• Welcome to OGBoards 10.0, keep in mind that we will be making LOTS of changes to smooth out the experience here and make it as close as possible functionally to the old software, but feel free to drop suggestions or requests in the Tech Support subforum!

George Will: Vote Against the GOP in Midterms

Newenglanddeac

Well-known member
Joined
May 1, 2011
Messages
13,135
Reaction score
390
Amid the carnage of Republican misrule in Washington, there is this glimmer of good news: The family-shredding policy along the southern border, the most telegenic recent example of misrule, clarified something. Occurring less than 140 days before elections that can reshape Congress, the policy has given independents and temperate Republicans — these are probably expanding and contracting cohorts, respectively — fresh if redundant evidence for the principle by which they should vote.

The principle: The congressional Republican caucuses must be substantially reduced. So substantially that their remnants, reduced to minorities, will be stripped of the Constitution’s Article I powers that they have been too invertebrate to use against the current wielder of Article II powers. They will then have leisure time to wonder why they worked so hard to achieve membership in a legislature whose unexercised muscles have atrophied because of people like them.

Consider the melancholy example of House Speaker Paul D. Ryan (Wis.), who wagered his dignity on the patently false proposition that it is possible to have sustained transactions with today’s president, this Vesuvius of mendacities, without being degraded. In Robert Bolt’s play “A Man for All Seasons,” Thomas More, having angered Henry VIII, is on trial for his life. When Richard Rich, whom More had once mentored, commits perjury against More in exchange for the office of attorney general for Wales, More says: “Why, Richard, it profits a man nothing to give his soul for the whole world . . . But for Wales!” Ryan traded his political soul for . . . a tax cut. He who formerly spoke truths about the accelerating crisis of the entitlement system lost everything in the service of a president pledged to preserve the unsustainable status quo.


Ryan and many other Republicans have become the president’s poodles, not because James Madison’s system has failed but because today’s abject careerists have failed to be worthy of it. As explained in Federalist 51: “Ambition must be made to counteract ambition. The interest of the man must be connected with the constitutional rights of the place.” Congressional Republicans (congressional Democrats are equally supine toward Democratic presidents) have no higher ambition than to placate this president. By leaving dormant the powers inherent in their institution, they vitiate the Constitution’s vital principle: the separation of powers.

Recently Sen. Bob Corker, the Tennessee Republican who is retiring , became an exception that illuminates the depressing rule. He proposed a measure by which Congress could retrieve a small portion of the policymaking power that it has, over many decades and under both parties, improvidently delegated to presidents. Congress has done this out of sloth and timidity — to duck hard work and risky choices. Corker’s measure would have required Congress to vote to approve any trade restrictions imposed in the name of “national security.” All Senate Republicans worthy of the conservative label that all Senate Republicans flaunt would privately admit that this is conducive to sound governance and true to the Constitution’s structure. But the Senate would not vote on it — would not allow it to become just the second amendment voted on this year .

This is because the amendment would have peeved the easily peeved president. The Republican-controlled Congress, which waited for Trump to undo by unilateral decree the border folly they could have prevented by actually legislating, is an advertisement for the unimportance of Republican control.

The Trump whisperer regarding immigration is Stephen Miller, 32, whose ascent to eminence began when he became the Savonarola of Santa Monica High School . Corey Lewandowski, a Trump campaign official who fell from the king’s grace but is crawling back (he works for Vice President Pence’s political action committee), recently responded on Fox News to the story of a 10-year-old girl with Down syndrome taken from her parents at the border. Lewandowski replied: “Wah, wah.” Meaningless noise is this administration’s appropriate libretto because, just as a magnet attracts iron filings, Trump attracts, and is attracted to, louts.

In today’s GOP, which is the president’s plaything, he is the mainstream. So, to vote against his party’s cowering congressional caucuses is to affirm the nation’s honor while quarantining him. A Democratic-controlled Congress would be a basket of deplorables, but there would be enough Republicans to gum up the Senate’s machinery, keeping the institution as peripheral as it has been under their control and asphyxiating mischief from a Democratic House. And to those who say, “But the judges, the judges!” the answer is: Article III institutions are not more important than those of Articles I and II combined.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opin...ory.html?noredirect=on&utm_term=.29299233ee81
 
Principled stance, but politically impractical one in today's super-partisan environment.
I have noted how much is done by Executive Order now instead of legislation, which is a dangerous precedent and alarming trend.
Those aligned with Trump may not mind now, but what about when the next President is Democrat?
Will the Democrats be willing to take George Will's principled stand then?

I think the solution would have been to defeat the lapdog R's in the primaries. But we know that wouldn't happen. Just like we know voters won't take a principled stand.
 
If a Dem is as racist, moronic, dangerous and as egotistic as Trump, you bet I'll take such a stance. In over 230 years of POTUS, none has approached Trump's actions.
 
So much is done by Executive Order because Republicans in Congress have no desire to work with Democrats on legislation.
 
neither side wants to work with the other, after winning the Cold War comes the unseemly fight over the spoils, no end in sight, sad

but we have seen this before in history

I said during the time of Obama that a Republican president would not recieve much better treatment from Congress either, and the next Dem president can expect the same.
 
Democrats spent the first 18 months of the Obama administration desperately trying to work with Republicans on health care. Republicans stonewalled them and won control of the House. Republicans reward Republicans for not working with Democrats.
 
Democrats spent the first 18 months of the Obama administration desperately trying to work with Republicans on health care. Republicans stonewalled them and won control of the House. Republicans reward Republicans for not working with Democrats.

This.
 
Democrats spent the first 18 months of the Obama administration desperately trying to work with Republicans on health care. Republicans stonewalled them and won control of the House. Republicans reward Republicans for not working with Democrats.

No matter how many times this is pointed out to Republicans, they still keep repeating the same "bosides" stuff over and over. Obamacare was based in large part on a GOP healthcare plan created by the conservative Heritage Foundation, and implemented by Mitt Romney as a state healthcare plan when he was the Governor of Massachusetts (Romney, tellingly, disowned his own plan and dissociated himself from it as a presidential candidate to win the GOP primaries, as it had become identified too closely with Obama). Obama repeatedly tried to get Republicans on board, and was willing to make concessions. Yet the GOP in Congress stonewalled him, operating under Mitch McConnell's mantra that they wouldn't support any Democratic measures, and would thus make Obama a one-term president. Republicans generally have also been much less willing to work or deal with Congressional Democrats, and that's especially true of Trump and the current GOP majority in Congress. Yet, on social media and message boards like this one, conservatives just keep posting the same "neither party will work with the other" line ad nauseam.
 
Last edited:
“He’s not a perfect guy; he does some stupid stuff,” said Tony Schrantz, 50, of Lino Lakes, Minn., the owner of a water systems leak detection business. “But when they’re hounding him all the time it just gets old. Give the guy a little.”

Do these people realize that Obama was “hounded” and outraged 24/7 by Republicans and Fox News? It’s almost as if they have selective memories...and no self awareness. The difference being, of course, Obama was a rational politician, criticism warranted sometimes. Trump’s behavior and policies, on the other hand, is completely worthy of the constant criticism. These people forgot they participated in the perpetual Obama bashing for the past 8 years.
 
Democrats spent the first 18 months of the Obama administration desperately trying to work with Republicans on health care. Republicans stonewalled them and won control of the House. Republicans reward Republicans for not working with Democrats.

Democrats knew they were passing crap legislation with their majority, and were looking to "work" with Republicans to share the blame later while making no meaningful concessions. Pubs recognized this, ran away from it, and let the law be 100% pure Democrat. Not really the best example of well-intentioned reaching across the aisle. But I do see your point. Congress used to pass laws, and sometimes both parties passed laws together.
 
Democrats knew they were passing crap legislation with their majority, and were looking to "work" with Republicans to share the blame later while making no meaningful concessions. Pubs recognized this, ran away from it, and let the law be 100% pure Democrat. Not really the best example of well-intentioned reaching across the aisle. But I do see your point. Congress used to pass laws, and sometimes both parties passed laws together.

That “crap legislation” was preemptive compromise. Your narrative does admit that Republican never had a plan to work together. Almost 9 years later Republicans still can’t pass a cohesive health care plan to the right of ACA. That’s because there really isn’t one that accomplished the same basic mission.
 
neither side wants to work with the other, after winning the Cold War comes the unseemly fight over the spoils, no end in sight, sad

but we have seen this before in history

I said during the time of Obama that a Republican president would not recieve much better treatment from Congress either, and the next Dem president can expect the same.

Don’t you have a more local fascist that you can support, komrade sailor?
 
Democrats knew they were passing crap legislation with their majority, and were looking to "work" with Republicans to share the blame later while making no meaningful concessions. Pubs recognized this, ran away from it, and let the law be 100% pure Democrat. Not really the best example of well-intentioned reaching across the aisle...

That’s a fantastical take.
 
Back
Top