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

Skip to comments.

Gas fumes are getting to the GOP
The Austin American-Statesman ^ | May 05, 2006 | James Lileks

Posted on 05/06/2006 4:05:31 PM PDT by neverdem

NEWHOUSE NEWS SERVICE

If the economy continues to percolate nicely, it will be due to increased drywall sales: Experts predict a continued increase in the number of Republican voters banging their heads into walls, trying to wake from this nightmare. It's not the president's poll numbers — that could be fixed by impeachment. (Worked for Clinton.) It's not the staff shake-up — new blood's fine, but nobody in Peoria is switching parties because Scott McClellan got the gentle boot. It's not even the Iraq war, the prospect of war with Iran, or the prospect of no war with Iran. It's Congress.

In short, the Republican base wants to know: Where's all this partisan extremism we were promised?

Nothing better exemplifies the world-turned-upside-down madness than the response to the gas "crisis." If the GOP was intent on educating the public, it would explain obscure concepts like "supply" and "demand" and how this big country called "Chi-na" has been sopping up more liquefied dinosaurs than usual. Also, we don't build enough refineries, and thanks to the greenies we can't drill anywhere Steven Spielberg might see the rig from his house. And he has houses everywhere. But who cares? Man up, ya crybabies! We're Americans. Let's go poke holes in Mother Nature's noggin and hoover up some light sweet crude so we don't have to rehash this drivel next year.

The actual GOP response? Hundred-dollar rebates. Cash money, friend, just for drivin'. We feel your pain: Here, have some money we borrowed from someone else. How's your Starbucks bill looking this week? Caramel mocha lattes add up, we know, and perhaps we can spot you a twenty (as long as you'll agree you're addicted to caffeine) and let Congress mandate 25 percent ethanol in your morning cup.

Rebates! If there's anything that exemplifies the nanny-state mentality, it's driving up the federal armored car and pitchforking sawbucks out the back. For a moment the nation braced for the Democratic response — if it had been true to form, the rebates would have been twice the size, adjusted for income, paid for with a tax on those chrome fish emblems Christians like to stick on their cars, printed on recycled paper with soy ink and introduced at a press conference featuring a leading liberal strategic theorist like Susan Sarandon, who would use the opportunity to complain that Karl Rove has been giving her movies one star on Amazon.com review sites.

As it happens, the Democrats saw a nice issue left on the ground, picked it up and gave it a close look: hmm. Tax relief. Crazy, but it just might work. And so we had the Republicans throwing money at the problem, and the Democrats proposing a moratorium on gas taxes. You almost expected Bill Frist to propose alternate fuels based on embryo stem cells.

Anything but drill in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge, of course. Some GOP senators still balk at that. Look: The only possible reason for a Republican senator not voting to drill the heck out of ANWR is that he has been informed, in secret briefings, that the Earth will split and millions of armed Mole-Men bent on conquest and pillage will spill out. Make that liberal Mole-Men. Conservative Mole-Men could form a new base of support. But no: We can't drill anywhere, because some constituents at a tony fundraiser might make sad faces about the elk.

Rove, we're told, has a plan for '06: turnout. The base should choke it down and realize that a Democratic Congress would be anathema to conservatives: a big hard tax wedgie, cut and run from Iraq, Bush in the dock, no more judicial nominees, marriage licenses for gay ANWR elk, the full horror. So the strategery is simple: Turn out enough GOP voters to assure control of the House and Senate, but not too many — wouldn't want them to get cocky. Give the GOP another clear majority, and it may come up with some delightful plan to grant pre-amnesty and health insurance to unborn Mexicans, paid for with estate taxes and abortion-doctor license fees.

So now both parties are based on the notion that the other guys are worse. Wonderful. At least they agree on something.


TOPICS: Business/Economy; Culture/Society; Editorial; Foreign Affairs; Government; News/Current Events; Politics/Elections; US: District of Columbia; War on Terror
KEYWORDS: 109th; anwr; energy; gasprices; gop; iraq
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-42 next last

1 posted on 05/06/2006 4:05:32 PM PDT by neverdem
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: neverdem

Beautiful. One of his best ever!


2 posted on 05/06/2006 4:09:25 PM PDT by Cicero (Marcus Tullius)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Cicero

I thought it was hilarious!


3 posted on 05/06/2006 4:15:08 PM PDT by neverdem (May you be in heaven a half hour before the devil knows that you're dead.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: All
Great post!

It's not just the gas prices where they dropped the ball.

The republicans continue to be on the defensive about the WMD issue rather than go on the offensive. The Bush White House also continues to give the left the ammo.

I would have thought twice about sending in ground forces if we knew for sure that Saddam had WMD. It was NOT the main purpose for going to Iraq. The WMD issue only helped us determine WHEN we should go into Iraq to take care of Saddam's terrorist ativities against Israel, his connections to Al Qaeda and his refusal to abide by the cease-fire agreement.

We decided it was better to go in now (sooner rather than later) and NOT wait for Saddam to have WMD and be able to use them to blackmail the world. Pre-Iraq War Bush once said that if we allowed Saddam to continue his plans of having WMD he could very well change the geo-politics of the region.

We did NOT go to Iraq because of WMD. The WMD issue was to determine that we should go sooner NOT later.

So, who is at fault? The democrats for lying? Or the Bush White House for dropping the ball and actually going on the "defensive" and quoting past democrats on WMD instead of insisting that Saddam's connection to terrorists, his terrorist activities and his failure to abide by the cease-fire agreement were the reasons we went to Iraq.

How can we defend the WH when it does not defend itself?

ELECTION 2006 LINKS

4 posted on 05/06/2006 4:15:56 PM PDT by MaineVoter2002 (http://jednet207.tripod.com/PoliticalLinks.html)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: neverdem

3$ and 4$ gasoline is a God-send for Republican politicians, it is the perfect campaign issue that even dumb people can understand. Prices are high and going higher because anything and everything anyone might do about it meets a firestorm of opposition.

And where is the center of this firstorm of opposition?

Thats easy. The Democratic Party. Democrat bureaucrats, Democrat lawmakers, Democrat pressure groups, Democrat nutball activists, Democrat "not-in-my-back-yard" neighborhood morons with an axe to grind... We all gripe about environmentalist whackos who make it impossible to do anything, but that is simply code for... Democrats.

Their response to energy shortages is to attack the people who are bringing in what energy we have. In the middle of blackouts and brownouts these are the people organizing to shut down what power plants we have, all the while opposing any new ones. "Why are you trying to shut down this plant, when we already have a power shortage" "We don't believe the shortage is real..."

These are the people we are up against. We will never achieve a healthy, secure supply of energy as long as these people are in the way, we will continue to fight a losing battle on energy until these people are turned out of office in droves.

Anyone should be able to understand this. So what do our Republican warriors do? They run for the tall grass, they try to blend in with the Democrats, they try to out-Democrat the Democrats, hoping they can get re-elected by stealth, by sneaking in among the Democrats, maybe the voters will accidently pull the lever for them thinking they are just another Democrat.

If there is a better strategy for disaster at the polls, I don't know what it is. These guys embarrass me.


5 posted on 05/06/2006 4:18:07 PM PDT by marron
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: neverdem

We're just too damn nice! How's about pulling up a spigot at the oil wells of our new-found friends in Iraq? With all the billions we've spent blowing them up and building 'em back up, why are we not helping ourselves to a nice percentage of their natural resources?

If the war was really "for oil" as the nutbags say it is, where is our profir to show for all the expense and death?

If the Iraqis didn't like it, I'd say "Fine. As soon as you've got a government in place and an army that can defeat the terrorists yourselves, we'll leave and let you negotiate a sale price for your oil like all your other customers. Until then, we're going to top our tanks as a 'thank you gift'."


6 posted on 05/06/2006 4:20:29 PM PDT by Tall_Texan (I wish a political party would come along that thinks like I do.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: neverdem
Rove, we're told, has a plan for '06: turnout. The base should choke it down and realize that a Democratic Congress would be anathema to conservatives: a big hard tax wedgie, cut and run from Iraq, Bush in the dock, no more judicial nominees, marriage licenses for gay ANWR elk, the full horror. So the strategery is simple: Turn out enough GOP voters to assure control of the House and Senate, but not too many — wouldn't want them to get cocky. Give the GOP another clear majority, and it may come up with some delightful plan to grant pre-amnesty and health insurance to unborn Mexicans, paid for with estate taxes and abortion-doctor license fees.

Yeah, that's our GOP. They have no problem wrecking our republic to hold on to a modicum of political viability.

7 posted on 05/06/2006 4:20:45 PM PDT by eskimo (Political groupies - rabid defenders of the indefensible.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: neverdem

They say if you knew how sausage is made you wouldn't eat it.

The more I know about politics the less I like it.


8 posted on 05/06/2006 4:22:04 PM PDT by Supernatural (I used to care but things have changed.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: neverdem
"Give the GOP another clear majority, and it may come up with some delightful plan to grant pre-amnesty and health insurance to unborn Mexicans, paid for with estate taxes and abortion-doctor license fees."


That made my day!



9 posted on 05/06/2006 4:27:22 PM PDT by G.Mason (The Left is as deadly as Islam's al Qaeda. Both kill, only Muslims tell you to your face.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: G.Mason

On illegals the republicans can't even figure out their own interest.

All the illegals granted amnesty will vote democratic. That's what they did the last time with the simpson mizzoli amnesty under reagan.


10 posted on 05/06/2006 4:44:28 PM PDT by ckilmer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: neverdem

I am more and more convinced that Dave Barry is the "Poor Man's" James Lileks.


11 posted on 05/06/2006 4:50:03 PM PDT by SquirrelKing (The Internet: Where the men are men, the women are men, and the 16-year-old girls are cops.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: neverdem
Rove, we're told, has a plan for '06: turnout. The base should choke it down and realize that a Democratic Congress would be anathema to conservatives: a big hard tax wedgie, cut and run from Iraq, Bush in the dock, no more judicial nominees, marriage licenses for gay ANWR elk, the full horror. So the strategery is simple: Turn out enough GOP voters to assure control of the House and Senate, but not too many — wouldn't want them to get cocky. Give the GOP another clear majority, and it may come up with some delightful plan to grant pre-amnesty and health insurance to unborn Mexicans, paid for with estate taxes and abortion-doctor license fees. So now both parties are based on the notion that the other guys are worse. Wonderful. At least they agree on something.

And this is what so offends me. When anyone suggests I should vote for a Party that has clearly calculated it can screw me, and I'll vote because the others are worse.

No.

It's morally repugnant to me and I won't do it. I vote FOR people. Not against. I'm leaving the opportunity for them to provide a reason for me to vote FOR them, leaving the door open for multiple issues infact, just take one and run with it. Judges, ANWR, Immigration...something! Do it and I'll have a reason to keep them around.

But I wouldn't vote for Clinton as a Liberal, and I won't vote GOP as a conservative on the line the other guy is supposedly worse. It is offensive to me. And if that is too "purist" for some to accept, too damn bad. I've been clear from the start that character trumps every issue for me INCLUDING conservatism and right now few in the GOP have demonstrated that quality.

12 posted on 05/06/2006 5:03:07 PM PDT by Soul Seeker (<a href = "http://www.send-a-brick.com/brick.htm" >Be Heard: Send a Brick</a>)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: neverdem

I don't like how much I have to pay for gas now. We need alternatives but the price of gas will not affect how I vote, unless I run out going to the polls:')


13 posted on 05/06/2006 5:10:56 PM PDT by CindyDawg
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: MaineVoter2002

Because he has done such a poor job of communicating, including to his base, Bush has let his enemies define him.


14 posted on 05/06/2006 5:17:10 PM PDT by BW2221
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: BW2221
Bush has let his enemies define him

Amen

15 posted on 05/06/2006 5:24:24 PM PDT by MaineVoter2002 (http://jednet207.tripod.com/PoliticalLinks.html)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: Soul Seeker
When it's tough to decide between dem-lights and the real dems, I suggest you answer which party is more likely to infringe on your right to self defense. The fight against firearms

It helped me to figure out a screen-name.

16 posted on 05/06/2006 5:27:38 PM PDT by neverdem (May you be in heaven a half hour before the devil knows that you're dead.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: CindyDawg
"We need alternatives but the price of gas will not affect how I vote, unless I run out going to the polls:')

They have fixed that where I live. We now just sit here in our easy chairs and pencil in the circle. Pretty soon they will have the whole state doing it. No ID, No Nothing. Thats how they are going to keep the Democrats in.

17 posted on 05/06/2006 5:27:50 PM PDT by Spunky ("Everyone has a freedom of choice, but not of consequences.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: neverdem

Thanks for the post - I now have a new tagline.


18 posted on 05/06/2006 5:29:06 PM PDT by Uncle Fud (The Republican base wants to know: Where's all this partisan extremism we were promised?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: marron
Republicans have been acting like losers for 2 years. They are not the party of "small government". I will no longer support any party...only politicians who have a proven record of restraint in spending & aggressive tax reform. I am done with party politics. Individuals only from now on.

Too bad we can't get a Tom Tancredo/Zell Miller ticket.

19 posted on 05/06/2006 5:33:57 PM PDT by Feiny (Now go bang your heads on your desks until something useful comes out!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: eskimo
I would work much harder to help the GOP candidate beat Tom Allen if I see a secure border, deported illegals, regulations taken from gas and oil companies, less PC in Iraq, drilling in ANWR and new refineries...afterall, this WAS the platform in 2000 and 2002 and 2004...well...are they going to play the democrat game and promise promise promise and not deliver?

Regarding judicial nominees.. the GOP is in the majority and STILL struggles for an up or down vote.

Sorry, I dont vote to keep a politician from being impeached. I vote on issues.

20 posted on 05/06/2006 5:35:40 PM PDT by MaineVoter2002 (http://jednet207.tripod.com/PoliticalLinks.html)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-42 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