

And it seems that every time we turn around we are throwing massive amounts of money at this that and the other. Then throw in Universal Health Care as another HUGE expense that will be ripe for rampant corruption. I honestly believe we are bringing this country to its knees with the amounts of spending we are doing. We are bankrupt and both parties just want to keep spending more. Depending on what party your talking about determines what they are spending on.

That is why I hedge my bet on the GOP gaining seats on the fact that they very rapidly have a come to Jesus meeting within the party. Because right now in my opinion and i think it is shared by many that the current GOP is nothing more than Democrat light. The Democratic party has moved towards the progressive movement and the Republicans have followed along with the me to attitude with becoming the progressive light party. They have completely abandoned the idea of fiscal responsibility.

There are so many things to comment on, most of which have no place in this thread, so while I don't necessarily agree with many of the things, I just don't think this is the thread to comment on them.

That said, and also slightly off topic, I am glad that we agree on our wishes for the economy.

The one part of your comment that in my opinion is correct to comment on for this thread is the direction of your party.

If you are right (no pun intended) and your party has a purity (my word, not yours, but it is how I interpreted what you said) meeting, you will be in the desert for a very long time. As a Democrat, I know how that process works. We did it. It was wrong. We came back. But not until we had abandoned the purity rule.

The job of a party is not to wax philosophical, but is simply to win elections. It is the job of think tanks and other kinds of organizations to do the former, not the party.

As Ronald Reagan said if you agree with me 80% of the time we are friends. As Democrats, we think if you agree with me on the issues 60% of the time we are friends. We have learned it is better to get 60% of the loaf than 100% of nothing.

I am going to look at Florida with great interest. Your congressional party leadership has anointed Crist. Rubio has the backing of the conservative movement. In my opinion Crist would win against anyone the Democrats put up. Rubio at best will be in a dog fight to beat the Democrat and most likely at this point in time would lose.

So to me, the question is do you want to win, or, do you want a fighting party?