« BACK  |  PRINT

RS

EDITOR OF REDSTATE

The McConnell Defenders

By: Erick Erickson (Diary)  |  May 12th, 2011 at 12:45 PM  | 

RESIZE: AAA

It never ceases to amaze me that so many self-described conservatives will defend Mitch McConnell and the GOP Senate Leaders to the hilt when it comes to their treatment of Senate conservatives.

Last night, I noted that Mitch McConnell had snubbed Jim DeMint by putting Richard Burr in the Finance Committee.

“But wait,” whined the alleged conservative defenders of McConnell. “Richard Burr had seniority.”

Well yes, which I noted. Except for more than a month Richard Burr said he was not interested in the slot and, in fact, had to be persuaded by Mitch McConnell to change his mind.

Nonetheless, the alleged conservatives say, “Pooh-pooh, he had seniority so there it is.”

Well, for those who use the seniority argument as a blanket #WINNING argument, please explain why Kelly Ayotte is on the Budget Committee and not Rand Paul?

Rand Paul wanted to be on the Budget Committee. And he has seniority over Kelly Ayotte under the Senate’s rules. But McConnell passed him over and gave it to Ayotte instead.

This, of course, isn’t a dig at Ayotte. Just pointing out that for those who are hiding behind the “seniority” argument, you are full of b.s.

Tags: , , ,

COMMENTS

POSTING RULES  |  LOGIN TO COMMENT  |  REGISTER TODAY
  • http://www.hakubi.us/ Neil Stevens

    What are we, Teamsters? Don’t we care about ideas and results, not whoever happened to be filling a seat longer?

  • fsured

    but I think your portrayal of Richard Burr as some sort of RINO was way off base. Perhaps Burr has made decisions in the past that we disagree with, but he is a strong Republican and will serve that committee well.

  • Diogenes314

    1) According to both Politco and the Hill, Burr changed his mind about wanting the position. Any evidence that McConnell ‘persuaded’ him?

    2) I?m sure endorsing Rand Paul after McConnell had already endorsed the other candidate (in his own state) didn?t help his case. Neither did DeMint publicly trashing the leadership during the 2011 budget process. You can?t posture and hold yourself up as the only ?real conservative? among a bunch of squish traitors in the middle of negotiations and then be surprised when you?re not given preferential treatment. To DeMint?s credit, he took it well.

    3) The whole thing about having the same people who trash McDonnell call in to demand he promote their favorite candidate probably was ineffectual at best, counter-productive at worst. MM probably wasn’t snubbing tea partiers or conservatives. Just Mark Levin and some RS diarists.

    4) From what I know, if the Chairman and senior members on a certain committee prefer one candidate over another, their input is weighed into the equation. Apparently there wasn?t an overwhelming desire to include DeMint on the Committee.

    Of course, they could all be a bunch of leftist squishes as well. You know, as in not named DeMint.

    Wait-you said Coburn is a fiscal conservative now if I recall.

    Does that mean “Taxby” is one of the good guys now as well?

  • kenjames

    daily. It is a little disconcerting to hear you use terms like “self’described” and “alleged” when referring to conservatives and then characterize them as “full of b.s.” because they don’t agree with you. Perhaps McConnell and the ohters feel Burr is someone they can work with better. After all, McConnell is responsible for his performance. I happen to agree with you that DeMint would be a better choice, but the fact someone thinks differently doesn’t warrant this kind of response. You have done it before.

    As I post this I am looking at the first two words below this pane: “Be respectful…..” Those two words should apply to the authors on this site as well as the commenters..

  • Aaron Gardner
  • http://www.hakubi.us/ Neil Stevens

    So you really have no refutation to bring?

  • Diogenes314

    As I post this I am looking at the first two words below this pane: ?Be respectful?..? Those two words should apply to the authors on this site as well as the commenters..

    Let me break it down for him. When certain individuals here use the word conservative it means whoever agrees with them. When they say ‘so-called conservatives’ or words to that effect, it’s anyone with an honest difference of opinion. And if you can see both sides, you’re a Copperhead. I like that one myself.

    I’m sure he’ll catch on.

  • Leon H. Wolf

    You’re obviously unhappy here, but for some reason you suffer from a pathological inability to stop commenting on a website that persecutes you grievously and deals with its commenters unfairly. Therefore, I have decided to do you the favor of banning you, thus improving your life dramatically.

    You’re welcome.

  • http://slcliberty.blogivists.com randy streu

    If you don’t know a person personally, and they call themselves Conservatives, then actually, “self-described” and “alleged” are actually being MORE than fair — it’s MORE ACCURATE than simply calling them Conservatives. To simply take their word for it, regardless of further actions and statements, wouldn’t be very accurate reporting.

    Plus, if you look, he’s saying these individuals are full of b.s. because of the seniority argument. Which, in fact, is not only complete crap, as suggested by Erick, but actually rather unConservative.

  • Common_Cents
  • red_oakster

    which is what would have happened if Ensign had not resigned-so DeMint knows his seniority will get him what he wants in due course. If I’m correct, Dole kept Gramm off Finance for awhile too.

  • Brian Darling

    Is a great American! Love him. He would be a great addition to any committee and would have been a rock solid conservative voice on the Senate Finance Committee.
    Please don’t read this as an implicit knock on Senator Burr or any of the other candidates for the position. I don’t think anybody could argue against DeMint being on the Senate Finance Committee.
    I am surprised that DeMint’s efforts to expand the conservative movement are not rewarded and seem to be punished by some.
    The allegation by Diogenes314 that “DeMint publicly trashing the leadership during the 2011 budget process” is bunk. DeMint was fighting for conservative values and he should not be critiqued for helping to pull the conference to the right. But for DeMint, the Senate Republican conference earmark ban would not have passed. Furthermore, he has saved the taxpayers billions in his fight, with Senator’s Coburn, Paul, Lee, Vitter, Sessions and McCain against waste, fraud and abuse in the budgeting process. Please give him credit for his many accomplishments.
    The bottom line is that Senator Jim DeMint is doing an excellent job in the Senate. He deserves praise and respect for all of his excellent work.

  • earlgrey

    Of course I am trying to get the party active and working with my local GOP. I also plan to no longer contribute to the NRSC. I will, however, send them notes with the amount(s) that I have pledged and donated to the SCF, DeMint’s Senate PAC.

    Short of moving back to KY so I can vote against Mitch, I don’t have any other ,means of making my case.

  • YnotNOW

    If McConnell shows that he is not willing to wisely use the level of responsibility he currently has as Minority Leader, he should not be trusted with the increased level of responsiblity as Majority Leader in 2013.

  • YnotNOW

    If McConnell shows that he is not willing to wisely use the level of responsibility he currently has as Minority Leader, he should not be trusted with the increased level of responsiblity as Majority Leader in 2013.

  • jimmyneutron

    thank you! Every time I read one of his replies it sets my teeth on edge.

  • Aaron Gardner
  • jimmyneutron

    has been unfavorable for a long time. I don’t recall him ever being particulary conservative and I have hoped many times that the voters of Kentucky would give him the pleasure of returning home and getting a real job (I don’t believe that would happen – I am guessing he would become a lobbyist). From what I can see he has the same problem many of his fellow reps have, which is that they think that only those willing and able to reach across the isle will ever get anything done and in their mind getting things done, even if it is the wrong thing, is what it is all about. I don’t know, maybe they just want to keep the gravy train rolling. Either way, they seem to feel that taking stands on principle is counter productive, whereas I would rather have people in there who understand that, while you can’t always steer straight to your conservative ideals, the idea is to continuously move in that general direction.
    In my mind as well the R’s should ditch seniority and put the best people on each comittee. They are there to do a job, not to follow seniority rules. Leave that garbage to unions and gov’t employees.

  • jimmyneutron

    has been unfavorable for a long time. I don’t recall him ever being particulary conservative and I have hoped many times that the voters of Kentucky would give him the pleasure of returning home and getting a real job (I don’t believe that would happen – I am guessing he would become a lobbyist). From what I can see he has the same problem many of his fellow reps have, which is that they think that only those willing and able to reach across the isle will ever get anything done and in their mind getting things done, even if it is the wrong thing, is what it is all about. I don’t know, maybe they just want to keep the gravy train rolling. Either way, they seem to feel that taking stands on principle is counter productive, whereas I would rather have people in there who understand that, while you can’t always steer straight to your conservative ideals, the idea is to continuously move in that general direction.
    In my mind as well the R’s should ditch seniority and put the best people on each comittee. They are there to do a job, not to follow seniority rules. Leave that garbage to unions and gov’t employees.

  • earlgrey

    if they see gains in the election in 2012?

  • YnotNOW

    Insert your definition of “extra-ordinary” here.

  • YnotNOW

    Insert your definition of “extra-ordinary” here.

  • PatriotForLiberty

    After 25 years in the Senate, we respectfully believe that Mitch has overstayed his effectiveness and has been a diminishing return for some time now. How/is there any way to encourage the real Senate leadership like Sen. DeMint to give him an opportunity to gracefully step out of leadership?

  • acat

    who’s next in line?

    Mew

  • cordpt

    Seniority in the US Senate is a long held tradition. It does not constitutes itself as Tradition, but as a tradition, a custom. Conservatives tend to esteem institutional traditions and procedures like this one. Institutional memory is important and changing old customs is a dangerous activity – even more when they’re part of the political realm of activity.

    I admit this is one of those traditions that, besides apparently irrelevant, can be called, from a rationalistic perspective, as a “bad habit”. And it certainly looks demod? for the modern soul and mind. However, taking down traditions due to the belief that established human practices can be conveyed adequately by the means of reason and abstract thought is the dearest practice of progressives of all eras.

    A conservative accepts change when it’s needed, but a conservative isn’t one to surrender a known good for an unknown better lightheartedly.

    You mention results. What’s at stake is a minuscule part of the complex machinery that is the American politic institutions. I’d claim that the seniority system has provided or, maybe more accurately, has not constituted an insurmountable obstacle to the achievement fairly decent results – as I do believe that the American political system, albeit very far from perfect, being an human construct operated by humans and not angels, compares pretty well to its peers for the last couple of centuries.

    Would a change provide better results? One, looking at it on paper, from an abstract perspective, would be tempted to answer affirmatively, but we know that’s not enough for a conservative. And after all, there’s a strong rationale to have seniority as a general rule of conduct in the Senate: senior senators are those who’ve deserved the trust of the American voters for longer. They’re a proven commodity, there’s already an intimation of familiarity – something that appeals to conservatives. And what would replace the seniority procedure? Are we sure we’ll be able to replace it with something better? Is such a clear hubris consistent with conservatism? Maybe we’d like to see more democratic solutions implemented. But just 30 years ago, almost everybody thought proposition 13 was a great idea (including many conservatives).

    Conservatives have prudence as the most important principle in practical politics. And it’s extremely easy to understate the importance of these apparently negligible conventions. It comes to mind Prime Minister Churchill speech about the rebuilding of the Commons Chamber and its rectangular shape though. We shape our buildings and afterwards our buildings shape us… maybe the same is true about parliamentary procedures?

    Traditions, even insignificant and merely ceremonial ones (or especially those?), make societies more robust. They’re frequently unpopular and even more often looked down as meaningless. But those are exactly the ones that need, not the protection, rather the attention of conservatives. Someone needs to say: let’s give this some more thought, no need to hurry up.

  • AceInTX

    are they conservative?

    perhaps…marginally

  • AceInTX

    You can?t posture and hold yourself up as the only ?real conservative? among a bunch of squish traitors in the middle of negotiations and then be surprised when you?re not given preferential treatment.

    Mitch and the boys proved the point didn’t they?

    bottom line is…we get candidates who are marginal on budget cutting issues in favor of true budget cutters and Mitch gets to avoid icky fights on principle

    make all the excuses you want…but that is the bottom line

  • AceInTX

    just sayin

  • swi2522

    lets face it when mitch talks you know if someone get in his face he will back down

    mitch is still mad that the kids in his 5 grade class tied him up at his birthday party and none noticed he was missing

  • Adjoran

    DeMint is following my first advice – to lead, ignoring the seniority of Graham, in conservative issues. I love the guy, but I completely understand why McConnell wanted Burr on Finance.

    In the Senate, the Majority Leader is in control of the voting process. It takes 2/3 to get anything to the floor over his head; it’s a lot of power. BUT the Senate Committee Chairmen, especially of the key committees, are powerful in their own right, and jealous of that power. A Majority Leader cannot run the Senate without allies on the key committees. McConnell hopes to become Majority Leader, and wants his people on those committees. That’s reality. It is how the Senate works, or doesn’t work.

    DeMint has become one of the key elected leaders of the conservative movement. His attention and goals will be more devoted to that area. I don’t even know if he actually wants the seat on Finance, the amount of homework on that and similar committees is very time-consuming if you do it halfway right. Of course, some do just phone it in, like that Obama character, but that serves no one’s interests.

    For the same reason, I urged DeMint NOT to seek any leadership positions. These could only serve to restrain his voice. Loyalty and the company line are important in such positions, and DeMint needs to be free to speak his mind AND to be able to fight for principles even when they conflict with the leadership’s proposed course. A man cannot in good conscience serve two masters.

    Burr is no movement conservative, to be sure, but we don’t have enough movement conservatives in the Senate to fill every important committee seat. In case you haven’t noticed, DeMint is fairly lonely in the Chamber at times, there aren’t exactly 99 like him. Burr is a back-bench guy who can probably play his cards well enough to keep his seat for several terms, and he will play ball with the leadership. Want more conservative strategies from leadership? Elect more conservatives.

    The idea that a grandstanding firebrand like Rand Paul would be put on the Budget Committee by any sane Leader is pretty funny.

  • rightwingmom52

    to let your own senators know you’re not happy with the GOP leadership. Of course you have my sympathies that in your case those comments would probably go in Alexander’s ear and out Corker’s, but it might make you feel better to at least vent to them. I’ve been pleasantly surprised at how much nicer the staffers are to me since I took CW’s advice and started identifying myself as a voting member of the executive committee of the Shelby Co. (AL) GOP. I really don’t think they realize that’s pretty much the first step on the ladder, but it’s a start and it does seem to get their attention, especially if you say it real fast. LOL.

  • sowa1

    so we can get something done in Washington. Democrats stop everything. they want the Government to be in charge of everything and everyone. NO! Take a look at North Korea. How’s that working out for them?

  • 20jan2013
  • kenjames

    as wailing on the commentors to this site. I realize that was not his (only) target.. I still don’t appreciate his characterizations of conservatives if they don’t fit into his slots, or don’t think as he does. People make decisions for all sorts of reasons, and don’t feel it necessary to consult those outside their circle for advice. I am in Burr’s district and have been mostly satisfied with him. I write to express my approval, and have had to write him to express my disapproval. Last time I checked he had a 91 or 92 ACU rating. You want pure – try heaven.