Two Types of Republicans and Rising Socialism in America
January 29th, 2013 // 7:33 pm @ Oliver DeMille
The future of America depends on the House of Representatives.
If it goes along with the Obama Administration’s plans, we’ll see major changes in the next four years, and the move toward socialistic policies will be as momentous as the swing to the right under Ronald Reagan.
The White House and Senate are committed to this course, and only the House stands in the way of a serious socializing of America.
There are two types of Republicans in the House, and as long as they are split the White House will probably keep winning.
On the one hand, the Legislative Republicans believe in government.
They are conservative in the sense that they want the government to make good policy and live within its means, but they believe in government and in passing laws to effect change.
More to the point, the Legislative Republicans are against many of the Administration’s policies, and they believe in stopping the White House agenda by getting involved in the legislation and amending it to make it more conservative.
On the face, this may seem like a good viewpoint.
But these representatives have little support for their amendments. Democrats typically vote against such amendments, and so do the other Republicans.
Because of this, such a strategy routinely fails.
The Legislative Republicans don’t get their amendments passed, so they simply end up splitting the vote and allowing the White House to win.
The second type, the Limited Government Republicans, don’t believe in more legislation.
They want smaller government, major spending cuts and wise fiscal choices concerning entitlements.
They want tax reductions and a balanced budget, because they believe good fiscal policy leads to immediate and lasting improvements in the economy.
The White House wins whenever it splits the votes of these two branches of the GOP.
Legislative Republicans argue that the problem comes from the Small Government Republicans who don’t support amendments to White House proposals, amendments that would make the laws less hurtful to the economy.
These two camps show little likelihood of working together, and as a result the White House agenda keeps passing.
So who are the bad guys?
Those who try to work with the president but slow down his plans, or those who want to stop his agenda in its tracks?
In truth, the Legislative Republicans are living in a fantasy world.
Even if they were to gain the support of all Republicans in the House, they would amend various policies and pass them, only to see the White House bring more and more proposals that would undo the slowing effects of their amendments.
Those in the House who are standing strongly against big government policies are the hope of America.
We need the Legislative Republicans to join them.
It takes three presidential terms to really turn America around.
In third terms, two things happen: 1) policies really take hold, and 2) more Supreme Court appointments come.
For example, Reagan effectively got a third term by putting George Bush into office and continuing many of his main policies.
Clinton wasn’t able to do this because Al Gore lost in the 2000 election.
In the case of Barack Obama, there is a strong sense in the Administration that enough changes need to be made that real change occurs even if a third Democratic term doesn’t come.
President Obama is very popular personally, not so much for his policies but because of his person.
Republicans keep winning in Congress, for example. So the president may not have a third term Democratic follow-up after 2016.
As long as the Republicans are split, the White House can keep pushing its agenda and promote two term’s worth of policies during the next four years.
This seems to be their strategy.
The future of freedom right now depends on the House of Representatives, and it is time for the Legislative Republicans in the House to step back, realize what’s at stake, rethink their stance, and take a more direct stand for freedom.
Category : Blog &Current Events &Economics &Featured &Government &Leadership &Liberty &Politics
Keith
11 years ago
Oliver,
I honestly do not see how Republicans can work together without a grand conservative strategy. Democrats win because they are linear, they see pain, poverty, inequality and they voice their concerns and literally mess up the works when they try to implement change. Gun control is a good example. Take away the guns and we stop shootings. This kind of thinking appeals to linear minds. And all because they emphasize terms like social responsibility, social justice, and collective solutions at the federal level. When they do this they literally kill personal responsibility, of which they exhibit none themselves. Republicans talk all day about personal responsibility and this hurts them every time in a collectivist state because they show no social responsibility for the same issues, none. If conservatives want to decentralize government, they need to shrink the collective control. Why not take everything the dems argue, all their goodness they propose, and shrink it to “community responsibility.” They could then argue that when dems implement change, they take away your voice. When republicans implement change, they give it to the people within local communities and not individuals alone, much like a well run corporation that gives more autonomy to individual departments. Dems are far more ready to implement their state run change in a crisis than republicans and republicans need to get back to a constitutional government without calling it that. republicans need to talk more about the conservation of responsibility in the people and not the state. They need to call Obama a fascist and not wimper at it. Calling attention to the corruption on wall street is enough alone to bury the dems agenda. Conservatives are simply afraid.