Blogs and Stories
The GOP's Big Comeback
Jae C. Hong / AP Photo
The battle over the public option is just the beginning of the Republicans' resurgence—and Obama doesn't even see it coming.
The right is coming back. Inevitably, it's a messy and even ugly process, one that involves fear-mongering and utter falsehoods as well as legitimate concerns and old-fashioned righteous indignation. The Obama White House and left-leaning media outlets are focusing on the "nonsense feedback loop," the fears of "death panels," the outrage of Birthers—all of the outré untruths you'll hear raised at congressional town brawls. Rather more convincing arguments made by the likes of Bush economic policy advisor Keith Hennessey—arguments that influence real-world Republican policymakers—are getting short shrift. It's easy to understand why Democrats have embraced this approach. A few short years ago, the conservative media worked overtime to marginalize the anti-war movement by skewering Cindy Sheehan. Instead of focusing on the retired generals and regional experts and diplomats who opposed the war, the right spent an inordinate amount of time highlighting the lunacy of 9/11 Truthers and ANSWER activists. And it seemed to work, at least for a while. But just as this approach didn't stop a genuine anti-war upsurge from sweeping Republicans out of office, dismissing opposition to Obamacare as the work of a corporate-funded lunatic fringe won't make it go away.
If the war gave the left a sense of purpose, the exploding federal debt is doing the job for the right.
Part of the problem for Democrats is that many have lost the taste for political combat. At this weekend's Netroots Nation in Pittsburgh, what had been an insurgency of disenfranchised left-wingers become something rather different: a sober, sensible gathering of confident—if not slightly smug—activists who are preparing themselves for a long stint in power. Rage against the Bush White House has given way to low-level anxieties over whether President Obama is tough enough to push through a truly progressive agenda. News that the White House has all but abandoned the public option has already been greeted by howls of derision from netroots stalwarts, but the frustration and disappointment is mostly muted. The left was energized by fierce opposition to the war in Iraq, which transformed legions of college-educated Democrats into the internet-enabled shock troops of a new and assertive political movement that promised to transform the country.
With Obama in power, that energy has dissipated. Anti-war sentiment gave progressives the unifying narrative they needed. Yet the fact that over 100,000 troops remain in Iraq and are drawing down according to a gently-paced Bush-era timetable seems to barely phase once-fired-up MoveOn members. Obama's neoconservative-approved escalation in Afghanistan has gotten a rise out of a handful of progressive bloggers and dovish congressional Democrats, but again, the progressive base seems strangely indifferent. And when Organizing for America, the Democrats' effort to institutionalize the excitement surrounding the Obama presidential campaign, tries to rally supporters to counter the right at health reform town halls, one gets the impression that its emails are going straight to spam.
If the war gave the left a sense of purpose, the exploding federal debt is doing the job for the right. There is no small irony to this, as Bush-era tax cuts and the enormously expensive wars in Afghanistan and Iraq (wars which I supported and continue to support) are responsible for much of the deterioration of America's fiscal position. It's taken an economic calamity to remind grassroots conservatives of the virtues of pre-Reaganite root-canal economics. This is not the modern, youthful, multiethnic, forward-looking GOP that Karl Rove and George W. Bush envisioned when they were plotting a run for the White House. Nor is this the highly-educated answer to the middle-class and mostly middle-aged netroots nation. Like the Perot voters who were so desperate for sincerity that they turned to an eccentric and enormous-eared billionaire, this is a movement of old, flinty, very skeptical people who don't believe President Obama when he claims that he can cover the uninsured and improve quality and lower costs long-term. They see it as their duty to save America from smooth-talking politicians.
Obama-era Republicans are as ill-prepared for this wave of angry activism as Bush-era Democrats were for the rise of the netroots. It took years for inside-the-Beltway Democrats to understand that the progressive base wanted a feistier, more confrontational politics. Only when Democrats united to defeat Social Security reform and to pressure the White House on Iraq did the party start to build momentum. That could be why most congressional Republicans are reluctant to cut a deal with the White House: they sense, rightly or wrongly, that maintaining clear distinctions will work to their advantage.
The Republicans who will benefit from this new mood are a very mixed bag. Some are moderates, others are unapologetic conservatives. Gubernatorial candidates like Bob McDonnell in Virginia and Chris Christie in New Jersey are suburban pragmatists, not hard-core ideologues. They're counting on the votes of hundreds of thousands of Bush-loathing Obama voters, and so they're careful to maintain distinctive profiles. Incredibly, Pat Toomey, the staunchly conservative former congressman running for Arlen Specter's Pennsylvania Senate seat, is running ahead of the party-switcher in a Rasmussen poll that could be an outlier. A generic Republican is polling ahead in the race to replace outgoing Pennsylvania Gov. Ed Rendell. In New Hampshire, Kelly Ayotte, a popular Attorney General has an excellent shot at holding Judd Gregg's vulnerable Senate seat while Frank Guinta, the Republican mayor of Manchester, just might defeat Democrat Carol Shea-Porter in the race for the state's 1st Congressional District, putting an end to a long winning streak for the state's Democrats. Republicans also have high hopes for Mark Kirk in Illinois and Mike Castle in Delaware. Note that apart from McDonnell, all of these candidates are running in the Northeast and the Midwest, regions where Republicans were on the verge of extinction as recently as last November.
This piece was corrected to reflect that Ed Rendell is bound by term limits and not running for re-election in 2010.
Reihan Salam is a fellow at the New America Foundation and the co-author of Grand New Party.
How Rich People Smoke Pot
Paul Schrodt is a writer living in New York City. He has contributed to New York magazine, Radar, and Esquire.com.
Justice Clinton?
As vice chairman of Public Strategies and president of Maverick Media, Mark McKinnon has helped meet strategic challenges for candidates, corporations and causes, including George W. Bush, John McCain, Governor Ann Richards, Charlie Wilson, Lance Armstrong, and Bono. McKinnon is co-chair of Arts & Labs, a collaboration between technology and creative communities that have embraced today's rich Internet environment to deliver innovative and creative digital products to consumers.
The Trouble With John McCain
Reihan Salam is a fellow at the New America Foundation and the co-author of Grand New Party.
Now's the GOP's Time to Strike
Reihan Salam is a fellow at the New America Foundation and the co-author of Grand New Party.
The Taliban's Deadly Plan
Reihan Salam is a fellow at the New America Foundation and the co-author of Grand New Party.
quick2no
You think because you post this drivel, it's the truth?
mcmchugh99
No, not at all. This is a reform wave of the kind that comes along every 30-40 years, so the party of conservatism will be at a disadvantage. The pendulum has swung against them.
In addition, the whole Republican, free market ideology has already been tried for 30 years, and it ended in a big crash and depression. Today, it looks like a party of angry old white people in the South.
Add all this up and Obama has been handed the most favorable chance to pass progressive reforms since FDR, and if he can't make hay out of that, then he is no politician at all.
Maezeppa
You are right. I don't think the Republicans really get what has happened to them. This is a significant trend and they are severely disadvantated for a good 25 to 30 years at least.
clearthinker
"free market ideology" is the basis of what this country was founded on. This is not a freak experiment of the last 30 years. I would love to hear what we should have instead? A giant government infringing on our personal freedoms? That's called Soviet Russia. Is that what you would rather have?
tehixe
There's a difference between free market economics and free market ideology. The ideology that the Republicans espouse is a free market for the corporations, not for the consumers. Free markets must be regulated to prevent fraud, otherwise they are not free. Consumers must have information, otherwise they cannot be rational self-interest maximizers, and the only way to ensure that they have information is to regulate. The Republican ideology is not about the free market, it's about a free ride for the rich.
You're right that America was founded on a free enterprise system, but you're wrong that we either have to do it the Repubs' way or become commies. There is a third option, and that's a free and *fair* market. The last 30 years were an experiment in crushing consumers under loads of debt, tricking them with hidden bank and mortgage fees, and generally bleeding them dry. Considering that the US economy is based on consumer spending, I'm sure you can see why bleeding consumers dry has turned out to be a big failure.
This comment has been removed by The Daily Beast's editors.
benama
Who's 'We'?
Don't pretend that you voted for Obama. That you were a Democrat and now on the flimsiest of evidence from Salam you've switched and now decry your previous support.
This is part of the problem with the present debate in that the rantings of a few who never supported the Democrats and so lost the previous election are being treated by the media as disgruntled 'citizens'. They're disgruntled Republicans what a surprise they don't agree with their elected representative - they didn't vote for them!
Their guy lost and their angry. But the American media is such a bunch of losers they report some phony narrative that places themselves in the middle of a 'reputable debate' as supposed impartial commentators.
Those that actually support Obama decry the despicable tactics of the right rather than the supposed failing tactics of Obama. The same garbage was spun by the media when he ran in the primaries and they were wrong. And in the election and right now and guess what they're still wrong.
tehixe
I will never forgive the Progressives who told us that Bush and Gore were two sides of the same coin. After eight years of our country's slow-motion train wreck, we know how wrong those people were, and they share the blame for Iraq and all the other Bush debacles right along with the people who voted for him.
Obama might not be the Progressive Jesus, but he's worth voting for when you consider the downright insanity we're up against on the other side. Obama is willing to listen to, talk with, and compromise with people from across the political spectrum. If you think that makes him a failure, I think there's something wrong with your value system. Obama's presidency so far reflects the political realities he's dealing with. You expect him to walk on water and transform the Blue Dogs into true progressives? For the sake of our country, please get your head on straight and recognize that change happens in the real world, not in a vacuum.
This comment has been removed by The Daily Beast's editors.
tehixe
You're joking, right? He went from being a community organizer to being President of the United States, all without the support of an established national political machine. He built his organization from the ground up. As a junior senator, he steamrolled Hillary Clinton, the biggest name in the Democratic party. Then he wiped the floor with John McCain, a war hero with decades of political experience and a good deal of national fame. No kind of politician at all? That's a bigger joke than the article itself.
Furthermore, healthcare reform has not been defeated, and it won't be. I understand the statement you quoted, but it poses a misleading hypothetical. If he can't make hay, then sure, he sucks. But he CAN and he WILL. A small, well-organized rabble of lunatic fringe astroturfers cannot unravel a 1200 page bill on which so many legislators are staking their careers. The cable news echo chamer is amplifying Republican opposition, because conflict, not accord, makes good news. This gives a distorted picture of Republican legislative power. But let me make it clear: they have none. The current fight does not involve Republicans, it's Democrat vs. Democrat. While there are disagreements to be sorted through, a strong hand by the party leadership will assistance from the White House will see something passed. It's still not clear what it will be, but it's certainly better than the nothing exhorted by the Party of No.
This comment has been removed by The Daily Beast's editors.
Embers
Reihan Salam - we're supposed to take your writing seriously, and you can't even button your damn shirt right?
DocHumboldt
Yo, Salam! About your severly deformed head... Death Panel for you, buddy.
ElLamer
come on guys, even though I disagree with this guy theres no need for this kind of aggression.
mindlessmissy
Dream On ... Mr. Salam ....
djanimaequeen
clearthinker
What we should have is a free market with economic mechanisms in place that keep the greedy from plundering the market. Those mechanisms should be regulated by government.
mcmchugh99 is correct, Republican deregulation of government agencies is what has caused this mess plain and simple. You can argue semantics all day but the bottom line is that Bush and his cronies were at best asleep at the wheel or at worst turned a blind eye while their friends got rich plundering the market. Regulation does not automatically mean big government. There in essence must be a balance to allow the market to innovate and therefore profit but at the same time keep it clean.
It would be like living in a society with no police which is no society at all but rather chaos. A completely free market would pretty much send us back to the middle ages.
PS the author of this article is an idiot who smokes crack. He should resume his old job of licking Limbaugh's ass.
clearthinker
I agree that markets should have a form of regulation and there can be a debate as to how much there should be, but wasn't Chris Dodd and Barney Frank heads of the housing committee? Were they not asleep at the wheel also? You can't constantly beat the same tired drum that it is free markets that caused this crisis. I completely agree that GREED caused all of this. I don't think GREED is necessarily monopolized by Republicans. GREED is usually weeded out through free market systems. A government run "mechanism" can be dangerous if not defined correctly. Usually, to define it comes from both parties agreeing to it such as Regan and Tip O'Neil did and Clinton and the Repub congress in the 90's. This decade has been spent having absolute powers. It is my belief that the American people do not trust absolute powers.
djanimaequeen
Uhh yeah I can. A republican president with a republican controlled congress. I can easily say that it's all their fault.
EdmondDantes
Astoundingly dumb article. Why should we believe that the wacko fringe far right can be considered as synonymous with the GOP? Salam, go back under the rock from which you slithered and resume picking your nose until you find a real story. (Keep picking!)
BullMoose
Clinton wins in 1992. The Republicans wake up and take the Congress, House and Senate back, and these lefty loons don't see Obama the smooth talker losing in 2012? That is after 2010, when the Republicans , now awakened by his giveaway's to illegals and cronies, will throw out the Dems.
Ritarita
NOW THAT'S OPTIMISM !!
tehixe
Tell me about it. I don't understand how a commentator sees the Repubs use the same tactics that lost in 2008, and believes that they have a chance of working this time. Conservatives, being obsessed with the past as they are, have this bizarre notion that when you try the same thing more than once, you get different results each time. Deregulation derailed the economy. The Conservative way to solve it? Deregulation. Tax cuts padded the wallets of the rich without helping consumers, the economy's true base, thus facilitating the collapse of a fragile, top-heavy system. The Conservative solution? More tax cuts. An ugly, fear-based campaign of identity politics and outright lies lost them the election in 2008. And how do they want to win in 2010? By doing the exact same thing. This unwillingness to embrace (and dare I say, hatred for?) logic, this unwillingness to change, these are the things that make them a relic.
There's no question that a segment of the American population are comforted by relics, but that segment shrinks every year as old people die, young people reach voting age, and immigrants drawn by hope, not hate and fear, enter the nation. The problem with the Republicans is that the face of America is changing, while theirs remains white, old, and twisted with a rictus of malice and panic. No indeed, the same old tactics will not save them, because this country will never be the same as it used to be.
melissamsouza
Excellent response. What "Republican" supporters refuse to see is that their Party needs fundamental reform; "same old, same old" will not do it this time around. This "Party" has been afflicted by racism which has become more blatant sinde Obama's election--barely a week goes by without some racist incident involving a GOP operative, followed by the inevitable "retraction" (in some cases not even this, as with the e-mails showing a picture of Obama as a animal, or as a witch doctor, or endless others). And just look at who they elected as their Young Republican Leader--one of those bigoted, Southern ignorants that are increasingly becoming the face of the Party. They are not offering credible alternatives to any of the Democrats' proposed solutions to this country's myriad problems. All they do is rally their "base" (apparently alot of hateful, ill-informed people with plenty of free time on their hands) to yell and scream and block any attempt at actually governing by the Democrats. This is not a credible opposition by any means; the public senses this, which is why Obama's pitfalls have not been accompanied by any increase in public trust of the GOP, which continues to sag at around 25% support. No, Mr. Salem, the economy will improve, a health care bill will pass, and the GOP will continue to implode.
tehixe
And let's not forget how they've told people who want to reform the party, in no uncertain terms, to "GIT OUT!" Honestly, it becomes more of a mystery every day why people like Meghan McCain and Colin Powell stick with the party. The Democratic party has already absorbed moderate conservatives, that's why we have this somewhat chaotic fusion of liberals and Blue Dogs instead of the mindless lockstep sell-America-to-the-highest-bidder party that the Repubs had in the Bush years. The fact is, there are enough conservatives caucusing for the Democrats in red states that the Republicans don't have a chance. All the independents and many of the fiscal conservatives have already left, and all they've got to fall back on is the crazy. Which is why this article is such a joke.
This user is no longer registered.
n--Y--Yurdelitescriabin
great use of the word "rictus"!
roger37
Yeah, "rictus"--- kind of like John McCain's smile.
sophia5
Never mind a Republican "come back" or the Democrats.
It's time for a RON PAUL come back.
He's ridiculed and laughed at by both Republicans and Democrats,
which means he's a threat to the embedded culture of
big government that represents and supports lobbyists.
He understands the current system that
ties political with economic corruption.
RON PAUL IN 2012.
Ritarita
Sophia-
Have you had
The special experience
Of reading one of the uber-racist
Ron Paul newsletters
From the early nineties?
Locate a few-
And keep your eyes
In your head.
hithere3
Ron Paul may be a little nuts, but he's no racist.
The quotes attributed to him were made up by his organization's newsletter writer. Paul never approved the newsletters, and in fact didn't even know the newsletters existed until people complained, months later, at which point he ended them and fired the writer.
I will say this: I like Ron Paul OK, I guess, but his supporters creep me out.
sophia5
-hithere3
There are creepy people in every political spectrum.
What's interesting about Ron Paul, he has supporters
made up of Liberals, and Conservatives.
check out Bill Maher
He calls Paul a hero.
LINK:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WUYDt7kC3Z0
here's D.L. Hughley with Ron Paul
LINK:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Yk5LUhAZxek
scriabin
The reason I have trouble taking Ron Paul seriously is that he claims to be a libertarian, but takes a pro-life stance on abortion.
How can you be a supporter of individual liberty against an overbearing government (libertarian) and also support a movement which wants to give the government the power to force every woman to carry every pregnancy to term, regardless of circumstances - on the basis of forcing a fundamentalist religious belief (that a fetus is a person) on the entire population, regardless of their individual religious beliefs (a movement called pro-life)?
Seems like a disturbing bit of cognitive dissonance to me.
hithere3
unlike most americans, i care not one iota what other people think of ron paul or any other political figure. the only opinion that matters to me is my own.
in any case, bill maher and d.l. hughley are hardly impressive, are they? maher, who is sometimes witty and funny, is nevertheless capable of being a cynical idiot. d.l. hughley is just an idiot.
did you see his cnn show? never mind that it was a poor attempt at attracting a daily show demographic... it was painful. PAINFUL.
it is true, quite a few liberals have joined the pauloverse. but it is a certain kind of liberal -- social liberals who are paranoid about government. likewise, the conservatives paul attracts are fiscal conservatives who are paranoid about government.
i do like one thing about ron paul. his ideas -- even if they are ridiculously impractical and poorly thought out -- are often provocative and worth discussing. oh, two things -- i am glad he takes the u.s. constitution seriously.
frontman9000
I am very supportive of Ron Paul when it comes to the fed and foreign policy. As for his stance on the rest of the issues concerning America, he is right up there with the rest of the lunatic fringe of the GOP unfortunately.
AlanD2
Ritarita: That's not optimism. It's the TRUTH.
(You just have to remember that Republicans create their own reality. After all, the real reality has a liberal bias, which obviously cannot be tolerated.)
BullMoose
Nor satire. See first post from Patricia Williams atrticle about Obaba Elite. OOpps sorry, it was removed, even though there were no cuss words, nor threats, of which i am now flagging to see whether the Gestapo here removes only those not in their click.
dcbooknurse
What I don't understand is why the Republicans continue to want to be the party of hysteria. Yes, you have been very successful in lying to people about Obama wanting to kill their grandmother. You packed town halls with angry, screaming people who are scared out of their wits by the specter of Death Panels. I'm not saying that lying to people to scare them doesn't work. But God forbid if some person you've whipped into a frenzy decides that stronger action is needed to stop Obama and his plans. If violence breaks out, you and your friends will be the first ones on televisions waving their hands and saying "No, no, we never wanted it to come to this! We just wanted civil dialog." You are playing with fire, gentleman.
bcaldwell
Please, people have legitimate concerns. Do you expect people to just swallow without question the integrity of those behind this plan? Just because people are screaming loudly does not mean that something bad is going to happen like violence....by the way, so far in a lot of posts, I keep hearing about violence.... a lot of it keeps coming from so called progressives. In fact, if I'm the President, I want more people screaming and complaining and more dialogue( constructive and absurd) the more you talk, it usually means less chance of stupidity by the true believers. Actually on this, , I'm really not worried about 50 somethings starting trouble ...or granny packing an AK 47 to off someone.
I have seen however union members play the menacing role -I was in St. Louis and personally witnessed the Gladney incident. SEIU guys got, shall we say, over exubirant in their positions. They knocked the guy down trying to explain things to him and then wanted to drive home the point by discussing the issue on the ground with him. I have not seen Republican leaning types doing anything close to that.
tehixe
Have you been living under a rock? Hate groups are on the rise. Militias are adding members, the Aryans are rattling their sabers and talking about revolt. I'm not saying that these people are part of the mainstream Republican party, but the Republican commentators, and to some extent politicians, are encouraging them with their paranoid fearmongering. Apparently, they've got so little of a base left that the only thing they can think to do is tacitly encourage people who will threaten to kill the rest of us. Maybe if we're afraid of dying, we'll vote their way, a la Dick Cheney -- "vote for us, or die."
AlanD2
bcaldwell: Videos of the St. Louis incident show a SEIU guy on the ground.
By the way, your "victim", Kenneth Gladney, was a former employee of the St. Louis Police Department. His account of the incident is somewhat suspect. Other people witnessing the event have different stories.
roger37
The usual false equivalency from the wingers.
mclaubr1
Hype is the addiction of television. Why is Fox News on top? It's their addiction to showcasing the "rage" at these staged events.
Screaming is addictive as well. It is meant to be intimidating, not communicating.
Put it all together and you have the tinderbox for something very bad.
This is exactly what the 42% of the voters who didn't vote for the President want, God forbid!
I went to dinner with a surgeon and his wife on Saturday night and he said someone should pull the trigger. I couldn't believe my ears. He said he watches Fox News and big brother was out to get him. They want to buy a gun. They have become the new addicts.
Is this the future GOP?
DeeAmbro
Yeah, last weekend a friend of my brother-in-law's was in town. I had never met him, my husband only once. So there we are getting to know each other and he makes a comment about hate, how his family loves to hold onto their hate. I laugh, thinking it must be some kind of twisted joke, only to be met with a stone cold face. "Some people deserve to be killed, Dee!" is his response. Not wanting to start anything, I just tried to ignore it but later it comes out he's a Fox watcher too (it was so obvious anyway). So, the christian-Fox-watchers love their hate? Isn't hate something Jesus told us to disown? This is dangerous stuff and yes I'm afraid another Timothy McVeigh is on the horizon.
clearthinker
I don't believe Fox is causing your doctor friend to be enraged. I believe it is the rest of the media continually calling normal Americans "extremists" or "right wing nuts" or "astroturf" or somehow marginilizing them all. It's pretty simple really. The word "hate" is a two way street and is just a point of view.
mclaubr1
"Clearthinker," you can stop your veiled support of that hate-mongering, death-invoking network. I occasionally watch that junk network to hear it for myself. I KNOW where he got his hate from. He spat it at my in public. As a republican, I am appauled at your ignorance and blindness. WE are Americans first. We fix what we break. We work together. We build up what has fallen down. Fox News is breaking down our discourse and sleps like you slurp it up. It is poison on Fox. Violent extremism is now the Conserv's mantra. You are wearing it too.
DocHumboldt
Duct tape and visquene for all!
AlanD2
dcbooknurse: Just as they wrung their hands when "Tiller the Baby Killer" was assassinated.
Federalist
There's one problem with the notion of GOP's comeback. There needs to be an actual leader with a vision for the country that reinforces conservative principles - smaller, less intrusive government. I don't see one.
The GOP has subscribed to the Clinton playbook invented by Dick Morris. Poll the constituency base, figure out the mix of policy preferences, and sculpt a campaign that has something for everyone. This may work for democrats who do not have a practical compass for the consequences of large government; but it is a death-blow for those who believe in small government and free-market enterprise.
If the GOP wants to get back into power, they need a leader who understands this and can communicate why it is a better path for everyone. Freedom is a good thing. And freedom from overbearing Oligarchies ultimately leads to wealth generation, defensive strength and support of common-sense values. The freedom and liberty to stand on your two-feet causes self-sufficiency, the drive to "earn" a wage and the need for innovation. If we want any of those things, we must reduce, not increase the size of Federal government. To do that, we need a leader who understands the virtues of a small federal government.
Ritarita
If the GOP
Wants a leader-
They're going to have to
Regain consciousness.
MTFinch
Lovely Rita -
How about
"Reagan consciousness"?
Ritarita
Missa Reagan
He daid
Missa Finch.
DeeAmbro
And start appealing to the less rabid among us. The demographics are not in their favor. 3% of hispanics approve of the GOP. They'll have to dump the screamers and try to convince the rest of us they like us! I heard someone say that Republicans love America, they just hate 50% of the people living in it.! Now it's more like 70%.
AlanD2
MTFinch: You took those words right out of my mouth! :-)
BullMoose
Put on rag on this guys head and he fits the mold of any Taliban or Al Qaida terrorist, in my humble opinion of course.
pacifistgunslinger
Let's start by reducing the size of Defense (or what we euphemistically call Defense). Let's see some self sufficiency. Let's not waste trillions in stupid wars that accomplish nothing, not even the "mission." Also, show me one president since WWII who made government smaller, who decreased the national debt. How, in short, do you have a small government in a huge country?
Federalist
Government shrank or stayed relatively flat under Eisenhower, Kennedy, Nixon and Clinton. It increased under Reagan do to increased spending on Defense. It was significantly reduced in all other ways. You also have to look at the longer term effects taxes and the value of the dollar. These things cannot be affected immediately. Example: Nixon undoubtedly benefited from lower taxes in Kennedy's administration, and Clinton undoubtedly benefited from Reagan's tax reductions. But to give Clinton credit he did also reduce spending on welfare on other entitlement programs.
As for you Defense comment - I agree we should be much less involved in the politics of (via our military) other nations.
AlanD2
Federalist: It is more likely that Clinton benefited from Reagan's three or four tax increases that were made after his initial tax cut.
BullMoose
Clinton won because Ross Perot siphoned off moderate's who were not religious zealots. Then he won again because of Bob Dole here, can Bob Dole speak?
kitem08
You know what happened about 76 years ago in a time of recession, increasing poverty and unemployment when a bunch of hate-driven guys finally found a leader in a Western, largely white and Christian country?
outragedfan
yes. yes i do.
AlanD2
kitem08: Yup. They voted for Herbert Hoover.
Konchster
Yes I can see how screaming about a debt that republicans created will strengthen them We will be operating under Bush's budget until Oct and the unfunded liabilities left behind (Medicare part D ) et al will stifle any effort to rein in deficits
sonofloud
"If the war gave the left a sense of purpose, the exploding federal debt is doing the job for the right".......of course the right created the war and the federal deficit so they are arguing against their own creation.
tehixe
Also, to respond to the quip about how liberals aren't that offended by Afghanistan -- I don't think we ever were. Afghanistan was the justified war. When Osama Bin Laden attacked us, the Taliban harbored him, and that made Afghanistan the most dangerous nation in the world to us. What offended liberals was the way that Bush took his eye off the ball so he could finish his daddy's fight in Iraq, a country that was no threat to us whatsoever. If we hadn't fought the Iraqi boondoggle, Afghanistan would probably be over by now, or at least a lot closer. Instead, Afghanistan became a haven for Al Qaeda, the Taliban established havens in Pakistan. If we had left Iraq alone, they would still Iran's primary enemy, keeping Iran from turning its attention to provoking the US and Israel. Even if taking town Sadaam and liberating the Iraqi people was a good thing, it should have been an international effort, and not paid for almost exclusively with American blood and treasure. THAT is the liberal position, and the above article is either willfully blind about it, or just too partisan to do a little research and try to understand the other side.
donquijoterocket
That and the fact that bush and the bushistas seemed to have no plan whatsoever for the people of Afghanistan or what a post- taliban Afghanistan should look and function like. We're still paying the price for that omission and will be until we can figure a way out of the graveyard of empires. Meantime I find this characters analysis to be on a par with Ms. McCain's which is to say shallow and fatuous in the extreme.
AlanD2
tehixe: If the 9/11 attack justified the Afghanistan war, why didn't the Oklahoma City attack justify war on America? (Or at least Oklahoma - we would be a lot better off without Inhofe and Coburn in the Senate.)
rottenart
Alan,
Hear, hear! I say that as an Okie!
tehixe
AlanD2: Well for one thing, Oklahoma didn't harbor McVeigh, they arrested him, tried him, and executed him. If the Taliban had done that with Bin Laden, we probably would have stayed out. But Obama ran on a platform of stepping up efforts in Afghanistan, and we voted his ass right in there. So I think it's pretty reasonable to say that, despite the more dovish left-wingers making noise, the majority of Americans do support finishing the job in Afghanistan and making sure it doesn't become the staging ground for yet another 9-11.
AlanD2
sonofloud: Absolutely right.
Barbara416
Gee, and you think the tactics of the GOP will get them back in power? Too soon. This crap usually works in a second term presidency. A blow job will not be in order this time I'm sure. They'll have to find another excuse.
This user is no longer registered.
n--Y--YurdeliteThis user is no longer registered.
n--Y--alcamadusAlanD2
No Republican is going to vote for any health care reform bill, no matter how much Obama gives up.
If anything passes, it will be a win for Obama. Whether it is a win for Americans depends on how much he has to give up.
GOPtakesEllisDee
This is the most ridiculous thing I've ever heard. I for one will NEVER vote for a republican again. They are a party of hate, division, and lies.
Dolmance
People who lose the will to fight deserve to lose. So I certainly hope the author is full of it. For myself, I could not imagine not opposing those Republicans until I'm dead.
Republicans are evil. To give up the fight is acquiescence. To give up is to be complicit with swine. And if the American people let them come back, they'll have proved themselves to be a nation of fools who deserve everything they get.
This user is no longer registered.
n--Y--Yurdelitelmktacwa
They already showed themselves to be a nation of fools when the RE-elected G.W. and his evil sidekick, DICK.
But I get your point and agree wholeheartedly.
clearthinker
I challenge you to NOT be able to see hate written all over this thread. The contemptable rage written here is disturbing. Stereotyping Republicans as "evil" is dispicable and inmature.
Mclaubr: stop drinking the Kool Aid and by all means quit calling yourself a Republican or conservative. Fox News is no more disruptive than msnbc. The media in this country, Fox included, is doing NOTHING to help politcal discourse in this country. IF any of you believe otherwise, then you are just blinded by the flag of your own party.
dana64
Dolmance...................VERY well said.
THIS fellow can DREAM ON...................not happening as long as I am here.
a Party who does not believe in GOV should stay home. period
they have no place in the real world.
the repubs destroyed american Prestige.
tumbleweed
To a lot of us former Republican's who have gotten wise to the games they play. It is just business as usual with these people. I would say there are a lot of Republican's who haven't gotten wise as yet. But, give them time!
dana64
i always made a dstinction between repulcan party members and the eleadership............but it is for those members to set themselves apart.
the Republcan party should remain a minority party..............they are not capable of being a LOYAL opposition.............they do not care about AMERICA..............contrary to their clams
baldguy
I find the analysis of Ed Rendell's re-election chances amusing, and as insightful as the rest of the column. As any marginally interested observer knows, Rendell is term limited and not eligible for re-election. You don't have to be a Pennsylvania resident to know that - I'm not. I guess that's the kind of data that can be overlooked when writing about a Republican comeback.
thekingofcheap
The GOP didn't stop anything, backroom lobbying by big moneyed interests did. Mr. Salam, you're remiss to leave out the issue of White House visitors' logs, which Mr. Obama refuses to produce. Not that it matters. We all know that Blue Dogs and the White House were either on the take or at least happy to see corporate interests served ahead of Americans'.
The real issue here is what progressives should do considering we have a president and congress that don't seem to give two shits about us, even though we elected them. That's how Republicans will take back the government, by default, when the disenfranchised left stops showing up to vote for the same party that keeps selling us up the river.
lmktacwa
I wish it weren't true, but you are spot in. *sigh*
AlanD2
thekingofcheap: The real challenge is to elect new Democratic Senators in 2012 to replace Republicans. I wouldn't mind seeing a few blue dogs replaced by more liberal Democrats too, but I doubt this will happen.
sippewissett
This is a case of wishful thinking, not reality. The waning GOP currently consists primarily of Bubbas and fringe lunatics. The moderates have fled, leaving the Republican "battleground" to narcissistic lightweights like Palin and Jindal, self-seeking old guard like Newt and Grassley, and ranters like Limbaugh and the Fox gang.
Yes, the ill-educated, anti-change contingent is riled, which means we should expect a "comeback" of the confederate south. Their resistance of change is understandable because change is frequently disruptive, but change is also inevitable, especially now in the century in which we are living the reality that "the world is flat."
However, resisting change is not laudable because it also means avoiding problem-solving, which is why the GOP is currently the Party of No.
jpelhamtn
Are you saying that the voters of New Jersey & Virginia...both likely to elect Republican Governors, consist mostly of Bubba's & lunatics?
melissamsouza
Let's wait and see if they elect Republican governors. Anyways, if this happens, it has nothing to do with a reemerging GOP nationally because governor's races have their own dynamics, which are distinct from Congessional and Presidential races. And I do believe that if these Republicans are elected, they will need to be moderate, in line with the electorate of these states. It is not uncommon for Red states to elect Blue governors, and vice-versa. This has nothing to do with the electoral dynamics of that state come Presidential elections.
Thank you.
As a first time user, your comment has been submitted for review. It can take anywhere from a few hours to a day or two for your comment to be reviewed, depending on the time of week and the volume of comments we receive.