The top news out of the House Republican retreat in Williamsburg, Virginia is that the party is considering a short-term extension of the debt limit in order to give the party more time to try and convince their Democratic antagonists to start cutting spending. The proposal, which according to the New York Times, is being floated by Rep. Paul Ryan, could wind up connecting the debt ceiling issue with the deadline for the implementation of sequestration that would mandate devastating across-the-board spending cuts. That would theoretically give the GOP some room to maneuver in order to avoid a confrontation with President Obama that few think they would win. But it is hard to avoid the impression that the main object of a delay would be to deal with the Republicans’ biggest problems: a lack of unity.
Like a sports team in disarray, the GOP needs a time out where they can catch their breath and somehow get on the same page with each other. As the votes over House Speaker John Boehner’s Plan B and then the final fiscal cliff deal revealed, the party is badly split between those who don’t want to give an inch on spending and taxes, those who think that compromise with the president is inevitable and those who believe the best the party can do is to speak out for its principles and oppose tactics that will blow up the economy and help demonize the party. But the problem for the Republican leadership is that even if they can buy themselves some more time to get their fractious caucus in line, the likelihood that a confident and aggressive President Obama will either accept a short-term extension or deal honestly with them on the issues.
The argument for a time out is that in its current condition with a leadership that can’t count on its members to agree to back a unified strategy on fiscal issues, Republicans are doomed to defeat no matter what option they choose. The president is counting on the GOP splintering into warring factions and has done his best to help that process along by goading his opponents whenever possible including his stunning attack on them even as the two sides were negotiating a deal to prevent the nation from going over the fiscal cliff earlier this month.
As Robert Costa and Andrew Stiles noted in their sum up from the retreat, even though Republicans remain in control of the House, the tone of the gathering was that of a defeated party searching for answers. Given the shock felt by many in the party over the president’s re-election and the beatings they’ve received over the debt ceiling and the fiscal cliff, that’s understandable. But Bill Kristol’s advice to them to “suck it up,” is exactly what they need to hear.
I think those Republicans who want to make a stand on the debt ceiling are right. Even though the odds are against them prevailing in such a battle, the party can’t simply stand by and let President Obama off the hook without at least trying to stop him by whatever means are at their disposal. That sort of surrender would split the GOP and make it harder for them to recover at the next midterm.
But the one given in this equation is that without a united caucus, House Republicans haven’t a prayer of doing anything effective to halt the country’s drift toward insolvency and to head off new taxes.
For all of their pessimism, the GOP still controls the power of the purse. President Obama may have the wind at his back right now but his political capital is finite. So is his time. If conservatives can use the coming weeks to agree on a strategy to exploit his weaknesses — such as the division among Democrats and the president’s refusal to deal with entitlement reform — their position could be stronger than they think. The question is do Boehner, Eric Cantor or even Paul Ryan have the ability to convince their colleagues that if they don’t hang together, their hopes of stopping Obama from worsening the nation’s problems are nonexistent.
". . . deadline for the implementation of sequestration that would mandate devastating across-the-board spending cuts. " n nIt would be helpful to Republican congressional leaders if spending cuts were not so much described as "devastating." Those cuts currently to be implemented are slight trimmings compared to what will be required if the politicians don't become brave enough to do what needs to be done to reduce our annual deficits.
What is devastating is trillion dollar annual deficits for 4 straight years and the Presidents breathtaking response " We don"t have a spending problem."
These are strategies and tactics that are best left to the professional office-holders in the GOP House caucus. The drooling talk-show hosts should be ignored. Politically, they are amateurs who hurt more than they help the conservative cause.
The uncertainty caused by debt ceiling gamesmanship is NOT how the GOP will want to be remembered for a lot longer than the 2014 mid-term elections. n nLink JOBS and FRACKING with EVERYTHING else Obama wants.
“The GOP is rebranding itself from a party that accidentally blows up the world economy to one that purposely blows up the world economy.” n– @LOLGOP
While the Pr. should offer spending reduction, the GOP should offer more tax on the super rich, corporations etc… .!
It isn't "the members" who are the problem with the GOP. What can you expect of them, when the party itself sold ITSELF down the river, by nominating an inept, inarticulate candidate for the presidency—George W. Bush—and then running masterful, take-no-prisoners campaigns in 2000 and 2004 to get him elected.? These "members" are by now as confused, disunited, angry and depressed as one would expect. n nIt is not they, nor we—average Republican voters—who chose George W. Bush to drive the GOP over a cliff. The Old Guard did it, and their man Karl Rove devised methodologies that paid scant attention to what a George W. Bush presidency might mean for the country. Rove's only concern was to get their man elected—it's what George H.W. Bush had originally hired him to do years earlier, re: the Texas political career of George-2. n nSo long as these men—and they are nearly all men—continue to dominate the party and act as the "unseen hands" pulling the Republican Party's "strings," Republicans in Congress will be impotent, confused, angry and depressed. Their only means to object is via the Tea Party and Libertarian Party. That there is a Tea Party, in fact, is due solely to the fact that the GOP is no longer a fit vehicle for conservative ideas and policies. It can neither formulate them nor advance them, nor convince the public of their value to governing this nation. So the Tea Party is doing it. n nAs hard as we try, we cannot erase the memory of what has occurred during the last 50 years within the Republican Party. Beginning with Barry Goldwater—a decent man wholly unable to "manage his message"—-moving on to the sociopathic Richard Nixon, and interrupted only by the 8 good-governance (though far from perfect) years under Ronald Reagan—and let us not overlook the party's cynical embrace of segregationist southern Democrats, the Moral Majority, the anti-abortion lobby, which included a campaign to move religion into the public square under the guise of "values" (which fooled no one)—has left Republicans and their party with an image-problem. n nI venture to say that, had The Center been given a real choice (which Mitt Romney was not, by any measure), the overwhelming majority of America's voters (including hispanic and many black citizens) would have thrown Barack Obama out of the White House gladly. But the GOP gave them Mitt, and since Americans are not an ass, they voted to retain the devil they knew. n nThe Republican Party is a dry husk, a burnt-out shell, a smoking bomb-crater. There's nothing "there." To their credit, Mitch McConnell and John Boehner are fighting a rear-guard action that at least is not doing further damage to the conservative brand. But that's all they're doing, and probably all they can do. n nThe solution: a new party. We can either spend decades arguing with the anti-abortionists, the religion-in-the-schools folks, the anti-stem cell research lobby, the anti-gay marriage people, and those who want illegal immigrants from Latin America to "self-deport." If we go that route, we'll ruin both our cause and the United States itself. n nThe institution of bankruptcy was placed in the Constitution, with its own administrative courts, for a reason: so that debtors could move on. Why is this better than putting them in prison? Two reasons: first, just because a man or woman 'loses' in business or mismanages their household finances, this does not translate into criminality, and it should be punished as such. Second, the nation needs its citizens to be productive, so they can add to the national wealth, and thereby keep us strong and prosperous as a people via our labor and ideas. Folks in prison don't add anything. n nThe GOP is bankrupt. It is a dead hulk, a bad idea, a self-defeated entity. It's time to leave it behind. We need a party that can attract the Center of the American life. Leave the fringe causes and ideologies (and hatreds) to a dying GOP, and to the Democrats. We Republicans can make common cause with men and women of every race, every ethnicity and religion, every class and sexual preference—-who want a strong America, a nation and people that live within their means, and who stand for personal liberty and self-reliance (but also protection and assistance for those citizens who genuinely need both). We must become that party. And the sooner we begin forming and shaping this new political force, the quicker centrists of both the Right and the Left can again take control of America's future. n n[continued]
[continued] n nAn aside. I recall sitting with my wife during the darkest days of the Bush second term, wondering aloud why he didn't at least call the CEOs of the car companies or invite them to the White House for a "royal" chewing out. Since we can all agree that manufacturing automobiles is a key industry of this nation, what was Bush thinking—that the problem would take care of itself? Or that, "it isn't my job to help failing industries?" What was Bush's job—bringing democracy to the Arabs? Substituting an overhaul of our nation's schools, colleges and universities with "No Child Left Behind" and "school vouchers?" It is one thing for the government to nationalize industries. But what does that have to do with a president calling dangerously inept business executives of key business sectors into the White House, and "cutting them a new one?" n nA perfect illustration is what FDR did as he turned US industry into an 'arsenal of democracy." He called the heads of Detroit and other industries in. He laid out his demands, made it plain their would be no negotiating, and then they "persuaded" this great man to let them, not bureaucrats, carry out the policies. That, to me at least, has always sounded like the perfect compromise! And it worked. FDR enlisted the intelligence, organizational skills, capacity for hard work and mental discipline of seasoned businessmen. And that's what won us WWII. Was that challenge any more difficult than the one we face today? I think not. It is American business—and I am no "marketplace" ideologue, not by any measure!—and a tamping-down of "pure globalism" that will put our country back into the black. n nIf we don't do these things, there's always Australia.
If the Republicans don't "hang together" then, as Ben Franklin said, they "will hang separately." If you mix stone and clay together they will eventually come apart. How do you reconcile differences in philosophy and temperament with some Republicans wanting to remain true to conservative principles while others are animated by fear of losing an election? If half a platoon is ready to engage the enemy to win a battle and the other half is afraid of dying or being disabled then what kind of a chance will they have for being victorious? Republicans need to find out what they believe in collectively and then decide if they have the courage and fortitude to fight for their beliefs. They have hoisted the white flag of defeat in almost every encounter with Obama and their credibility with their own supporters is already as thin as a shoe string. Coming together would be less difficult if they had a strong leader but they don't have one. Boehner is for Republicans what Neville Chamberlain was for Great Britain when confronting Hitler.