Michelle Malkin » Question of the day: Does the GOP have enough balls?

Question of the day: Does the GOP have enough balls?

By Michelle Malkin • March 4, 2010 02:38 PM

And no, I’m not talking about basketballs or baseballs or golf balls. You know what I’m talking about — excuse the language, but we need to be blunt. And you know that it’s the question that will hang over the Republican Party from now until November as it tries to persuade the base — let alone the American electorate — that it can provide a real alternative to the current crop of big government corruptocrats in power in Washington.

So: Does the GOP have enough balls to fight the Left or doesn’t it?

You know about my doubts. You’ve heard my warning about McCain Regression Syndrome.

Now, I want you to read every word of what Andy McCarthy has to say about the GOP leadership’s abandonment of Jim Bunning — and what it says about the lack of Republican fortitude in the war against the permanent, ever-growing Nanny State.

Andy speaks the truth. Hard truths. And fiscal conservatives/Tea Party activists need to shout them from the rooftops. I’ve invoked Phyllis Schlafly many times over the past year in urging the GOP to provide true choices instead of echoes. Actions speak louder than words. So, alas, does feckless inaction:

Maine’s Susan Collins took to the Senate floor to assure Americans that Bunning’s radical views about Congress’s not spending yet more billions it doesn’t have “do not represent a majority of the Republican caucus.” And sure enough, they didn’t. Once Bunning backed down, the measure passed by a whopping 78-19.

Think about that. We are talking about $10 billion in a year when Leviathan is slated to spend a total of $3.6 trillion. The majority of Senate Republicans joined Democrats in concluding that the allocation of every one of these 3.6 thousand billion dollars is so vital that not one of them could be sacrificed in favor of unemployment insurance. So another $10 billion just gets heaped on the already unfathomable trillion-dollar deficits stacking year upon year.

The pols call these mounting months (now years) of unemployment benefits “temporary,” even though the real unemployment rate remains in the double digits and no relief is in sight. The “temporary” label is a budgetary trick. It enables lawmakers to sidestep “PAYGO” — Pay As You Go — restrictions that require the federal government to pay for current obligations out of current revenues. Democrats recently made a big show of reinstituting PAYGO — but not until after they’d blown deficit spending through the stratosphere.

It was a bit of theater Democrats had good reason to believe they could pull off. When Republicans controlled Congress, they made a mockery of PAYGO entitlement restrictions, particularly when it came to enforcing Medicare cuts that were required by law. As the Heritage Foundation’s Bruce Riedl observes, PAYGO was a gimmick to project the illusion of fiscal responsibility even as budget deficits soared. Thus it comes as little surprise that, even as President Obama’s sudden paeans to PAYGO ring in our ears, Democrats are slyly sidestepping it.

Besides unemployment compensation, what is in the bill Bunning was blocking? The proposed goodies include public funds to prevent what would otherwise be a 21 percent reduction in payments to doctors who treat Medicare patients.

Of course, these are exactly the sort of steep cuts that enacting Obamacare would accomplish. Given that enacting Obamacare is the Left’s ne plus ultra, why not just let the Medicare payments get slashed now? Because Democrats realize that if people get a load of how Obamacare would actually work before it is a fait accompli, they will scream bloody murder. So the game is to make certain that doctors don’t feel the pinch now, just as the game is to pass Obamacare now but delay its implementation until 2013 — allowing Obama and Democrats to get through the 2010 and 2012 election cycles without being held accountable for the epic disaster that will be government-controlled medicine.

In sum, Bunning’s battle gave Republicans a chance to make points about runaway deficit spending, the fraudulence of PAYGO posturing, the foolish redistribution of wealth to create expensive and unproductive government jobs, unemployment-benefit extensions that Democrats refuse to pay for and that actually increase unemployment, and the monstrous rationing that would be wrought by Obamacare. So, did Republicans rally behind Bunning? Not a chance.

Why? Why abandon this fight when the GOP has the facts on its side? Why no enthusiasm when a year of Obama’s forced march to crony socialism has the public more receptive than ever to the case for slashing government? Simple: Republicans are afraid of being demagogued — as Democrats and the media demagogued Bunning — as wanting to cut off funding (i.e., money we don’t have) for unemployment insurance and the usual laundry list of other Big Government baubles like COBRA coverage, satellite TV dishes, the “highway trust fund,” etc. Republicans also did not want their own sorry PAYGO history rehashed.

Here’s the sad truth: For all the shining they did at last week’s White House “summit” on health care, when it gets down to actually putting the brakes on the Big Gummint Express, most of today’s Republicans are AWOL. They’re great at the debate society. But making the fight on something concrete, really saying no when it means grinding redistribution to a halt, means taking the slings and arrows. No thanks, they say, let’s just make the whole thing go away on a voice vote, the sooner the better. Indeed, while Senator Bunning should be lauded for engaging this fight, it is telling that he took it on only after deciding not to seek reelection.

…Democrats know the electoral setbacks will only be temporary. They are banking on the assurance that Republicans merely want to win elections and have no intention of rolling back Obamacare, much less of dismantling Leviathan.

For my money (while I still have some), that’s an eminently sound bet. The Bunning battle, in which the GOP was nowhere to be found, is the proof. Bunning just wanted Congress to live within its gargantuan means. Yet, the Washington Post ridiculed him: “angry and alone, a one-man blockade against unemployment benefits, Medicare payments to doctors, satellite TV to rural Americans and paychecks to highway workers.” That’s outrageously unfair, but it is a day at the beach compared to the Armageddon that would be unleashed upon any attempt to undo Obama’s welfare state on steroids.

As it turns out, Republicans didn’t have the stomach for a fight over wealth transfers that plainly exacerbate the problem of unemployment. Why would anyone think they’d take on a far more demanding war, in which Democrats and the legacy media would relentlessly indict them for “denying health insurance to millions of Americans”?

Even if the GOP gets a majority for a couple of cycles, even if President Obama is defeated in his 2012 reelection bid, Obamacare will be forever. And once the public sees that the GOP won’t try to dismantle Obamacare, it will lose any enthusiasm for Republicans. Democrats will eventually return to power, and it will be power over a much bigger, much more intrusive government.

Health care is a loser for the Left only if the Right has the steel to undo it. The Left is banking on an absence of steel. Why is that a bad bet?

So dead-on. So painfully dead-on. Where’s my famous head-banging-against-the-wall graphic? Ah, there it is:

Like I said this morning, I don’t want to hear the preemptive Republican promises to “repeal Obamacare later.”

Stop. It. Now.

As long as Beltway GOP hacks see this as a cynical marketing campaign and not an ideological battle, we are screwed.

~ For the latest breaking news, be sure to join Michelle's e-mail list ~

Posted in: GOP,Health care

Printer Friendly

comments (116)

See what others have said

Note from Michelle: This section is for comments from michellemalkin.com's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that I agree with or endorse any particular comment just because I let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with my terms of use may lose his or her posting privilege.

Comments

« Older Comments

#101

On March 5th, 2010 at 7:35 am, zoyclem said:

If the past is any indication, I think the Republican Party will try to play nice, which is a mistake. It’s long past time for the gloves to come off–our way of life is being altered irrevocably by those currently in the majority. I hope the Party leadership recognizes this, but I have my doubts.
#102

On March 5th, 2010 at 9:06 am, USMCgramma said:

3/3 news: PETA trades Tiger for Sanford – a poster child to encourage people to spay and neuter pets (proposed South Carolina billboard).
#103

On March 5th, 2010 at 10:33 am, et said:

It seems that the MSM has effectively neutered most republicans in congress. Perhaps we need to buy them a replacement set.
#104

On March 5th, 2010 at 11:54 am, Desert Dave said:

I live in a district with a semi-RINO (Mary Bono) who voted for cap and tax. There are no republicans running against her in the primary–RINO or otherwise. Looks like it will be against the left wing mayor of Palm Springs in Nov. So who do I vote for? This is why the RINOs stay in forever. We need good conservatives to run against these people in every district, but it’s not easy. I’m told it takes more than $1mil to even think about running for congess.
#105

On March 5th, 2010 at 1:02 pm, Virginia Patriot said:

I live in Eric Cantor’s district, he used to be a fairly reliable conservative, but since getting into leadership has adopted a more McCain-like stance. I have called the VA GOP asking if anyone is challenging him in the primary. The lady who answered the phone said no one has stepped up yet, but mine was not the only call she’s gotten asking the same question.

I’m done holding my nose, they either find the anatomical parts to fight the communists or they go the way of the Whigs.
#106

On March 5th, 2010 at 1:15 pm, ITookTheRedPill said:

Desert Dave,

You could run against her. Run a completely Internet-funded campaign.

Who knows? You may have been called for such a time as this.
#107

On March 5th, 2010 at 1:20 pm, ITookTheRedPill said:

Virginia Patriot,

The same thing I said to Desert Dave applies to you.

In each and every Republican primary, we need a candidate who will fight for Tea Party principles.

I’m blessed to have one running in my district. If you don’t in yours, take a moment to seriously consider, “If not me, then who?”

Someone’s got to step up to the plate. Who beter than someone like you with the “Malkins” to fight the Communists.
#108

On March 5th, 2010 at 1:21 pm, ITookTheRedPill said:

“better”, not “beter”. Ugh. Preview is my friend.
#109

On March 5th, 2010 at 7:06 pm, ssnark said:

Question of the day: Does the GOP have enough balls?

The short answer is, NO.

How can you have enough of anything you have none of?

But, the Republican party doesn’t just lack gonads, it also lacks a spine.

To be honest, I’ve become convinced that Republican politicians are not too much better than Trematodea.
#110

On March 5th, 2010 at 7:25 pm, cheapseat said:

well, most of them are swinging bb’s, but some like michelle bachmann clank when they walk. this april is the time to unass these lightweights, and not fall for these 1 year conservatives and five year liberals like mccain, mcconnell, and gramnesty. I’ve given up on the two witches of maine, and the maine voters.
#111

On March 6th, 2010 at 1:41 am, rightwingrocker said:

Does the GOP have enough balls to fight the Left or doesn’t it?

Sure didn’t in 2008.

Not likely now, either. I’d say they’re much more likely in bed with the Left.

That’s why I’ve moved on. If the Republicans grow a pair and dump their version of the progressive agenda in favor of something more Constitutional, I’ll consider returning. In the meantime, I’ll vote for whomever I think is the best for the job.

The GOP will not substantively change until the majority of people whose votes they seek do as I do – and even then, it’s questionable. It will be a question of whether the GOP wants to survive or be relegated to third party status.

RWR
http://www.rightwingrocker.com
#112

On March 6th, 2010 at 1:48 am, rightwingrocker said:

We can replace these cowards with true conservatives in the next Republican primary.

No chance whatsoever of succeeding unless the GOP knows without doubt that their candidate will not get the necessary support unless he/she is conservative.

The GOP counted on the LOTE vote in 2008. They didn’t get it. They had a plethora of appropriate candidates, and chose the only one that was completely inappropriate, and the one with the least chance of winning the election. Romney wasn’t the greatest candidate, but had GOP voters given him the nod, we’d be dealing with President Romney’s foolishness today. Ditto for every other candidate the Republicans fielded, right on down to Ron Paul.

The Republicans have to know that non-conservative candidates will not get the conservative votes that they so need. If conservatives keep voting LOTE, then LOTE is what you’re going to get.

RWR
http://www.rightwingrocker.com
#113

On March 6th, 2010 at 7:50 am, bolivar said:

Gee sure do love when Michelle gets down and dirty!!! I did not leave the Republican Party, they left me. I really do think Rush might be wrong – another party just might be able to pull it off. The R or D label means little anymore. With Lindsey Gramnesty a proponent of the R I see little reason to pull for that line of manure. I had hopes that Scott Brown might be a breath of fresh air but, alas as many alluded to – we got a load of manure again. He is just as bad as many D’s and many R’s as well. We need a new party – one that the Progressives cannot bastardize. How about Liberty? We are losing ours and we need to fight for it.
#114

On March 8th, 2010 at 4:55 pm, FirstSkirt said:

Aaargh….it must be hell living without a spine…and a set of, well, you know. I agree with BOLIVAR #123, as I too, can’t tell the difference between D’s and R’s. Pray for our nation.
#115

On March 9th, 2010 at 2:17 am, Robohobo said:

Question of the day: Does the GOP have enough balls?

Easy.

NO!

Thing is they are just more of the same only slower. They worship “Cthulhu The Statist Leviathan” just not as faithfully as the D’s. They will be eaten, surely, just not as soon as the rest of us and before the D’s who worship the best.

We must clean DC of the establishment. The political class that we have allowed to grow so large has forgotten why they were sent there. Some time back Boehner said something along the lines of his being sent to DC to ‘wield power’ for his constituents. He is just wrong. He was sent to serve the interests of those constituents, nothing more, nothing less. He is a servant of the people.
#116

On March 9th, 2010 at 3:18 pm, max said:

The Salty Massa/Rahm Emmanuel Blues
(sung to the tune of “Salty Dog Blues” with apologies to Flatt and Scruggs

Standin in the showers with the Beltway blues…
a great big hole in the bottom of my shoes…
Rahmy lemme wash your salty balls.

Rahmy let me wash your salty balls
I really aint no man at all…
Rahmy, lemme wash your salty balls.

What’s that you say I must vote yea?
How can I make that pay and pay?
Rahmy, lemme wash your salty balls..

You wash for me, I’ll wash for you…
Wash out Rahmy Barney’s comin too
Rahmy lemme wash your salty balls…

Rahmy let me wash your salty balls
I really aint no man at all…
Rahmy, lemme wash your salty balls.