I couldn’t get past the first sentence of Josh Kraushaar’s piece on The Rise of the Republican Pragmatists without balking. It at once indicated the trouble that was coming and made me want to break out my editor’s pen.
In Washington, narratives last long past their sell-by date. One of the most common tropes is that Republicans are controlled by the far-right wing of the party and have little ability to govern.
Now, a “trope” is a figurative or metaphorical use of an expression, meaning that it is not intended to be literally true. And, while we can bicker about the precise meaning of the word “control,” there is no ambiguity about the recent record. There’s a reason that anyone who follows politics has heard the expression “John Boehner is not good at his job.” It’s not because he has exerted control over his caucus, and it’s not because he’s shown an ability to govern. Boehner and his leadership team have been repeatedly blindsided by the far-right wing of their party and been forced to abandon deals, pull bills from the floor, delay scheduled vacations, shut down the government against their better judgment, and resort to tear-filled serenity prayers. All this stuff literally happened and talking about it honestly is not the same thing as throwing around shopworn tropes.
If those days are about to be over then, as the Missourians say, “Show Me.” But don’t insult my intelligence in the first sentence by suggesting that the far-right of the Republican Party has not been exerting an out-sized amount of control.
The next bit is what amounts to hope, I guess.
This year’s congressional majorities were built on the victories of center-right candidates, not the bomb-throwers who disrupted their party’s leadership over the past two years. Of the 16 House Republicans who picked up seats for the party, 11 of them represent districts President Obama carried in 2012. And the freshman Senate class may be filled with conservatives, but ones who have expressed willingness to work across party lines.
Silly me, but I thought the “trope” about Cory Gardner was that he knew how to put a moderate sheen on an extreme anti-contraception record. He didn’t say stupid things like Sharron Angle or Ken Buck, but his left-right alignment isn’t any different. Thom Tillis presided over the most radical state legislature in North Carolina in living memory. Joni Ernst spent much of time talking about how she was going to come to Washington and start cutting the balls off the place. What these folks did was win where their radical predecessors had lost, and they gave lip service here and there to finding solutions, but all that happy talk was accompanied by completely uncompromising paranoia and lunacy regarding the president.
And then we get to the just plain stupid.
That’s not to say the new wave isn’t conservative, but there’s a huge distinction between being conservative and being uncompromising. All of these GOP senators-elect have an interest in policy, and already showcased governing aptitude. Cotton, Sullivan, and Ernst (all military veterans) could join the party’s group of foreign policy hawks, led by Sens. McCain, Lindsey Graham, and Kelly Ayotte. Sasse, a policy wonk, could team up with Sen. Mike Lee on proposing Obamacare alternatives.
Gardner, who made inroads with Hispanics in his election, could be a point person on immigration reform if the Senate tackles the issue. Shelley Moore Capito, the first Republican elected to the Senate from West Virginia since 1956, is likely to take up energy issues as part of her portfolio. These aren’t Republican nihilists at all.
How have Joni Ernst or Dan Sullivan “showcased governing aptitude”? If you haven’t noticed, John McCain, Lindsey Graham, and Kelly Ayotte are frothing maniacs on foreign policy. Mike Lee’s idea of an ObamaCare alternative is practical? West Virginia’s priorities on energy align with America and China’s interests in what way?
If there is any basis for optimism it is that Speaker Boehner has some vulnerable members to protect now, which also means that he might be able to rely on them to sell-out the Republican base and cut a deal on something. But, if there’s a real case to be made that the freshman class of Republicans is coming to Washington eager to sell out the base, I haven’t seen the evidence for it. In 2006, when dozens of vulnerable blue-district Republican representatives were clearly about to be defeated, they walked in lockstep over the cliff rather than break with their deranged leadership or president.
Maybe the definition of insanity isn’t doing the same thing over and over again expecting a different result but watching the same thing over and over again and expecting the Republicans to become practical or moderate.
You can practically hear an organ like the NJ pleading for the GOP to act sanely and reasonably: “Please, please don’t be nuts or we will have to admit that the left is correct. Horse races are SO much easier to cover!”
Show me some critical thinking in the beltway media and I will show you a sparkly fucking unicorn.
That really is dumb.
If the Senate tackles the issue? What about the bill they already passed? If Gardner wants to be a point person, maybe he can urge Boehner to allow a vote in the House now. If the Republican Senate does pass an “immigration reform” bill, it’s not going to include a pathway to citizenship. Not a lot of inroads to be made there.
I really want to find someone from Iowa and kick them in the gonads for Joni Ernst. How the hell do you elect a more photogenic version of Steve King to represent your whole damned state?
Gardner is just as bad. And Tillis is in Gohmert territory. Those CO, IA, NC GOP voters will pull out their guns before any leftie can get near their junk.
Better yet, turn Joni loose with her hog knife.
Ike and Nixon had to be “pragmatic” since other than ’53-55, Congress was held by Democrats and a high percentage of those Democrats were “New Dealers,” especially during Ike’s tenure.
Oops, meant this to respond to Voice’s other comment down thread.
I read it here anyway. I agree and I’m sure much of Ike’s government expansion was due to military considerations, like the Interstate Highway System, which I believe Gore’s father shepherded through Congress, likewise the response to Sputnik. Still, he did hold back the RWNJ’s, but, I’ll concede, possibly for political power considerations.
I always liked Nixon’s negative income tax. was he serious? Or was it a stalking horse? Did the tapes ever make it clear? Still, can’t imagine Reagan or either Bush letting those words past their lips.
Nixon wasn’t all that interested in domestic policies. Don’t know anything about his flirtation with a “negative income tax” but if I had to guess, it was concocted at a RW think-tank as an alternative to a guaranteed minimum income in case that notion any gained political steam. Sort of like “Romneycare” was the alternative to single-payer.
O/T
Here is what waving the red flag in front of the bull looks like.
Ugh! I just got through eating. Catch this little Nazi answering himself on that link:
http://www.addictinginfo.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/11/11-8-2014-10-17-39-PM.jpg
I guess that’s the new center-right Republican voter.
Did you read it? Now you can feel your gorge rise too.
Yes, but Obama brought up race by having the audacity to nominate a brown, which makes him the real racist.
I think that the Republicans have been eminently pragmatic since day 1 of the Obama administration. They knew in a practical way how to scare Democrats enough to sabotage any progressive tendencies that President Obama might have. They pragmatically knew how to play against Obama’s bipartisan vision and how to savage him without getting a public backlash. They knew how to use the courts to harrass him. And they knew how to shut down the government as a tactic without getting hammered for it. They knew how to turn the media into a bully that blunts the bully pulpit.
The Republican Party over the past six years has pragmatically known how to play the pragmatic wing of the Democratic Party to make sure that an miserable status quo continues and gets hung around the donkey’s neck.
What you mean by “pragmatic” and what Kraushaar means by “pragmatic” might not be the same thing. Was John Boehner’s weakness real or kabuki? Is Obama’s weakness real or kabuki? Until we see the emails, we’ll never know.
A lefty trope is to ask who the weakness benefits, and to them it seems that is always benefits the 1% and the major donors to the two parties.
Sorry, we just can’t reach agreement on clawing back tax cuts for special interests. Wink, wink, nod, nod.
Isn’t that pretty pragmatic?
It doesn’t save the economy, the environment, world peace, or justice, but it does create a certain reality to which the rest of the unwashed have to respond, doesn’t it.
Welcome to the world beyond Alice’s looking-glass.
Tactically and strategically the GOP has come a long way since Goldwater in ’64. Been a long haul, but the Bircher/Koch vision is now within an election cycle or two.
I don’t know if I would say “they knew how” to do all those things. It’s more like corporate power mushroomed in our culture and politics, and Republicans discovered that in this new corporate ruled world, there would never be any consequences for their extremism. Maybe they got a little ahead of themselves with the Cheney Regency, conditions weren’t quite right for the total corporate/neo-con takeover of america. But 2016 could be the year.
McConnell took a big risk with how the President and the Democrats would respond in 2009. By the 2010 election, both McConnell and Republican strategists knew how to move–and they lassoed the media to be its ever-familiar echo chamber, even bring MSNBC to heel by isolating a progressive ghetto and bringing forward Joe-Mika and Chuck Todd.
Just because the trained lawyers in the GOP act like idiots doesn’t mean they haven’t learned the country lawyer ways of appealing to a jury. Louis Goehmert doesn’t have to convince you to vote for him, only enough people in TX-01. That is very practical behavior for the Texas A&M graduate.
Oh, I think they have some very smart strategists. They have a core brain trust which is absolutely masterful at exploiting fear and anger. Maybe it’s not so much strategic brilliance as they have a cadre of news producers, “think tankers” and various wurlitzer players who get paid to eat, sleep, and breath the marketing of resentment, working 24-7 with a large number of various other well paid people dedicated to that task. It’s a sophisticated industry at this point.
McConnell was key but their strategy was hardly well organized overall. It’s was a chaotic process which they paid no price for because they have billions to protect them on all sides. Like, the fact that corporate media is totally beholden to GOP friendly framing of the issues, that’s not a result of brilliant strategy. That’s corporate newspeak. That’s much bigger than McConnell.
So, yesterday’s RWNJs with a regressive, uncompromising agenda are today’s center-right pragmatists with the same regressive agenda that they can now implement?
Kraushaar should invest in lipstick futures. He’s going to need a lot of it as the ranks of castrated pigs continue to swell. Gonna need some for the Democrats too. To make them look as alive as corpses in caskets.
Meanwhile Republican leaders are very pragmatically laying plans to gut the EPA.
Bad air and water will be good for the medical-industrial-complex.
Just so, and it perfectly illustrates the fix we are in.
Nixon invented the EPA and Republicans of his ilk went along with it, only conservatives opposing.
Today, all Republicans are conservatives.
They differ only on the methods they would use to get their way.
Technically, the EPA was to put all activities mandated by Congressional legislation on the environment under one umbrella. Avoided the often dual purpose of Interior to protect the environment and exploit it. Plus, like the Pentagon, Interior can’t seem to do honest accounting.
Are we forgetting that even Republicans who are not extreme conservatives are still conservatives?
And that all conservatives since the days when The National Review was a gleam in Mr. Buckley’s eye have had one central aim for American domestic politics, to totally undo every progressive innovation since McKinley?
There are no Eisenhower, Nixon, or Rockefeller Republicans and haven’t been for decades.
Today’s Republicans are extreme or not according as their methods – a shutdown, for instance, or even defaulting on some due portion of the national debt, to punish Democrats for not giving them what they want – are extreme or not.
Their goals are the same.
I’ve not forgotten, which gets me called unpragmatic and cynical.
Sure there are Eisenhower, Nixon, and Rockefeller Republicans. They form the leadership of the Democratic Party.
Republicans used to see Democrats as the enemy of their party. These Republicans see Democrats as the enemy of the United States. Not just some Democrats, as in the McCarthy era, but all Democrats. Not just Max Cleland, but Michelle Nunn.
” They form the leadership of the Democratic Party.”
I dispute that. Eisenhower and even Nixon were to the Left of today’s Democratic Leadership.
Really? In what ways? (And, in what ways weren’t they?)
Goldwater and Reagan said Medicare was communism and its adoption would hand America to the reds.
For conservatives to label progressive Democrats enemies of America is not new.
Is the fix in?
Molly O’Toole, DefenseOne: National Security Professionals Pick Mitt Romney in 2016 Poll
I find it interesting that someone thinks that national security professionals should be a constituency worth polling. The politicized military becomes self-conscious of its political power. That is something that the US military has studiously avoided becoming public since George Washington resigned his commission in becoming President.
Only because keeping a foot in both camps gave the military/war party the option of moving to whichever camp offered more money and wars that produce medals and promotions. But the rightwing in the military was ascendant with the Cold War (gotta fight the “godless commies”). By 1972 it dominated the military, aligned with the GOP, and later added the Christian fundie (Colorado Springs) component. Other than feeling a bit burned by GWB’s wars, has remained in control and generally vocal about it.
But now they want to choose which Republican, and settle on Mr. 1% himself.
Pragamatism: Republicans plus McAuliffe Edition
NC Official Host Closed Meeting on Oil Drilling
Which beaches are they decided to soil?
IL-10 was carried by Obama in 2012 and Teabagger Dold was thrown out. This year he came back, touting himself as “bi-partisan” yada yada yada. But he’s the same Teabagger with a new campaign paint job.
Kraushaar probably considers this an example of a center-right gain.
In deep newsreader tones; A recently chastened Dold turned to pragmatic solutions and attained victory. Moderates like Dold will be the center of the new Congress.
Quickly, please….someone get me some of what Josh has been smoking. It has to be some really good shit!!
I suspect that it’s only available in country clubs.
After further consideration of the levels of hallucination in the article, I am thinking it more likely that he is doing magic mushrooms.
Nah, he dropped a tab…
pony and unicorn mofos
they will chase those unicorns rather than tell the truth about the GOP.