Monday, February 22, 2010
"A Passion You Can't Fake In Politics"
National Review's Robert Costa and Lew Rockwell's David Franke explain the Ron Paul movement's hijacking of CPAC.
The rise of the Paulists also explains this fun occurrence on Friday. As the Franke piece points out, the big issue is deficits and the economy. Paulists care little for who is doing what to whom in the privacy of their homes.
|
The rise of the Paulists also explains this fun occurrence on Friday. As the Franke piece points out, the big issue is deficits and the economy. Paulists care little for who is doing what to whom in the privacy of their homes.
Labels: CPAC, Republicans, Ron Paul
Thursday, March 19, 2009
Say Good Night, Ronnie
So, in the end, the Reagan Revolution ended Thursday with a whimper and not a bang. For nearly three decades, the only thing that unified Republicans in all circumstances was an aggressive anti-tax stance.
|
The revolution began with Reagan's 25 percent cut in personal income taxes passed in 1981. While disagreements over foreign policy (Kosovo) and social issues (immigration) would arise in the GOP over the years, tax-reduction and anti-tax philosophy was the glue keeping the coalition together. The one time that there was a split -- when George H.W. Bush's lips moved in 1990 -- was the exception that proved the rule. The future leaders of the party -- Republican Whip Newt Gingrich, Dick Armey and others -- staged a rebellion among the House GOP on behalf of the Reaganite tax policy. After Bush I lost in 1992 (which the base of the party blamed on his violating his tax pledge), those rebellious House leaders went on to formulate the Contract With America, which included no less than nine tax limitation or cutting measures.
That background is important to understand the significance of Thursday's House vote to impose a 90 percent tax on individuals who got bonuses from A.I.G. and other firms who received more than $5 billion in federal bailout money. The vote was 328-93. That's significant because it was brought to the floor under terms called "suspension of the rules." That means a bill can be considered without going through the usual process of being debated and voted out of committees.
Bills considered under "suspension" are usually uncontroversial, ceremonial bits of legislation -- like honoring a recently deceased beloved entertainer or naming a bridge after a favorite Kennedy (hmmm...poor choice of words). They require a two-thirds support for passage. In fact, they usually pass by voice vote. In any event, regardless of the "crisis of the moment," any bill that contains a 90 percent tax levy (no matter how narrowly tailored) could hardly be considered "uncontroversial." Even with the large majority that Democrats have, a two-thirds vote requires Republican support.
Which is why I assumed there would be no way that this bill could get out of the House under these circumstances.
But, one could see something was "up" when Grover Norquist, the high-priest of anti-tax theology -- who demands that candidates sign a no-tax-raising pledge -- declared that voting for a tax on bonuses was defensible-- with a pseudo-caveat:
"If your goal is to recoup the resources that you've given people that you hadn't thought would be spent this way, you can make it not a tax increase simply by having an offsetting tax cut on honest taxpayers," Norquist explained. "Or you could do the same thing by cutting the amount of money that you were going to give AIG in the next tranche that they'll demand, so you can have the withdrawal of the resources done in less spending."Ah, right. I really can't imagine any other circumstance where Grover would give Republicans a pass to raise taxes today -- with a promise of cutting them later! Who is this -- Wimpy? "I'll gladly pay you Tuesday for a hamburger today.
Come to think of it, "wimpy" is a pretty good description.
Geez, Grover, glad to see that Benedict isn't the only Pope offering indulgences.
Now, Grover can justify this all he wants, but it's clear that he's allowed his populist instinct to overwhelm his anti-tax foundation (pun intended).
With Grover's dispensation out of the way, the eventual vote couldn't be seen as too much of a surprise. Unlike 1990 when the future leaders of the House and the conservative movement voted against a tax hike, GOP Whip Eric Cantor (who models himself after a young Newt Gingrich) ended up voting for the bill, bringing 84 other Republicans with him.
You know how bad this bill is? It's so bad that even liberal writer Josh Marshall -- who has been doing yeoman work in mining this A.I.G. story and everything connected to it --calls it an "ill-advised..Frankenstein."
Yet, Cantor & Co. couldn't see that. They especially couldn't see what precedent was being set. Sure, they might say that this was a special circumstance and won't be replicated. But, they are now on record as voting for a 90-percent rate confiscatory tax -- and as the old joke goes, "Madam, we've already determined what you are; we're now just haggling over the price."
And, that's how the Reagan era died in the Republican Party.
With a wimp-er.
Labels: A.I.G., AIG, Eric Cantor, House Republicans, Newt Gingrich, Republicans, Ronald Reagan
Friday, February 27, 2009
Learning To Live With Govt. Health Care?
The Manhattan Institute's David Gratzer outlines where conservative should make their stand on what appears inevitable -- a health-care system run by the government (or at least parallel with the current system).
|
Gratzer rightly notest that ground has seriously shifted on the issue in the fifteen years since Clintoncare blew up in Bill and Hillary's faces. The odds of something getting through a Democratic Congress and a president who clearly won more than 50 percent of the popular vote are much greater. Given that, here's what Republicans should try:
First, draw a line in the sand. If there is any lesson to be learned from the economic-stimulus package, it’s this: A few votes count. The key for Republicans will be to make those votes actually amount to something more than trimming at the edges.[SNIP]
Republicans can compromise on some things; they can’t allow new public programs for everyone.
Second, remind Americans of why we care. No one would deny that America’s health-care system is unsatisfying. But acknowledging the obvious doesn’t necessarily mean that a sweeping White House plan is the right approach. Democrats may care about this issue, but their passion blinds them: They understate the deep problems with Medicaid and Medicare; they are eager to embrace expensive new entitlements; they dismiss the incredible shortcomings of socialized medicine in countries like Canada.
[SNIP]
Third, provide alternatives. Americans want solutions, not just criticisms. We need to point Americans to the road less traveled in health reform: individual choice and competition. It’s possible to allow the unemployed and the self-employed more options in health insurance, not by expanding Washington’s reach, but by allowing people to purchase health plans across state lines. We favor better quality of care, not through the creation of a government committee, but by empowering patients with better information.
Conservatives and Republicans must decide pretty soon whether the best way to expend their energy is screaming and yelling to little avail -- and have no input on the final result -- or try to create the least-awful legislation by demanding a seat at the table.
Labels: health-care reform, Republicans
Friday, January 30, 2009
The GOP Steeles Itself For A Comeback
It took six ballots, but the Republican National Committee picked the right man as its new chairman Friday: It's Michael Steele. Not exactly objective view here: I've known Steele for several years (of the other candidates, I've also met Ken Blackwell a few times). I saw some of the BS some RNC-ers were tossing at him early on.
He brought to the race something important: Besides being smart, good on the issues -- yeah, "articulate" too, Joe Biden -- he always looks like he's enjoying himself while talking politics. (He was also chair of the Maryland GOP (before running for lieutenant governor) and did a good job there.)
He may be the person best suited to build the party in ways similar to what I write here. Steele's a conservative who can work with moderates while defending the party's principles to the rest of America.
Congratulation, Michael.
Oh, and I'm not a gambler, but between Barack Obama and Michael Steele, anyone heading to Vegas and playing roulette might want to bet on black.
What a stunning few months.
|
He brought to the race something important: Besides being smart, good on the issues -- yeah, "articulate" too, Joe Biden -- he always looks like he's enjoying himself while talking politics. (He was also chair of the Maryland GOP (before running for lieutenant governor) and did a good job there.)
He may be the person best suited to build the party in ways similar to what I write here. Steele's a conservative who can work with moderates while defending the party's principles to the rest of America.
Congratulation, Michael.
Oh, and I'm not a gambler, but between Barack Obama and Michael Steele, anyone heading to Vegas and playing roulette might want to bet on black.
What a stunning few months.
Labels: GOP Chairman, Michael Steele, Republicans
Wednesday, December 03, 2008
No 60 This Year...
Saxby Chambliss easily wins run-off reelection bid in Georgia, denying Democrats of a de jure filibuster-proof majority (regardless of what happens in Minnesota). Obama played it smart, frankly, by not campaigning there. No reason to expend political capital on a race that the GOP were likely to hold onto anyway (Chamblis narrowly missed the 50 percent threshold he needed to win outright on Election Day).
|
However, it may just be delaying the inevitable, given that Florida's Mel Martinez announced two years early that he won't run for re-election in 2010. This suggests that Republicans bleak last two cycles may actually continue for a third even though Obama will be in his midterm (usually a moment to vote against the guy in the White House). The economy will probably still be pretty crummy. Though more Republican seats are up for grabs (19 vs. 16 for Democrats), the last thing the GOP needs is more Republican retirements. An open seat is always a better target for a challenger than one filled by an incumbent.
The former RNC chairman has done his party no favor here (cynics -- and those actually in the know -- would say that he did his party no favors when he was chairman for that matter). Hunch is that Martinez will go down in history as the most memorable Florida senator since Paula Hawkins!
Exactly.
Labels: Mel Martinez, Republicans, Saxby Chambliss
Wednesday, November 19, 2008
Baked Alaska
Didn't have the chance to use that headline during the whole Sarah Palin silliness. But it is most appropriate -- and deserved -- to cheer the electoral defeat of Sen. "Bridge To The Penitentiary" Ted Stevens.
Forget partisanship. Alaska voters did the right thing by avoiding the embarrassment of returning (however briefly) a convicted felon to the Senate.
Don't let the prison door hit you on the way out, Senator.
|
Forget partisanship. Alaska voters did the right thing by avoiding the embarrassment of returning (however briefly) a convicted felon to the Senate.
Don't let the prison door hit you on the way out, Senator.
Labels: corruption, Republicans, Ted Stevens
Wednesday, November 05, 2008
The Death of The GOP...
...in New England.
After this election, the area that once defined Eastern Establishment Republicanis has not one House seat held by a member of the GOP.
Little bit of trivia: Connecticut's Chris Shays, who lost last night, was a moderate but a true loyalist. He was the one who, in 1997, when learning that several House GOPers were planning on overthrowing Speaker Newt Gingrich marched into the Speaker's office and said, "You need to know what's going on."
Anyway, Mr. Shays is gone and the GOP is looking like a shrunken regional, Southern-based party -- a fate predicted some ten years ago by author Christopher Caldwell.
UPDATE: My post colleague Charles Hurt urges the GOP to get its act together, before it becomes totally "irrelevant."
|
After this election, the area that once defined Eastern Establishment Republicanis has not one House seat held by a member of the GOP.
Little bit of trivia: Connecticut's Chris Shays, who lost last night, was a moderate but a true loyalist. He was the one who, in 1997, when learning that several House GOPers were planning on overthrowing Speaker Newt Gingrich marched into the Speaker's office and said, "You need to know what's going on."
Anyway, Mr. Shays is gone and the GOP is looking like a shrunken regional, Southern-based party -- a fate predicted some ten years ago by author Christopher Caldwell.
UPDATE: My post colleague Charles Hurt urges the GOP to get its act together, before it becomes totally "irrelevant."
Labels: Chris Shays, Republicans
Wednesday, October 29, 2008
2012!!
The Republican race begins! Possible cases for --
Mike Huckabee?
Sarah Palin?
Bobby Jindal?
My personal hunch is Huckabee. But, it's a little early for official predictions, dontcha think?
|
Mike Huckabee?
Sarah Palin?
Bobby Jindal?
My personal hunch is Huckabee. But, it's a little early for official predictions, dontcha think?
Labels: 2012 GOP nomination., Republicans
Saturday, October 04, 2008
The Bush Legacy?
A wiped out party?
Both the Washington Post and Politico report on increasing GOP fears of a congressional bloodbath come next week. And no, John McCain is not the cause of the party's problem, but just another symptom. The cause is the increasing economic turmoil, accoriding to Politico:
|
Both the Washington Post and Politico report on increasing GOP fears of a congressional bloodbath come next week. And no, John McCain is not the cause of the party's problem, but just another symptom. The cause is the increasing economic turmoil, accoriding to Politico:
A poll out Friday shows Sen. Norm Coleman could now easily lose his Minnesota seat to comedian-turned-candidate Al Franken. A Colorado race that initially looked like a nail-biter has now broken decisively for the Democrats. A top official in the McCain camp told us Sen. Elizabeth Dole is virtually certain to lose in conservative North Carolina.Though McCain's recent tactics (strategy?) has contributed to the problem, the Post notes:
Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell of Kentucky has seen his race tighten dangerously close over the past week — and Democrats are considering moving more money into the state very soon. And there is even talk that Republican Sen. Saxby Chambliss is beatable in conservative Georgia after backing the economic bailout package opposed by many voters.
“Before the economic crisis, we had a number of races moving our way,” said Matthew Miller, communications director of the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee. “But now we’re seeing Republican numbers plummet.” GOP officials largely agree.
GOP operatives said the party's declining fortunes are rooted in a series of events over the past two weeks, including McCain's decision to suspend his campaign in order to help broker a deal on the rescue plan and Republican opposition that doomed the bill in a House vote on Monday. Those incidents helped reinforce voter impressions that Washington is broken and that Republicans bear the brunt of the blame, the party insiders said.In the most recent Washington Post-ABC News national poll, more than half of all voters said they were "very concerned" that the failure of the first bailout vote would cause a "severe economic decline." By a ratio of 2 to 1, they blamed the legislations' defeat on Republicans.
Neil Newhouse, a partner in the Republican polling firm Public Opinion Strategies, echoed van Lohuizen's sentiment. "The bailout crisis has had a corrosive effect on the national political environment, and that impacts not just John McCain, but GOP candidates up and down the ticket," he said.
The proximity to the election added to the chaos on Capitol Hill this week as lawmakers sought to pass a $700 billion package to stabilize banks and financial markets. In the House, most vulnerable Republicans opposed the version that failed on Monday, as well as the revamped legislation that passed easily yesterday. But in the Senate, which voted Wednesday, just two vulnerable Republicans, Sens. Elizabeth Dole (N.C.) and Roger Wicker (Miss.), opposed the bill (along with the only Democrat who is seen as endangered, Louisiana Sen. Mary Landrieu).
Seven Republicans who are being targeted for defeat by Democrats backed the plan: Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (Ky.), and Sens. Saxby Chambliss (Ga.), Ted Stevens (Alaska); Norm Coleman (Minn.); Gordon Smith (Ore.), Susan CollinsJohn E. Sununu (N.H.). (Maine) and
Some states that have been hit particularly hard economically saw fractures within their delegations. In Michigan, Knollenberg switched his vote from no on Monday to yes on Friday, while Walberg voted no both times. Asked whether he changed his mind out of concern for his reelection, Knollenberg shrugged and responded, "This is politics." But he added that supporting the bailout "is really what's best for the community."
Of course, in an environment like this, Democrats can have it both ways: Their party passes the bailout (er, "rescue" as it is now politically correct to call it), with most Republicans in the House voting against it. But Democratic challengers can either run in support of the bailout or against it, depending on their GOP opponent. Either way, the Republican gets stuck with the "Bush economic legacy" tag and is painted as out of touch.
Not so good times.
Labels: Destruction of the GOP, Republicans
Tuesday, May 20, 2008
Deja Vu All Over Again
Hmmmm....Politico breaks yet another huge scoop, "GOP fails to recruit minorities".
Without a doubt, this one's up there with the Watergate break-in in terms of a groundbreaking exclusive!
Though I swear I might have read this story in, oh, say, 1998 or maybe 2000...2002... 2004...2006. Actually, not 2006, because the party did have Ken Blackwell running for governor in Ohio and Michael Steele for Senate in Maryland. Blackwell was slaughtered in a double anti-Republican wave (incompetence and corruption with the national party; corruption with the state GOP); plus, if one accepts the viewpoint of sometime Thots contributer, Madscribe, some of the inherent racism that lingers in the state. Steele might have won in Maryland if not for the national anti-Republican trend.
Anyway, as far as the rest, when it comes to the Republican Party and "recruitment" of minorities":
Been there. Done that. Read the book. Saw the movie. Played the video game. (Actually, I thinkI starred in the movie at one point -- or maybe it was a straight to DVD production...)
|
Without a doubt, this one's up there with the Watergate break-in in terms of a groundbreaking exclusive!
Though I swear I might have read this story in, oh, say, 1998 or maybe 2000...2002... 2004...2006. Actually, not 2006, because the party did have Ken Blackwell running for governor in Ohio and Michael Steele for Senate in Maryland. Blackwell was slaughtered in a double anti-Republican wave (incompetence and corruption with the national party; corruption with the state GOP); plus, if one accepts the viewpoint of sometime Thots contributer, Madscribe, some of the inherent racism that lingers in the state. Steele might have won in Maryland if not for the national anti-Republican trend.
Anyway, as far as the rest, when it comes to the Republican Party and "recruitment" of minorities":
Been there. Done that. Read the book. Saw the movie. Played the video game. (Actually, I thinkI starred in the movie at one point -- or maybe it was a straight to DVD production...)
Labels: race, Republicans
Wednesday, May 14, 2008
Denver Beckons; GOP Woes
The "race" may be "over", but the nomination fight is just beginning. Hillary Clinton's "thumpin'" of Barack Obama in West Virginia last night means that she won't drop out after next week's Kentucky and Oregon fights (which the two of them will split, but she is likelier to run up a WV-type margin in Kentucky, while Obama may win Oregon "only" by 10 or so points)...or after Puerto Rico on June 3rd. HRC will take the fight all the way to the convention floor in August in Denver, where either she, Obama -- or, yeah, Al Gore could come out as the Democratic nominee.
As disastrous as this scenario undoubtedly could turn out to be for the Democrats, the Mississippi special election has got to give Republicans serious intestinal anxiety (if you get my meaning). That means they are now a lovely 0-3 in special elections this year, losing long-held GOP seats in Illinois, Louisiana and now Mississippi. These results suggest that, despite how unpopular Nancy Pelosi's Democratic House may be, the "R"-brand (still typefied by an historically unpopular current president) is still woefully damaged. John McCain, using his own unique sensibility may ride that out (though the odds are heavily against him. But this gives Democrats amazing momentum in just about all congressional races.
UPDATE: Recriminations aplenty among House Republicans.
|
As disastrous as this scenario undoubtedly could turn out to be for the Democrats, the Mississippi special election has got to give Republicans serious intestinal anxiety (if you get my meaning). That means they are now a lovely 0-3 in special elections this year, losing long-held GOP seats in Illinois, Louisiana and now Mississippi. These results suggest that, despite how unpopular Nancy Pelosi's Democratic House may be, the "R"-brand (still typefied by an historically unpopular current president) is still woefully damaged. John McCain, using his own unique sensibility may ride that out (though the odds are heavily against him. But this gives Democrats amazing momentum in just about all congressional races.
UPDATE: Recriminations aplenty among House Republicans.
Labels: Barack Obama, Democratic 2008 Presidential, Democrats, Hillary Clinton, Republicans
Friday, March 07, 2008
GOP Not Dead Yet?
The Democratic presidential candidates are raking in the money.
The Democratic National Committee? Hmmm...not so much. That could have interesting developments down the road in terms of limiting some of the damage in House and Senate races (the Democrats have an edge in fundraising in their respective congressional and senate campaign committees). Indeed, the NRCC is in the middle of major scandal out of its fundraising shop.
However, the RNC numbers are something of a bright light in an otherwise dismal political picture.
But, some people say, what about the fact that conservatives are demoralized and may not turn out?
Well, trust liberals to come through and fire up part of the social conservative base -- the homeschoolers, for example. (Thanks to ERA for the tip.)
|
The Democratic National Committee? Hmmm...not so much. That could have interesting developments down the road in terms of limiting some of the damage in House and Senate races (the Democrats have an edge in fundraising in their respective congressional and senate campaign committees). Indeed, the NRCC is in the middle of major scandal out of its fundraising shop.
However, the RNC numbers are something of a bright light in an otherwise dismal political picture.
But, some people say, what about the fact that conservatives are demoralized and may not turn out?
Well, trust liberals to come through and fire up part of the social conservative base -- the homeschoolers, for example. (Thanks to ERA for the tip.)
Labels: fundraising, Republicans
Friday, January 18, 2008
DeLay of Game
John McCain is by no means a perfect person or perfect person candidate. He's been on the wrong side of a couple of issues. But he's responsible for "betraying" the conservative movement?
Right.
Ask anyone who might have been paying attention back in 2006 what they thought were the main reasons why Republicans lost the House and Senate. Yes, the Iraq War was part of it. But so too was Republican overspending -- and rampant corruption (particularly in the House). What role did John McCain play in any of that? On the contrary, he was the one always decrying the GOP's profligacy.t
Conversely, how much did the legal troubles of The Indicted Hammer (AKA former majority leader) contribute to the ethical cloud that hovered -- continues to hover? -- over Republicans?
And this man -- now running a brand new operation called the Coalition for a Conservative Majority and whose former aides almost single-handedly helped spread the Jack Abramoff corruption infection throughout the party -- has the nerve to accuse John McCain of "betraying" conservatism?
Pathetic doesn't quite describe this.
Tom DeLay isn't qualified to pass moral judgment on anyone -- and certainly not John McCain.
UPDATE: First sentence now corrected.
|
Right.
Ask anyone who might have been paying attention back in 2006 what they thought were the main reasons why Republicans lost the House and Senate. Yes, the Iraq War was part of it. But so too was Republican overspending -- and rampant corruption (particularly in the House). What role did John McCain play in any of that? On the contrary, he was the one always decrying the GOP's profligacy.t
Conversely, how much did the legal troubles of The Indicted Hammer (AKA former majority leader) contribute to the ethical cloud that hovered -- continues to hover? -- over Republicans?
And this man -- now running a brand new operation called the Coalition for a Conservative Majority and whose former aides almost single-handedly helped spread the Jack Abramoff corruption infection throughout the party -- has the nerve to accuse John McCain of "betraying" conservatism?
Pathetic doesn't quite describe this.
Tom DeLay isn't qualified to pass moral judgment on anyone -- and certainly not John McCain.
UPDATE: First sentence now corrected.
Labels: corruption, John McCain, Republicans, Tom DeLay
Monday, November 26, 2007
No Lott-a Love
My old pal is hitting the road apparently for "other opportunities."
Obviously, the Senate minority whip sees little hope of becoming part of the majority following the '08 elections.
Specultation on the timing of the abrupt departure centers around the need to get out of Congress before a new tough lobbying law goes into effect.
UPDATE: Republicans reportedly "stunned" at Lott's sudden decision.
|
Obviously, the Senate minority whip sees little hope of becoming part of the majority following the '08 elections.
Specultation on the timing of the abrupt departure centers around the need to get out of Congress before a new tough lobbying law goes into effect.
UPDATE: Republicans reportedly "stunned" at Lott's sudden decision.
Labels: Republicans, Trent Lott
Wednesday, October 31, 2007
Losing Allies
The following letter was forwarded from an old college friend of mine: Jed was Republican long before I ever was. Indeed, every day on our dorm floor sophomore year began with Wall St. reports blaring out of Jed's room. He was also the biggest hawk (particularly when it came to Israel) as I had ever met at the time.
Considering he sent copies to the White House, New York Times and The Economist (the latter for good reason, as the letter will indicate), I don't think Jed will mind my sharing this.
From: Jed Arkin [mailto:XXXX@XXXX.com]
Sent: Tuesday, October 30, 2007 11:24 AM
To: 'comments@whitehouse.gov'; 'vice_president@whitehouse.gov'; 'amctelaviv@state.gov'Cc: 'letters@nytimes.com'; 'letters@economist.com'
Subject: Trickle Down Security
Dear President Bush:
I am an American citizen based in Tel Aviv. I had an appointment yesterday at the US Consulate in Tel Aviv to replace a lost passport for my 12 year old son. When we appeared at the appointed time, the guard outside the embassy wouldn’t let us enter because of several articles we carried with us: an Economist magazine, a man’s wallet, containing nothing but currency and the usual driver’s license and credit cards, and several blank pieces of paper for my child to draw on while we waited. The guard sent us back to our car (4 separate times – we’re slow learners) to dispose of these questionable articles.
Once inside, we sat for over two hours after the scheduled time of our appointment, waiting to be called. I stared at the blank walls for a while, then over the course of an hour, found myself, against my nature, transformed into a political activist.
Now I should say that for the last 25 years, I’ve been a steadfast Republican. I’ve bristled at the mounting American discontent at your Administration, been skeptical of the reported abuses in Guantanamo, turned a blind eye to supposed incompetence in Iraq, and endured cheerfully the increasingly intrusive, and far-fetched security measures at airports. But when my government tells me that I have to sit for two hours without a magazine on security grounds, I can no longer buy into the comforting story that our leaders know what they are doing.
The guard outside the embassy told us that the no-magazine policy wasn’t up to him – the procedures were determined by the managers within. Inside, I asked about the policy, and the woman behind the bullet-proof glass shrugged and said that they inside had nothing to do with security.
At some point during my two hour wait, the frustration bubbled over, and I did the only thing within my limited power as a citizen – I started talking, talking politically, with the 50 other Americans who had been called for an appointment at the same time that I had, and who had been sent back to their cars (or sent home, in some cases) to leave behind an increasingly preposterous basket of “suspicious” everyday objects.
Your Administration seems to have lost sight of the simple truth that treating people badly – treating their time or basic freedoms as unimportant -- can actually lead to more terrorism in the world. Among the ad-hoc group of newly-politicized Americans gathered in the drab waiting room at the consulate, the question was brought front and center: if your Administration could permit this kind of treatment of ordinary American citizens in broad daylight, what must you permit against “suspect” foreigners, isolated, helpless and denied Habeas Corpus, caught up in our expanding dragnet abroad? To a man, Democrats and Republicans, we understood yesterday that you and your Administration do not know what you are doing. And with this, we all came to the same sad (to me) conclusion: the time has come to vote the Republicans out of office.
Jed Arkin
(Jed makes a very good side point. Assuming that this is a close election, the votes of Americans living abroad may be a factor. Having frustrated U.S. voters overseas is not a good thing for t he GOP).
|
Considering he sent copies to the White House, New York Times and The Economist (the latter for good reason, as the letter will indicate), I don't think Jed will mind my sharing this.
From: Jed Arkin [mailto:XXXX@XXXX.com]
Sent: Tuesday, October 30, 2007 11:24 AM
To: 'comments@whitehouse.gov'; 'vice_president@whitehouse.gov'; 'amctelaviv@state.gov'Cc: 'letters@nytimes.com'; 'letters@economist.com'
Subject: Trickle Down Security
Dear President Bush:
I am an American citizen based in Tel Aviv. I had an appointment yesterday at the US Consulate in Tel Aviv to replace a lost passport for my 12 year old son. When we appeared at the appointed time, the guard outside the embassy wouldn’t let us enter because of several articles we carried with us: an Economist magazine, a man’s wallet, containing nothing but currency and the usual driver’s license and credit cards, and several blank pieces of paper for my child to draw on while we waited. The guard sent us back to our car (4 separate times – we’re slow learners) to dispose of these questionable articles.
Once inside, we sat for over two hours after the scheduled time of our appointment, waiting to be called. I stared at the blank walls for a while, then over the course of an hour, found myself, against my nature, transformed into a political activist.
Now I should say that for the last 25 years, I’ve been a steadfast Republican. I’ve bristled at the mounting American discontent at your Administration, been skeptical of the reported abuses in Guantanamo, turned a blind eye to supposed incompetence in Iraq, and endured cheerfully the increasingly intrusive, and far-fetched security measures at airports. But when my government tells me that I have to sit for two hours without a magazine on security grounds, I can no longer buy into the comforting story that our leaders know what they are doing.
The guard outside the embassy told us that the no-magazine policy wasn’t up to him – the procedures were determined by the managers within. Inside, I asked about the policy, and the woman behind the bullet-proof glass shrugged and said that they inside had nothing to do with security.
At some point during my two hour wait, the frustration bubbled over, and I did the only thing within my limited power as a citizen – I started talking, talking politically, with the 50 other Americans who had been called for an appointment at the same time that I had, and who had been sent back to their cars (or sent home, in some cases) to leave behind an increasingly preposterous basket of “suspicious” everyday objects.
Your Administration seems to have lost sight of the simple truth that treating people badly – treating their time or basic freedoms as unimportant -- can actually lead to more terrorism in the world. Among the ad-hoc group of newly-politicized Americans gathered in the drab waiting room at the consulate, the question was brought front and center: if your Administration could permit this kind of treatment of ordinary American citizens in broad daylight, what must you permit against “suspect” foreigners, isolated, helpless and denied Habeas Corpus, caught up in our expanding dragnet abroad? To a man, Democrats and Republicans, we understood yesterday that you and your Administration do not know what you are doing. And with this, we all came to the same sad (to me) conclusion: the time has come to vote the Republicans out of office.
Jed Arkin
(Jed makes a very good side point. Assuming that this is a close election, the votes of Americans living abroad may be a factor. Having frustrated U.S. voters overseas is not a good thing for t he GOP).
Labels: Americans abroad, Republicans
Monday, October 15, 2007
Blue Days For The Red Party
How goes it for Republicans these days? Well, on Capitol Hill, not so well. Former House Majority Leader Dick Armey becomes the lates of prominent GOPers to predict that a certain person will win the White House next year. Hint: She ain't a Republican.
Meanwhile, the Wall St. Journal chastises both Democrats and conservatives over the manipulation of children in the SCHIP debate. Alas, as the aforementioned Hill Republicans note, the bad PR will only accrue to the GOP brand. Well, they only have themselves to blame. If they had bothered to keep an eye on spending over the last six years, they wouldn't seem like Scrooges now by declaring that "children's health" is where they need to draw the line (understanding that the debate isn't really about "children's" health).
|
Meanwhile, the Wall St. Journal chastises both Democrats and conservatives over the manipulation of children in the SCHIP debate. Alas, as the aforementioned Hill Republicans note, the bad PR will only accrue to the GOP brand. Well, they only have themselves to blame. If they had bothered to keep an eye on spending over the last six years, they wouldn't seem like Scrooges now by declaring that "children's health" is where they need to draw the line (understanding that the debate isn't really about "children's" health).
Labels: Destruction of the GOP, Republicans
Tuesday, September 04, 2007
"Everyday Normal"...Politician
Pardon the cynicism that occasionally seeps into my viewpoint after having spent about ten years in Washington. However, it's hard to ignore it after seeing Fred Thompson adviser Mary Matalin's performance on Meet The Press this past Sunday.
Matalin used variations of the word "normal" (or phrase "normal person") no less than seven times while responding to various Russert questions on the issues of the moment.
Then it occurred to me: Each campaign tries to sum up its particular effort in one or two words. For Hillary Rodham Clinton, it's "experience"; for Barack Obama, it's "change"; for Rudy Giuliani, it's "security"; Mitt Romney can probably be assessed as "competence."
Oh, of course! "Normal" must be the Thompson campaign's "brand" for its big unveiling this week. He wants to be the "everyday normal" candidate.:
In response to Shrum's charge that she was hardly the "average" voter, Matalin said she was doing "school orientation" like a "normal" mom, while the guys on MTP were focusing on politics. Right. It's pretty obvious that Mary was collecting her talking points on how to make sure the right code word was pushed into the ether as actor-politician Thompson unveils his new fall "series": The plot is about a "normal" guy who -- after a few years as an actor playing a district attorney -- decides to run for president. And, yes, like most "normal" actors who run for office, he makes his announcement on a late-night talk show.
And they wonder why we all get so cynical?
|
Matalin used variations of the word "normal" (or phrase "normal person") no less than seven times while responding to various Russert questions on the issues of the moment.
Normal people, when the husband cheats on the wife, the wife does not consider the politics before she gives a response on this. Normal people out there did just what James just referenced, they looked at Mrs. Craig, and I remember looking at Lee Hart and through the years this—these poor suffering families. The first thing normal people thinks are—think are, “What? Is—this is a family tragedy.” The second thing they think is, “Why is everybody in Washington glued to this? And can’t—and don’t you guys have something better to do?” And thirdly, I didn’t listen to the tape, I didn’t watch any of this, but the people that I talked to are not particularly Craig fans, or critics, said, “That sounds like entrapment. Don’t the cops have better things to do than tap dance in bathrooms in the airport?” I’m just telling you the normal person view at the end of all...I thought it a litle odd: Mary Matalin -- "Miss Normal"? I mean, she was an RNC chief of staff, campaign manager for Bush I's re-election, special adviser to Vice President Dick Cheney -- and married to James Carville (with whom she shared the MTP set on Sunday). Oh, yeah, she's "normal." Indeed, Bob Shrum even called her on it: "Mary, I love you, but you are not actually the ideal spokesman for the average person in America."
Then it occurred to me: Each campaign tries to sum up its particular effort in one or two words. For Hillary Rodham Clinton, it's "experience"; for Barack Obama, it's "change"; for Rudy Giuliani, it's "security"; Mitt Romney can probably be assessed as "competence."
Oh, of course! "Normal" must be the Thompson campaign's "brand" for its big unveiling this week. He wants to be the "everyday normal" candidate.:
Thompson will announce his White House bid Wednesday night on the “Tonight Show with Jay Leno,” after skipping a Republican debate in New Hampshire."Everyday normal," eh?
“There have been a million debates already and there are going to be a million more,” Harris said. “And people are going to see Fred Thompson out there, mixing it up with the other candidates, mixing it up with the media, engaging the voters. They are going to see months and months and months of that.”
In the meantime, Harris said, “it makes a lot of sense” for Thompson to appear on the Leno show instead of the GOP debate because the candidate will reach “everyday normal Americans who don’t live in the 202 area code.” [Emphasis added.]
In response to Shrum's charge that she was hardly the "average" voter, Matalin said she was doing "school orientation" like a "normal" mom, while the guys on MTP were focusing on politics. Right. It's pretty obvious that Mary was collecting her talking points on how to make sure the right code word was pushed into the ether as actor-politician Thompson unveils his new fall "series": The plot is about a "normal" guy who -- after a few years as an actor playing a district attorney -- decides to run for president. And, yes, like most "normal" actors who run for office, he makes his announcement on a late-night talk show.
And they wonder why we all get so cynical?
Labels: Fred Thompson, GOP 2008 President, Mary Matalin, Republicans
Tuesday, August 28, 2007
Not To Be Judgmental...
...but honestly -- straight, gay or whatever, the only people who should be caught having sex in public restrooms are celebrities (or wannabes), high on coke and looking for a mention in Page Six.
Otherwise...ick.
UPDATE: Drudge's headlines...listed here only for their pun-ishing sensibility:
BROKEBACK BATHROOM: SENATOR BUSTED IN AIRPORT SEX STING...
CRAIG'S LIST: TERROR IN THE TOILETS...
His Own Private Idaho...
But the best bad pun goes to one of Ed Morrissey's commenters at Captain's Quarters:
This has got to be one of the weirdest summers on record.
UPDATE: A different take on the Craig episode, offered by one of Josh Marshall's readers and fill-in blogger. Gives fair-minded folk something to think about.
|
Otherwise...ick.
UPDATE: Drudge's headlines...listed here only for their pun-ishing sensibility:
BROKEBACK BATHROOM: SENATOR BUSTED IN AIRPORT SEX STING...
CRAIG'S LIST: TERROR IN THE TOILETS...
His Own Private Idaho...
But the best bad pun goes to one of Ed Morrissey's commenters at Captain's Quarters:
Posted by watchingthenews August 27, 2007 7:20 PM
Just another example of GOP stall tactics.
This has got to be one of the weirdest summers on record.
UPDATE: A different take on the Craig episode, offered by one of Josh Marshall's readers and fill-in blogger. Gives fair-minded folk something to think about.
Labels: Larry Craig, Republicans, sex scandal
Tuesday, May 08, 2007
Cruel Month -- or Moment of Clarity?
Despite all the superficial sturm und drang, September is shaping up as a bipartisan moment of truth in Iraq.
Trent Lott joins House Minority Leader John Boehner in singing the autumnal blues.
|
Trent Lott joins House Minority Leader John Boehner in singing the autumnal blues.
Labels: Iraq, John Boehner, Republicans, Trent Lott
Tuesday, May 01, 2007
A GOP Prescription?
Ross Douthat uses David Brooks' Sunday NYT column (behind the Times Select wall) to suggest some Republican policy options.
He then responds to Jonah Goldberg's assessment of Brooks:
However, as The Washington Post notes today, on the contentious issue of the day -- Iraq -- it may surprise many, but Bush's base remains with him. Any GOP candidate running (or planning to do so) in 2008 must deal with the fact that the Iraq War remains popular among Republicans -- even as it has fallen out of favor with Democrats and, especially, independents.
That dichotomy is going to make for an interesting -- though frustrating -- debate in the coming months and years.
|
He then responds to Jonah Goldberg's assessment of Brooks:
I think this is largely right as analysis, and it's precisely why the Right is in such difficulties. Reaganism ran out of steam in the late 1990s: It had succeeded on many fronts, been co-opted by the Democrats on others, and run up against a wall of pro-welfare state public opinion on still others. "Compassionate conservatism" was an attempt to address the new political landscape by promising to reform government in a conservative direction, rather than simply slashing it to the bone; it was a terrible slogan, to my mind, but the underlying idea was basically a good one. Unfortunately, the Bush Administration was a disaster on a variety of fronts, and even though the substance of compassionate conservatism was arguably the least of the Administration's problems, Bush's deviations from small-government principle have provided a convenient scapegoat for conservatives looking to explain what's gone wrong in the last six years without addressing, say, why the public rejected Social Security reform or why Iraq has been such a disaster.There's a sense is that this is the spark for a lengthy discussion of what conservatism/ Republicanism will be/should be in the post-Bush era.
As a result, conservatives who think the movement needs to adapt to a post-Reaganite landscape, rather than hunkering down and getting back to basics, are deemed to have been discredited by George W. Bush, and the prevailing attitude on the right is that the way out of the current mess is to commit the GOP to a platform of cutting government waste, extending Bush's tax cuts, and talking really, really tough about the war on terror and Iran. The result is that the Right is back where it was in the late 1990s, headed toward what Chris Caldwell has termed "Southern captivity", and convinced that going in this direction constitutes a change for the better.
However, as The Washington Post notes today, on the contentious issue of the day -- Iraq -- it may surprise many, but Bush's base remains with him. Any GOP candidate running (or planning to do so) in 2008 must deal with the fact that the Iraq War remains popular among Republicans -- even as it has fallen out of favor with Democrats and, especially, independents.
That dichotomy is going to make for an interesting -- though frustrating -- debate in the coming months and years.
Labels: conservatives, David Brooks, Iraq, Republicans
