Republican Party missing: Feared dead

[Greed]

Pence's Promotion Signals Republican Return to Reagan Roots
By Laura Litvan

Nov. 21 (Bloomberg) -- Representative Mike Pence says the Republican Party doesn't need new ideas: It needs to reconnect to old ones.

The Indiana lawmaker, elected Nov. 19 to the No. 3 House Republican leadership job, says only the limited-government and low-taxes orthodoxy of Ronald Reagan can revive the party after its heavy losses in this year's elections.

That includes rejecting massive federal aid packages for failing industries, even the $25 billion proposed for struggling automotive companies with factories in his state of Indiana.

``The American people know we can't tax and spend -- or bail our way out -- to a better economy,'' says Pence, who as House Republican Conference chairman is responsible for shaping and selling his party's agenda.

With Democrats ascendant in Washington, poised to control the White House and Congress, Republicans are taking a long look in the mirror.

Pence's rise to the leadership is ``an indication of the power of conservative Republicans in the House, and it's a sign of his stature as an eloquent spokesman for the conservative position,'' says John Pitney, a political-science professor at Claremont McKenna College in Claremont, California.

Path to Power

Pence, 49, is one of the most outspoken conservatives in the congressional leadership and will be an important player in any plan to lead Republicans back to power.

A former talk radio host, he is also the freshest face on the Republican leadership team in the chamber. He earlier chaired the Republican Study Committee -- a group of more than 100 House Republicans who endorse Reagan's principles.

Representative Chris Van Hollen of Maryland, who chairs the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee, says Pence's rise suggests Republicans may become more combative, and their party may view the ballot-box losses in November as a matter of not being ``ideologically pure.''

``I respect Mike Pence for the consistency of his views, but they are consistently to the right of the American people,'' Van Hollen says.

Pence says his leadership team will work with President- elect Barack Obama and House Democrats whenever possible, and offer alternatives whenever they disagree. He cites human-rights issues and cutting wasteful spending as possible areas of cooperation.

Indiana Races

A native of Columbus, Indiana, Pence grew up in a Democratic household, though he changed his party affiliation after joining an evangelical group at Hanover College in Hanover, Indiana. In 1988, when he was 29, he made the first of two consecutive unsuccessful bids for a House seat, losing the second time by 19 points.

He went on to become a radio commentator, building up a syndicated talk show that was broadcast on 18 stations in Indiana, sometimes as a lead-in to Rush Limbaugh's program. The name recognition helped and he won by 12 percentage points to secure his first term in 2000.

He describes himself as ``a Christian, a conservative and a Republican, in that order,'' and has opposed abortion and federal funding for embryonic stem-cell research. He supported President George W. Bush on most of his policies -- including his tax cuts and the Iraq War -- splitting when the administration pushed for a $400 billion Medicare prescription drug bill he considered too expensive.

Challenge to Boehner

In 2006, Pence challenged Representative John Boehner of Ohio for the Republican leader job, arguing the party needed someone new in the top post after losing 30 seats to Democrats. Boehner crushed him, 168-27.

Pence's presence adds more conservative heft to the leadership team when the new session of Congress begins in January. He took a pledge not to seek home-district ``earmarks'' in spending bills, a pledge also taken by Boehner and Representative Eric Cantor of Virginia, who is currently chief deputy whip.

Of the new crop of leaders, no one has been so consistently against the recent drive for industry aid as Pence. In October, he voted against the Treasury Department's $700 billion bailout program for the financial-services industry, even as Boehner and Cantor voted for it after tense bipartisan negotiations with the administration.

Auto Bailout

All three Republicans opposed a rescue plan for mortgage giants Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac in late July, and all three oppose the auto industry's bid for $25 billion in additional aid this month.

That view isn't so popular with everyone back home. His eastern Indiana district contains a General Motors Corp. parts plant in Muncie and thousands of retired GM workers in his district could be affected by congressional action.

This week, he attended the opening of a Honda Motor Co. plant that is producing Honda Civics in Greensburg, Indiana, and eventually will employ 2,000 people.

During that visit, Pence says executives pressed him to support the auto aid in a private meeting.

Ed Cohen, a top lobbyist for American Honda Motor Co., says the Japanese company isn't taking a position on the loans for the Big Three rivals, though it is concerned that GM's troubles could affect their supply chain.

``All the auto companies are intertwined at the supplier level,'' Cohen says. ``Any kind of disruption of the supply chain can have an impact on us.''

Pence says he is convinced most of his constituents are on his side. He says he saw ``overwhelming'' support for his position against the financial-rescue plan last month. The best step for the GM and other auto companies is probably reorganization under the U.S. bankruptcy code, he adds.

``Simply pouring $25 billion into the `Big Three' automakers without getting them some means to restructure their business plans seems to me to be ill-advised,'' Pence says.

To contact the reporters on this story: Laura Litvan in Washington at llitvan@bloomberg.net

Last Updated: November 21, 2008 00:01 EST

http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601070&sid=aTRtiwnWehww

 

[VegasGuy]

Return to Reagan roots? They mean Reagan era talking points of 30 plus years ago. If anything. Reagan's roots was that of a democrat. Reagan himself was an actor they used to sell the nation a bunch of deception framed as policy.

They never left those talking points which is why they are in the wilderness today. People see through that bullshit. Fact is they have no principals that doesn't involve the kind of hate and division we've seen at their rally's. This is the real GOP and the nation is tired of them. The world is tired of them.

-VG

 

[actinanass]

Return to Reagan roots? They mean Reagan era talking points of 30 plus years ago. If anything. Reagan's roots was that of a democrat. Reagan himself was an actor they used to sell the nation a bunch of deception framed as policy.

They never left those talking points which is why they are in the wilderness today. People see through that bullshit. Fact is they have no principals that doesn't involve the kind of hate and division we've seen at their rally's. This is the real GOP and the nation is tired of them. The world is tired of them.

-VG

damn dude, for all this time, I thought you was an independent.

What deception Reagan pulled? Did we NOT win the cold war? Did we NOT have one of the best economy in world history because of his policies? How come I can give FDR, JFK, and LBJ credit, yet you cannot give Reagan his due?

Back to the OP's subject, the republicans fuck off a good opportunity when they had the majority. Instead of doing the right thing, they spent money like they were the democrats. If you notice something, the democrats that gave Pelosi/Reid the leadership are not the type of democrats Pelosi/Reid are policy wise. Most Democrats, in congress, are what you called conservative democrats. This is how BUSH got funding for the war all them times. What the republicans must do is go outside the box with the type of people they recruit. Keep the same ideas *lower taxes, strong military, growing the economy, cutting government, and protecting the constitution*, however, bring more people into the fold. Meaning, try to get more minority entrepreneurs into congress. Basically, getting new blood into the conservative ideology. The first step was already in the works with getting Sarah Palin. In spite of how many ON HERE feel about her, that was a good move to get her in the limelight for the republicans. The only thing needs to happen with Palin is that she needs to coached up on matters like foreign policy, and military strategy.

Another key thing, the republicans need to invest in finding GOOD SPEAKERS that can carry Reagan's message like it's suppose to be carried.

The prove that I'm independent, I can tell you how Obama will have a good presidency if you like.....

 

[VegasGuy]

damn dude, for all this time, I thought you was an independent.

What deception Reagan pulled? Did we NOT win the cold war? Did we NOT have one of the best economy in world history because of his policies? How come I can give FDR, JFK, and LBJ credit, yet you cannot give Reagan his due?

Republican party is where my comments are diplomat. Fuck Reagan. Read my comments again. Reagan was largely a non issue since his purposes are largely celebrity and reading repaired speeches he did not write. But again, if republicans want to openly take credit for lack of oversight and deregulation of the banks and financial system in public then be my guest. There isn't a damn thing about a cold war that created one job in the private sector that I know of.

Back to the OP's subject, the republicans fuck off a good opportunity when they had the majority. Instead of doing the right thing, they spent money like they were the democrats. If you notice something, the democrats that gave Pelosi/Reid the leadership are not the type of democrats Pelosi/Reid are policy wise. Most Democrats, in congress, are what you called conservative democrats. This is how BUSH got funding for the war all them times. What the republicans must do is go outside the box with the type of people they recruit. Keep the same ideas *lower taxes, strong military, growing the economy, cutting government, and protecting the constitution*, however, bring more people into the fold. Meaning, try to get more minority entrepreneurs into congress. Basically, getting new blood into the conservative ideology. The first step was already in the works with getting Sarah Palin. In spite of how many ON HERE feel about her, that was a good move to get her in the limelight for the republicans. The only thing needs to happen with Palin is that she needs to coached up on matters like foreign policy, and military strategy.

Another key thing, the republicans need to invest in finding GOOD SPEAKERS that can carry Reagan's message like it's suppose to be carried.

The prove that I'm independent, I can tell you how Obama will have a good presidency if you like.....

See that's the thing. Republicans like the same big government they claim democrats like. Bush interviewed with Barbara Walters and found a way to mention just how much he planned to spend if he gets elected. He talked about the trillions in surplus we had and how he planned to get at those dollars with a quickness. We now see the result of electing people on Reagan era talking points. This country is in the biggest financial mess it has ever seen in history.

This is this republican legacy. Hate, smear, trickle down, morass, division, bigotry, real America vs those who disagree with them and death threats to the president elect. What the fuck nation is this?

Reagan ain't got shit to do with it. Just a name they hide behind to do their dirt. Much like republicans use the church to hide behind to do dirt to America. Like I said, fuck a Ronald Reagan. You know he hasn't driven a nail since before he stepped foot in the Oval Office.

-VG

 

[actinanass]

Republican party is where my comments are diplomat. Fuck Reagan. Read my comments again. Reagan was largely a non issue since his purposes are largely celebrity and reading repaired speeches he did not write. But again, if republicans want to openly take credit for lack of oversight and deregulation of the banks and financial system in public then be my guest. There isn't a damn thing about a cold war that created one job in the private sector that I know of.



See that's the thing. Republicans like the same big government they claim democrats like. Bush interviewed with Barbara Walters and found a way to mention just how much he planned to spend if he gets elected. He talked about the trillions in surplus we had and how he planned to get at those dollars with a quickness. We now see the result of electing people on Reagan era talking points. This country is in the biggest financial mess it has ever seen in history.

This is this republican legacy. Hate, smear, trickle down, morass, division, bigotry, real America vs those who disagree with them and death threats to the president elect. What the fuck nation is this?

Reagan ain't got shit to do with it. Just a name they hide behind to do their dirt. Much like republicans use the church to hide behind to do dirt to America. Like I said, fuck a Ronald Reagan. You know he hasn't driven a nail since before he stepped foot in the Oval Office.

-VG

here's the thing, BOTH SIDES ARE DIRTY.....

If you think that the republicans started this shit, you need to read up on your history.

BTW, you talk about regulations with the banks, funny that when republicans wanted to put some new regulations on some institutions WE DIDN'T HEAR SHIT FROM YOU. Remember 2005?

What was the big issue during 2005? The economy was GOOD in 2005 remember? OH YEAAAAA it was IRAQ. Everyone was bitching about IRAQ in 2005. The economy was at a HISTORIC HIGH during that time. I'm getting rather sick of Ya'll giving these knee jerk reactions just because it is shaky RIGHT NOW. I've been for letting the banks sort themselves out, and NOT bailing them out. The only way banks won't result back WITHOUT regulating the shit out of them is to let them fail.

I would even go as far as to say McCain supporting the bailout destroyed his chances to win the election....

BTW, I haven't heard anyone talking about killing Obama. Can you find a link that support this claim?

 

[Cruise]

damn dude, for all this time, I thought you was an independent.

What deception Reagan pulled? Did we NOT win the cold war? Did we NOT have one of the best economy in world history because of his policies? How come I can give FDR, JFK, and LBJ credit, yet you cannot give Reagan his due?

Back to the OP's subject, the republicans fuck off a good opportunity when they had the majority. Instead of doing the right thing, they spent money like they were the democrats. If you notice something, the democrats that gave Pelosi/Reid the leadership are not the type of democrats Pelosi/Reid are policy wise. Most Democrats, in congress, are what you called conservative democrats. This is how BUSH got funding for the war all them times. What the republicans must do is go outside the box with the type of people they recruit. Keep the same ideas *lower taxes, strong military, growing the economy, cutting government, and protecting the constitution*, however, bring more people into the fold. Meaning, try to get more minority entrepreneurs into congress. Basically, getting new blood into the conservative ideology. The first step was already in the works with getting Sarah Palin. In spite of how many ON HERE feel about her, that was a good move to get her in the limelight for the republicans. The only thing needs to happen with Palin is that she needs to coached up on matters like foreign policy, and military strategy.

Another key thing, the republicans need to invest in finding GOOD SPEAKERS that can carry Reagan's message like it's suppose to be carried.

The prove that I'm independent, I can tell you how Obama will have a good presidency if you like.....

You think Palin, the person, was a good pick? I think Palin, as a female, was good but Palin is not someone who should be representing the diverse nation of the United States.

Her vision is too parochial. I think the electoral map shows her appeal is to the hard core bigots, racists, and white supremacists.

When Obama showed a coalition of Spanish-speakers, slave descendants, liberal whites, rich bleeding hearts, with a sprinkle of independents can beat Dixiecrat politics, it shows Palin would drastically need to reinvent herself to be taken seriously again on the national stage.

 

[actinanass]

You think Palin, the person, was a good pick? I think Palin, as a female, was good but Palin is not someone who should be representing the diverse nation of the United States.

Her vision is too parochial. I think the electoral map shows her appeal is to the hard core bigots, racists, and white supremacists.

When Obama showed a coalition of Spanish-speakers, slave descendants, liberal whites, rich bleeding hearts, with a sprinkle of independents can beat Dixiecrat politics, it shows Palin would drastically need to reinvent herself to be taken seriously again on the national stage.

So, how did Palin ended up representing racism? Where the fuck did that come from? Again, show proof of your accusations.

All I'm saying is that Palin was a good start. Does Palin needs to modify parts of her appeal? I would be naive to say no because she needs to know how to combat some of the bias questions she will receive from outlets in the media. Palin's best plan is to try to get a senate seat. Stay one term, then try to become president.

 

[Cruise]

So, how did Palin ended up representing racism? Where the fuck did that come from? Again, show proof of your accusations.

All I'm saying is that Palin was a good start. Does Palin needs to modify parts of her appeal? I would be naive to say no because she needs to know how to combat some of the bias questions she will receive from outlets in the media. Palin's best plan is to try to get a senate seat. Stay one term, then try to become president.

Just do a search on youtube for palin racism. You'll see the kind of people that like Sarah Palin.

She never corrected these people.

In fact, she kept insisting on linking Obama with terrorism and Rev. Wright.

The Rev. Wright connection is especially irritating because it only appeals to the white supremacist mentality.

Whether you think she doesn't appeal to this crowd or not many see her as a divider, not uniter. She is an "us vs. them"-type rather than a "we're all in this together"-type.

For that reason, if John McCain had known how polarizing a figure she'd become (similar to Hillary Clinton), he never would have chosen her.

If the Sarah Palin of 2008 ever becomes President, she'll be the last President before the United States dissolves as a political/governmental entity.

Officially, she is a political loser.

For her to win, she needs to completely remake herself politically to remove the stink of her 2008 defeat.

 

[actinanass]

Just do a search on youtube for palin racism. You'll see the kind of people that like Sarah Palin.

She never corrected these people.

In fact, she kept insisting on linking Obama with terrorism and Rev. Wright.

The Rev. Wright connection is especially irritating because it only appeals to the white supremacist mentality.

Whether you think she doesn't appeal to this crowd or not many see her as a divider, not uniter. She is an "us vs. them"-type rather than a "we're all in this together"-type.

For that reason, if John McCain had known how polarizing a figure she'd become (similar to Hillary Clinton), he never would have chosen her.

If the Sarah Palin of 2008 ever becomes President, she'll be the last President before the United States dissolves as a political/governmental entity.

Officially, she is a political loser.

For her to win, she needs to completely remake herself politically to remove the stink of her 2008 defeat.

For one, who supports her do not represent who she is. So, if she doesn't address the negative comments *racially* she has to be racist? If you going with that logic, don't get mad if a white person generalize you because what one of our own do.

Honestly, if Obama can become president without no executive, or military experience whatsoever anything can happen. Be careful of your exaggerations because the jury is still out on Obama.

The misconception everyone got from the 2008 election is that Palin was McCain's downfall. In fact, McCain is the reason McCain lost. McCain biggest mistake was the fact that he signed on the bailout. Of anything, Palin gave more energy to McCain's campaign.

 

[Cruise]

For one, who supports her do not represent who she is. So, if she doesn't address the negative comments *racially* she has to be racist? If you going with that logic, don't get mad if a white person generalize you because what one of our own do.

Honestly, if Obama can become president without no executive, or military experience whatsoever anything can happen. Be careful of your exaggerations because the jury is still out on Obama.

Don't get carried away. I never said Palin was racist. My point was she tailored her message to appeal to white supremacists.

Besides, all those interviews she did made her seem uninformed and irritating (all that winking and wrinkling her nose was a bit over the top).

I don't see Palin making a comeback on the national stage without some major retooling.

McCain is the reason McCain lost. McCain biggest mistake was the fact that he signed on the bailout. Of anything, Palin gave more energy to McCain's campaign.

I agree, McCain didn't help himself with that comment about the fundamentals of the economy being strong back in September. It showed he was out of touch.

The economy destroyed McCain's chances.

His support of the bailout was another nail in the coffin.

Thus, the voters took their wrath out on McCain (clueless) and Palin (race-baiting).

 

[actinanass]

Don't get carried away. I never said Palin was racist. My point was she tailored her message to appeal to white supremacists.

Besides, all those interviews she did made her seem uninformed and irritating (all that winking and wrinkling her nose was a bit over the top).

I don't see Palin making a comeback on the national stage without some major retooling.



I agree, McCain didn't help himself with that comment about the fundamentals of the economy being strong back in September. It showed he was out of touch.

The economy destroyed McCain's chances.

His support of the bailout was another nail in the coffin.

Thus, the voters took their wrath out on McCain (clueless) and Palin (race-baiting).

1. My point is, you could of draw that conclusion with any opponent of Obama. The only way race wouldn't of been an issue if ALL candidates were black. That when "self-hatred" would kick in. *aka black democrats calling black republicans "coons" and shit like that. Back to the subject, why should it be Palin's job to tell ignorant folks to stfu about Obama's race?

2. I blame the interview part on the McCain camp solely. Its a well known fact that republicans will get tougher questions by the mainstream media than democrats. McCain's camp should of coached her specifically for this situation. McCain had soooooooo much time he could of worked with Palin to get her ready for the barrage.

I agree with you about Palin coming back. However, I do believe that she is a likable character that can become leadership on the republican side. This is why I suggest that she should run for that open senate seat in Alaska.

 

[Greed]

Republican Battle for Party Chief Pits Leaders, Base

Republican Battle for Party Chief Pits Leaders, Base (Update1)
By Heidi Przybyla

Jan. 23 (Bloomberg) -- Republican leaders’ efforts to select a new national party chairman are stirring concerns among a vital constituency: Republican voters.

Rank-and-file Republicans are telling their leaders they want more ethnic, gender and age diversity in a party that is dominated by white males. They also want party leaders to cooperate with President Barack Obama, according to surveys.

After losing the White House and 28 seats in Congress last year, some party leaders still aren’t hearing the message from voters who are urging them to claw their way back to power by promoting minorities and striking a less partisan tone, said Rich Bond, a former Republican National Committee chairman.

“We need a great deal more tolerance for the other guy’s point of view,” Bond said. “Not everybody comes from the same constituency as a majority-white homogenous district in the South where all people care about is keeping their guns and taxes.”

The 168 members of the RNC will vote for a new chairman as early as Jan. 29. Four of the candidates are white males. The two others are black, including Ken Blackwell, a former Ohio secretary of state. He is favored by the party’s social conservatives, who value ideological purity over compromise.

Black Candidate

The profile of the other black candidate, former Maryland Lieutenant Governor Michael Steele, may be more in tune with the voters’ aspirations for change. Yet he has aroused suspicion among RNC leaders because of his past willingness to work with Democratic-leaning groups and Democratic lawmakers.

“The one I ruled out from the beginning is Michael Steele,” said Steve Scheffler, an Iowa committeeman. “I don’t think you can be all things to all people.”

That mistrust may put the Republican leaders at odds with the party’s shifting base. A Jan. 9-12 Wall Street Journal poll bolsters the case that Republican voters are looking for leaders who are willing to work with Democrats. Sixty-eight percent of Republicans and independents said the party’s lawmakers should seek compromise on a Democratic-backed economic stimulus plan. Only 20 percent said the lawmakers should oppose it.

Separately, a Republican consultant found in recent research that voters are looking for more diversity and compromise with the new administration.

New England

The hard line taken by the leaders has already cost the party, which has become increasingly rural and Southern. With the defeat last year of Representative Chris Shays in Connecticut, Republicans no longer hold any House seats in socially moderate New England. The party also lost three House seats in New York, one in New Jersey and one in Pennsylvania, making Republicans an endangered species in the Northeast. Of New England’s 12 U.S. senators, only two are Republicans, Judd Gregg of New Hampshire and Olympia Snowe of Maine.

“It is a really glaring problem region for them right now,” said David Wasserman, House editor of the Cook Political Report, a nonpartisan publication in Washington.

While some Republicans dispute the importance of the RNC chairman, the position may be more important than ever this year if the party is to respond to calls for change.

So far, the Republican leadership in both the House and the Senate hasn’t changed, with Mitch McConnell of Kentucky remaining in his post as Senate minority leader and Representative John Boehner of Ohio holding the reins in the House.

Rebuilding a Majority

The RNC chairman will play a major role in rebuilding the party, said Republican strategist David Winston. During the election, Democrats demonstrated a clear technology and grassroots advantage, harnessing text messages and social- networking sites to collect more than 13 million addresses and raise half a billion dollars.

“The election of this particular chair, given the loss that just happened, is very important,” Winston said. “The key is electing someone who understands how to rebuild the majority coalition.”

Yet judging from a recent public debate about the party chairman’s job, much of the discussion among RNC leaders remains centered on ideology.

During the Jan. 5 panel in Washington, the candidates had little to say about diversity or how to retool the party. Instead, they discussed their values, including opposition to abortion, higher taxes and how many guns they owned.

Reagan, Lincoln

When asked to name their favorite Republican president, all chose Ronald Reagan and none mentioned Abraham Lincoln, whom Obama cites as an example for his presidency.

During a closed-door meeting with RNC leaders, Steele, 50, was grilled for having worked with liberal groups and about his support from the Log Cabin Republicans, which represents gays and lesbians.

“He was addressing concerns that he wasn’t actually conservative, that he wasn’t actually pro-life, that he didn’t actually have conservative values, and I think he expressed very clearly and showed based on his record that in fact he is,” said Jim Dyke, Steele’s spokesman.

Steele’s opponents also cite his scant experience as a state chairman, the facts that he isn’t an RNC member and that he lost his 2006 bid for a Maryland U.S. Senate seat to Democrat Ben Cardin.

Other Candidates

The other candidates running for the chairmanship are Michigan Republican Party Chairman Saul Anuzis, who highlights his roots as a son of Lithuanian immigrants, former Teamster and motorcyclist; Katon Dawson, the South Carolina Republican Party chairman who emphasizes the need to stick to a conservative message; Chip Salzman, who was campaign manager for former Arkansas Governor Mike Huckabee’s presidential bid; and the current party chairman, Mike Duncan.

The focus on ideology over the technical skills needed to run the RNC -- including raising money and recruiting candidates -- is drawing criticism from some Republicans.

“This is not the old Soviet Union where you have the ideology minister on the Politburo,” said former Minnesota Congressman Vin Weber, an unaligned Republican strategist. “There’s nobody in the Republican Party who determines ideology from the top down, so if you elect a chairman based on ideology you’re probably going to make a mistake.”

To contact the reporter on this story: Heidi Przybyla in Washington at hprzybyla@bloomberg.net

http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601070&sid=aBwpO03_b_xI&refer=home

 

[Greed]

Michael Steele becomes first black RNC chairman

Michael Steele becomes first black RNC chairman
By LIZ SIDOTI, Associated Press Writer – 1 hr 32 mins ago

WASHINGTON – The Republican Party chose the first black national chairman in its history Friday, just shy of three months after the nation elected a Democrat as the first African-American president. The choice marked no less than "the dawn of a new party," declared the new GOP chairman, former Maryland Lt. Gov. Michael Steele. Republicans chose Steele over four other candidates, including former President George W. Bush's hand-picked GOP chief, who bowed out declaring, "Obviously the winds of change are blowing."

Steele takes the helm of a beleaguered Republican Party that is trying to recover after crushing defeats in November's national elections that gave Democrats control of Congress put Barack Obama in the White House.

GOP delegates erupted in cheers and applause when his victory was announced, but it took six ballots to get there. He'll serve a two-year term.

Steele, an attorney, is a conservative, but he was considered the most moderate of the five candidates running.

He was also considered an outsider because he's not a member of the Republican National Committee. But the 168-member RNC clearly signaled it wanted a change after eight years of Bush largely dictating its every move as the party's standard-bearer.

Steele became the first black candidate elected to statewide office in Maryland in 2002, and he made an unsuccessful Senate run in 2006. The former chairman of the Maryland Republican Party currently serves as chairman of GOPAC, an organization that recruits and trains Republican political candidates, and in that role he has been a frequent presence on the talk show circuit.

He vowed to expand the reach of the party by competing for every group, everywhere.

"We're going to say to friend and foe alike: 'We want you to be a part of us, we want you to with be with us.' And for those who wish to obstruct, get ready to get knocked over," Steele said.

"There is not one inch of ground that we're going to cede to anybody," he added.

"This is the dawn of a new party moving in a new direction with strength and conviction."

His job is to spark a revival for the GOP as it takes on an empowered Democratic Party under the country's first black president in the next midterm elections and beyond.

He replaces Mike Duncan, who abandoned his re-election bid in the face of dwindling support midway through Friday's voting.

Two others who trailed farther back in the voting eventually followed suit, former Ohio Secretary of State Ken Blackwell and Michigan GOP chairman Saul Anuzis.

In the sixth and final round of voting, Steele went head-to-head with his only remaining opponent, South Carolina GOP chief Katon Dawson. Steele clinched the election with 91 votes; a majority of 85 committee members was needed.

Just eight years after Republicans controlled both the White House and Congress, the GOP finds itself out of power, without a standard-bearer and trying to figure out how to rebound while its foe seems to grow ever stronger.

The Democratic Party boasts a broadened coalition of voters — including Hispanics and young people — who swung behind Obama's call for change. At the same time, the slice of voters who call themselves Republican has narrowed. The GOP also has watched as Democrats have dominated both coasts while making inroads into the West and South, leaving Republicans with a shrunken base.

Despite the run of GOP losses, Duncan had argued that he should be re-elected because of his experience; his five challengers called for change and said they represented it.

As he left the race, Duncan thanked Bush and said of his two-year tenure: "It truly has been the highlight of my life."

Another candidate, former Tennessee GOP Chairman Chip Saltsman, withdrew from the race on the eve of voting and with no explanation, saying only in a letter to RNC members, "I have decided to withdraw my candidacy."

Saltsman, who ran former Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee's failed presidential campaign last year, saw his bid falter in December after he drew controversy for mailing to committee members a CD that included a song titled "Barack the Magic Negro" by conservative comedian Paul Shanklin and sung to the music of "Puff, the Magic Dragon."

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090131/ap_on_el_ge/republicans;_ylt=AoaCGvPc3OZa.JW_MIzKYTFI2ocA

 

[keysersoze]

Re: Michael Steele becomes first black RNC chairman

Steele, an attorney, is a conservative, but he was considered the most moderate of the five candidates running.

If Steele is the most moderate of the candidates, I guess I don't even want to know who conservative the rest of the Republican party head figures are!

 

[QueEx]

Re: Michael Steele becomes first black RNC chairman

If Steele is the most moderate of the candidates, I guess I don't even want to know who conservative the rest of the Republican party head figures are!

Whats do you see as the problem with Michael Steele ???

QueEx

 

[QueEx]

Re: Michael Steele becomes first black RNC chairman

<font size="5"><center>GOP picks its first black chairman,
but will change follow?</font size><font size="4">

Former Maryland Lt. Gov. Michael Steele is the Republican Party's
necessary response to President Barack Obama's historic election</font size></center>

McClatchy Newspapers
By James Rosen and
Halimah Abdullah
Friday, January 30, 2009


WASHINGTON — Republican leaders from across the country on Friday chose former Maryland Lt. Gov. Michael Steele as the party's first black national chairman in what many said was a necessary response to President Barack Obama's historic election.

Steele, a 50-year-old son of a laundress, defeated two state party heads and incumbent Republican National Committee chairman Mike Duncan in the sixth round of daylong voting.

"This is the dawn of a new party moving in a new direction," Steele said after his win.


<font size="3">Moderate Choice - Need to Change Direction</font size>

The choice of Steele, a relative moderate, to lead the party was the Republicans' first concrete acknowledgement since Obama's inauguration that they must chart a new course after George W. Bush's departure as one of America's least popular presidents.

Senate Republican leader Mitch McConnell of Kentucky, the embodiment of the GOP establishment in Washington, had urged activists a day earlier to end the divisiveness of the Bush years and open the party to new viewpoints.

Steele vowed that Republicans no longer would cede most of the Northeast, the Midwest and other regions to the Democrats.

"We're going to bring this party to every corner, to every boardroom, to every neighborhood, to every community," Steele declared to a standing ovation in a Capital Hilton ballroom. "We're going to say to friend and foe alike that we want you to be part of us. And to those who wish to obstruct — get ready to get knocked over!"

The selection of a new Republican standard-bearer from heavily Democratic Maryland over four other party leaders reflected the widespread view that the GOP must draw younger, more diverse voters to the fold.

"In the 21st century, the Republican Party realizes and America realizes that the party needs to change," said Johnnie Morgan, a black Los Angeles activist.

Duncan, of Kentucky, who was seeking re-election despite Republican national election losses in 2006 and in November, dropped out after falling behind Steele in the third round of voting.

Steele defeated the last remaining candidate, South Carolina Republican chairman Katon Dawson, on the sixth ballot.

Dawson, 52, congratulated Steele on his election.

"Today's hard-fought election among five honorable candidates for chairman was a testament to the strength of our cause and ideals," Dawson said.

Dawson's supporters, though, were stunned when the second black candidate, former Ohio Secretary of State Ken Blackwell, withdrew and asked his supporters to back Steele. Blackwell's handling of the Ohio elections in 2004, which Bush won, came under considerable criticism for alleged voting irregularities.

Blackwell, who had the backing of many social conservatives, said afterward that he hadn't chosen race over philosophy.

"I deplore racial politics," Blackwell said. "It's never worked."

Blackwell said that Steele opposes abortion, backs gun owners' rights and holds other conservative views.

Patrick Ruffini, a 30-year-old Republican who launched www.rebuildtheparty.com two days after John McCain's loss to Obama, said Steele's first tasks must be "closing the huge technology gap" Obama exposed and reaching out to voters under 30.

"We cannot lose an entire generation of voters," Ruffini said.


<font size="3">RNC Right Dismayed by Steele's Connection to Left</font size>

Some of the 168 RNC members in attendance were dismayed by Steele's election.

Steve Scheffler, head of the Iowa Christian Alliance, said Steele had ties to Republicans for Choice, Log Cabin Republicans — a gay-rights group — and others at odds with party conservatives.

"It's a whole group that is as far left as you can get," Scheffler said. "I'll support Steele because I'm a good party solider, but certainly he's my last choice."

Steele's victory revives a political career that was in decline after his loss to Rep. Benjamin Cardin in Maryland's 2006 Senate race. He defeated Blackwell, two state party chairmen — Dawson and Saul Anuzis of Michigan — and the incumbent national chairman.

A sixth candidate, Tennessee Republican chairman Chip Saltsman, withdrew from the race Thursday after enduring weeks of ridicule over sending his supporters a CD that included a song entitled "Barack the Magic Negro."

Ron Thomas, a lawyer and Dawson supporter from South Carolina, said he was disappointed in his candidate's loss, but said that he looked forward to Steele's leadership of the party.

"It's a historic day to have a minority picked as chairman," said Thomas, who's black. "It's just an exciting time to have this chairman and to have Barack Obama as president."

(David Lightman contributed to this article.)

http://www.mcclatchydc.com/227/story/61199.html

 

[Lamarr]

Allow me to chime in on this:

There was a time years ago that Rush was a voice in the wilderness who spoke the truth and took on the GOP establishment . Those days are long gone. Rush is the mouthpiece of the GOP establishment now. He is rapidly becoming irrelevant because he failed to grasp the new direction that constitutional conservatives are heading in. He mocked and dismissed Ron Paul. Huge mistake. Why? Because Ron Paul isn't going away. His voice grows louder and more influential as every prediction of the economic crisis we face made more then 20 years ago is unfolding right before our eyes. Where was Limbaugh? Telling us the fundamentals were strong and that the crisis is being caused by the Liberals who are talking us into a recession. Limbaugh was saying this nonsense right up till the election. Limbaugh has never to my knowledge exposed the fraud of the Federal Reserve. Nor has he exposed the fraud of the Income Tax. One of the most hypocritical positions Rush has taken is his support for the Drug War. All while facing charges for abusing pain pills. Especially puzzling considering his conservative idol William Buckley very publicly criticized the folly of the Drug War. Rush like Sean Hannity makes millions of dollars a year and both protect the GOP establishment. The election of Michael Steele as RNC Chairman a Bush Republican, was clear evidence that the GOP's claim to be reforming is a sick joke. Rush, I believe will continue his role as the protector of brand Republican no matter how corrupt they remain. Rush puts party before country and that is the best reason I can think of for sending Rush off to retirement in Florida. We have new voices in the media to listen to. Glenn Beck, John Stossel, Lou Dobbs to name a few. To my fellow Republicans who feel your values have been betrayed you won't hear objective views from Rush, Hannity, or Medved etc etc.. You will only get Neoconservative propaganda masquerading as Traditional Conservatism.

Repubs, you've been hoodwinked!

 

[QueEx]

- Dwane Powell / Raleigh News and Observer (January 30, 2009)

​

 

[keysersoze]

Re: Michael Steele becomes first black RNC chairman

Whats do you see as the problem with Michael Steele ???

QueEx

Its not with Steele as much as it is with the other heads of the Republican party.

Steele is not that bad, he gets a bad wrap, but he is moderate in many ways such as the death penalty and affirmative action.

 

[QueEx]

Re: Michael Steele becomes first black RNC chairman

<font size="3">

Steele says he will focus on 3 critical races to revive the GOP:

1. "The most critical battles for the GOP is to capture New York's 20th congressional seat -- formerly held by U.S. Sen. Kristen Gillibrand, D-N.Y.
   
   "It is the first of a series of races that are coming up that are going to be incredibly important," Steele said in remarks Saturday to the Republican House Retreat in Hot Springs, Va.
   
   "That win will send a powerful signal to the rest of the country and especially those folks in the elite media who think they know so much more than the rest of us," he said.
   
   
2. the GOP's second focus will be on winning the governorship in both Virginia and New Jersey, along with other state offices.
   
   "That is our fight," he said of the two races.
   
   
3. Steele also stressed the importance of winning "reapportionment races at the state level."

</font size>
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2009/01/31/steele-focused-critical-races-rebuilding-gop/

`

 

[keysersoze]

Steele’s Challenge​

He faces some tough GOP math.​

By John J. Pitney Jr.

On winning the chairmanship of the Republican National Committee, Michael Steele pledged to “bring this party to every corner, every boardroom, every neighborhood, every community.” He was engaging in rhetorical stretch: Given its limited resources, the RNC cannot literally go everywhere. But his aspiration makes political sense. On the congressional level, Republicans have to expand their reach, because Democrats currently have a bigger playing field.

Democrats can contest just about every kind of House district: rich and poor, rural and urban, black and white. Last year, Montgomery mayor Bobby Bright won an Alabama district that had belonged to the GOP since 1965. In the First District of Idaho, which President Bush twice carried by 2-to-1 margins, Democrat Walt Minnick ousted Republican incumbent Bill Sali. The list goes on.

It doesn’t work the other way around. There was only one 2008 race—an odd one—where a Republican took a deep-blue district. With a delayed election date that depressed turnout, Anh “Joseph” Cao edged out scandal-scarred William Jefferson in Louisiana’s Katrina-depopulated Second District.

That was a fluke. In reality, large swatches of Democratic turf are off limits to the GOP. Ever since the 1960s, Republicans have seldom won more than 10 percent of the black vote, so they are not competitive in African-American districts. Democrats hold 30 of the 31 districts where African Americans make up 40 percent or more of the population (with Cao’s seat as the sole exception). Republicans also find it tough to win Hispanic votes. Democrats have 35 of the 42 districts that are at least 40 percent Hispanic. The few Republican victories are not signs of progress: Three of the seven come from the Cuban American districts in Florida, whose voting patterns differ from those of other Hispanic communities.

New England Republicans have been an endangered species for years, and with the 2008 defeat of Chris Shays, they hold none of New England’s 22 House seats. Now is the first time that the region has lacked any Republican House members since the party’s formation in the 1850s. The neighboring state of New York once had a robust GOP that could win even urban areas. No more. Of New York’s 29 House members, only three are Republicans, none from New York City.

In all, 106 Democratic districts fall into one or more of these categories: black, Hispanic, New England, New York. If the GOP concedes these seats, then it must win about two-thirds of the rest in order to regain a majority. It is hard to see how Republicans could pull off that feat, especially when Democrats can snatch so many GOP seats.

The Senate numbers are just as discouraging. After taking over a number of Republican seats in 2008, Democrats are nearing a 60-vote majority. Bringing down that number will be difficult. According to Gallup, there are seven states in which Democrats have at least a 25-point lead in party identification: Rhode Island, Massachusetts, Hawaii, Vermont, New York, Connecticut, and Maryland. (Republicans do not have as large a margin in any state, even Utah.) No Republican has won a Senate election in any of these states since 2000.

But these seven have something else in common: All have elected a Republican governor at least once in the last eight years. Gubernatorial elections are different from senatorial elections, because governors deal with different issues and expectations. Nevertheless, these GOP victories suggest that the Republican label is not totally toxic in blue America. Chairman Steele—who himself won statewide office in Maryland—might give careful analysis to these states to see what Senate candidates can learn from GOP governors.

He might also study the other side. As Democratic national chairman, Howard Dean pursued a “50-state strategy” to rebuild party organizations in places where they had withered. Though the strategy was controversial at first, there is evidence that it has been a major asset. If Steele takes this approach, he may have to work harder than Dean. As long as President Obama is in office, the GOP will make little headway in African American constituencies. And it will take time and patience to crack other Democratic strongholds.

That poses special difficulties, because candidates and their staffs understandably focus on the next election, not the next decade. But if Republicans hope to recover, they need to take a realistic, long-term perspective. They need not aim for radical transformations: A few points here and a few points there can make a real difference.

Such a strategy does not mean that Republicans must renounce the Second Amendment, embrace abortion, or endorse amnesty for illegal aliens. Indeed, it would make no sense to abandon the principles that matter to the party’s most loyal supporters. But Republicans do have to frame those principles in terms that appeal to a wider array of voters. The party cannot think of growing if it depends on a base that is shrinking.

— John J. Pitney Jr. is the Roy P. Crocker professor of government at Claremont McKenna College. With James Ceaser and Andrew Busch, he is co-author of Epic Journey: The 2008 Elections and American Politics.

 

[QueEx]

<font size="5"><Center>
Cheney’s Model Republican:
More Limbaugh, Less Powell </font size>
<font size="4">
Powell abandoned the Republican Party
when he endorsed Barack Obama for president last year</font size></center>



New York Times
By JANIE LORBER
Published: May 10, 2009


WASHINGTON — Former Vice President Dick Cheney said on Sunday that he preferred Rush Limbaugh’s brand of conservatism to former Secretary of State Colin L. Powell’s, saying Mr. Powell had abandoned the Republican Party when he endorsed Barack Obama for president last year.

“Well, if I had to choose in terms of being a Republican, I’d go with Rush Limbaugh, I think,” Mr. Cheney said in an interview on “Face the Nation” on CBS. “I think my take on it was Colin had already left the party. I didn’t know he was still a Republican.”

Mr. Cheney said he “assumed” Mr. Powell’s support of Mr. Obama over Senator John McCain was “an indication of his loyalty and his interest.” The endorsement, in a carefully timed and deliberate statement after Mr. McCain chose Gov. Sarah Palin of Alaska as his running mate in a move to fire up the party’s conservative base, helped solidify Mr. Obama’s campaign.

Mr. Powell, a retired chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, identified himself as a Republican only after retiring from the military. Last week, Mr. Powell said the Republican Party was in “deep trouble” and needed to find a way back to the middle of the political spectrum and away from polarizing leaders like Mr. Limbaugh and Ms. Palin.

His view, if not a new one, came after Senator Arlen Specter of Pennsylvania switched to the Democratic Party and as Republicans debated where the heart of the party lay. In response, Mr. Limbaugh suggested that the moderate Mr. Powell should leave the party.

“What Colin Powell needs to do is close the loop and become a Democrat, instead of claiming to be a Republican interested in reforming the Republican Party,” Mr. Limbaugh said on his talk show.

Mr. Cheney has been a particularly fierce critic of the Obama administration and a defiant defender against critics of the Bush administration, including President Obama. While his remarks have been striking, they are not unusually outspoken by comparison, for example, to former Vice President Al Gore’s condemnations of the Bush administration when it held office.

Mr. Cheney said he did not want to drive moderates from the party, but did not want the party to move left.

“I think there is room for moderates in the Republican Party,” he said. “I think partly it’s a semantic problem. I don’t think the party ought to move dramatically to the left, for example, in order to try to redefine its base. We are what we are.”


http://www.nytimes.com/2009/05/11/us/politics/11cheney.html

 

[QueEx]

 

[QueEx]

<font size="6"><center>
Cheney's party </font size></center>

Dick Cheney has been making
regular appearances on cable
TV news


BBC News
By Matt Frei
BBC News, Washington
Wednesday, 13 May 2009


Only four years ago, flush with the re-election of George W Bush and the expansion of the GOP majority on Capitol Hill, Washington insiders fell over each other to predict how solid the Republican hold on power would be.

Democrats seemed doomed to irrelevance.

But the tide began to turn almost immediately, as Mr Bush squandered his much-vaunted political capital, Iraq haemorrhaged American blood and Hurricane Katrina drowned any pretence of competence.

Today, some polls suggest that just one in five American voters now describe themselves as Republicans, George W Bush is so silent in retirement he appears to have gone into a witness protection programme, and his floundering party seems devoid of ideas, direction and plausible leaders.

But wait! There IS a Republican shuffling to centre-stage. The man who spent part of the last administration in an undisclosed location has popped out like a Jack-in-the-Box to take the Obama administration to task.


Conservative values

With the thawing of Spring and the greening of dead lawns, Dick Cheney has sprung back to life like a forgotten prickly plant. He has dominated the airwaves. Now even his daughter Liz is jousting on his behalf.

But with him as its figurehead, the GOP will have as much success vying for lost moderate voters as a garlic seller at a vampire's convention.

Eventually, the party will of course recover. Sooner or later Barack Obama may regret his joke that in the next 100 days he will "try to lose his cool".

Deep down, the conservative values of the Republican Party - faith, family, flag, low taxation and small government - are still the values of (much of) Middle America.

But for now, they have been put on the back-burner while the administration performs economic triage.

The continuing resonance of these values is, I believe, not in question. They are likely to reassert themselves precisely when the economy begins to recover and Americans stop assuming the foetal position and start flexing their muscles once again.

But for now, these are conservative values in search of a voice and Sarah Palin, Mitt Romney and Bobby Jindal do not quite seem to cut the mustard.

The implosion of the Republican Party reminds me of the collapse experienced by the British Conservative Party after its defeat in 1997.

The knives were out, and stayed out for almost a decade, as the party toppled one hapless leader after another and slithered about in a bloodbath of mutual recrimination while Lady Thatcher looked on like Banquo's ghost.

She revelled in the grim satisfaction that the decline started with the treachery committed against her. Arguably, the fall had begun during her reign precisely because the party had overreached itself.


Wilderness

Hubris did for the Tories, just as it appears to be New Labour's undoing (although you could argue that they have already soldiered on into nemesis, where they will already find the GOP having set up camp).

And who will they find round the camp-fire thumbing his nose at an uncomprehending world? Dick Cheney.

Mr Cheney predicted that the Iraq War would go relatively quickly and that the economy would continue to boom. He still asserts that waterboarding is not torture and that suspending it will endanger the US.

The former Vice-President has a loyal retinue of die-hard supporters.

If, heaven forbid, al-Qaeda were to strike again on the American homeland, his currency would doubtlessly rise.

But, for now, he and the remnants of his party wander the wilderness.

Or at least that part of the wilderness where cable TV hosts have studios.

Matt Frei is the presenter of BBC World News America which airs every weekday on BBC News, BBC World News and BBC America (for viewers outside the UK only).

 

[muckraker10021]

<img src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_wFWqWIH-WFU/Sej3w4sZ0hI/AAAAAAAAJlU/wJHerE5KGDQ/s320/gop.elephant.dead.jpg" width="209" height="186">

GOP R.I.P.
Conservative radio host John Batchelor says it’s obvious:
His Republican Party is a corpse. And its response to the financial crisis reveals how and when it died.

What remains to call themselves Republicans are baldly badly educated or just prankish Confederate re-enactors—chubby men in gray and butternut suits with gold buttons and feather-tipped hats, clanking down stairs with shiny sabers. A handful of them are just boors from the South who look poorly on horseback and wave unread Bibles while calling for Billy Sunday to rise like the gold market.

by John Batchelor

April 10, 2009

http://www.thedailybeast.com/blogs-and-stories/2009-04-10/gop-rip/p/

The Republican Party is dead like Lehman Brothers and Robert E. Lee, not to be revived by TARP, Rupert Murdoch, or a surge of feverish nationalism. The present financial collapse makes it plain to see that the Republican Party did not die recently at the hands of the clever Democrats, but rather in 1933 at the hands of cowards, sycophants, and snobs who regarded the awesome Democratic victories in 1930 and 1932 as a “smear” of Herbert Hoover and a “panic.” Since the Great Depression I, the Democrats have been the electorate’s default choice, the politicians who rule as if America was simultaneously a school district, a union hall, a junior-year-abroad seminar, and a PAC. The Republicans who pop up now and again thrive in the empty-quarter counties of the West or in the so-called Old South, which is better understood as Confederacy Lite.

<blockquote>
“GOP is a mummy-wrapped skeleton sitting in its own chilly mausoleum of bilious resentments and creepy sentimentality.” </blockquote>
I am the son, grandson, and great-grandson of Hoosier Republicans who marched through Georgia with Sherman, endured jobs on the Pennsy, and then survived the Hitlerites from Omaha Beach to Berlin. My father is at Arlington now and would not at first be comfortable with my saying what he himself could see in his last years as he watched the Keystone State become solid blue. The Democrats win just because the Republicans have disqualified themselves as leaders with their greed, cruelty, and surprising clumsiness. From Herbert Hoover to Robert Taft, from the Bush clan to the ridiculous Tom DeLay, not one note of grace, not a convincing moment of understanding that the Republican Party is about honest liberty for honest, laboring people—not about Wall Street, the tax code, chasing Reds, or bullying the lonely.

Vigilant Democrats worry today that the Republican Party is only playing possum, or that it can be revived by extraordinary means such as a Martian invasion. In fact, the GOP is a mummy-wrapped skeleton sitting in its own chilly mausoleum of bilious resentments and creepy sentimentality. <span style="background-color: #FFFF00"><b>What remains to call themselves Republicans are baldly badly educated or just prankish Confederate re-enactors—chubby men in gray and butternut suits with gold buttons and feather-tipped hats, clanking down stairs with shiny sabers. A handful of them are just boors from the South who look poorly on horseback and wave unread Bibles while calling for Billy Sunday to rise like the gold market.</b></span>

What about Ike and Richard Nixon and the worshipped California cowboy manqué Ronald Reagan? Not one of them cared a toothpick for the Republican Party of their time and each struggled mightily to remake it. Ike was indifferent to partisanship: His beating of the splenetic Robert Taft in 1952 for the nomination was the success of a conqueror over a sharpie. Nixon was a troubled, spiteful Quaker who despised the Republican Party as the “Eastern Establishment,” and who governed as a liberal Democrat with the apostasy of wage and price controls, the EPA, and embassies to the mass-murdering Mao and the hollow Brezhnev. Reagan was a right-wing Democrat from homespun Illinois who, after years of failing in Hollywood and then charming California, swamped Jimmy Carter and Walter Mondale with the passionate votes of the Democratic Party. I have long suspected that the Kennedys voted for Reagan twice.

What about 1994? Georgia’s Newt Gingrich (born Newton McPherson in Pennsylvania to teenaged parents whose father immediately scrammed) was a gifted opportunist and compulsive gabber who asserted before the 1994 election that “Clinton Democrats” were “the enemy of normal Americans.” Gingrich made other heated claims that left no Yankee Republican in doubt that this was a man who dreamed to be either Jeff Davis or his butler. The Gingrich-led takeover of the House, matched by the cranky Bob Dole’s suzerainty in the lifeless Senate, can now be regarded not as a Republican comeback but as a transitional blip in which the baby boomers and Gen Xers established a new leadership of the Democratic Party.

As Speaker of the House, Gingrich wasted four years talking aimlessly about “normal Americans.” Then, after he failed against Bill Clinton with the silly ploy of using Monica Lewinsky and her Inspector Javert, Ken Starr, Gingrich fled to Fox TV to ramble harmlessly about “moral tone” and his enemies, “the very small counterculture elite.” Gingrich’s talking points have attracted imitators over the last decade, chiefly the Gingrich mini-me Karl Rove and Rove’s carny creation of George W. Bush.

There is much to explicate about Rove and Bush in the White House—their fearful temperament, their petty theories of governance, their inability to shoot straight so that, at firing at the lunatic bin Laden, they hit the cretin Saddam Hussein. But in terms of the death of the Republican Party, there is nothing original. The Rovian Bush midway was followed by the cartoon candidacy of John McCain, who spent months imitating both Popeye the Sailor and Sarah Palin’s Uncle Sam. That McCain didn’t claim to be more than an aviator, and that Palin didn’t claim to be more than a moose hunter, demonstrated that neither had need of, nor interest, in the Republican Party’s history or meaning.

What about the Republican Party right now? Isn’t it on radio and TV claiming to be the party of fiscal responsibility and American power? Bypassing the stupidity of these claims, I am on radio, on what is called right-wing radio, and it is easy for me to see that my loudest colleagues, who compulsively repeat the cant of Conservatism for Dummies, are not sincere students of the Republican Party but rather barkers, hookers, establishmentarian jesters, cultists, and, in the worst instance, just thatch-headed whiners. Fox News is a parade of wet-eared Republican office holders, yet there is usually just one each allowed of the categories the Democrats own in multitudes: a Jewish-American, an Asian-American, an African-American, a Hispanic-American. Then there is the beauty pageant of fast-talking, rude Fox blondes—if they are not all the same woman in mood swings—who stridently mock the Democrats, yet have almost nothing to say about the Republicans, as if the party was a disappointing ex or mother’s latest beau.

The party’s death 76 years ago was never more obvious than over the last six months of the financial crisis. The Democrats sensibly blamed the feckless, bootless Bush administration for the collapse of the markets. Tongue-tied Bush and dyspeptic Cheney defended themselves with grunts and sarcasm before they surrendered to Congress by sending out the plutocrat Hank Paulson with a plan called TARP (Troubled Asset Relief Program). A breathing Republican Party would have brought out the flintlocks, boarded the windows, and settled down for a defense of the republic. Instead, the Republican leadership in the House and Senate rushed to grab the pork bribery and vote with the Democrats. John Boehner, Roy Blunt, Eric Cantor, Mitch McConnell, and Judd Gregg distinguished themselves as dhimmis and were later rewarded by the victorious Democrats by being granted parakeet cages for offices in the new Congress. The House Republicans now boasts that they voted a goose egg against the stimulus package, but this was just the twitching of the corpse. The truth about the House Republicans—cowards, sycophants, and snobs just like 1930’s lot—is illustrated by the fact that 85 of them voted for the ludicrous AIG bonus-confiscation bill written on the back of a parking ticket.

The Republican Party’s death doesn’t really threaten anyone, and I puzzle why Democrats and independents who vote Democratic spend words and worry debating the look of the corpse. We few Republicans with long memories wander around the cemetery admiring the tombstones and enjoying the rain. I can hear you doubting that this could truly be the end. The final stage of grief is acceptance.

<HR NOSHADE COLOR="#ff0000" SIZE="10"></HR>

 

[Greed]

Welcome, Senate Conservatives

Welcome, Senate Conservatives
Remember what the voters back home want—less government and more freedom.
By JIM DEMINT

Congratulations to all the tea party-backed candidates who overcame a determined, partisan opposition to win their elections. The next campaign begins today. Because you must now overcome determined party insiders if this nation is going to be spared from fiscal disaster.

Many of the people who will be welcoming the new class of Senate conservatives to Washington never wanted you here in the first place. The establishment is much more likely to try to buy off your votes than to buy into your limited-government philosophy. Consider what former GOP senator-turned-lobbyist Trent Lott told the Washington Post earlier this year: "As soon as they get here, we need to co-opt them."

Don't let them. Co-option is coercion. Washington operates on a favor-based economy and for every earmark, committee assignment or fancy title that's given, payback is expected in return. The chits come due when the roll call votes begin. This is how big-spending bills that everyone always decries in public always manage to pass with just enough votes.

But someone can't be bribed if they aren't for sale. Here is some humble advice on how to recognize and refuse such offers.

First, don't request earmarks. If you do, you'll vote for legislation based on what's in it for your state, not what's best for the country. You will lose the ability to criticize wasteful spending. And, if you dare to oppose other pork-barrel projects, the earmarkers will retaliate against you.

In 2005, Sen. Tom Coburn (R., Okla.) offered a measure to kill funding for the infamous "Bridge to Nowhere." Before the vote, Sen. Patty Murray (D., Wash.), an appropriator, issued a warning on the Senate floor.

"If we start cutting funding for individual projects, your project may be next," she said. "When Members come down to the floor to vote on this amendment, they need to know if they support stripping out this project, Senator Bond [a Republican appropriator] and I are likely to be taking a long, serious look at their projects to determine whether they should be preserved during our upcoming conference negotiations."

The threat worked. Hardly anyone wanted to risk losing earmarks. The Senate voted 82-15 to protect funding for the Bridge to Nowhere.

Second, hire conservative staff. The old saying "personnel is policy" is true. You don't need Beltway strategists and consultants running your office. Find people who share your values and believe in advancing the same policy reforms. Staff who are driven by conservative instincts can protect you from unwanted, outside influences when the pressure is on.

Third, beware of committees. Committee assignments can be used as bait to make senators compromise on other matters. Rookie senators are often told they must be a member of a particular committee to advance a certain piece of legislation. This may be true in the House, but a senator can legislate on any matter from the Senate floor.

Fourth, don't seek titles. The word "Senator" before your name carries plenty of clout. All senators have the power to object to bad legislation, speak on the floor and offer amendments, regardless of how they are ranked in party hierarchy.

Lastly, don't let your re-election become more important than your job. You've campaigned long and hard for the opportunity to go to Washington and restore freedom in America. People will try to convince you to moderate conservative positions and break campaign promises, all in the name of winning the next race. Resist the temptation to do so. There are worse things than losing an election—like breaking your word to voters.

At your swearing-in ceremony, you will, as all senators do, take an oath to "support and defend the Constitution." Most will fail to keep their oath. Doing these five things will help you maintain a focus on national priorities and be one who does.

Congress will never fix entitlements, simplify the tax code or balance the budget as long as members are more concerned with their own narrow, parochial interests. Time spent securing earmarks and serving personal ambitions is time that should be spent working on big-picture reforms.

When you are in Washington, remember what the voters back home want—less government and more freedom. Millions of people are out of work, the government is going bankrupt and the country is trillions in debt. Americans have watched in disgust as billions of their tax dollars have been wasted on failed jobs plans, bailouts and takeovers. It's up to us to stop the spending spree and make sure we have a government that benefits America instead of being a burden to it.

Tea party Republicans were elected to go to Washington and save the country—not be co-opted by the club. So put on your boxing gloves. The fight begins today.

Mr. DeMint is a Republican senator from South Carolina.

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB100...5588612828579920.html?mod=WSJ_Opinion_LEADTop

 

[Greed]

Weekly Republican Address: A second chance

<object width="640" height="385"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/Q-2oZ2MoP-0?fs=1&amp;hl=en_US"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/Q-2oZ2MoP-0?fs=1&amp;hl=en_US" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="640" height="385"></embed></object>

 

[Greed]

Sen. DeMint forces battle within GOP over earmarks

Sen. DeMint forces battle within GOP over earmarks
By ANDREW TAYLOR, Associated Press Andrew Taylor, Associated Press – 2 hrs 45 mins ago

WASHINGTON – Fresh off the tea party's show of election might, GOP Sen. Jim DeMint said Tuesday he'll force a showdown next week with Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell and other old guard Republicans over "earmarked" pet projects that DeMint and other victors last week made a symbol of out-of-control deficit spending.

The South Carolina Republican, buoyed by support from six GOP freshman, is optimistic he'll win a change in internal GOP rules to effectively bar any Republican from seeking earmarks.

"Americans want Congress to shut down the earmark favor factory, and next week I believe House and Senate Republicans will unite to stop pork barrel spending," DeMint said.

DeMint won backing from 25 Senate Republicans, including McConnell, earlier this year to impose an earmark ban on Republicans and Democrats alike. Despite winning the support of a majority of Republicans, the proposal was easily defeated by Democrats and 14 pro-earmark Republicans. Thirty-three of 41 Senate Republicans then sought earmarks in this year's unfinished roster of spending bills.

McConnell, however, isn't enthusiastic about the idea of a ban now. And he finds himself caught in the middle of an unwelcome battle dividing his party and opening it to criticism from anti-pork tea party activists who helped Republicans take back the House and elect several anti-earmark senators.

House Republicans already have such a rule in place and are about to renew it, but both House and Senate Democrats are strongly opposed.

Earmarks include road and bridge projects, grants to local police department and community development projects, among many, many others.

McConnell says giving up earmarks would provide a "blank check" to President Barack Obama because his administration would determine exclusively where money for popular programs would go. The proposed ban wouldn't save any money, McConnell says.

"Every president, Republican or Democrat, would like to have a blank check from Congress to do whatever he chooses to do," McConnell said in a speech to the Heritage Foundation last week. "You could eliminate every congressional earmark and you would save no money. It's really an argument about discretion."

But an argument it is, and an uncomfortable one for McConnell and other Republican old-timers since it puts them at odds with tea party activists who say pork barrel spending is at the center of what's wrong with Washington.

And it's not lost on incumbents that earmark refuseniks Mike Lee, R-Utah, and Joe Miller, R-Alaska, beat incumbent members of the pork-dispensing Senate Appropriations Committee in GOP nominating contests earlier this year. One of those incumbents, Sen. Lisa Murkowski, R-Alaska, still may survive after running a write-in campaign against Miller in the Nov. 2 election. Votes are still being counted there.

Most earmarks have merit, but a handful became outsized symbols of wasteful spending, such as the $200 million-plus, later canceled "Bridge to Nowhere" in Alaska. Earmarks also are blamed for a "pay to play" culture in which lobbyists and business executives seeking earmarks lubricate the system with campaign contributions.

All but a few of the 13-member GOP freshman class made campaign pledges that they wouldn't seek earmarks.

"Ending earmarks is an important first step toward getting our fiscal house in order. These special pet projects have become a symbol of Washington's 'pay-to-play' culture that must be stopped," said Sen.-elect Kelly Ayotte, R-N.H.

But the newcomers are running into a phalanx of old school Republicans who defend the practice. They argue that they know the needs of their states better than Washington bureaucrats and that earmarks totaled only about one-half of 1 percent of the $3.5 trillion 2010 federal budget, about $16 billion.

Based on the vote earlier this year, DeMint would seem to have the votes to prevail in his anti-earmark campaign. But the earlier measure would have barred earmarks for both Democrats and Republicans. Tuesday's vote would only affect Republicans; majority Democrats could still seek earmarks — prospect that some Republicans say is unfair.

The upcoming vote also will be by a secret ballot, which means that anyone who publicly voted for the moratorium earlier this year could change their mind and not be held to account.

At the same time, DeMint is unpopular with many Republicans. He helped tea party favorites like Ken Buck, R-Colo., Sharron Angle, R-Nev., and Christine O'Donnell win their nominations but prove to be weak candidates in the general election.

GOP defenders of earmarks are invoking Obama — who endorsed an earmark moratorium the day after the election — in their campaign to preserve the practice.

"The only winner in this thing would be Obama, and I'm just not going to cede our authority to Obama," said Sen. Jim Inhofe, R-Okla. "I can't think of anything worse than to have all these great tea party people who I worked so hard to get elected come in and cede their power and authority to the president."

Inhofe says he expects to lose to DeMint next week after years of "demagoguery" by earmark opponents.

"Only Congress — not the president — appropriates funds," Sen. Lamar Alexander, R-Tenn., said in a floor speech earlier this year. "When Tennesseans come to see me about making Center Hill and Wolf Creek Dams safe or improving housing at Fort Campbell, my job is not to give them President Obama's telephone number."

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20101110/ap_on_go_co/us_republicans_pet_projects

 

[Greed]

Debate: Will The GOP Die If It Doesn't Seize The Center?

THE GOP MUST SEIZE THE CENTER OR DIE (50:30)
April 23, 2013

Following the Republican Party's losses in the 2012 elections, there has been a lot of hand-wringing about what the party should do to improve its electoral fortunes.

Some argue that the GOP should moderate its positions on social issues, as well as policies that affect income inequality and social mobility, and that it should embrace compromise as a way to attract more voters. But others say that changing its positions risks alienating the core Republican base and diluting the party's conservative message — doing more damage in the end.

That hot topic was the subject of the latest Intelligence Squared U.S. debate, which pitted moderate New York Times columnist David Brooks and former U.S. Rep. Mickey Edwards against conservative talk radio host Laura Ingraham and Ralph Reed of the Faith & Freedom Coalition. The motion of the Oxford-style debate was: "The GOP Must Seize the Center or Die."

Those debating were:

FOR THE MOTION

David Brooks became an op-ed columnist for The New York Times in September 2003. He has been a senior editor at The Weekly Standard and a contributing editor at Newsweek and The Atlantic Monthly, and he is currently a commentator on the PBS NewsHour. He is the author of Bobos in Paradise: The New Upper Class and How They Got There (2001) and On Paradise Drive: How We Live Now (And Always Have) in the Future Tense (2005), both published by Simon & Schuster.

Mickey Edwards, a former Republican representative from Oklahoma, is vice president of the Aspen Institute and the director of its public leadership program. After 16 years in Congress (1977-92) as a member of the House Republican leadership, Edwards spent 16 years teaching at Harvard, Georgetown and Princeton. In addition to serving as the national chairman of the American Conservative Union, he was one of three founding trustees of the Heritage Foundation and the chairman of task forces for the Council on Foreign Relations and the Brookings Institution. A weekly columnist for the Los Angeles Times and the Chicago Tribune, Edwards published his most recent book, Reclaiming Conservatism, in 2008. He is currently a director of the Constitution Project and an adviser to the U.S. Department of State.

AGAINST THE MOTION

Laura Ingraham is host of talk radio's The Laura Ingraham Show, heard in hundreds of markets from coast to coast. Ingraham is the author of numerous New York Times best-sellers, including Of Thee I Zing, The Obama Diaries, Power to the People and Shut Up & Sing. She is a frequent political and cultural commentator in print and on television, as one of the primary contributors on the Fox News Channel and the permanent substitute host on The O'Reilly Factor. In addition, she is a frequent guest on Today and other shows such as ABC's This Week. Ingraham is a former white-collar defense attorney and Supreme Court law clerk.

Ralph Reed is founder and chairman of the Faith & Freedom Coalition. Reed served as a senior adviser to George W. Bush's presidential campaigns in 2000 and 2004 and was chairman of the Southeast region for Bush-Cheney in 2004. As chairman of the Georgia Republican Party, he helped to elect the state's first Republican governor and its third Republican U.S. senator since Reconstruction. Reed is chairman and CEO of Century Strategies, a public relations and public affairs firm. He was executive director of the Christian Coalition from 1989 to 1997. Reed has been named one of the top 10 political newsmakers in the nation by Newsweek, one of the 20 most influential leaders of his generation by Life magazine, and one of the 50 future leaders of America by Time magazine. He is the author and editor of five books, including his latest novel, The Confirmation (2010). Reed serves on the Board of Visitors for the University of Georgia School of Public and International Affairs and on the executive board of the Northeast Georgia Council of the Boy Scouts of America. He is a member of the Advisory Council of SafeHouse, a faith-based organization helping the poor and needy.

http://intelligencesquaredus.org/debates/past-debates/item/801-the-gop-must-seize-the-center-or-die

 

[Greed]

The Cabal That Quietly Took Over the House

The Cabal That Quietly Took Over the House
For 40 years, the Republican Study Committee has prized ideological purity over partisan loyalty. That mindset now dominates the GOP.
By Tim Alberta
Updated: May 26, 2013 | 3:59 p.m.
May 23, 2013 | 8:20 p.m.

On a frigid Wednesday afternoon in January, Speaker John Boehner sat in a conference room at the Kingsmill Resort in Williamsburg, Va., acknowledging the limits of his authority. For the past two years, the Republican Study Committee—a caucus of the most conservative representatives—had defied his leadership, plotted against his policy proposals, and, just two weeks earlier, organized a revolt to dethrone him. A group of RSC malcontents, exasperated with Boehner’s stewardship of the House Republican Conference during the previous session of Congress, persuaded 12 members to oppose Boehner in an effort to replace him with a more conservative leader, just five shy of the number necessary to force a second ballot. This would have legitimized the putsch and provided cover for nominal loyalists to abandon their chief.

Boehner survived, battered and humbled, but there was no time to hold grudges. The internal wounds opened in the 112th Congress were bleeding into the 113th, and Boehner knew he wouldn’t last long as speaker (let alone help his party block the agenda of a commandingly reelected president) unless he sutured those wounds. Tomorrow, Boehner would appear before the entire fragmented GOP conference at its annual retreat to set the next year’s agenda. But first he needed a plan to win back the trust of conservatives. So now, on this winter afternoon, he was meeting with five RSC leaders not to gloat about his reelection but to secure their support.

Four of the guests had at some point chaired the RSC: Jeb Hensarling of Texas, Tom Price of Georgia, Jim Jordan of Ohio, and Steve Scalise of Louisiana, who had taken over the committee just weeks before. The fifth attendee was House Budget Committee Chairman Paul Ryan of Wisconsin, a longtime RSC member and the recently defeated vice presidential candidate. They were putting the final touches on a deal with the speaker, weeks in the making, to hide ideological divisions by agreeing on a legislative strategy for the new Congress.

Not long ago, it would have been ludicrous for the House speaker to approach the Republican Study Committee on bended knee, much less to depend on it to restore harmony to the conference. The committee’s philosophy of governance would vex any speaker: Members consider themselves conservatives first and Republicans second. They did not come to Washington to play for the Republican team; they came to fight for conservative principles. If that means voting against party interests, so be it. For core RSC believers, ideological purity trumps legislative accomplishment. Period.

For decades, the group was seen as a parasitic anomaly—a fringe organization of hopeless ideologues surviving off the perception of undue moderation among Republican leadership. Several previous speakers had bullied or ignored it, and one even dissolved the RSC in a quest to squelch internal dissent. For decades, the committee’s membership rolls were thin, and internal GOP debates didn’t matter much anyway, because the party was in the minority.

But the 2010 midterms—thanks to an influx of ideologically charged lawmakers converging with an increasingly conservative GOP—changed everything. More than 60 of 85 GOP freshmen joined the Republican Study Committee, giving the group a record 164 members. The committee known as “the conservative conscience of the House” was now, for the first time in history, a majority of the House majority.

As a result, its influence grew geometrically, and, today, no single subgroup drives the legislative agenda like the RSC. When its members rally against a bill, it usually fails; when they join to push a proposal, it almost always succeeds. Indeed, since 2010, the RSC’s embrace or rejection of any legislative effort has become the surest indicator of whether it will pass the chamber. With 171 members today, the Republican Study Committee is the “largest caucus in all of Congress,” as Scalise puts it. If Boehner and his conductors make the trains run, RSC members are the soot-soaked boilermen shoveling coal into the furnace.

Or refusing, as they sometimes do, to shovel. In the last session of Congress, they made life miserable for Boehner as he attempted to exert authority over his caucus that he did not possess. Opponents of the RSC—including some within the GOP’s ranks—now see it as a mob of conservative kamikazes willing to hold the government hostage until their demands are met. During the debt-ceiling negotiations of 2011, Vice President Joe Biden allegedly labeled these lawmakers “terrorists.”

Everyone knows Washington’s policy: No negotiating with terrorists. But back in January, Boehner had no choice. By seeking the RSC’s assistance, he was accepting its de facto control of his conference. Supplication was the only way to salvage his speakership. The defenders of the faith—the ones who argue that principles are not bargaining chips—had finally penetrated the innermost sanctum of power.

Read further for a short history of the group: http://www.nationaljournal.com/magazine/the-cabal-that-quietly-took-over-the-house-20130523

 

[Greed]

Report by College Republicans details ways to capture youth vote

Report by College Republicans details ways to capture youth vote
By Chris Moody, Yahoo! News | The Ticket
5 hrs ago

It will take a lot more than Facebook and Kid Rock to get young people on the Republican bandwagon.

In the months since the 2012 presidential election, Republicans have acknowledged they have their work cut out for them in winning millennials—the generational tag given to those born between 1980 and 2000. On Monday, the College Republican National Committee unveiled a data-heavy, 95-page report that examines how (and why) Republicans can make inroads with young voters.

Among voters under 30—who made up 19 percent of all voters in the November 2012 general election—President Barack Obama received 5 million more votes than Republican nominee Mitt Romney. Despite the gap, the CRNC believes there are ways to bring young people back into the GOP fold.

"[T]he Republican Party has won the youth vote before and absolutely can win it again," the report said, pointing to Ronald Reagan winning 59 percent of the youth vote in 1984 and substantial support from young voters for Georgw W. Bush in 2000. "But this will not occur without significant work to repair the damage done to the Republican brand among this age group over the last decade."

The analysis, co-authored by CRNC principals Alex Schriver and Michael Antonopoulos and polling from the Winston Group, emphasized three areas where Republicans must focus: technology, policy and branding. Much of the data in the report is based on focus groups conducted in California, Ohio and Florida in January and polls of registered voters age 18-29 conducted in the spring.

The new report is part of a wider Republican effort since last year's presidential election to find solutions that can help the party win in the future. In March, the Republican National Committee unveiled its "Growth and Opportunity Project" report, the product of intense polling and accounting of where the GOP went wrong in 2012 and what it can do better in upcoming contests.

Here are seven pieces of advice for how Republicans can better reach young people.

1. Winning young people and minority voters goes hand in hand

The CRNC report says that the challenges Republicans face with the youth vote and the minority vote are "inseparable." As the younger population grows more diverse, the GOP's lack of support among the age group will only grow worse.

"It could be said that the GOP’s young voter problem is as much about failing to gain support from the African American and Latino communities as anything else," the authors write. "With non-white voters making up 42% of voters under the age of 30, the issue of party diversity and the party’s success with the youth vote are absolutely inseparable."

The key, the authors conclude, is to tie messages of "economic opportunity and social mobility" to as many issues as possible.

2. Republicans who oppose gay marriage need to be careful how they discuss it—if at all

"[T]he conventional wisdom is right," the study's authors write in a section on how Republicans should approach marriage policy for gay and lesbian couples. "Young people are unlikely to view homosexuality as morally wrong, and they lean toward legal recognition of same-sex relationships."

The group's survey found that 44 percent of young voters support gay marriage and 26 percent say it should be left up to the states to decide. Thirty percent of responders said marriage should be between a man and a woman.

After conducting the focus groups, the authors concluded that it is "unmistakable" that "gay marriage was a reason many of these young voters disliked the GOP."

With the culture shifting away from the party's policies, here's what they recommend:

The best course of action for the party may be to promote the diversity of opinion on the issue within its ranks. (After all, for quite some time, former vice president Dick Cheney was to the left of President Obama on same-sex marriage) and to focus on acceptance and support for gay people as separate from the definition of marriage. Where the Republican Party will run into the most trouble over this issue is when it is not winning on any of the more prominent issues, either – the economy and spending. If a candidate is compelling enough on economic opportunity and spending, they may well be able to overcome a difference of opinion with young voters on same-sex marriage.​

The authors conclude: "On the 'open-minded' issue, yes, we will face serious difficulty so long as the issue of gay marriage remains on the table. In the short term, the party ought to promote the diversity of thought within its ranks and make clear that we welcome healthy debate on the policy topic at hand. We should also strongly oppose the use of anti-gay rhetoric."

3. Republicans should focus more on a positive message and move away from being 'The Party of No'

A social media analysis in the report found that "positive" messages are often shared more on social media platforms. Adopting and spreading proactive ideas—as opposed to just challenging and nay-saying the opposition—will help spread the Republican message on mediums like Facebook and Twitter, the report found.

The tactic isn't just for getting "likes" and "shares." It's also a fundamental messaging strategy that Republicans need to use to convince young voters that Republicans have an agenda that supports them.

"Young voters simply felt the GOP had nothing to offer, and therefore said they trusted the Democratic Party more than the Republican Party on every issue tested," the report authors write.

4. The debate over Obamacare is a good example of how Republicans can improve positive messaging

The report authors recommend ways Republicans can discuss the federal health care law while it is being implemented over the next two years:

As Obamacare is implemented and headlines continue to tell the tale of increasing costs and new problems with the health care system, it will be important for Republicans to outline a vision for how they would build a better system that does contain costs and improve quality. For the moment, the advantage that Obama has on the issue is largely due to the fact that he attempted a reform plan at all.​

5. Candidates must be in touch with issues young people care about, including pop culture

You don't have to be "young" to carry a message that speaks to young people. Just look at Ron Paul! But you do have to be able to speak using terms that resonate with a younger generation. The report found that even though elected Republican leaders are generally younger than Democrats, millennials still think of Republicans as old. Perhaps it is because Democrats do a better job of speaking the language of young people.

From the report:

t helps to be somewhat in touch with pop culture. Some 30% of respondents said that they would be more likely to vote for a candidate who can talk comfortably about music, movies, and sports, while only 21% said that they would be more likely to vote for a candidate who is under the age of 40. Young voters are far more concerned about finding candidates who understand what they are going through and have solutions to address the problems they are facing; whether that comes from a 60-year-old or a 30-year-old is not quite as important. (After the 2010 elections, House Republicans’ average age fell to under 55, while the average age of a Democratic member of the House rose to over 60. This did not stop “old” from being mentioned in almost every focus group as an attribute associated with the GOP.) However, youth and knowledge of pop culture may not even necessarily be a boost.​

6. Advertise in mediums used by young people

Candidates should think outside the realms of traditional campaign strategies. They should bring their message to the places where young people gather, including popular television shows and online:

We don’t expect candidates to throw back shots with college kids, but it wouldn’t hurt to have them target ads at the people who watch re-runs of Family Guy. Young people do not get their information the way voters used to. They carry smartphones in their pockets and purses that allow them to connect with anyone, anytime, anywhere, and that give them instant access to any piece of information they may want to know. There are countless ways they can watch the latest episode of their favorite TV show, and the screens where they’re focusing their eyes all day are more and more likely to be portable. To win young voters, the Republican Party and its candidates must embrace this reality.​

7. Show young voters what you can offer

The authors sum it all up pretty well here:

We’ve become the party that will pat you on your back when you make it, but won’t offer a hand to help you get there. This has to change in order to have a shot with young voters.​

http://news.yahoo.com/blogs/ticket/...etails-ways-capture-youth-vote-192412832.html

 

[Greed]

The House GOP revolts: John Boehner officially has no control over his caucus

The House GOP revolts: John Boehner officially has no control over his caucus
By Jon Terbush | The Week
14 hrs ago

The speaker suffers another embarrassing defeat at the hands of his own party
In a stinging blow to Speaker John Boehner (R-Ohio), the House on Thursday voted down a five-year farm bill, with 62 Republicans siding against the party leadership and voting no.

By a vote of 234 to 195, the House defeated the measure, largely over objections to proposed cuts to food stamps. Democrats decried those cuts as too deep, while conservative Republicans who joined them said those cuts should have been much deeper.

The embarrassing defeat for Boehner comes one year after he opted to not even bring the massive, $940 billion measure to the floor for a vote because of Republican objections. The bill was thought to have had more bipartisan support this time around, and its defeat came as a surprise.

Boehner even took the unusual step of publicly backing the bill — to no avail. And to pour salt in the wound, the divisive food-stamp cuts that scuttled the legislation had been pushed by Boehner's top lieutenant, Majority Leader Eric Cantor (R-Va.).

Republicans tried to pin the blame for the bill's defeat on Democrats, saying they'd been banking on 40 promised votes from across the aisle that allegedly evaporated at the last moment; only 24 Democrats voted in favor of the bill. Yet as Roll Call pointed out, even with all 40 of those votes, the bill still would have failed.

Many pundits pointed to the defeat as further evidence that Boehner is a singularly ineffective speaker who cannot control the far right wing of his caucus. "House Republicans simply cannot be led by anyone at the moment," the Washington Post's Chris Cillizza observed.

"The majority party in the House should never — repeat NEVER — lose floor votes on major (or, really, minor) pieces of legislation," he said. "Republicans, literally, write the rules governing the debate — and, as the majority, must ensure that even in the worst case scenario that they can get the 'yeas' they need from their own side."

National Review's Daniel Foster concurred, saying Boehner had made a "tactical mistake" in forgetting that "the Honey Badger that is the House GOP don't care."

The fact is House Republicans remain untamable. This isn't the first — or fifth — time John Boehner has been dealt a surprise defeat on a floor vote. I don't think he's a bad Speaker, per se, but this caucus is unusually independent for a House majority, and the institutional levers that have traditionally afforded leadership great control over the herd have proven insufficient with this group." [National Review]​

Remember, Boehner has been badly burned by his own party before. After much chest-thumping aimed at President Obama during last year's budget negotiations, he ultimately had to pull his "Plan B" budget bill last December for lack of Republican support. Once the new Congress convened in January, there were even concerns he'd get booted from the speakership.

Following the farm bill's defeat, Red State's Erick Erickson wondered if it was only a matter of time before Boehner lose his post.

Erick Erickson ✔ @EWErickson

Does John Boehner have any clout left after publicly saying he would take the rare act as Speaker of voting for the farm bill? Pasture time?
1:41 PM - 20 Jun 2013​

The farm bill defeat also underscored why Boehner has taken such a delicate approach toward the massive immigration bill winding through the Senate. Even though the bill is gaining strong bipartisan support in the upper chamber, it contains a pathway to citizenship loathed by many on the far right.

If Boehner couldn't get his party in line on a largely bipartisan farm bill, what are his odds of wrangling party members on a more controversial one to completely overhaul the immigration system?

http://news.yahoo.com/house-gop-revolts-john-boehner-officially-no-control-192900400.html

 

[QueEx]

<param name="movie" value="http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/32545640" /><param name="FlashVars" value="launch=52278311&amp;width=420&amp;height=245" /><param name="allowScriptAccess" value="always" /><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true" /><param name="wmode" value="transparent" /><embed name="msnbc5b0375" src="http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/32545640" width="420" height="245" FlashVars="launch=52278311&amp;width=420&amp;height=245" allowscriptaccess="always" allowFullScreen="true" wmode="transparent" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" pluginspage="http://www.adobe.com/shockwave/download/download.cgi?P1_Prod_Version=ShockwaveFlash"></embed></object><p style="font-size:11px; font-family:Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; color: #999; margin-top: 5px; background: transparent; text-align: center; width: 420px;">Visit NBCNews.com for <a style="text-decoration:none !important; border-bottom: 1px dotted #999 !important; font-weight:normal !important; height: 13px; color:#5799DB !important;" href="http://www.nbcnews.com">breaking news</a>, <a href="http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/3032507" style="text-decoration:none !important; border-bottom: 1px dotted #999 !important; font-weight:normal !important; height: 13px; color:#5799DB !important;">world news</a>, and <a href="http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/3032072" style="text-decoration:none !important; border-bottom: 1px dotted #999 !important; font-weight:normal !important; height: 13px; color:#5799DB !important;">news about the economy</a></p>



​

 

[muckraker10021]

Former Black 'Miss America' Called 'Street Walker' by Local GOP Leader


June 19th 2013

Former Miss America Erika Harold Called 'Street Walker' by Local GOP Leader

http://gma.yahoo.com/blogs/abc-blog...called-street-walker-local-gop-001954765.html

 

[thoughtone]

Former Black 'Miss America' Called 'Street Walker' by Local GOP Leader

So why do some, so called Black folk want to be part of that party?