Congressional Republicans rollover already
By Ron Watrous | Thursday, January 27th, 2011 | Policy
The GOP had a wonderful opportunity during the State of the Union Address Tuesday.
America expressed its lack of confidence in the Pelosi-led House with the most sweeping shift in power in a lifetime. The biggest stage to give America a visual clue of that change came and went Tuesday night and Republicans blinked.
Dem calls for ‘solidarity’ and ‘civility’ by turning the speech into bipartisan date night (with the exception of Pelosi’s snub of Cantor) led to the unprecedented diffusion of the party divide. Instead of seeing which side of the aisle was supportive of different aspects of the president’s speech, America was treated to a mixed crowd. Some of the GOP congressmen seemed to engage in zombie-clapping when they realized they were surrounded by Dems clapping enthusiastically…another nod to ‘civility.’
No matter what happens for the next two years, the first big visual of the new class and old guard Republicans was stolen. The Dem House minority conned the new majority with a head-fake on a ‘minor’ issue and the majority flinched…Score: Alpha dog – 1, the really big Omega dog – 0.
Once more Pelosi smiles and gets to ask, “who’s your daddy be-atch??” If the new majority can’t outmaneuver the minority on a camera-op, it could be a long two years indeed.
For a clue on what the GOP should be doing as the “last redoubt” of power in government: see State Senate Democrats.
Tags:
Contribute for Conservatism!
Share this post
About the author
Ron is a native of Texas and has been an editor, writer and communication consultant for 19 years. He currently resides in Virginia.
Comments
21 Responses to "Congressional Republicans rollover already"
My mom watched the State of the Union. She liked the space they saved for Rep. Giffords. She wanted to see what Michelle Obama was wearing. Then she watched her Glee Season 1 dvd she got for Christmas.
I bet that’s a darn good assessment of America’s interest in the State of the Union.
Last I checked, this was a political blog, Brian.
So, what, we don’t comment about the State of the Union because most of America doesn’t care?
And that’s not what this post is about. Read what Ron is really saying. It’s not about SOTU. It’s about the GOP having a backbone.
If they get played by the left over seating assignments, what else will they not stand up for in Congress?
Sorry, JR. Didn’t know you and Ron were such close friends.
Huh? I just think you’re wrong. I’m friends with you too, last I checked.
Again – trying to stay on topic – if the GOP can be out-maneuvered over a photo-op, what will happen with spending cuts? healthcare? energy? illegal immigration?
I think Ron’s asking a fair question.
Nobody got played. Not everything has to be political. Pelosi had nothing to do with the idea that folks sit together. That was Mark Udall from Colorado’s idea.
There was nothing wrong with folks sitting together, and frankly, I’d like to see more of that. One of the reasons for the level of vitriol and the lack of civility is the fact that nobody knows anybody on the other side of the aisle personally. They’re all just Democrats or Republicans. It didn’t used to be that way. I think that’s unfortunate, and a result of the way the schedule works now.
Nobody got played here.
I’m with Brian. Strategically, I think this would be a dumb thing to take a stand on.
It may have been Udall’s idea, but it did mute the message that “change” has indeed come to Washington.
I also think by muting the message, the president’s platitude-laden speech has been better received than it might have been otherwise.
I don’t think anyone’s taking a stand on this BK. It’s an observation by a new contributor. He has that right still.
JR, Obama always gives a good speech, especially at the State of the Union when he says he favors things he NEVER will support.
The half-life of SOTU speeches is about a day. It’s already done now. Let’s make Democrats vote on these things now.
Compromise for principle without compromise on principle – Ron Reagan
I saw no compromise on principle by mixing it up in the house. Frankly it makes little difference in most cases since both parties have spent and borrowed us up the creek together. A paddle on the left, a paddle on the right.. we are heading over the niagara together and it will take both to paddle back away from it.
Screw the photo imagery, I want to see results. If the result is better cross party communication among individual representatives and less compromise of ethics then conservatives have a golden opportunity to build bipartisan support. I applaude all of those who mixed it up and Pelosi is still a hero in her own pervert infested back yard. Me thinks GOP wins this game.
I agree that this is not something in and of itself to wring hands over. However I think Ron was just making the point that the Congresional Repubs always seem tongue tied and baffled how to respond to predictable Dem gamesmanship (unlike say Chris Christie).
Repubs should have called out the Dems to renounce the Dem hate speech that followed After Obama’s Tucson speech. Didn’t Pres Obama himself say that incivility and political rhetoric had Nothing to do with the shootings? Have I missed any rebuke by Obama Pelosi and Reid of the constant hate speech by Dems After the speech? Did I miss the Dems offering to cross the aisle when they won in 2006?
I think Repub voters just want Congressional Repubs to ask these kind of questions of the Dems before agreeing to their requests.
I think Ron was wrong in his evaluation. The State of The Union event was a nice show of unity and we need more of that activity. Ron didn’t like it and expressed his views here BD. His comments are typical of the hardcore stand in party politics. I see if in differently and believe we need to reconsider.
Let me add this to the discussion: What about the Americans who are not represented in Congress or in local or state governments? You know the people who failed to vote for whatever BS reason they may have had and those folks who voted for the loosing candidate? Remember them? There are lots of those folks…
My point and observations: I see is elected officials (choose a party and personal example of your choice) who only pushes party politics, bills, agendas and ideology. Not picking on him but I’ll use Ron Villanueva as my example: Ron won by some 14 votes. (Note: I am NOT picking on him.) Ron Villanueva being a Loyal GOP member supports the GOP position in every vote he casts in Richmond. But I have to ask: what about the 7,659 voters who voted for the other candidate and the tens of thousands who failed to vote (at all) that live in Villanueva’s district? Who is representing them? Honestly nobody… Ron Villanueva is trying to do his best representing 7,673 people but what about everyone else?
So I ask you to consider and ponder my above point. If you only support those who voted for you, then we have nobody representing the vast majority of Americans. It plays well in the party scheme but the results for local, state and national government leave all of us in a bind. Just an observation and thought I wanted to share.
Republicans hit the right tone and did the right thing – Udall, born and raised in Tucson, offered this up as a tribute to Rep. Giffords. Can you imagine the media stink had Republican leadership followed Pelosi’s example? Winners can afford to be gracious; there was nothing to gain (and much to loose) by snubbing Udall’s plan.
2010 was a repudiation of President Obama’s policies and Congressional spending. It wasn’t necessarily a vote for Republicans. I suggest the national mandate is “stop the bleeding and fix it – if not we’ll vote you out”. Americans expect solutions, not just rhetoric and blame, out of this new congress.
Power isn’t the same as leadership. You can’t lead if you can’t communicate and convince. And you certainly can’t communicate effectively while throwing rocks. Doing date nite was a terrifically smart call by Republican leaders. Today, both the right and the left are pounding President Obama – and the conversation surrounds the substance (or lack thereof) of the SOTU speech – not the seating arrangements. Gotta agree with Schoeneman, “Nobody got played here.”
Actually Jay D, I hope republicans run as you have suggested, because if they do, they will be “fighting the last war” and that never works out well. If you believe and they believe that the last vote was a permanent repudiation of the President’s policies, and you and they underestimate the President, they will deserve to lose. Fact is, the economy is improving, jobs in the private sector are being created, the TARP and the Stimulus, while imperfect, have worked as planned, and the components of health care are more and more popular everyday. In two years, we will be out of Iraq and leaving Afghanistan, barring unforeseen circumstances, and the President’s international relations will be on focus. But hey, what do I know.
Mike – Do over! Read again. I meant to communicate:
#1 – Date night was the right thing to do and a smart thing to do.
#2 – 2010 was a repudiation of the health care bill (the President’s signature policy) AND a repudiation of federal out-of-control spending. Yes, both parties deserve blame, but the sitting party got nailed for it.
#3 – Republicans now control the House (1 out of 3) and made significant gains in the Senate. Voters expect (want) solutions – NOT more rhetoric or finger pointing. Just fix it.
#4 – The honeymoon period will be short. If Republicans do not take a leadership position and perform, recent gains will be temporary gains.
This post is generating some interesting albeit puzzling comments.
@ William “What about the Americans who are not represented in Congress or in local or state governments? ”
Last time I checked every citizen is represented in terms of their basic Constitutional rights and can petition or request constituent services. What you are referring to I guess is the policies du jour of the parties. If pols are belligerently stupid like Obama and the Dems they will ram through a partisan bill whether or not if affects life liberty and property. If they are smart they will talk with the opposition and find ways to co-opt them. Otherwise when you lose, your opponents will cancel your bill. If citizens don’t get relief that way they are free to organize and apply outside political or financial pressure. Happens all the time. I’m dumbfounded that I even have to mention this.
@Jay “Doing date nite was a terrifically smart call by Republican leaders.Today, both the right and the left are pounding President Obama.”
I googled this and only came up with Sarah Palin says Obama WTF is bad and Dems attack her. They also attacked Michelle Bachmann and Paul Ryan. Where am I going wrong??
As for Mike B. I’m just too tired today to have a go with his autological “facts.” He does ask a fascinating question at the end though.
Thanks Jay. I don’t always get the point, but I do now.
Sorry Valentinus, should have written “both the right and the left are pounding President Obama’s speech.” Seems like neither right or left give it very high marks. http://realclearpolitics.com/
Thanks for the source JayD. I did google “state of the union” but not “speech”. Google usually generates leftist leaning links at the top but on reflection its entirely probable that they would have buried negative comments by Dems about the SOTU on the 15th or 16th page. That’s where I was going wrong. I stopped at page 4.
@Mr. Bailey. I pondered – here’s my 2 cents: IMO, gerrymandered districts are the source of many of your issues, including low voter turnout. If there isn’t real competition for a seat, candidates put more resources into winning the primary – and they remain in office by supporting these core supporters’ agendas. A congressman’s office may be open to all (for constituent services), but his/her legislative votes – in a gerrymandered district – will represent the district’s primary voters, not the general electorate.
And apologies to Ron for going off-topic.
Frankly, I thought date nite was a great improvement from past SOTU speeches where one party jumps up and down at every third word and the other party sits on its hands in defiant silence. That sort of childish behavior was blessedly absent this year. I certainly did not see it as the Republicans being rolled or rolling over. I saw it as adult behavior and true leadership finally emerging from a body that deservedly has the lowest approval rating of any branch of the federal government.
The most stupid (of many) comments Obama made was about rooting out government regulations that cause problems. Like this was something he just woke up and realized? Why are they in effect in the first place?? Duh!!!
Leave your response
The comments section is for meaningful discussion. Readers are reminded to post comments that are germane to the article and write in a common language that steers clear of personal attacks and/or vulgarities.
Please take a moment to review our comment policy.