Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Fate of the Democrats: Hugh Hewitt says obstructionist tactics pushing left into irrelevance
WorldNetDaily.com ^ | Wednesday, November 19, 2003 | Hugh Hewitt

Posted on 11/19/2003 4:25:12 AM PST by JohnHuang2

Fate of the Democrats

Posted: November 19, 2003
1:00 a.m. Eastern

© 2003 WorldNetDaily.com

Last week marked a huge burst of activity from the United States Congress.

Not only did Senate Majority Leader Frist lead his Republican colleagues in an excellent exposing of Democratic obstructionism on judicial nominees, but conference committees finished work on two major pieces of legislation.

House and Senate negotiators finished work on a major energy bill and on a Medicare-reform bill that includes a prescription-drug benefit.

The energy bill contains some traditional pork, but it also authorizes the construction of a new and much needed Alaska natural gas pipeline.

The Medicare-reform bill delivers on the president's promise of an affordable prescription-drug benefit for seniors while also bringing some much needed experimentation with competitive models into the Medicare bureaucracy.

Democrats from the left have attacked both bills, and true to predictions, Ted Kennedy appeared on Sunday to urge a filibuster of the prescription-drug bill. Teddy would rather have seniors go without much-needed medications than allow the exposure of Medicare as a vast and wasteful bureaucracy that drives prices up even as it results in a rationing of health care through its pricing structure.

Teddy cries crocodile tears over seniors even as he threatens to block the one reform of the program which every candidate running for president in 2000 and 2004 has embraced: A prescription-drug subsidy for the elderly.

It's not hard to figure the left's hysteria on both bills. George W. Bush is close to becoming the most accomplished president in the category of major legislation since Nixon, and a successful wartime commander in chief as well. This combination is speeding realignment along, and Democrats know they are perilously close to becoming an irrelevant – if still loud – force in American politics.

Bill Clinton may have invented triangulation, but George W. Bush has perfected it, and the Democratic Party is in the cross-hairs as a result.

The answer for the Democrats is not, however, more obstructionism. If either of these bills is filibustered, every Republican in 2004 will be able to run against every Democrat under the banner of defeating a do-nothing, stop-everything minority party committed only to its superannuated old bulls like Kennedy and Robert Byrd and their ridiculous polemics.

The Democratic Party is trapped by its ancient regime into opposing modest but necessary reforms across the legislative landscape and into defeating accomplished jurists because their race or religion is wrong for the Democratic high priests among the interest-group left.

The Conservative Party in Canada a few years ago went from a major party to an isolated group of non-entities in a single election.

The same fate is beckoning the Democrats. If Ted Kennedy has his way, 2004 may mark the collapse of the Democrats in so thorough-going a fashion as to remove them from significance for a generation to come.



TOPICS: Editorial; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: christianlife; dems; hughhewitt; irrelevant; obstructionists
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-39 next last
Wednesday, November 19, 2003

Quote of the Day by South40

1 posted on 11/19/2003 4:25:13 AM PST by JohnHuang2
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: xm177e2; mercy; Wait4Truth; hole_n_one; GretchenEE; Clinton's a rapist; buffyt; ladyinred; Angel; ..

Hugh Hewitt MEGA PING!!


2 posted on 11/19/2003 4:26:34 AM PST by JohnHuang2 (< -- As Neanderthal as they come)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: RonDog
The Conservative Party in Canada a few years ago went from a major party to an isolated group of non-entities in a single election.

The same fate is beckoning the Democrats. If Ted Kennedy has his way, 2004 may mark the collapse of the Democrats in so thorough-going a fashion as to remove them from significance for a generation to come.

Right on the money...

4 posted on 11/19/2003 4:31:18 AM PST by JohnHuang2 (< -- As Neanderthal as they come)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: JohnHuang2
It's becoming clear the RATS strategy is to obstruct everything; judicial nominees, prescription drugs, the Iraq war, on and on and on. It doesn't matter whether it's good or not. It may work with their base and a few independent but I doubt a negative strategy is going to work with the majority of the populist. In the end they're going to alienate those independents who can never make up their minds.
5 posted on 11/19/2003 4:41:19 AM PST by HarleyD
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: JohnHuang2
If Ted Kennedy has his way, 2004 may mark the collapse of the Democrats

Mark that down, Our Prayers will have been answered !!

6 posted on 11/19/2003 4:44:01 AM PST by The Mayor (Through prayer, finite man draws upon the power of the infinite God.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: The Mayor
Bump!
7 posted on 11/19/2003 4:44:44 AM PST by JohnHuang2 (< -- As Neanderthal as they come)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: JohnHuang2
What was the saying?

Vote democrat, they have all that it takes to take away all that you have.

Bump back atcha!

8 posted on 11/19/2003 4:49:37 AM PST by The Mayor (Through prayer, finite man draws upon the power of the infinite God.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: The Mayor
back-backatya :-)
9 posted on 11/19/2003 4:54:05 AM PST by JohnHuang2 (< -- As Neanderthal as they come)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: JohnHuang2
The Democratic Crime Syndicate is on the little red truck tour on the cul-de-sac to extinction.
10 posted on 11/19/2003 5:00:55 AM PST by PGalt (Sooner Rather Dan Later)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: HarleyD
Maybe I'm a pessimist on this matter, but their strategy of obstructing IS working and I see no end to it. The majority of the American populace is too complacent and as long as the only thing they hear from a majority of liberal media that conservative views are restricting their God-given and constitutional rights(witness Mass. enacting same sex marriage on an equal rights theory), it will be hard to convince them otherwise.
11 posted on 11/19/2003 5:08:27 AM PST by freeangel (freeangel)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: JohnHuang2
PING!
12 posted on 11/19/2003 5:30:52 AM PST by jmstein7
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: JohnHuang2
Two things I have found a bit curious of late.

Why are Republican activists so concerned about Democrats becoming irrelevent? It is kind of like they are pushing them from the front instead of the back when trying to get them over the cliff.

As I read yesterday, The Republicans have not been able to master (especially when speaking to the press) the ability to express "outrage" or to take credit when successful. They also have no willingness to take the credit for some extremely important legislation, Historical accomplishments, and battles won.

13 posted on 11/19/2003 5:36:39 AM PST by ODDITHER
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: freeangel
You may be right but I noticed in the Washington Times today there are many women mad at NOW for opposing the judicial nominations of the three women (along with that Clinton thing), yesterday was a post about how the AARP is supporting the Republicans on the Medicaid bill (ugh!), and several days ago how 30 percent of Blacks identify themselves as conservatives verses 22 percent who identify themselves as liberal. I wouldn't break out the Champaign yet but I see movement. The REAL question is whether the Republicans will stay where they are ideology and let the people move to them or if they will compromise their position as some have.
14 posted on 11/19/2003 5:38:14 AM PST by HarleyD
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: ODDITHER
Why are Republican activists so concerned about Democrats becoming irrelevent?

My theory is that they think demonRATS will listen to them, and change their ways before becoming irrelevant.

If true, then they're shortsighted, because losing the Medicare bill and a delay in confirming jurists of the highest quality is chump change compared to the implosion of our opposition. Which, I think, was your point.

15 posted on 11/19/2003 5:43:57 AM PST by freedomcrusader
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: JohnHuang2; MeeknMing; doug from upland; ALOHA RONNIE; DLfromthedesert; PatiPie; flamefront; ...
Thanks for the PING, King!
"It's not hard to figure the left's hysteria on both bills.
George W. Bush is close to becoming the most accomplished president in the category of major legislation since Nixon, and a successful wartime commander in chief as well.
This combination is speeding realignment along, and Democrats know they are perilously close to becoming an irrelevant – if still loud – force in American politics.

Bill Clinton may have invented triangulation, but George W. Bush has perfected it, and the Democratic Party is in the cross-hairs as a result..." - Hugh Hewitt

This graphic, popularized by MeeknMing (and others) - once again seems appropriate:

.

If you listen to Hugh Hewitt, or read his WND commentaries,
this PING list is for YOU!

Please post your comments, and BUMP!

(If you want OFF - or ON - my "Hugh Hewitt PING list" - please let me know)

16 posted on 11/19/2003 6:24:48 AM PST by RonDog
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: JohnHuang2; *Hugh Hewitt
See also, from LAST WEEK:
The Media and the Memo - Hugh Hewitt
      Posted by kattracks
On 11/14/2003 2:02 AM PST with 3 comments


FrontPageMagazine ^ | 11/14/03 | Hugh Hewitt
     
 
Hugh Hewitt: What Memo?
      Posted by swilhelm73
On 11/13/2003 2:13 PM PST with 50 comments


Weekly Standard ^ | 11/13/2003 12:00:00 AM | Hugh Hewitt
     
 
A tale of two memos: Hugh Hewitt exposes Democrats' lack of concern for U.S. security
      Posted by JohnHuang2
On 11/12/2003 2:32 AM PST with 42 comments


WorldNetDaily.com ^ | Wednesday, November 12, 2003 | Hugh Hewitt
I knew about the Weekly Standard, and WorldNetDaily - but FrontPageMagazine, too?
That is the home of David Horowitz...
...and Ann Coulter!

17 posted on 11/19/2003 6:35:44 AM PST by RonDog
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: RonDog
A "hugh" HUGH HEWITT BTTT
18 posted on 11/19/2003 6:37:08 AM PST by onyx
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: RonDog
I knew about the Weekly Standard, and WorldNetDaily - but FrontPageMagazine, too?
That is the home of David Horowitz...
...and Ann Coulter!
See also, ANN's recent commentary on Hugh's theme - of incompetent RATs:

'The Plan'
WND ^ | November 5, 2003 | Ann Coulter
Posted on 11/05/2003 3:47 PM PST by perfect stranger

The Democrats' new method of opposing the war on terrorism while pretending not to oppose the war on terrorism is to keep demanding that Bush produce a "plan." Wesley Clark recently complained that Bush had put American troops in harm's way, "without a plan." Of course, Clark's "plan" would have been to create a quagmire, just like in Bosnia.

Sen. John Kerry, D-Mass., said the difference in how he would have prosecuted the war in Iraq is: "I would have planned." Yes, the invasion of Iraq was the usual unplanned, spur-of-the-minute thing that took 14 months.

Sen. John Edwards, D-N.C., noted for the record that when he voted for war with Iraq, "I said at the time that it was critical for us to have a plan. ... This president has no plan of any kind that I can see." Maybe it's that Beatlemania mop-top that's blocking Edwards' view.

Sen. Joe Lieberman, D-Conn. – the one Democratic presidential candidate too conservative for Barbra Streisand – said that President Bush gave the American people "a price tag, not a plan." He said that "we in Congress must demand a plan." You know, like that incredibly detailed plan the Democrats have in place to spend $400 billion buying prescription drugs for elderly millionaires.

Sen. Edward Kennedy, D-Mass., said: "The administration had a plan to fight the war, but it had no plan to win the peace." Kennedy's idea of "a plan" consists of choosing a designated driver before heading out for the evening.

Interviewing Vice President Dick Cheney on "Meet the Press" about a month ago, Tim Russert echoed the theme, asking: "What is our plan for Iraq? How long will the 140,000 American soldiers be there? How many international troops will join them? And how much is this going to cost?" When will we be there, Daddy? Can I go to the bathroom? Are we there yet?

The same questions were asked of FDR over and over again by the American people after the Japanese attacked Pearl Harbor. "How much will this cost?" "My husband's a sailor – how long will he be gone?" "What's your exit strategy, you warmonger?" Wait – no. My mistake. That didn't happen.

The Democrats' incessant demand for a "plan" tends to suggest there is something called "The Plan," which would magically prevent bad things from ever happening – especially something as totally unexpected as violence in the Middle East. Violence in the Middle East constantly comes as a bolt out of the blue to liberals.

Bush said deposing Saddam Hussein and building a democracy in Iraq was an essential part of the war on terrorism. He did not say that invading Iraq would instantly end all Muslim violence and rainy days that make liberals blue. We're at war with Islamic lunatics. They enjoy blowing people up. What further insights do liberals have to impart about this war?

A war is not as predictable as, say, a George Clooney movie (although generally more entertaining). Historian Stephen Ambrose described Gen. Dwight Eisenhower's genius as a soldier, noting that "he often said that in preparing for battle, plans were essential, but that once the battle was joined, plans were useless." Transforming a blood-soaked police state dotted with mass graves and rape rooms into a self-governing republic might take slightly longer than this week's makeover on "Queer Eye for the Straight Guy."

This is not the first time an evil tyrant was deposed only for bloody elements of his regime to remain. For example, it's been nearly five months since Howell Raines was removed as editor of the New York Times. No quagmire there! What is Bill Keller's "plan" to turn the New York Times around, and how long will it take?

The U.S. military has had considerably more success in turning Iraq around than liberals have had in turning the ghettos around with their 40-year "War on Poverty." So far, fewer troops have been killed by hostile fire since the end of major combat in Iraq than civilians were murdered in Washington, D.C., last year (239 deaths in Iraq compared to 262 murders in D.C.). How many years has it been since we declared the end of major U.S. combat operations against Marion Barry's regime? How long before we just give up and pull out of that hellish quagmire known as Washington, D.C.?

The Democrats' urgent need for an "exit strategy" apparently first arose sometime after 1993, when Bill Clinton sent all those U.S. soldiers to Bosnia – who are still there. The Democrats' conception of a "plan" is like the liberal fantasy that there's a room somewhere full of unlimited amounts of "free" money that we could just give to teachers and hospitals and poor people and AIDS sufferers and the homeless if only the bad, greedy Republicans would give us the key to that wonderful room. Republicans should claim the "plan" is in that room. In a lockbox.

It's interesting that after we've finally gotten liberals to give up on seven decades of trying to plan an economy, now they want to plan a war...

CLICK HERE for the rest of that thread

19 posted on 11/19/2003 6:43:13 AM PST by RonDog
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: OXENinFLA
From that thread:
To: perfect stranger


9 posted on 11/06/2003 6:55 AM PST by OXENinFLA ( Attempt to evaluate curvature at parametric singularity.)


20 posted on 11/19/2003 6:45:47 AM PST by RonDog
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-39 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson