Wednesday
Nov042009
Don't Award 2010 To The Republicans Just Yet
Wednesday, November 4, 2009 at 9:39AM
By Bob Ney - Talk Radio News Service Special Correspondent
Political leaders tend to (as some pundits do) simplify the outcomes of elections. Hence, of yesterday, Republicans will say, 'Obama is done, his agenda failed, Republicans will rule in 2010.' Democrats will find a way to spin this in another direction by saying, 'Corzine called his opponent fat, Deeds was an idiot and ran negative ads, etc,' and the Republicans and Democrats will actually believe their own B.S.
The elections yesterday, at the end of the day, are not good for Obama. But, elections are like history. I used to ask my students at OU that I taught, a history question. What started World War 1? They answered, the assassination of The Archduke Franz Ferdinand. Well, a lot of other factors started WW1. People will tend to say, just like they simplify history, that Obama caused Democrats to lose in New Jersey and Virginia yesterday.
Obama's lack of an agenda, not his agenda, hurt yesterday. People wanted change, and although I am not totally comfortable with some of Obama's philosophy, I would argue that many are and were, and the majority voted for him knowing he was liberal, knowing what he said he would do and expected him to do it. Reagan did what he said he would do, and while some people complained about him, I clearly remember a vast majority of folks saying later, "Well, he did what he said he would do." As a result, he was successful. It is irrelevant whether or not you liked him, the majority did.
Obama, on the other hand, has done what? Where are the bills that the Majority have passed? Where are his bold changes? How has he stood up to corporate interests as people are economically melting down? I'm not the one posing these questions; this is what I hear daily from folks in Ohio and West Virginia, REAL America, not Washington, D.C. Obama's lack of action has successfully driven potential Democratic supporters into the unsure.
Conversely, the Republicans will waste no time in blowing an opportunity to be successful. Rush Limbaugh's comments about the Dede Scozzafava's of the world - "they are not guided by principle" - are correct. Dede has just delivered a teachable moment for those who lack a keen sense of the obvious. RINOs cannot be trusted. Republicans-in-name-only cannot be trusted. They aren't principled. You vote 'em into office and you're going to get cap and tax, you're going to get some version of Obamacare, you're going to get tax increases, you're going to get TARP bailouts and you're gonna get amnesty.
In 2010 at least 12 Republicans (RINOs) will be challenged by true conservatives. This will be an internal bloodbath and the party will focus on purity vs. winning. (Newt Gingrich gets this, he is one of a few in the party that understands that you have to win, even with RINOs, to get the majority to be able to affect change). This attitude and viciousness will hurt the party. Some of the Republican leaders would rather have a pure majority of 100 than a "week squishy liberal" Republican majority of 218 in the House.
Next, look at the GOP leadership. John Boehner just released a health care bill that allows insurance companies to deny sick people coverage. The VAST majority of uninsured in this country are WORKING people, not welfare people. They are Boehner and his party's potential constituency -- believe me. Boehner is the second thing that hurts the party; A lack of direction, compassion, and the unwillingness to stand up for the average John and Susie Six Pack instead of the corporate "I want it all and bail me out" Americans.
Boehner is an addicted smoker, he tans, and he golfs, has money AND he has insurance, very cheap I may add. He just doesn't get it that the rest of America does not function like he does. John does not appreciate his money and does not understand how to use his position to help others. He could do so much more for people, as many who have made it are. His attitude will hurt the Republicans.
So, yes, this is a setback for the Democrats - they need to realize that. But, there is a long way to 2010, and the Republican factors that I mentioned will make this all come out in the wash. There is a lot of time left, a lot of local politics to play out (all politics are local, Tip knew this) and unknown economics. Throw in the fact that Obama's staff will probably bungle a few things, and 2010 is wide open!
The writer is a former Republican Congressman who represented Ohio's 18th District. He currently hosts his own radio program on WVLY in Wheeling, W.Va.
Political leaders tend to (as some pundits do) simplify the outcomes of elections. Hence, of yesterday, Republicans will say, 'Obama is done, his agenda failed, Republicans will rule in 2010.' Democrats will find a way to spin this in another direction by saying, 'Corzine called his opponent fat, Deeds was an idiot and ran negative ads, etc,' and the Republicans and Democrats will actually believe their own B.S.
The elections yesterday, at the end of the day, are not good for Obama. But, elections are like history. I used to ask my students at OU that I taught, a history question. What started World War 1? They answered, the assassination of The Archduke Franz Ferdinand. Well, a lot of other factors started WW1. People will tend to say, just like they simplify history, that Obama caused Democrats to lose in New Jersey and Virginia yesterday.
Obama's lack of an agenda, not his agenda, hurt yesterday. People wanted change, and although I am not totally comfortable with some of Obama's philosophy, I would argue that many are and were, and the majority voted for him knowing he was liberal, knowing what he said he would do and expected him to do it. Reagan did what he said he would do, and while some people complained about him, I clearly remember a vast majority of folks saying later, "Well, he did what he said he would do." As a result, he was successful. It is irrelevant whether or not you liked him, the majority did.
Obama, on the other hand, has done what? Where are the bills that the Majority have passed? Where are his bold changes? How has he stood up to corporate interests as people are economically melting down? I'm not the one posing these questions; this is what I hear daily from folks in Ohio and West Virginia, REAL America, not Washington, D.C. Obama's lack of action has successfully driven potential Democratic supporters into the unsure.
Conversely, the Republicans will waste no time in blowing an opportunity to be successful. Rush Limbaugh's comments about the Dede Scozzafava's of the world - "they are not guided by principle" - are correct. Dede has just delivered a teachable moment for those who lack a keen sense of the obvious. RINOs cannot be trusted. Republicans-in-name-only cannot be trusted. They aren't principled. You vote 'em into office and you're going to get cap and tax, you're going to get some version of Obamacare, you're going to get tax increases, you're going to get TARP bailouts and you're gonna get amnesty.
In 2010 at least 12 Republicans (RINOs) will be challenged by true conservatives. This will be an internal bloodbath and the party will focus on purity vs. winning. (Newt Gingrich gets this, he is one of a few in the party that understands that you have to win, even with RINOs, to get the majority to be able to affect change). This attitude and viciousness will hurt the party. Some of the Republican leaders would rather have a pure majority of 100 than a "week squishy liberal" Republican majority of 218 in the House.
Next, look at the GOP leadership. John Boehner just released a health care bill that allows insurance companies to deny sick people coverage. The VAST majority of uninsured in this country are WORKING people, not welfare people. They are Boehner and his party's potential constituency -- believe me. Boehner is the second thing that hurts the party; A lack of direction, compassion, and the unwillingness to stand up for the average John and Susie Six Pack instead of the corporate "I want it all and bail me out" Americans.
Boehner is an addicted smoker, he tans, and he golfs, has money AND he has insurance, very cheap I may add. He just doesn't get it that the rest of America does not function like he does. John does not appreciate his money and does not understand how to use his position to help others. He could do so much more for people, as many who have made it are. His attitude will hurt the Republicans.
So, yes, this is a setback for the Democrats - they need to realize that. But, there is a long way to 2010, and the Republican factors that I mentioned will make this all come out in the wash. There is a lot of time left, a lot of local politics to play out (all politics are local, Tip knew this) and unknown economics. Throw in the fact that Obama's staff will probably bungle a few things, and 2010 is wide open!
The writer is a former Republican Congressman who represented Ohio's 18th District. He currently hosts his own radio program on WVLY in Wheeling, W.Va.
Reader Comments (2)
"Boehner is an addicted smoker, he tans, and he golfs, has money AND he has insurance, very cheap I may add. He just doesn’t get it that the rest of America does not function like he does. John does not appreciate his money and does not understand how to use his position to help others. He could do so much more for people, as many who have made it are. His attitude will hurt the Republicans."
Change the word Boehner to Obama, and change the word Republicans to Democrats and I think you will have it correctly.
well ms. information, they both seem to be the same, don't they, just different party labels