GOP no Longer a Conservative Party

[speaktothesky]

1. Kerry
2. Lieberman
3. Gore
4. Mondale

[schaabdl]

Originally Posted by speaktothesky

sch, "who is John Galt?" j/k
They might could win, but I think it would be a huge mistake.

Speak - sorry, I was out of the loop for awhile.
John Galt - character from Ayn Rand's Atlas Shrugged - great reading for those who believe in the individual.

[speaktothesky]

I assumed you might know.
I was trying to be funny.
thanks scha.

[David]

Peggy Noonan is really on the warpath. Everything she writes here is spot on.
SOURCE

[David]

I am beginning to warm to the notion that getting clobbered this Nov. may be a welcome wake up call. Problem is, the world is so dangerous a place at the moment. Turning the government over to the left is truly frightening. My hope is they over correct to prove they aren't all cut and runners.

The worst scenario for conservatism would be a Dem rout in Congress and a McCain squeaker of a win. The GOP would take from that the need to get even squishier. We are so screwed.

Denver Post

You call this a political party?

By David Harsanyi
Article Last Updated: 05/15/2008 09:22:11 PM MDT

Republicans are bracing for a political annihilation of epic proportions after losing a special election this week in a solidly conservative district in Mississippi — yes, Mississippi.

We can call this "a harbinger."

And Republicans not only deserve the flogging, they should be praying for more. We can call this "creative destruction."

When Democrats claim that Republican presidential candidate John McCain would mean a third term of the Bush presidency, they're not kidding. The GOP offers no coherent policy, no leadership, no imagination, no principles and, most important, it offers no choice.

The Democrat-run Congress now carries an approval rating of 18 percent — the lowest in history, according to Gallup. You may believe such mass discontent is fertile ground for a strong opposition party to emerge. You'd be wrong.

A betrayal of fiscal conservatism and limited government by George Bush has fractured the Republican Party, and mending it won't be easy. Certainly, co-opting liberal ideas and repackaging them for moderates has failed to elect a single Republican. You may wonder, then: Why does it remain the GOP game plan?

Exhibit One: Republican presidential hopeful McCain unveiled his plan to nationalize energy with a cap-and-trade system (among other nuggets). McCain, in a speech that could have easily have been delivered by Al Gore, bemoaned the "profit" motive and claimed his solutions were "market"-driven.

If you believe McCain's new, massive energy bureaucracy is essential, there is already a party out there that will undertake the task with gusto.

Exhibit Two: In a misguided effort of legacy-building (good luck with that), the Bush administration designated polar bears as a threatened species. Seems innocuous enough. Everyone loves polar bears; they're such cuddly creatures, after all.

The administration ignored the steady increase in the polar bear population and for the first time in history, a species was listed based not on evidence but on the prospective threat relayed to us by computer models used by the United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change.

This decision may relegate huge tracts of land unusable for the extraction of energy at the worst possible time. Additionally, anyone who has the audacity to emit carbon into the atmosphere is now partially responsible for threatening the polar bear. Wait until the lawyers get hold of this one.

If you believe polar bears need protection from theories, there is already a party for you.

Exhibit Three (the most egregious of all): The massive, $300 billion boondoggle farm bill was approved this week with a veto- proof margin. It features $25 billion in annual charity for farmers — a majority headed to commercial farms with an average income of $200,000 and a net worth of almost $2 million. A massive entitlement that drives up costs? What's not to like? (McCain opposes the bill.)

Bush has signed nearly every budget-busting spending proposal in existence — and constructed a few himself.

A veto here would be some small redemption. Allow Congress to override it and explain to the American people why, when food prices are rising precipitously, government is giving away billions in tax dollars.

Republicans, sadly, have offered little else. If they believe victory can be found in convincing voters that Barack Obama (or Hillary Clinton) is a traitor or that Iraq is worth 100 years, they will lose.

It's about time members of the GOP stopped being enablers. And a decisive defeat in November would be the perfect start.

Reach columnist David Harsanyi at 303-954-1255 or dharsanyi@denverpost.com.

SOURCE

[David]

If GOP Wants To Govern Like Dems, Why Have a Separate Party?
By Patrick Casey

Republicans are and should be panicked over the fact that conservative Democrat Travis Childers just defeated Republican Greg Davis by a margin of 54%-46% in the race for a vacant Mississippi congressional seat. That seat is in a conservative district that had given President Bush a 25-point margin of victory over John Kerry in 2004 - it never should have flipped Democrat. This is the third double-digit loss in a row for Republican candidates in conservative districts across the United States.

Childers' victory came one week after Rep. Don Cazayoux won a House seat in the Baton Rouge, La., area that had been in Republican hands for three decades. Over the winter, Rep. Bill Foster won an election in Illinois to succeed former House Speaker Dennis Hastert, who had been in Congress more than 20 years.

What we're watching is the culmination of the decade-plus deterioration of the conservative Republican brand. Put simply, no one, including base conservatives, trusts the Republicans to govern effectively while following anything even faintly resembling a conservative platform.

That's unfortunate, since the only time that the Republicans really took the country by storm was in 1994, when they all ran on a set of firm, well established conservative values and issues. When the GOP strayed from that, falling back on the Democratic Party tradition of retaining power through excessive pork barrel spending and questionable ethical practices, they first lost seats - then lost their majorities. To regain what they have thrown away they must return to those conservative principles. If successful, they then must reject the compromising allure of power and promise to govern in the future as conservatives, not as the Democratic Party Lite.

Pollsters such as Gallup and the Pew Foundation have measured the voters' party identification for decades. Concurrent with the GOP's move away from conservative governing principals has been the increase in voters' self-identification as either being a Democrat or someone who leans Democrat, with a comparable decrease in self-identification with the Republicans. Is that merely because of changing demographics, as many political scientists suggest? Or is it because there have been no national leaders that continually challenge the Democrats on an ideological basis and promote widespread conservatism in the Republican ranks? The last nationally recognized GOP leader that did that was Newt Gingrich - ten years ago. Without such leadership, without such an enunciated conservative agenda for people to believe in, without a Republican Party that does what it promises, is it not natural for voters to wander - looking for something else to believe?

The aforementioned disparity between self-identified Democrats and Republicans doesn't fully explain the losses suffered by the GOP in 2006. The Dems had to run conservatives to win their majority that year. They had to run conservatives to win the three most recent House special elections. Isn't the natural home of many of those voters who elected conservative Democrats really the Republican Party, rather than the party of Nancy Pelosi, Harry Reid, and Barack Obama? The GOP's problems have gotten so bad that even a prominent national conservative, Sean Hannity, is now publicly speaking of his plan to leave the GOP and re-register in New York's Conservative Party.

That conservatism is no longer an effective belief system and governing method for the Republicans is becoming a self-fulfilling prophecy. Without anyone in the GOP publicly promoting conservative ideology and a true conservative agenda as a solution to our problems, how do we know that it won't work? When it's been tried in the past, it's attracted enthusiastic supporters and voters - and been quite successful.

Waiting for another Ronald Reagan is foolish - he was one of a kind. But there are new conservative leaders on the horizon, such as Governor Bobby Jindal of Louisiana. The problem is that up and coming national leaders like Jindal are in the future, not present. The current GOP leadership is merely treading water. The House Leadership just announced their "new" message in the wake of the GOP's special election losses: "Change You Deserve". Unfortunately, their message sounds suspiciously similar to the message that the Democrats used to win in 2006 and are working on today. And lost upon the Republican leadership is the irony that the faces behind their latest "change" are the same faces that "changed" the GOP from the majority party to the minority two years ago. Voters will recognize that.

The national GOP has fallen for the media lie that voters across America want a 'moderate', as opposed to a conservative, Republican Party. Unfortunately, that's also the philosophy behind the Presidential campaign of John McCain. McCain might very well become the next President, but it will be more because of the inadequacies of his opponent than any wellspring of support for his governing philosophy or ideology.

This moderation trend is nothing new, nor is the Republicans' refusal to deal with it. By their actions, or inactions, the Republican leadership has permitted the Democrats and the media to define down the GOP, recreating the word "conservative" as a pejorative. Think family values and the image is of Mark Foley and Vito Fossella. Think wasteful pork barrel and earmark spending - and the image is of Ted Stevens. Think corruption and the public thinks Randy Cunningham. Think "against tax cuts" and the image is of ... John McCain.

All of these issues define the Republicans as a party that promises to both reform government and to address the major problems that the country faces today, but delivers no more and acts no better than Democrats. As such, are we supposed to be surprised that the voters would rather have the real Democrats, rather than the fake?

Republicans, and conservatives in particular, won't be able to benefit much from their Presidential candidate's coattails this year either. For an example, just look at Senator McCain's newly launched climate change tour. In a national poll conducted by Los Angeles Times/Bloomberg released earlier this month, only 4% of respondents replied that the environment as a whole was one of the most important issues in this election. More surprisingly, only 6% of Democrats thought so! So why is McCain so focused on climate change? Because it is one of the mainstream media's pet issues, and McCain is trying to get in the media's good graces again. By doing so, and prominently embracing issues that the Democrats own nationwide, McCain feels that he'll attract some swing votes.

That's not going to work. The media will never be in John McCain's corner during a Presidential general election, no matter how hard he tries. They will be firmly in Obama's back pocket, and will be the primary enablers for Howard Dean's upcoming viscous attack machine against McCain. And the voters who view global warming as a major election issue? They're so far Left that they'll be repulsed from voting for McCain by his other stances on issues such as the War in Iraq.

So what other good might come of John McCain's tack to the left? Will his road to 'moderation' help Republicans overall this fall? To answer that, I'll just relay something that Fox News' Carl Cameron said in his report from 5/13/08 on Brit Hume's show about McCain's global warming tour. Cameron quoted a McCain aide on the candidate's plan to distance himself from the GOP and President Bush by Election Day:

...By the time the November elections come around, it'll be hard to tell that they were even in the same party.


Seeing as this statement was made in the context of the Senator's climate change tour, it's safe to assume that McCain isn't talking about moving the image of the party to the right. How that will serve to help other Republicans this fall escapes me, unless McCain's real plan is to remake the party in the image of himself and former politicians like former Rhode Island Senator Lincoln Chafee and former New Jersey Governor Christine Todd Whitman. While that does take care of most ethical issues, it throws the rest of Republican conservatism under the bus. If he does that, the GOP will be in the minority for generations to come.

McCain will be all over the map this fall - conservative on some important issues like the war and judges, but liberal on other issues such as the global warming, immigration, and perhaps even taxes. The past few years has shown that such vacillation - such an inability to enunciate a clear set of conservative governing principles across the policy spectrum - might work for an individual GOP candidate here and there, but represents disaster for the overall political party.

John McCain might win this crucially important Presidential election, since the alternative would be disastrous for the United States and the world. The war issue alone, and the ramifications worldwide and domestically if we should lose, should be enough to bring the conservative base out to vote for the Senator in an election that many of them might otherwise be tempted to skip. But the message so far from McCain to down-ballot Republicans this fall is clear: "Don't expect any help from me, unless you are prepared to repudiate much of your conservative beliefs".

That's not the way for the GOP to rebuild the party. And that's certainly not the way for the GOP to win.
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/art...n_like_de.html at May 17, 2008 - 12:57:59 PM PDT

[David]

- Works and Days - http://pajamasmedia.com/victordavishanson -

The Problem is not conservatism, but conservatives who aren’t conservative

May 16, 2008 - by Victor Davis Hanson

A Simple Conservative Message

There is a lot of anguish among Republicans as they look at the dismal polls and the even more depressing performance of their candidates in various preliminary House races. New books and prophets forecast an end to conservatism, and a need to formulate a new sort of muscular liberalism to meet new challenges. Expect more such nostrums if Barack Obama wins in the fall.

What mystifies is the paralysis of Republicans and their impotent protestations that “Bush did it”. The truth is that Congressional Republicans, responsible for turning principles into governance, deserve to lose—unless they craft clear positions that won’t be compromised and then offer them as alternative choices to the voters this fall. Here are some examples:

Spending: a balanced budget, no exceptions. Voters are tired of hearing that this or that projection assures a balanced budget in 2, 3, or 5 years. Revenues continue to soar after the tax cuts, so the problem is too much going out, not too little coming in. Surpluses are preferable to deficits, since we want to retire, not add to out foreign debt. Just say no—or better yet “Please pay for it” — the next time a new entitlement is introduced.

The War: Afghanistan and Iraq have radically improved. Anti-war hype and slurs are a year out of date. We are finally on the edge of having done the impossible: removed the most odious regimes in the Middle East and fostered constitutional governments in their places. Spending on general defense and the war still run at only 4% of GDP, not high by historical levels. The reforming Petraeus army is stronger and wiser, despite the toll of war, for our ordeals in the Middle East. As troops slowly begin to come home next year, let everyone take credit for it.

Energy: Drill, explore, conserve. The answer does not lie in any one area, but in the willingness to produce more energy in all of them. We must ensure more oil, coal, and nuclear power, conserve more energy as we produce more—to prevent going broke while we transition to next-generation fuels.

Why should others abroad, who are far less careful, extract oil for us in areas of the world more fragile than our own? We must end the notion that ANWR only yields a million barrels a day, or the coasts only 2 million, or tar sands or shale only a million, or nuclear power and coal only so many megawatts of power. To paraphrase, Sen. Dirksen—‘a million barrels a day here, a million there, pretty soon it adds up to real production.’

Economy: We are in a natural down cycle, not the Great Depression—interest rates, unemployment, economic growth, and stock prices do not reflect a recession. Use this downturn as a warning not to spend what we don’t have when things rebound.

Immigration: Close the border, and then, and only then, argue over what’s next. Stop illegal entries, while we promote assimilation, the English language, integration, and education in American civics. Do that and most of our seemingly insurmountable problems will shrink as we endlessly bicker over amnesty, guest workers, and legal quotas.

Trade: free and supervised trade creates more jobs, makes us more competitive, and fosters alliances. Protectionism does the opposite. Americans like to compete and usually win—when they know the rules of the contest are fair and clearly explained to them.

Foreign Policy: Neither provoke nor talk to our enemies in the Middle East, Asia, or South America. Instead, cultivate our allies, build our defenses—and be ready for anything.

Homeland Security: the framework is in place. Let the Democrats try to repeal it. Let them make the argument that the Patriot Act and Guantanamo haven’t made us safer.

Ethics: Warn Republicans that in matters of sex, influence peddling, and graft, the Party of family values suffers the additional wage of hypocrisy. So the tolerance level for these sins is zero.

If Republicans could adopt such a simple message, stick to it, and find the most articulate spokespeople, they could still win.

The Alternative

Why? Because for all the charisma, Barack Obama advocates antitheses that most in most years would not otherwise choose—higher taxes, more government spending; pie-in-the-sky promises of wind and solar while gas hits $5 a gallon; more government intrusion into the economy that leaves us with more obstacles after the economy improves on its own; more illegal aliens as we talk in lofty terms of “comprehensive immigration reform,” a de facto euphemism for open borders; a protectionism that only antagonizes friends, drives prices higher, and insulates us from reality; and a multilateralist foreign policy, patterned after UN leadership, in which we deny rather than confront challenges.

In short, the Republicans’ problem? They forgot who they were and can’t explain what they might be. They need to go back to basics, adopt conservative principles to confront new challenges, and then find the most effective spokesmen they can to explain their positions—hourly.

Article printed from Works and Days: http://pajamasmedia.com/victordavishanson

URL to article: http://pajamasmedia.com/victordavish...-conservative/

[speaktothesky]

The party has kept helping Rino's stay in office and now it has come back to bite them.

[David]

This is more like it. Jeb Hensarling is one of our own here in North Texas. He's one of the good guys! NY Times
SOURCE

House Conservatives to Offer Ideas for G.O.P. Message
By CARL HULSE

WASHINGTON — Conservative Republicans in the House plan to urge their colleagues to rally behind a new manifesto that mixes antispending initiatives and tighter restrictions on government benefits as the party seeks a fresh message after a string of election defeats.

Leaders of the Republican Study Committee intend to use a closed-door party meeting on Tuesday to present a seven-point proposal calling for a constitutional limit on federal spending, a new simplified income tax alternative and a proposal to require recipients of food stamps or housing aid to meet work requirements.

“Clearly, we have been sobered by three special election losses in a row,” said Representative Jeb Hensarling of Texas, chairman of the group of more than 100 Republican lawmakers. “We are sobered by the massive cash advantage that Democrats have to get their message out.”

Mr. Hensarling said that getting off the political defensive would “take unity, and it is going to take unity behind a handful of messages.”

The proposal from the group of conservatives is likely to be just one of the ideas circulated at the session as Republicans look for ways to right themselves heading into what is promising to be a difficult election year.

The party leadership in the House has already begun to roll out its own agenda under the rubric “The Change You Deserve,” but some lawmakers have said the party needs to be more aggressive. Others are skeptical about overreacting to the elections or embracing too strong a conservative theme.

A spokeswoman for Representative Roy Blunt of Missouri, the No. 2 Republican in the House, said the leadership was open to constructive suggestions from lawmakers.

“It’s healthy and good for our members to weigh in and put forward ideas,” said the spokeswoman, Antonia Ferrier. “That’s how we get the energy leading into November.”

Several Republicans have said it is not their goal to force changes in the House leadership team. Representative John A. Boehner of Ohio, the Republican leader, said Sunday that he intended to remain in his position.

Some of the ideas from the conservatives have been circulating for months, including an immediate moratorium on seeking money for the pet home-state projects known as earmarks. But other Republicans have rejected that idea, arguing it is a chief responsibility of representatives to win federal aid for local initiatives.

A draft of the conservative agenda calls for the endorsement of a constitutional amendment to prohibit federal spending from growing faster than the economy except in times of war or national emergency. The plan seeks support for an income tax overhaul that would provide a simplified flat tax and allow people to choose between it and the current system.

The conservative proposal seeks tax credits for buying health insurance, more domestic energy production and a streamlined terrorist surveillance program. The draft also said that House Republicans should extend existing welfare work requirements to food stamps and housing assistance “so that those who are not old, young or disabled are either working in the private sector or serving in their community.”

Mr. Hensarling said his group was emphasizing fiscal policy because polls and recent electoral experience showed that voters viewed Republicans as having strayed too far from the party’s tradition on spending restraint. That approach could also mesh with the presidential campaign of Senator John McCain of Arizona, the party’s presumed nominee, who has made his opposition to excessive federal spending a central theme.

“We have to get back to our core identity,” Mr. Hensarling said, adding that “there is work to be done.”

[schaabdl]

This is an election that down ticket is by far more important. The DIMS love to showcase the three special elections but when you look at what the candidates said the convervative voice was the winner. There is no need for a new party but a concerted effort similar to 1994. May be too late for 2008 and I suspect we will have McCain with a DIM majority in Congress. Then we need people, in the mode of Jeb and even John Cornyn that leads a new conservative revolution - Contract II. (If I had the resources, I would seriously consider going against my wife to join this revolution!)

[speaktothesky]

I would run if:
1: someone would bank roll my efforts
2: Sam Johnson would retire

[David]

Republicans Are in Denial
By TOM COBURN
May 27, 2008; Page A21

As congressional Republicans contemplate the prospect of an electoral disaster this November, much is being written about the supposed soul-searching in the Republican Party. A more accurate description of our state is paralysis and denial.

Many Republicans are waiting for a consultant or party elder to come down from the mountain and, in Moses-like fashion, deliver an agenda and talking points on stone tablets. But the burning bush, so to speak, is delivering a blindingly simple message: Behave like Republicans.

Unfortunately, too many in our party are not yet ready to return to the path of limited government. Instead, we are being told our message must be deficient because, after all, we should be winning in certain areas just by being Republicans. Yet being a Republican isn't good enough anymore. Voters are tired of buying a GOP package and finding a big-government liberal agenda inside. What we need is not new advertising, but truth in advertising.

Becoming Republicans again will require us to come to grips with what has ailed our party – namely, the triumph of big-government Republicanism and failed experiments like the K Street Project and "compassionate conservatism." If the goal of the K Street Project was to earmark and fund raise our way to a filibuster-proof "governing" majority, the goal of "compassionate conservatism" was to spend our way to a governing majority.

The fruit of these efforts is not the hoped-for Republican governing majority, but the real prospect of a filibuster-proof Democrat majority in 2009. While the K Street Project decimated our brand as the party of reform and limited government, compassionate conservatism convinced the American people to elect the party that was truly skilled at activist government: the Democrats.

Compassionate conservatism's starting point had merit. The essential argument that Republicans should orient policy around how our ideas will affect the poor, the widow, the orphan, the forgotten and the "other" is indisputable – particularly for those who claim, as I do, to submit to an authority higher than government. Yet conservatives are conservatives because our policies promote deliverance from poverty rather than dependence on government.

Compassionate conservatism's next step – its implicit claim that charity or compassion translates into a particular style of activist government involving massive spending increases and entitlement expansion – was its undoing. Common sense and the Scriptures show that true giving and compassion require sacrifice by the giver. This is why Jesus told the rich young ruler to sell his possessions, not his neighbor's possessions. Spending other people's money is not compassionate.

Regaining our brand as the party of fiscal discipline will require us to rejoin Americans in the real world of budget choices and priorities, and to leave behind the fantasyland of borrowing without limits. Instead of adopting earmarks, each Republican can adopt examples of government waste, largess and fraud, and restart the permanent campaign against big government.

Republicans can tear up the "emergency spending" credit card and refuse to accept any new spending whatsoever, including for the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, until Congress does its job of eliminating wasteful spending. The federal budget contains a vast unexplored area of offsets. My office alone has identified $300 billion in annual waste. Borrowing from the next generation when we haven't done our job of oversight is unconscionable.

Regaining our brand is not about "messaging." It's about action. It's about courage. It's about priorities. Most of all, it's about being willing to give up our political careers so our grandkids don't have to grow up in a debtor's prison, or a world in which other nations can tell a weakened and bankrupt America where we can and can't defend liberty, pursue terrorists, or show compassion.

John McCain, for all his faults, is the one Republican candidate who can lead us through our wilderness. Mr. McCain is not running on a messianic platform or as a great healer of dysfunctional Republicans who refuse to help themselves. His humility is one of his great strengths. In his heart, he's a soldier who sees one more hill to charge, one more mission to complete.

Mr. Coburn is a Republican U.S. senator from Oklahoma.

See all of today's editorials and op-eds, plus video commentary, on Opinion Journal1.

And add your comments to the Opinion Journal forum2.
URL for this article:
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB121184690228421415.html

[David]

Wash Times
SOURCE

November sit-out threats worry GOP
S.A. Miller (Contact)
Tuesday, June 3, 2008



SHREWSBURY, Pa. | Republican voters increasingly say they have lost faith in the party and might not vote this year, compounding headaches for party leaders struggling to avert a November massacre at the polls.

"The Republican Party doesn't represent me anymore," longtime Republican voter Joseph E. Ayers, 57, said recently while grabbing lunch at an Amish market in this rural hamlet.

Mr. Ayers, an investment consultant, said he was disgusted with President Bush and Republicans in Congress for allowing massive government growth, runaway federal spending, escalating energy prices and a costly nation-building mission in Iraq.

"We were betrayed by Bush in a lot of ways," he said, adding that presumptive Republican presidential nominee Sen. John McCain of Arizona lacks the conservative mettle needed to repair the damage.

"I won't vote for McCain," he said. "I might not even vote at all. That's the way it looks now."

Low Republican turnout contributed to May's Democratic upset victory in a congressional special election in southern Mississippi, a once-safe Republican district that President Bush carried by a 25-point margin in 2004.

[speaktothesky]

The party long ago quit being "Conservative".
My question is what is left to conserve?
Joseph Farah asked this same question a couple of years ago...
The Libertarian party is destroying itself right now and the Reform party was destroyed by Buchanan years ago.
So, the question becomes what is left.
The Constitution party IS Conservative, but they are a bit theocratic for me personally. I might be willing to live with them, if that is all that there is.

[David]

Don Young Embodies What's Wrong With the GOP
By PAT TOOMEY
June 6, 2008; Page A13

Today, the Club for Growth Political Action Committee endorses Alaska Lt. Gov. Sean Parnell in his bid to unseat Republican Rep. Don Young in the state's August primary.

The reason for the endorsement is simple. Mr. Parnell is a solid conservative who led the fight for lower taxes and spending in the state legislature, and joined Gov. Sarah Palin in pushing for reform in the state. The man he is hoping to replace isn't economically conservative in the least. Mr. Young is actually a poster child for what has gone wrong with the Republican Party in Washington.
[Don Young]

Over his 35 years in Congress, Mr. Young made himself into the most powerful Republican on the House Transportation Committee. But instead of using his power to steer Republicans down a principled, conservative track, he helped derail the GOP train in 2006.

Mr. Young spends taxpayer money so wastefully he could make a liberal Democrat blush. As chairman of the Transportation Committee (from 2001 to 2007), Mr. Young was directly responsible for one of the biggest boondoggles of the Republican majority – the 2005 highway bill. With a price tag of $296 billion, the highway bill contained a record 6,371 pork projects.

One of those projects was the $223 million Bridge to Nowhere, inserted by Mr. Young. The notorious bridge was meant to connect the city of Ketchikan, Alaska – population 8,000 – to an airport on Gravina Island – population 50. Instead, it came to symbolize Republican excess, and helped cost the GOP its majority.

But the bridge isn't Mr. Young's only earmark to draw negative attention. It seems the veteran lawmaker inserted a $10 million earmark into the 2006 transportation bill for a road project in Florida.

Of course, Florida is not exactly next door to Alaska, so more than a few people have wondered why Mr. Young pushed to fund the pork-barrel project. Among those inquiring into the matter is the Justice Department, which is looking at the fact that a Florida real estate developer, Daniel J. Aronoff, who stands to benefit from the federal earmark, has raised some $40,000 for Mr. Young's campaign coffers.

It's not just on spending that Mr. Young abandons Republican principles. Recently, he has joined with Democrats in voting to increase the minimum wage, increase income taxes on top earners, and to pass a bloated farm bill. Mr. Young also voted for "card check," which would allow unions to organize without holding secret ballot elections.

He has a history of voting against important free-trade agreements and, just a couple of weeks ago, proposed a $1 per-gallon tax increase on gasoline. He must not have had to fill up at the pump lately.

During his time in Congress, Mr. Young has come to represent the worst of a Republican Party that became too comfortable in power. In 1995, a Republican majority passed a budget that actually cut spending. Today, only 40 Republicans out of 248 GOP senators and representatives have sworn off earmarks, despite overwhelming support for earmark reform among the party's base and the general public.

Just 12 years ago, the Republican Caucus, including Mr. Young, voted for a bill to phase out farm subsidies. Three weeks ago, Mr. Young and many of those same members voted for a farm bill that exemplifies everything the GOP once stood against. Somewhere between then and now, many congressional Republicans abandoned their former commitment to limited government, fiscal discipline and economic freedom.

There is no question that the Republican Party is in trouble. Faced with staggering losses in 2006 and what might be an even worse election cycle this year, GOP congressmen are finally acknowledging the dismal state of the Republican brand. What are they doing about it?

Not much. The reason is that Mr. Young and many other members are not willing to change. They don't want to give up their pork projects, their subsidies and their favorite big-government programs. And those members with the temerity to challenge the broken system are berated as disloyal and threatened.

"Those who bite me will be bitten back," Mr. Young warned New Jersey's Republican Rep. Scott Garrett last July. Mr. Garrett had tried to remove a $34 million earmark inserted into an appropriations bill by Mr. Young.

The Alaska primary represents a crossroads for Republicans. Will party leaders line up behind Mr. Young, even as the Justice Department is looking into his earmarks? Or will they tell him they cannot support a member who has flagrantly disrespected taxpayers and abandoned Republican principles?

If Republicans want to start winning again they need to return to the principles of fiscal responsibility and limited government that won them control of Congress in 1994. This is no easy task. But the GOP can start by showing Mr. Young the door.

Mr. Toomey, a former Republican congressman from Pennsylvania, is the president of the Club for Growth.




http://online.wsj.com/article/SB121270989481150353.html

[Rafael]

Originally Posted by David

Don Young Embodies What's Wrong With the GOP
By PAT TOOMEY
June 6, 2008; Page A13

Today, the Club for Growth Political Action Committee endorses Alaska Lt. Gov. Sean Parnell in his bid to unseat Republican Rep. Don Young in the state's August primary.

The reason for the endorsement is simple. Mr. Parnell is a solid conservative who led the fight for lower taxes and spending in the state legislature, and joined Gov. Sarah Palin in pushing for reform in the state. The man he is hoping to replace isn't economically conservative in the least. Mr. Young is actually a poster child for what has gone wrong with the Republican Party in Washington.
[Don Young]

Over his 35 years in Congress, Mr. Young made himself into the most powerful Republican on the House Transportation Committee. But instead of using his power to steer Republicans down a principled, conservative track, he helped derail the GOP train in 2006.

Mr. Young spends taxpayer money so wastefully he could make a liberal Democrat blush. As chairman of the Transportation Committee (from 2001 to 2007), Mr. Young was directly responsible for one of the biggest boondoggles of the Republican majority – the 2005 highway bill. With a price tag of $296 billion, the highway bill contained a record 6,371 pork projects.

One of those projects was the $223 million Bridge to Nowhere, inserted by Mr. Young. The notorious bridge was meant to connect the city of Ketchikan, Alaska – population 8,000 – to an airport on Gravina Island – population 50. Instead, it came to symbolize Republican excess, and helped cost the GOP its majority.

But the bridge isn't Mr. Young's only earmark to draw negative attention. It seems the veteran lawmaker inserted a $10 million earmark into the 2006 transportation bill for a road project in Florida.

Of course, Florida is not exactly next door to Alaska, so more than a few people have wondered why Mr. Young pushed to fund the pork-barrel project. Among those inquiring into the matter is the Justice Department, which is looking at the fact that a Florida real estate developer, Daniel J. Aronoff, who stands to benefit from the federal earmark, has raised some $40,000 for Mr. Young's campaign coffers.

It's not just on spending that Mr. Young abandons Republican principles. Recently, he has joined with Democrats in voting to increase the minimum wage, increase income taxes on top earners, and to pass a bloated farm bill. Mr. Young also voted for "card check," which would allow unions to organize without holding secret ballot elections.

He has a history of voting against important free-trade agreements and, just a couple of weeks ago, proposed a $1 per-gallon tax increase on gasoline. He must not have had to fill up at the pump lately.

During his time in Congress, Mr. Young has come to represent the worst of a Republican Party that became too comfortable in power. In 1995, a Republican majority passed a budget that actually cut spending. Today, only 40 Republicans out of 248 GOP senators and representatives have sworn off earmarks, despite overwhelming support for earmark reform among the party's base and the general public.

Just 12 years ago, the Republican Caucus, including Mr. Young, voted for a bill to phase out farm subsidies. Three weeks ago, Mr. Young and many of those same members voted for a farm bill that exemplifies everything the GOP once stood against. Somewhere between then and now, many congressional Republicans abandoned their former commitment to limited government, fiscal discipline and economic freedom.

There is no question that the Republican Party is in trouble. Faced with staggering losses in 2006 and what might be an even worse election cycle this year, GOP congressmen are finally acknowledging the dismal state of the Republican brand. What are they doing about it?

Not much. The reason is that Mr. Young and many other members are not willing to change. They don't want to give up their pork projects, their subsidies and their favorite big-government programs. And those members with the temerity to challenge the broken system are berated as disloyal and threatened.

"Those who bite me will be bitten back," Mr. Young warned New Jersey's Republican Rep. Scott Garrett last July. Mr. Garrett had tried to remove a $34 million earmark inserted into an appropriations bill by Mr. Young.

The Alaska primary represents a crossroads for Republicans. Will party leaders line up behind Mr. Young, even as the Justice Department is looking into his earmarks? Or will they tell him they cannot support a member who has flagrantly disrespected taxpayers and abandoned Republican principles?

If Republicans want to start winning again they need to return to the principles of fiscal responsibility and limited government that won them control of Congress in 1994. This is no easy task. But the GOP can start by showing Mr. Young the door.

Mr. Toomey, a former Republican congressman from Pennsylvania, is the president of the Club for Growth.




http://online.wsj.com/article/SB121270989481150353.html

Disgusting!

[luknikfan]

This quote from the Amish voter in the above thread is a perferct scenario of what conservatives are feeling and perhaps not going to do in the fall:

Mr. Ayers, an investment consultant, said he was disgusted with President Bush and Republicans in Congress for allowing massive government growth, runaway federal spending, escalating energy prices and a costly nation-building mission in Iraq.

"We were betrayed by Bush in a lot of ways," he said, adding that presumptive Republican presidential nominee Sen. John McCain of Arizona lacks the conservative mettle needed to repair the damage.

We were betrayed and very few conservatives dared speak up. They waited too long because after the coming political debacle in the fall, the GOP will I suspect be torn apart by a war over what direction it should go in.

I definitely see it moderating on social issues or simply leaving them up for the individual only.

On economic issues they have soul searching to do.

It was the GOP and the Bush administration that broke the budget. Massive domestic spending while also a massive increase in military spending. All while cutting taxes. Economics 101 will tell you that does not add up.

The surge in gas prices, despite the line of conservatives like Hannity - is only minimally affected by environmentalists and their regulations.

The major factor is the failure of the Bush administration to defend the dollar these past 2/3 years. At once much stronger than the Euro, it is now jusy 60% or so of the Euro. And for the first time the canadian dollar is on par or stronger than the US dollar. Gas being pegged in Euros at a time the dollar was not defended by Bush's administration is the major reason for the huge price run-up.

IMO it is voodoo economics to blame this huge increase on environmentalists. Yet the conservative "mouths" in the medi like Hannity and Rush and Sussman still do this. To an increasingly wary conservative base. Wary of the line they have been fed by the so-called leaders. On everything from gas prices to the war in Iraq.

It is quite possible the GOP loss will be so big it may be relegated to permanent minority party status. Especially with the demographics and the growing Hispanic and Asian populations that are largely Democratic in their voting tendencies. The combined Hispanic/Asian block makes the black voting block look small by comparison.

We shall see.

[David]

Originally Posted by luknikfan

This quote from the Amish voter in the above thread is a perferct scenario of what conservatives are feeling and perhaps not going to do in the fall:

Mr. Ayers, an investment consultant, said he was disgusted with President Bush and Republicans in Congress for allowing massive government growth, runaway federal spending, escalating energy prices and a costly nation-building mission in Iraq.

"We were betrayed by Bush in a lot of ways," he said, adding that presumptive Republican presidential nominee Sen. John McCain of Arizona lacks the conservative mettle needed to repair the damage.

We were betrayed and very few conservatives dared speak up. They waited too long because after the coming political debacle in the fall, the GOP will I suspect be torn apart by a war over what direction it should go in.

I definitely see it moderating on social issues or simply leaving them up for the individual only.

On economic issues they have soul searching to do.

It was the GOP and the Bush administration that broke the budget. Massive domestic spending while also a massive increase in military spending. All while cutting taxes. Economics 101 will tell you that does not add up.

The surge in gas prices, despite the line of conservatives like Hannity - is only minimally affected by environmentalists and their regulations.

The major factor is the failure of the Bush administration to defend the dollar these past 2/3 years. At once much stronger than the Euro, it is now jusy 60% or so of the Euro. And for the first time the canadian dollar is on par or stronger than the US dollar. Gas being pegged in Euros at a time the dollar was not defended by Bush's administration is the major reason for the huge price run-up.

IMO it is voodoo economics to blame this huge increase on environmentalists. Yet the conservative "mouths" in the medi like Hannity and Rush and Sussman still do this. To an increasingly wary conservative base. Wary of the line they have been fed by the so-called leaders. On everything from gas prices to the war in Iraq.

It is quite possible the GOP loss will be so big it may be relegated to permanent minority party status. Especially with the demographics and the growing Hispanic and Asian populations that are largely Democratic in their voting tendencies. The combined Hispanic/Asian block makes the black voting block look small by comparison.

We shall see.

Why would anyone take you seriously? You have been telling us Hillary was going to be our next President? IMHO, of course.

[luknikfan]

Originally Posted by David

Why would anyone take you seriously? You have been telling us Hillary was going to be our next President? IMHO, of course.

I was wrong on Hillary. I believed the Clinton machine would win out in the end. Just like some though Guiliani would win at one point and counted McCain out.

I think the thing to take seriouisly is the string of GOP House loses in traditioanlly conservative districts. The growing beleif that a GOP loss is the best thing in the fall for conservatives. In other words, much of the base may stay home. Like they did in the recent House race.

Plus the possibility gas will rise more this summer. The tanking economy.

Voters I think will blame that on the GOP and McCain as the standard bearer. I don't see Obhama being blamed for this.

[David]

Originally Posted by luknikfan

I was wrong on Hillary. I believed the Clinton machine would win out in the end. Just like some though Guiliani would win at one point and counted McCain out.

I think the thing to take seriouisly is the string of GOP House loses in traditioanlly conservative districts. The growing beleif that a GOP loss is the best thing in the fall for conservatives. In other words, much of the base may stay home. Like they did in the recent House race.

Plus the possibility gas will rise more this summer. The tanking economy.

Voters I think will blame that on the GOP and McCain as the standard bearer. I don't see Obhama being blamed for this.

On this you are correct. Your dream of a GOP debacle is going to come true. Hope you enjoy living in a Western European social democrat welfare state.