While the Democrats are still fulminating, the Republicans are at least trying to give us something to laugh about:
Dear Brad,
As we as a Party regroup after our near miss in the presidential election, we
must reflect on what our Party has done well and what we can improve moving
forward. It is for that reason we have created a new Web site for you to share
your thoughts on the direction of the Republican Party. Please take a moment to
visit www.RepublicanForAReason.com and
create an account to begin the dialogue.The Republican Party has always been the party of reason and hope, and I
strongly believe we will continue in this tradition as we work to the
future….
I mean, they were playing for laughs with that bit about "what our Party has done well" stuff, right?
You know, there was a time when I thought of the Democrats as lovable losers, sort of like the Chicago Cubs. They kept losing (in S.C. anyway), but they were hapless and helpless about it, and it was sort of endearing. Nothing like the partisan nastiness you’d often hear from the Republicans back in those days, who always seemed angry about something. Then, in the late 90s or so (during the Clinton impeachment and the Jim Hodges campaign), the Democrats caught up and showed they could be just as angrily organized as the GOP. Then, after the debacle of 2000, they took anger and resentment to new depths.
Anyway, this note from the GOP is so plaintive that it makes me wonder whether the Republicans are about to be like the Dems back when they struck me as a sympathetic underdog.
Related Posts
The party of reason and hope? I guess that’s true in a sense.
When the Grand Olds have held power, I usually have had reason to hope that tenure would pass quickly.
Anger and resentment was taken to “new depths” (as you put it) because over the last eight years, the Babybush Administration has taken subverting the US Constitution to the most atrocious…audacious…lengths…and that is considering only what we know of so far. I can’t wait until the inevitable Frontline episode that details the grievances on which we are currently ignorant (sarcasm off).
I’m still waiting on you pubs and Un-whatevertheblankyouthinkyouares to finally admit the direct relationship to and major role of this administration’s failed policies on our national economy. Don’t papercut yourself on the Downing Street Memo doing it, however.
You can’t be so oblivious or illogical as to not concede that direct line of culpability, so that line must have been inserted to spark reaction. Mission accomplished, Warthime.
The Republican Party has always been the party of reason and hope ..
LOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOL
I just lost a couple of pounds laughing at that ridiculous statement. The GOP is the party of greed for the few and tyranny against the many. If they want to rebuild their party they need to re-invent themselves into something that actually cares about the average American rather than a gigantic mafia family interested only in feathering the nest of the super rich. Perhaps they can, but I doubt it.
“…after our near miss in the presidential election…”
Gee, what sort of “reason” was used to arrive at that particular conclusion/redefinition of the outcome? Was it an actually rational one?
If the SC GOP is so serious about getting somewhere, then they need to start listening to Chris Buckley, Kathleen Parker, Andrew Sullivan, and Christy Whitman, among others.
Would Katon Dawson ever deign do that?
I honestly doubt it.
The Republican Party used to be the party of Lincoln, of the Union, and of fiscal conservatism. If it were to return to those roots, then the Democracy would have a run for its money in future elections and that would breathe new life into our two-party system.
We need to remember that the Democracy of old used to to be the party of the solid South, Dixiecrats, segregationists, and Redeemers. The Democrats worked tirelessly after Reconstruction to destroy the rights of African Americans, subvert democracy in the South at the state level, and generally terrorize blacks who tried to vote or assert their rights as well as hapless white people who supported them.
It was only in the 20th century under FDR that the Democrats recovered their roots in popular sovereignty, federalism, unionism, and the idea that government of, by, and for the people should work for all the people. By 1970 the transformation was complete: the Democracy was to be a party of the solid left that would seek tirelessly to expand the circle of American freedom and erect, sustain, and expand a comprehensive social welfare state.
That’s why the Republicans have to find their roots again. They were the party of Lincoln, of civil rights, of Radical Reconstruction, of the 13th, 14th, and 15th amendments to the Constitution. It was they who forced an abortive social revolution establishing immediate political equality for blacks down the throats of white Southerners in the immediate aftermath of the Civil War–and for a time it worked.
President Grant, much maligned by racist bigots of his day, was actually a decent man who tried very hard to support black rights throughout his tenure as he propped up with federal troops the legitimate, democratically elected governments of the postbellum South. You have but to read Lehman’s recent book, Redemption, to see what happened. Or Leon Litwack’s masterpiece, Trouble in Mind.
It should not surprise us that Barack Obama derives inspiration from Lincoln, a Republican who preserved the Union, emancipated the slaves, and set the course of U.S. history in the direction of national popular sovereignty embracing ALL OF US.
The Republicans today, however, don’t seem to know any of this. They have become the Dixiecrat Party of the late 40’s that the Democracy ultimately rejected. The Party of Lincoln has become today the party that superintended the current mess in which we now find ourselves.
To think that if they had elected somebody intelligent like Lincoln, Grant, or Teddy Roosevelt, the Republicans might have become the party of fiscal restraint and of walking softly while carrying a big stick.
No, instead it has become the party of big oil, big debt, and fundamentalist religion. Read Kevin Phillips’ 2005 book on this topic, American Theocracy. He predicted that the Republicans would find themselves in dire straits within a few years of the publication of his book.
There’s going to be a lot of Republican soul-searching over the next few months and I am going to say that we need a rejuvenated Republican Party that can engage in an intelligent dialogue with a Democratic Party led by a genuine intellectual, Barack Obama.
If thoughtful people, well-read people (my God! isn’t it wonderful that the president-elect stands revealed as someone who reads books!! What a change from the idiotic incumbent of the White House!) end up at the helm of both parties, then our future will not be as bleak as has been forecast.
We need a viable two-party system in which whoever is incumbent is subject to daily scrutiny, although not to daily attack.
The Republicans need to be led once again by a Lincolnesque figure who intellectual capacity is at least equal to that of Barack Obama. They do not need to be led by someone as risible and as “low on information” as the likes of Sarah Palin. That way lies ultimate marginality for both the party and the rural, conservative areas of the Union that it represents. The Republicans need someone who can articulate a pro-union, pro-civil liberties, free-market, fiscally conservative vision of America that will become an honorable and worthy combatant in the free marketplace of ideas with the brains that now dominate the Democracy and control the fate of the Union.
The GOP needs to return to a platform of lower taxes, lower spending, and balanced budgets, not in 10 years or 5 or 2, but immediately and forever.
Obama ran on “tax cuts for 95% of Americans”, a position more conservative-sounding than anyone else in the race. That is the main issue his supporters remember and talk about.
Obama was lying, of course.
But the same lie worked to elect Bill Clinton in 1992, even if it was not with a majority of the votes.
GHW Bush was elected on a pledge of, “Read my lips: no new taxes!” He wasn’t lying, but he failed to deliver, and Clinton beat him up for it.
According to an article in Time, Mark Huckabee has an interesting analysis of the Republican campaign in his new book. Here is an excerpt from the review:
Agreed. The Republican have only themselves to blame for the election loss.
Libertarians don’t “see any tax increase as apostasy”. Libertarians rightly point out that taxes are so high on a minority of producers that they are immoral
Secondly, they argue from a pragmatic perspective, that taxes must be reduced to revive an economy being suffocated by government.
Since all of the current financial crises are the result of failed government attempts to “solve” some alleged social problems, Mike Huckabee or anyone else who thinks there is “room for government-driven solutions to people’s problems”, must have so novel and unrevealed ideas that have never been tried.
It’s fascinating to watch the Republicans talk about the need to “get back to basic conservative principles.” The problem is, none of them can agree what those include.
Rich’s analysis above is astute. The interesting question is whether the fiscal conservative, small-government, libertarianish wing of the party can stay married to the fundamentalist, anti-intellectual, government-interventionist-on-social-issues side of the party.
Huckabee is their most interesting GOP leader these days because he manages to be in both camps while poking a stick at each…the fiscal conservatives as Ozzie quotes above, and the social conservatives because he manages to convey their message with a smile and at least some nod towards tolerance and without the nasty invective and identity politics employed by some, like Palin for example.
BTW, Brad, if you criticize Obamacons for gloating too much about the election (as you should), then you also need to call out statements like the GOP’s referring to this election as a “near-miss.”
Yeah, a near-miss kind of like the Gamecocks had last Saturday down at Gainesville.
Mike Huckabee, obviously, not “Mark.” I’m down with a thorough-going infection, and my brain is fuzzier than usual.
Lee, you’re a self employed consultant, right? Why don’t/won’t you advertise on Brad’s blog? That’s a real question.
Actually, Phillip, in Saturday’s game, Florida scored 90.3 percent of the points scored and scored 9.3 times as many points as Spurrier’s Plundering Pullets.
That’s much less a near miss than a 52-47 loss by percentage. Obama got only 1.1 times as many votes as McCain.
True, allowing the other team to score 90.3% of the points “might” be worse than allowing Alabama to score 77% of the points and bulldoze over a supposedly top ten squad, but that perception is specious when you consider the initial, unfounded expectations that les tigres would be anything but how horrible they are currently. Lack of perspective and a faulty memory seem to be two traits shared by many Republicans, Dallas Cowboys and Clemson Tigers fans, all.
In the end, I guess the outcomes of those aforementioned games most closely approach that presidential election where LBJ pimpslapped Goldwater for the win. Hmmm…a confused Arizonan crushed under a landslide.
The more things change…
Yep, Cap, your memory is so good you’ve completely forgotten about those eight out of the last 10 Clemson-Carolina games you’ve lost, haven’t you?
The more things change…
I don’t think there are any of my potential customers reading this blog. I deal in high-technology projects, and am hired by the CEO, CIO, or Director of Engineering.
It is the Democrats who are anti-intellectual. They are the ones trying to censor talk radio, shut down discussion on the Internet, and send their goons to shout down speakers on college campuses.
Right thought about Republicans very good to read ………../
Christena
Free HD DVR Receiver Upgrade