Is the GOP self-destructing?

Is the GOP self-destructing?
The Republicans can't seem to agree on anything.
By Doyle McManus

August 4, 2013

We've all grown used to a Congress locked in bitter warfare between two parties, producing gridlock on federal spending and other pressing issues. But the Congress that left Washington last week hit a new high in another category: gridlock among Republicans.

Take last week's unremarkable proposal by President Obama for a deal to combine corporate tax cuts (an idea Republicans love) with an increase in spending on roads and other public works (an idea only some Republicans love).

Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.), who has emerged as Obama's chief partner in trying to negotiate bipartisan deals, praised the idea as "a good start." Sen. Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.), the Senate Republican leader, denounced it as a trick to boost government spending. Meanwhile, Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Texas), a leader of the up-and-coming tea party faction, said Republicans should stop talking about any deals and threaten to shut down the federal government instead.

And that was only in the Senate. In the House, where Republicans run the chamber, the chaos was even worse. When House leaders tried to pass exactly the sort of deep cuts in transportation and housing programs they've been calling for, they suddenly discovered that they didn't have a majority; some GOP members thought the cuts were too deep, and others thought they weren't deep enough.

How divided are Republicans in Congress? So divided, one conservative joked, that it shouldn't be called a civil war: "It's not organized enough for that."

The Republicans are divided over how much to cut federal spending and how fast. McCain and his "Gang of Eight" GOP senators are negotiating with Obama on a bargain that could include new spending on jobs in the short run in exchange for cuts in Medicare and other programs in the long run. To tea party Republicans like Cruz, that's anathema.

The GOP is also divided on how to fight the implementation of Obama's healthcare law, which begins signing up clients Oct. 1. Cruz and Sens. Mike Lee of Utah, Rand Paul of Kentucky and Marco Rubio of Florida have launched a tea-party-fueled crusade to block any spending bill — and thus shut down the federal government — unless Obamacare is defunded. But most Republicans, including conservative stalwart Sen. Tom Coburn of Oklahoma, think that's a terrible idea. Not only would it probably fail to stop Obamacare, it could also draw the wrath of voters, who would blame the GOP for an unnecessary crisis.

The party is divided over immigration. McCain, Rubio and a handful of other Republican senators joined with Democrats in June to pass a bill that would offer a path to citizenship to immigrants who entered the country illegally or overstayed visas. But conservatives in the House have dug in their heels against a path to citizenship.

And it's divided over foreign policy and national security. Tea party libertarian Paul has called for a smaller defense budget, demanded tighter restrictions on the National Security Agency's electronic surveillance and denounced what he calls the "war caucus" in his own party. That's drawn rebukes from defense hawks like McCain and New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie.

Every political party has its factions, of course. And parties that have recently lost presidential elections — as the GOP just did — are often the most divided.

But the current brawl in the GOP seems more destructive and personal than most. McCain has called Paul and Cruz "wacko birds," for example, while Cruz called his GOP critics the "surrender caucus." Christie warned that Paul's views were "very dangerous." Paul responded by calling Christie "the king of bacon."

Part of the problem is that Republicans in the Senate and the House have grown steadily more conservative, with fewer compromise-friendly moderates in their ranks. To Cruz and other tea party insurgents, traditional Republicans are part of the problem, not part of the solution. "I don't trust the Republicans," Cruz has said. "It is leadership in both parties that has gotten us into this mess."

Another reason for the bickering is that the most committed Republican voters aren't interested in compromise. A poll released last week by the Pew Research Center found that most Republican voters don't think the GOP is conservative enough — especially on government spending, where the faithful are squarely against further deal-making.

But perhaps the biggest problem the Republicans have is one of leadership. When asked to identify the leader of the Republican Party, the first-place winner in the Pew poll was, accurately enough, "nobody."

"The single biggest difference is the disappearance of an organized establishment," said Richard Norton Smith, a historian at George Mason University who has written several books on GOP history.

It all means that when Congress returns to Washington in September, at least two dramas are in store. One is the collision between the two parties over federal spending; the other is the civil war within the GOP.

The battle over the budget will get solved at some point — if not by Oct. 1, then by the end of the year.

The war within the Republican Party? That will take longer.

 

Nope. Just typical politics. Something you might want to study.

 

It would seem the democrap party is in even more turmoil. The far left radicals are taking over and will soon push the moderates out completely.

 

View attachment 1888

 

Tea-partiers are separating from republicans to the point that they don't even consider themselves republican anymore. That says a lot about the problems the republican party is facing today.

They chose to go that route, under the guidance and policies of the infamous Regan and his puppet Reagan, bless their little hearts.

 

Little abortion Davy thinks that there is a Tea Party equivalent in the Democratic Party. I'd love hear the name of that group. Ya think he can come up with it?

 

Mainstream democrats?

The article YOU posted shows that 77% of democraps consider themselves people of faith...are you in that 77% or are you in the 23%?

 

There is NO such equivalent since democrats don't believe in the Constitution.

 

The Audacity of Hope, by Barack Obama, p. 89-92 Oct 1, 2006

 

This quote demonstrates the basic misunderstanding (or purposeful misdirection) of the Democratic party. The United States is not a Democracy; it's a Republic...a fact the Democrats conveniently ignore.

True...we're a Democratic Republic...meaning, we vote for our representatives, but keep in mind which is the noun and which is the adjective...Democratic (adjective) Republic (noun).

Most folks don't even know the difference between a Democracy and a Republic. A Democracy means "Majority Rule"...whoever gets the most votes makes the rules. A Republic is a form of government anchored to a founding document of individual rights which "protects the Minority FROM the Majority".

In America, that document is the US Constitution. President Obama is correct when he says "...democracy is an ongoing conversation". However, equating the US Constitution to "an ongoing conversation" is simply wrong-minded and dangerous. It opens the door for subversion of the American Republic and threatens the lives and liberties of its citizens.

 

You do realize that it's not just one party, or two, that your point can be applied to. It can be applied to Democrats, republicans, and the newly formed "tea-party" as well.

The tea-party isn't going to live by your standards for long, not if they had true power. The first thing they'd do is exercise their interpretation of the documents that founded this country.

Get that? What you're talking about is a difference of opinion on the interpretation of the documents. No side can claim to be an absolute authority, and neither could the founders themselves.

That's part of what Obama was talking about, that those documents are subject to interpretation, as a fact of nature, in that it'll never be interpreted the same way by everyone...ever.

It needs to be put into the context of the current issues, not bound to a century's old interpretation. If it was, there'd be no electricity, or cars, or planes, as those things wouldn't satisfy the documents limited understanding of future events and possibilities.

It's a frame-work, based on solid ideas, but it is in no way perfect. To insist it is is to refute the very nature of the documents, because the documents allow for reinterpretations as new information arises. It's adaptable, as it must be, for a society to flourish. Without that built-in flexibility, the country couldn't even survive long enough to be mentioned as anything more than a footnote in some future history book.

 

Herein lies the fundamental difference of our views.

 

lol...is that why you have a yak avatar? Transportation? How the heck can you allow yourself the privilege of using a modern-day computer? Shouldn't it be an abacus, or beads or something?

Yes, I'm calling you old-school lol

But, I'm not here to change your mind on this issue, if that's what you believe, then so be it. We can exchange information all we want, but neither of us is likely to change the others pov on this subject.

War then?

That's what happens when animals, people included, can't adapt: They go to War.

Seriously, this can become another civil War in this country, if we as a country are so far apart and refuse to accept change.

I like to call it The Uncivil War, as civility is one of the first things to disappear under that scenario. There's plenty of that here, and in politics in general. All that's needed now is a powerful political party to refuse to compromise with the other...oh wait...Yeah, War it is then.

Bring it on, and to the victor goes the future of the country.

 

The republican party has commited suicide. I left in '06
With candidates like Romney...McCain....Ryan.....screw em.

 

What's amazing is that when you tell a Democratic politician that they can keep increasing spending...even when we spend 43¢ per dollar just to finance existing debt...but they have to reduce the increase from 6% to 4%, they throw a fit...saying "No One Will Compromise!" ...and want to declare WAR!!!

 

That's not exactly true, now is it? By that I mean it's a hell of a lot more complex than a single issue or point.

My main complaint with hard-core republicans and tea-partiers is the lack of compassion they show the poor.

Sure, people are abusing the system, but it's not the poor who are doing it, it's the doctors and other professionals scamming the system.

It's the rich, not the poor, who are causing the uncontrolled financial burden on the systems. The insane retarding of the funding within the systems and the demanding requirements enforced upon the poor do nothing to alleviate the problem, because the ones who abuse the system will always remain there, they're the ones sending in the fake bills: The doctors and other professionals.

republican politicians efforts are only hurting the poor, and not solving the problem.

Who are the poor? Everyone from every walk-of-life. A lot of them are the elderly, who worked their entire lives, and continue to work to the day they die. A lot of them are the ill and handicapped, who can't find work because few employers will hire them, and when they are hired, the wages they make are not enough to live on.

They are the under-employed, a result of the laws compromised on by both major parties. Keep wages low, and allow companies to call 31 hours a week "part-time" and then hire only part-time workers at minimum wage, as one example of many laws that inhibit the ability for people to climb out of their chronic poverty.

Another is companies finding unique solutions to those worker who've been on the payroll too long. They stay within the law, but only in a superficial way, as the bottom line is always about profit.

In other words: It's a bit more complicated than a single issue or point can address. Yes, the Democrats have issues, but I'll take them any day over the republican and tea-party any day, because neither has compassion for the poor, or understands the complex nature of the issues the way Democrats do.

 

Yes, it's a complex issue. But, that's what it boils down to.

Oh, have mercy. I'm so sick and tired of hearing this from you. Stop complaining. Your accusation is not true and you've been put in your place on this issue more time than I wish to count.

Bullshit. It certainly IS the "poor" (you've still failed to define that term, BTW) who abuse the system along with a few healthcare professionals you mentioned.

See my above response.

More bullshit.

You're going to see a lot more "part-time" workers with the full impact of Obamacare coming down upon us. Fewer and fewer companies are hiring full-time workers. Instead, they're hiring part-time workers so they don't have to pay the insurance mandate. Do you blame them? I started a thread on this topic and listed many companies who plan on doing exactly that. Companies are finding ways around the Obamacare rules that are threatening their livelihoods. Again, do you blame them?

Well, of course it's about profit! Did you ever take Economics 101 in school?

What a load of bullshit. Do you think the democrats really give a damn about you? If you do, then you're more naive than I previously thought. The democrats couldn't care less if you wandered out in the snow up there in Michigan and froze to death. There is only ONE thing the democrats care about: MONEY. Money creates power. Power creates more money. Don't you think it's time you wised up a little?

 

You guys never fail to put yourselves and your own beliefs on a pedestal do you?

No need to respond. I don't want to make you have to climb all the way down.

 

Well, the democrat - liberal - progressive plan sure has helped the poor. Just look at the black unemployment figures......food stamp rolls....folks on government assistance. I just see more peeps in line for help..........how is that helping the poor besides keeping them dependant on government? Ahhh....freedom;-)

 

That is the only thing he considers "help". He cannot be bothered to go out and get a job!