This is the GOP's sad face come 2014 if they squander away the real possibility of winning back the Senate. If the leaks about the upcoming Republican agenda from the GOP leadership are true, well, expect more dissension within the rank and file. What's more troubling is the base won't be happy, let alone those fed up with all the disasters of the current Democratic power vaccum that might welcome a new agenda (i.e. the elusive Independent per the latest Q. poll).
So much for the Year of the Elephant. More aptly, let's call it the year the GOP looked a gift horse in the mouth: Obamacare, the gift that keeps giving daily - literally. The president's signature achievement is like a monster in a horror flick that the public is screaming to get away from, regardless of Party. Americans are watching the abomination unfold in vivid color as they lose their healthcare and they can only blame Democrats. And now the GOP wants to change the narrative?
GOP, don't change the conversation when you are winning the debate!
At the top of the list is immigration "reform". But why? Is it because:
A) They believe the myth that we need millions more people participating in our anemic economy with high unemployment to help our economy.
B) The GOP thinks they'll win Hispanic voters in 2016 if they pardon the illegals.
C) If they acquiesce to all the Left's issues, they can avoid being labeled obstructionists and keep the focus on Obamacare- doh!
D) They want to line their pockets with big money donors like the Chamber, Zuckerberg, and other lobbyists to keep their seats in Congress.
E) All of the above.
My pick: E) All of the above. It's just plain stupid and maddening for the GOP to shift gears to immigration reform. This is the time to keep the spotlight on Exhibit A of big government, liberal policies gone amuk, and then some.. The not-so-affordable care act is harming everyone, including the supporters of the president. Finally the GOP has a mega-phone and a cause that spans the political spectrum and they want to punt?
The healthcare debacle is enough to deliver a Republican landslide in the upcoming mid-terms but they have a few more clever ways to jeopardize our victory this year and beyond.
Next stop, the Voting Rights Act. SCOTUS provided a much needed reprieve to the states and some counties that were unduly discriminated against by the decade's old law and Holder's injustice department. It was a great ruling for many of us in the South that have been under constant attack from the AG, profoundly Texas, that is still under scrutiny for it's 2010 redistrictring plans to this day. Another Primary in question so more taxpayer dollars can fly out the window? (Thanks Mr. Holder, for draining the middle-class with your frivolous lawsuits and blocking voter's rights.) But I digress.
Rather than take it as a win for States rights and voter integrity for all, the GOP plans to work on passing a new law, sponsored by Jim Sensenbrenner (R-WI), from the WashingtonTimes:
“This bill modernizes the Voting Rights Act and will restore those protections that were gutted by the court,” said Rep. F. James Sensenbrenner Jr., the Wisconsin Republican who oversaw the last bipartisan approval of the law in 2006. [snip]
Where the old standards singled out some states, the current bill makes clear that any state or municipality could be subject to stiffer scrutiny if it is found to have a recent history of voting problems.
Four states — Texas, Louisiana, Mississippi and Georgia — would be covered immediately, as would Charleston County, S.C., and Northampton County, Va., congressional aides said.
So they want to throw out the SCOTUS ruling and again, immediately put some states and counties right back into the pre-clearance dog house without cause? This makes no sense and once again, the GOP can't seem to understand when they've been handed a gift horse. http://www.flickr.com/photos/iheartphoties/6254713327/
Heritage describes the legislation this way:
Hans A. von Spakovsky, senior legal fellow at the conservative Heritage Foundation, called the bill “an absolute disaster” and said it would write race-based criteria into one part of what had been a race-neutral law.
“For the first time, Sensenbrenner’s bill actually says that the protections of this amendment will only apply to racial minority groups, and they defined them in the law, and it specifically excludes white voters,” Mr. von Spakovsky said. “They’re basically giving a ‘get out of jail free’ card to black elected officials in the South, where they can discriminate all they want against white voters.”
And this last example of "what are they thinking?" is a real conundrum: TPA (trade promotion authority). The Republicans want to cede their authority to oversee international trade agreements yet the Democrats are against it.
This isn't nearly as big an issue as the other two, but it is strange that the GOP is willing to give this president carte blanche on anything, let alone something that will effect jobs and the economy. Meanwhile, his own Party is against him. Seize the voters!
I'm on record of opposing TPA mostly because it gives this president more authority to fast track these deals, bypass Congressional oversight and it's possible he'll give up some of our sovereign rights:
"Per the Constitution, the president “shall have Power, by and with the Advice and Consent of the Senate, to make Treaties, provided two-thirds of the Senators present concur” (Article II, section 2). Yet it appears they may cede their authority to regulate commerce with foreign nations as per the Constitution.
Given his less than stellar record on international matters, is this a smart GOP move? Am I alone in wondering exactly what the GOP is thinking? Who are their advisors?
To me, their only advisors should be their constituents. The GOP is siding with the Democrats counting the president, in all of these three examples, rather than their base.
I'm left with this description of the GOP and its leaders: