THE HILL
 

The new Republican ‘strategerie’

By Peter Fenn - 11/04/09 06:10 PM ET

“OK, we’ve intimidated the moderates in the Republican Party, and that hasn’t worked out very well, so let’s try to put the squeeze on the moderate Democrats!” Can they be serious?

Rep. Eric Cantor (R-Va.) and other Republican operatives actually believe that they can pressure Democrats to join their “Party of No” and stop progress on healthcare, education, climate change, you name it.

The imaginary sound of galloping hooves bearing down on those poor, unsuspecting Democrats — quaking in their boots — how ridiculous!

Here is the fallacy of their argument — and let’s leave their misreading of the election results aside — why, for heaven’s sake, would moderate and Blue Dog Democrats want to campaign in 2010 under the banner: “We stopped Obama, crushed healthcare reform, slam-dunked an energy bill, prevented real change!”?

Hmm, yes, you elected us to actually accomplish something and now we want you to know just how close we are to the Republican Party and how glad we are that nothing was done in 2009-2010. That is what Eric Cantor and Rush Limbaugh and Glenn Beck want Democrats to campaign on next year? That is their reasoning for trying to intimidate moderates to join them on the floors of the House and Senate?

Sorry, but moderate Democrats are already making a real difference in crafting legislation that holds the line on spending, compromises on tough issues like abortion, and brings together business interests, so why in the world would they possibly become obstructionists and go to the voters as part and parcel of the “Party of No”?

Good try, but not smart strategerie.


Source:
http://thehill.com/blogs/pundits-blog/national-party-news/66393-the-new-republican-strategerie

Comments (6)

Your piece, like most liberal screeds, is filled with laughable ignorance. First, Eric Cantor is not driving Republican campaign strategy, conservative rank and file Republicans are. If you require more proof than yesterday's results, try a Poly Sci 101 course for clarification of the electoral process. Second, "moderate Democrats are already making a real difference in crafting legislation that holds the line on spending, compromises on tough issues like abortion, and brings together business interests," is so ludicrous it almost appears you are pulling our collective legs. Holding the line on spending with a trillion dollars in stimulus? "Compromise" on abortion? Where? When? And exactly what would you call the compromise provision in the so-called health care bill coming out of the House? And this one is really off the wall: bringing "together business interests…" I guess that's what Obama was doing two weeks ago when he attacked the Chamber of Commerce. You see? Ludicrous, laughable, and liberal. You should be reading www.theconservativegentleman.comBY Daniel A. Manzi on 11/04/2009 at 18:50
The Hill should at least attempt to try to find someone who can produce some meaningful political discourse as opposed to Peter Fenn's meaningless heads I win tails you lose rants which are all too common at The Hill. These types of rants do even rise to the level of political discourse. They are vacuous, as empty as liberalism itself, which has taken the country to the brink of disaster with out of control spending and high unemployment. Shades of Roosevelt under whose liberal takeover of society unemployment rose to over 20% for over ten years. As far as the issue of moderates the Democrats hate them, throwing a liberal moderate like Joe Lieberman out of the party. Can't The Hill find better pundits then these whiners? They come across as typical liberal losers who ignore facts and love to hate their fellow Americans. Is this really the best The Hill can do? If so, your future is soon to toll like the bells at CNN and MSNBC.BY Robert Rosencrans on 11/04/2009 at 19:36
Holding the line on spending? Are you crazy? If we are experiencing the wonders of a blue dog influenced government we ought to offer them to Iran . They could destroy their country more thoroughly than any bombBY Ron on 11/04/2009 at 19:52
The embarassing thing is that someone has to point this out. I'm no Republican, but still think it's not good for the country that Republican leaders are so blind to the obvious. They waste so much effort and so much money.BY Barry Schwartz on 11/05/2009 at 02:29
Hey Barry Schwartz, you're stupidity is showing. If the Republicans are so blind then how did they win New Jersey? That's like Castro losing Cuba. You really should think before you write. You sound like a moron.BY Baloney Guy on 11/05/2009 at 06:52
Last I looked.. Corzine lost in NJ. Obama tried to help.. but no one liked the guy… and exit polls proved that was the case. We gained one house seat that flipped from the Republicans and a second house seat we got a more liberal democrat. Republicans gained two governors.. who deal with local issues. We gained two reliable votes for national legislation.castro losing cuba - for god's sake.. Baloney baloney guyBY Dave on 11/08/2009 at 06:56

Add Comment

Name (required)

E-Mail (will not be published) (required)

Your Comments

You need Flash Player 8 (or higher) and JavaScript enabled to view this content

Get latest news from The Hill direct to your inbox, RSS reader and mobile devices.