The parties quietly trade places

Quick quiz: a prominent political figure in Washington criticized congressional Republicans yesterday for their lack of ideas and leadership. Howard Dean? Rahm Emanuel? Harry Reid? Try [tag]Tom DeLay[/tag].

Departing Rep. Tom [tag]DeLay[/tag] of Texas said yesterday that House Republicans have no vision or agenda and have let the Democrats choose the GOP leadership.

“We don’t have an agreed agenda — breaking up our leadership has taken its toll,” Mr. DeLay told a small group of reporters invited to his offices in the Cannon House Office Building.

I’ll gladly give House Republicans credit for putting on a brave face yesterday. Only the House GOP would think to send out a fundraising letter — as the NRCC did yesterday — asking for money to celebrate DeLay resigning in disgrace.

But lurking just below the smiles and congratulatory praise for DeLay was the realization that congressional Republicans have weak leadership, no ideas, a stalled agenda, and limited future prospects. The rank-and-file GOP are looking around wondering what their party is all about and pondering an unsure election cycle. They are, in other words, where Democrats were a few years ago.

On Capitol Hill last week, it was almost as if the two parties had decided to switch roles. At a press briefing, House [tag]Democratic[/tag] Whip Steny Hoyer was declaring, “Republicans don’t have an agenda,” a critique Republicans usually hurl at [tag]Democrat[/tag]s. The next day Hoyer and other [tag]Democrats[/tag] from the Senate and House, along with state governors, got together to announce the party’s unified plan for improving America’s national security.

Meanwhile, [tag]Republican[/tag]s were looking in disarray — even before the announcement this week that Tom DeLay would give up his House seat. Some House Republicans were quietly raising concerns after Majority Leader John Boehner questioned the value of a 700-mile fence for the U.S.-Mexico border that was part of an immigration bill passed by the House in December, while Senate Republicans questioned if their leader, Bill Frist, was allowing his presidential ambitions to get in the way of passing immigration legislation. And as the Senate moved forward with a lenient immigration reform plan, a group of almost two dozen House Republicans held a press conference to strongly denounce the Senate GOP’s approach.

The conventional wisdom in Washington in recent years has been that [tag]Republicans[/tag] are more unified and disciplined and have better-articulated ideas than Democrats, who are often at war with one another and questioning their leadership. But lately the Democrats, looking to create a campaign platform for 2006, have put out some ideas that their famously fractured party largely agrees on.

Dems are getting together on policy agendas in advance of the midterm elections and they’re literally writing books full of new policy ideas. Republicans have some old ideas that are of limited electoral value (tax cuts, flag burning), and some new ideas that divide the party in half (immigration, spending cuts, health savings accounts).

Sure, it’s hard for Dems to get too excited when the GOP controls literally every branch of government, but as of now, the party is right where it needs to be — and, coincidentally, Republicans are right where the Dems need them to be, too.

Consider this your morale boost of the day.

It gets even better — check out this story from RAW STORY

  • No, actually the RAW STORY link I posted is a story about 4 House Republicans suddenly demanding an investigation into the Iraq war — including the guy who coined the term “freedom fries”

  • Why, I do believe that the tide is turning, people. Time for a full-court press, methinks….

  • House Republicans have no vision or agenda and have let the Democrats choose the GOP leadership.

    On top of being corrupt, if Delay belives that, he is also insane. I would gather that he is the only person in the US – Democrat or Republican- that believes that. The only response is to laugh.

  • I wonder if now would’t be a good time for the GOP’s “Solid South” to at last cast off its image of being bigoted, snaggle-toothed, knuckle-dragging, bible-thumping droolers who look back fondly on the days when their economy was based on human slavery and join the rest of the nation’s working people in the Democratic Party?

    If you stop and think about it, there can’t possibly be enough obscenely rich people to elect a Republican to anything.

  • It’s interesting. I live near the top of a high hill and there’s a watershed point at the very top, of course, affecting the two major Texas rivers on either side. Every time I drive the road, because it’s less clear when the moment actually happens, I wonder, is it now? now? or now?

    Reading CB’s post, I realize that the watershed has been passed, and I (we?) failed to notice. We owe ourselves some kind of celebration. Or are we too superstitious? I think I am!

    Ed, I think there are plenty of obscenely rich to do the job… if they want to. But they are not unaffected by what’s happening. One or two obscenely rich friends here have got it in for Bush on a) privacy issues, coupled with b) executive power, and c) lying — in just about that order. What I don’t see is much of that money drifting leftward. We’re going to have to create some obscenely rich left-leaning coalitions of our own!

  • The Republicans were unified and disciplined because Karl Rove and Dick Cheney could crack the whip in the name of a popular and unbending Leader. But now Bush is whipped and useless, Rove has nothing left in the tank and Cheney isn’t much of a threat without a shotgun in his hand.

    On top of that, DeLay is gone so the robots he directed with an iron fist are becoming disoriented and starting to feed on each other. How fun.

  • If ya want to do that, PW, you’ll have to convince the nobs that it is in their self-interest.

    A century or two ago, the rich were worried that the poor might rise up and overthrow them (the Romans had a similar concept, thus “bread and circuses”). That’s a pretty good reason to offer welfare. A much smaller few even thought that offering services to the poor was the humane thing to do. Thus, the progressive movement was born.

    Of course, the poor never did rise up. The desperately poor of our country are disorganized, tired, and malnourished, so there’s a good chance they never will on their own. So what do the rich need to care about the poor, unless they happen to have an affinity toward doing good?

    Put differently, I think that if the rich didn’t have the GOP, they’d create another party just like them.

  • Whaddya mean repubs have no ideas? I mean, where have you been? They have precisely 2 ideas:
    9/11 justifies anything. Cut taxes for the rich.
    After that, it pretty much boils down to random syllables.

  • “The desperately poor of our country are disorganized, tired, and malnourished, so there’s a good chance they never will [rise up] on their own.” – Mr. Fribble

    If I understand the statistics correctly, there are half as many people living under the poverty level today (percentage wise) as there were in 1950.

    Democrats do sometimes succeed.

    The desperately poor of our country are still vastly richer than the poor of the world, who mostly live on $1 a day. People note the poverty of the people flooded out of their home in New Orleans…

    …FLOODED OUT OF THEIR HOMES…

    I suppose it is less comfortable for them, living as extended families in a three bedroom house, than it is for me. But why anyone would expect the poor to revolt is beyound me.

    Now, the homeless, that is an issue. And the inter-generational transfer of poverty encouraged by Welfare, that is an issue. And lack of health insurance/care/access, that is an issue.

    But the two biggest are education (getting kids to stay in school and graduate) and avoiding teen-age motherhood (teaching kids practical contraception). Tackle these two issues and the poverty rate in America will continue to go down.

    I believe that practical policies and not rhetoric are what we need.

  • Comments are closed.