Posted on 08/01/2005 1:40:41 AM PDT by Happy2BMe
Republican: GOP Revolution Dying on Washington D.C. Vine
For decades conservative Republicans dreamed of controlling the White House and Congress. The rallying cry was “If only we had the power, we could revolutionize this country and end the era of big government.” Well, in January 2001, it finally happened and the GOP took control of Congress and the White House. Since that time, it has held total control, except for a 17-month period in 2001-02. Yet, not only has Washington D.C. not been revolutionized, but spending has skyrocketed, deficits have ballooned and government has never been bigger.
What happened? It seems that Republicans in Congress only act like Republicans when Democrats are in charge. When the GOP has control, they change from Dr. Jekyll to Mr. Hyde and become the monsters they battled against.
Since 2001, Republicans have passed the pork barrel laden farm bill,
an all too expensive education bill, approved a massive new government bureaucracy, the Department of Homeland Security and added an unnecessary Medicare prescription benefit, which according to economist Stephen Moore is “the most financially irresponsible legislation of the last 30 years. “ The party of fiscal discipline is gone and Republicans have become addicted to the big government disease. In treating drug addicts, counselors always look for an important first step, the admission of a problem. Unfortunately, Republicans don’t see big government as a problem anymore, but just a way to buy votes from constituents also addicted to big government. Yet, this addiction is a true problem because as cogently observed by commentator Cal Thomas, “Government programs are the only sign of eternal life on earth! ”
In the last week, two more monstrosities were passed by the Republican controlled Congress, the energy bill and the transportation bill. Both bills are loaded with pork, include too many unnecessary projects and provide obscene perks for influential special interest groups. For example, in the $286.4 billion transportation bill, there is $230 million allocated for a bridge in Alaska to connect an island of 50 people to the mainland. It has been aptly called the “Bridge to Nowhere.” The energy bill authorizes spending of $66 billion and includes $14.5 billion in tax breaks. It doubles the domestic mandate for ethanol production to 7.5 billion gallons by 2012, giving corporate welfare to farmers and little benefit to consumers.
Our federal budget deficit is $333 billion, down from $412 billion last year, but truly “misleading” according to Senator Jim DeMint (R-SC), who believes that “Congress is raiding Social Security to mask the true size of the deficit.” What true deficit reduction has occurred had been due solely to increased tax revenues and not fiscal restraint.
Not only is there no fiscal discipline, there is no conservative agenda. Despite the President’s talk, there is no social security reform on the horizon and no real tax reform being seriously debated. Despite having control of Congress and the White House, Republicans are not pursuing a real conservative agenda, only more big government. For example, a true conservative agenda on the pressing issues of immigration reform, the real threats to the English language, or the multi-faceted culture war does not have the support of the GOP leadership in Congress or the White House and is in no danger of being passed. Republicans seem more interested in providing voters the security of big government than in effective border security.
But, isn’t the country doing so well due to visionary GOP policies? Maybe according to Republican lapdogs on talk radio and Fox News, but real America outside of the beltway knows better. Real wages declined in 2004 and the first quarter of 2005. Today, there are 22,000 fewer private sector jobs today than in March of 2001, when the recession started. Our stock market is stagnant, while gasoline prices keep rising and consumer debt and bankruptcies are skyrocketing. Our trade deficit just keeps going higher, and coupled with large budget deficits and purposely weak U.S. treasury policies, the dollar will continue to get pummeled in currency exchanges.
Today, the politically correct crowd rules the day and the Republicans do not have the will or in the inclination to do anything about it. A party that used to be defined by the mantra of smaller government and more individual freedom is basically indistinguishable from the Democrats on fiscal matters. With philosophical differences between the parties on domestic issues gone, is it any surprise that a new Gallup poll shows Americans becoming “more favorable to the Democratic Party.” Voters will realize that if both parties stand for big government, they might as well support the real thing as opposed to the sick and confused imitation.
In Washington D. C. today, bringing home the bacon is the main goal, not advancing individual freedom or a conservative agenda. This is not what I signed up for as a Reagan Republican. If politics today is all about power, not ideology or principled differences, count me out. So, if the Republicans are not going to govern any differently than the Democrats, what’s the use?
Blah, blah, blah, usual Pubbie hatred from you happy. In your above italicized passage no mention of the democrats using the filabuster to block Bolton.
No big deal happy, most people on FR, already know you are demo sycophant.
The confusion arises from the fact that the struggle is not between Republicans and Democrats but between fiscal conservatives and liberals, social conservatives and liberals, constitutional rights conservatives and liberals, and security conservatives and liberals.
Since 2001 there has been a slight majority in Congress only of security conservatives and even there it is because of 9/11 rather than an election and it is not enough for a major mobilisation. And there is a security and social conservative in the White House. Hardly enough to call 'a revolution'.
" So, if the Republicans are not going to govern any differently than the Democrats, what’s the use?"
I hear people say all of the time "You could have Gore!"
Yeah, we could have. But what we have instead is Gore and Hillary lite. That's NOT what I voted for.
I voted for a return to fiscal responsibility, a reduction in taxes, a REDUCTION IN GOVERNMENT, to include the destruction of useless beuracracies in Washington DC. I'm afraid the only way we will ever get back our Constitutional government is by open rebellion. If the Republicans won't do the job, then we don't have many other choices.
How many times have your posting privileges been suspended to date?
Damn you are mad that I haven't brought you an apple to your cyber desk.
" No big deal happy, most people on FR, already know you are demo sycophant."===================================
Try again.
At this point, I'd even settle for Newt Gingrich.
YOU SAID... "Damn you are mad that I haven't brought you an apple to your cyber desk."
Hey, since you are plugging apple barons...can I put in another plug for honey?
Support North Carolina Honey barons!
We thank yew
(private joke folks)
But that was before RINOs moled the Party...
Nonetheless, let's face it -- "principle" and "by the people for the people" was ultimately going to be all for naught anyway.
The NWO internationalists have made it clear it is they who are now really calling the political, cultural, and economic shots for the U.S.
So we would be better off with "Traitor" Kerry and "Silky Pony" Edwards leading the war on terror?
I don't think so.
The problem is at the grassroots. People need to get out and blow the stodgy party hacks out of their comfort zones and take control of the party.
The other is that we'd go further and faster down the socialism path and most people wouldn't care all that much. For instance, once socialized medicine starts, it would be next to impossible to stop it—ever. IMO, I will not proverbially "burn down my own house" to punish/shake up our team. How many years later are we trying to change SS incrementally and STILL having trouble? That's not our leadership alone, that is the American public. They must be moved first.
Therefore, I believe the best way to make things increasingly conservative is to focus on your own community, convince your friends and neighbors and put real conservatives in a the grassroots level. This stuff really should, and does, grow from the ground up.
There will never be another Reagan, just as there will never be another Washington.
In fact, I remember Reagan...and even he wasn't Reagan in the first half of his second term. ; ) All of our legends get much bigger with time, IMO, and we can't know what the effects will be as we are going through it. Hindsight makes them giants.
BTW, didn't Reagan do a blanket amnesty when he was in office?
The Reagan administration had the best of intentions when it pushed for passage of the Immigration Reform and Control Act of 1986. The amnesty was a one shot deal. At the core of the IRCA was strong enforcement of law that required employers to be prosecuted for hiring illegals. That never took place. In fact the entire piece of legislation has never been enforced. Its still existing law and the law should be enforced.
Granted, PresReagan made a mistake signing IRCA of 1986 into law. So be it. Today, the American people don't want amnesty for illegals. They do want the borders sealed, employers punished for hiring illegals and gov't welfare handouts halted.
I see no evidence that the American people want to give PresBush a green light to make the same mistake again, that was made in 1986.
More or less, yes. There were restrictions but about three millions benefited, I believe.
We anti-ILLEGAL immigration folks have the hardest time getting a key point across. Perhaps it would cool the rhetoric if we could find a way.
To wit, the amnesty was suppose to fix the problem. It included provisions that made hiring people who did not have permission to work in the U.S. a "crime."
There was virtually no enforcement and consequently it did not fix the problem. The problem today is far worse.
I truly believe that President Reagan did not intend for that to happen.
I also believe that some in Washington finally get it -- prove that you would enforce any shiny new immigration reform then lets talk.
Fool us once, shame on you. . . .
I fully admit, it just baffles me why anyone cares what desperate young women do.
That is exactly why I don't think we need more laws on this. We need to enforce the laws we have. That will take more than just an edict from the top.
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.