LETTER: GOP remains the party of ‘no’To the Telegram: In an April 27 article in the Washington Post, Thomas E. Mann and Norman J. Ornstein come right out and say it: “The GOP has become an insurgent outlier in American Politics.
To the Telegram:
In an April 27 article in the Washington Post, Thomas E. Mann and Norman J. Ornstein come right out and say it: “The GOP has become an insurgent outlier in American Politics. It is ideologically extreme; scornful of compromise; unmoved by conventional understanding of facts, evidence and science; and dismissive of the legitimacy of its political opposition.”
Such journalists traditionally criticize both parties concerning issues pertinent to the American people, but they find that it is harder to ignore that, “the core of the problem lies with the Republican Party.”
As, “People for the American Way,” points out, Obama’s appointees for Circuit Court have waited an average of 136 days for full Senate approval while Bush administration appointees needed only wait 30 days. Furthermore, Obama’s nominees were delayed even with the unanimous endorsement of the judiciary committee. These tactics apply an effective wall of partisan obstruction and consequently, during the President’s first Congress, when Democrats controlled both houses, more than 300 bills passed by the house were never considered in the senate. In 2011, GOP Senators tried using a nomination nullification strategy to undo existing legislation and resist voting for a new nominee for the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau — unless they were permitted to rewrite the law. This strong-arm tactic by Senate Republicans forced President Obama to use a recess nomination for Richard Cordray — this being the only means at his disposal to get on with an appointment that had been long overdue.
Also, consider the mean spirited intent of the Norquist Pledge, which precludes any positive debates concerning tax revenues, while holding well-meaning Republicans hostage by threatening a backlash from Tea Party Obstructionists — stopping at nothing to defeat the president and willfully withdrawing important support for any Republican congressman who fails to go along. In other words, they’re casting the votes of well-meaning Republicans by using political blackmail.
Meanwhile, Romney is running for office by way of “not being Obama.” and implying our slowly improving economy was sabotaged by presidential policies that have, in reality, turned the recession toward job creation rather than drastic job losses.
Although Mitt Romney’s Republican rivals now almost unanimously praise him, how about a few pertinent quotes from them before we forget their original opinions:
Rick Santorum then: “If Mitt Romney’s an economic heavyweight, we’re in trouble, because he was 47th out of 50 in job creation in the state of Massachusetts when he was governor. He may have had some success at making money for himself and his partners at Bain Capital, and I give him a lot of credit for doing so, but that’s a very different thing than going out and creating an atmosphere for people to create … jobs.”
Newt Gingrich then: “Someone who will lie to you to get to be president will lie to you when he is president.”
Michele Bachmann then: “He can’t beat Obama because his policy is the basis of Obamacare,” and “You can’t have a candidate who has given the blueprint for Obamacare. It’s too identical. It’s not going to happen!”
Rick Perry then: “If you are a victim of Bain Capital’s downsizing, it’s the ultimate insult for Mitt Romney to come to South Carolina to tell you he feels your pain — because he caused it!”
Jon Huntsman then: “You can’t be a perfectly lubricated weather vane on the important issues of the day.”
And — “He’s been on three sides of every major issue of the day. And, because of that, it’s going to be very tough in the end to make that trust argument with the American people.”
Ron Paul alone seems to value consistency. When asked recently when he’ll endorse Romney, he answered simply: “Not soon!”
Maybe all we other Americans should also entertain serious second thoughts.
Peter W. Johnson,