Novak: For good reason, the GOP often is called ‘the stupid party’

November 13, 2006

It’s a time-old political tradition: if you’re in charge when your team suffers a dramatic defeat, you fall on your sword. It’s not only the honorable thing to do, there’s also a degree of common sense — whatever you were doing wasn’t working, so it’s time for a new team.

With this in mind, Bob Novak noted, with some consternation, that the GOP is probably making a mistake by sticking with its current line-up.

The depleted House Republican caucus, a minority in the next Congress, convenes at 8 a.m. Friday in the Capitol on the brink of committing an act of supreme irrationality. The House members blame their leadership for tasting the bitter dregs of defeat. Yet, the consensus so far is that, in secret ballot, they will re-elect some or all of those leaders,

In private conversation, Republican members blame Majority Leader John Boehner and Majority Whip Roy Blunt in no small part for their mid-term election debacle. Yet, either Boehner, Blunt or both are expected to be returned to their leadership posts Friday. For good reason, the GOP often is called “the stupid party.”

Ouch.

It’s not an unreasonable point, though. Dennis Hastert is stepping down, apparently unwilling to suffer the indignity of moving from leading the chamber to leading the minority party, but there’s Boehner and Blunt, not only running to keep their House causus posts, but favored to keep them.

I realize that Republicans have convinced themselves that the Dem takeover is some kind of bizarre affirmation of conservative principles, but rank-and-file Republicans do realize that Boehner and Blunt failed miserably right?

As Novak explained, Boehner and Blunt are facing opponents for their leadership posts, but the party seems content to stick with the devil they know.

Rep. Mike Pence, current chairman of the RSC and a leader of reform, is an underdog candidate opposing Boehner. Rep. John Shadegg, Pence’s predecessor at the RSC who finished third in the race for leader last February, is running uphill against Blunt for whip on a reform platform. The conventional wisdom on the Hill is that at best, only one of them can win because the Republicans would not dare elect two conservatives to the two top House leadership positions.

In fact, the voting records of Boehner and Blunt are nearly identical to Pence’s and Shadegg’s. The difference between them was demonstrated last Thursday when Blunt went to the Heritage Foundation to campaign for his retention as whip. He delivered a defense of earmarking.

That is the view that led Republicans to earmark a “bridge to nowhere,” and hundreds of other projects in competitive districts, hoping it would save them on Election Day. The House has been a place where Rep. Don Young (a notorious Alaska porker) was setting national transportation policy, where the “Cardinals” on the Appropriations Committee established earmarking records, where the pharmaceutical industry had a pipeline to party policy and where even Hastert was making personal profits on an earmark. Maybe that’s what Republicans want to retain, even in the minority.

Different observers can and will interpret the midterm results in different ways, but by any reasonable definition, 2006 should be a wake up call to congressional Republicans.

Apparently, they prefer to sleep.

Wake up to what? That their President is a disastrous failure, that their own conduct has been universally mendacious, dishonest and dishonorable? That their ideology is full of crap and roundly disliked throughout most of the country?

Waking up isn’t an option. They’re going to need to reinvent themselves and dump most of their membership, or else face the prospect of becoming and ever more irrelevant regional party.

Not surprised they’ll do anything to avoid facing how dire the reality is.

  • Who is the most likely to be Republican Senate Minority leader? (Trivia question, not to be mistaken with me caring too much.)

  • The elemental weakness portrayed by both Pence and Shadegg is that they represent a team of “reformists.” Reform is a conceptual tool of the Progressive, and is therefore a profound and heretical blasphemy in the High Holy Church of Neoconservativism….

  • “Who is the most likely to be Republican Senate Minority leader? ”
    Isn’t it Mitch “Shakedown” McConnell?

  • For good reason, the GOP often is called “the stupid party.”

    Hey Nofacts, maybe that’s because they listen to gasbags like you? Or maybe that’s why they listen to gasbags like you?

    I can’t figure out which is the diseased chicken and which is the rotten egg.

  • Perhaps they’re sticking with the leaders they know because they simply don’t trust any other Republicans. Or conversely, Boehner and Blunt may just know where all the skeletons are buried. They’ve been known to be motivated by fear in their other decisionmaking, so I’d consider this entirely plausible.

  • If corruption is deeply woven into the fabic of the republican party, then real reform means death by starvation from lost earmarks for dollars.

  • “For good reason, the GOP often is called ‘the stupid party.’” – Robert Novak

    “Hey Nofacts, maybe that’s because they listen to gasbags like you? Or maybe that’s why they listen to gasbags like you?” – RacerX

    I suspect that Bob thinks it’s because they DON’T listen to him.

    The Republican’t Leadership failed to retain control of Congress because they break all the rules to get the pork they want. If they had been sensible enough to actually follow the rules, there would have been far less corruption (and fewer dead American Servicemen due to the mechniations of Randy “Duke” Cunningham) and there would have been far smaller deficits and the Republican’ts might have retained the respect of the American voter and power.

    But as they just had to twist the rules to “punish” those evil liberal Democrats, they let every sick little type of corruption into their caucus including the desire to spend money three times over. Thus by insisting on being mean to the Democrats, they proved themselves incompetent to legislate, appropriate and investigate. And they are gone, but hopefully not forgotten.

  • Lance sez:

    The Republican’t Leadership failed to retain control of Congress because they break all the rules to get the pork they want.

    I generally only hear people complain about corruption when it might hurt them. I think the Republicans lost because the American “middle” realized that THEY were getting screwed.

    IMO Dems could clean up congress and still get ousted if the American sheeple were convinced they’d get a better deal under the republicrooks. What Dems need to do is clean out their own stable, and communicate early and often how corruption costs people real dollars and lives, and also remind them how the republicrooks operated. Putting them on trial would be a good way to do that.

  • RacerX,

    The point I’m trying to make is if you losen the rules to make it easy to laud pork onto bills, you make it easy to be corrupt. That’s why I oppose paying the Republican’ts back for the last 12 years by acting the way they acted. Adhere strickly to the rules and you will reduce earmarks and spending and making asnine laws at 2:30 am which you regret.

    The Republican’ts lost because they were corrupt and they were corrupt because they broke the rules and they broke the rules to punish the Democrats.

    Please let that be a lesson Nancy 😕

  • What Dems need to do is clean out their own stable, — Racerx, @12
    Please let that be a lesson Nancy — Lance, @13

    Well, apparently, Nancy ain’t listening; she’s just endorsed Murtha for House Majority leader. Please look at what TPMmuckraker has to say about Murtha — it’s *far worse* than just larding.

    If we’re gonna run on principles then we should stick to them. I don’t think that bringing home thebacon is the only thing our representatives are judged on. In fact, the taxpaying public definitely *said* on Nov 7 that being corrupt is what turns them (it?) off.

    • Comments are closed.