Why We Need A Fresh Start In The Leader's Office
By Erick Posted in Republicans — Comments (13) / Email this page » / Leave a comment »
It is very important that Republicans and Conservatives learn the right lessons from this election. Make no mistake, losing 30 seats is a bad loss. Any CEO and his entire team would be fired if his company suffered such a loss. The election results were a clear message from millions of our supporters that they no longer identified with our party.
Is this the face of change that Republicans need to win back the Majority? If history is any indication, surely not. When it comes to reform and scandal, Mr. Boehner's actions speak much louder than his words.
Read on . . .
BOEHNER SAYS: "We also need to look at the credibility of the lobbying industry. Literally anyone can be a lobbyist. We need clearer ethical standards and greater transparency about their campaign contributions--if we're going to continue to allow such contributions at all--and we need to reform the laws governing so-called 527 organizations. Common-sense changes such as these, coupled with earmark reform in Congress, will increase public confidence and make it more difficult for inappropriate relationships to be built between legislators and lobbyists."
--John Boehner in the Wall Street Journal
"Nothing was more appalling to me than the fact that three of our own Members brazenly sold out our country, our Conference, and the fate of our colleagues for personal enrichment or in one case, personal perversion…. Voters correctly expect more from us, and we should expect more from each other. I'm dubious about simply changing ethics rules; Cunningham and Ney blatantly broke not just existing rules but federal law…. But I do believe we need to make the existing Ethics Committee process faster and we need give it teeth. More to the point, I will simply not tolerate ethical misconduct within our conference. Clear likelihood of serious transgressions will lead to suspension from important committee positions; guilt will lead to immediate and severe consequences." (Boehner Minority Vision Statement)
BOEHNER DOES: John Boehner has long had a cozy relationship with the K Street community. He rents his Capitol Hill apartment from a lobbyist that had business before his committee. The Washington Post has also detailed that, "Boehner has had his share of taint." He handed out checks from tobacco lobbyists on the House floor in 1995 while lawmakers were weighing tobacco subsidies. In 2004, he allowed Sallie Mae to throw him a fundraiser while the student lending outfit was lobbying his committee. And he is a frequent flier on trips paid for by special interests." In January 2006, USA Today revealed that, "In the past five years, special interests have paid for 31 of Boehner's 36 recorded domestic and international trips. On 22 of those 31 privately funded trips Boehner took his wife. The average cost for each of the 31 trips was about $4,000."
Though you may not have heard it, Mr. Boehner took more Abramoff money than some other people more widely known to have had the association. In fact, Mr. Boehner's PAC accepted more money than Mr. Ney's, according to Michael Collins of the Cincinnati Post (January 5, 2006). Collins wrote that Boehner lead "the pack, taking in even more money than Rep. Ney, who has become one of the central figures in the political corruption investigation that brought Abramoff down. Ney received $31,500 in donations from Abramoff and his clients - $1,000 less than Boehner, the report said." That isn't all that mind-blowing, but much more telling than the just contributions was Mr. Boehner's reaction to the Ney scandal. Rather than quickly acting on behalf of his majority, he protected the corruption that he knew to exist. Not only did he fail to act, when the deep roots of the Ney scandal became public in July/August, Mr. Boehner sat idly on the sidelines and allowed Ney to keep getting a paycheck and allowed him to remain a member of this body through the election.
In fact, when asked on FOX NEWS Sunday just 45 days ago whether Bob new should resign, Boehner refused to say "yes." Even in the face of a tough election, Mr. Boehner still would not work to help inoculate the Republican Majority from charges of scandal.
« Burn the Witch — Comments (18) | General Chairman Mel Martinez will not run the RNC — Comments (32) »
Why We Need A Fresh Start In The Leader's Office 13 Comments (0 topical, 13 editorial, 0 hidden) Post a comment »
Boehner and Blunt represent the country club wing of the GOP? Get a grip on yourselves.
We did not lose on Tuesday because of the House leadership. We lost because of the White House leadership. No amount of change in the House is going to do anything about the fact that liberals control both the Senate and the executive.
Change for change's sake is not conservative. Nor is a mindless belief that the perfect leader can lead us to the conservative promised land.
> No amount of change in the House is going to do anything about the fact that liberals control both the Senate and the executive.
That's the saddest thing about the election, that the best conservative veto in government is gone. That is the real big, big gain for the dems, that since the House is pure majority rule, effectively those republican votes don't count any more, so the dems can ram through amnesty and anything else they can get the president and 10 republican senators to sign on.
Change for change's sake is not conservative. Nor is a mindless belief that the perfect leader can lead us to the conservative promised land.
I have two words for you - Ronald Reagan
Steve Lockridge
http://redstateconservative.blogspot.com
-- Today we did what we had to do. They counted on America to be passive. They counted wrong. -- Ronald Reagan
So, are we in the promised land then? Reagan did not get us there, and no leader ever can.
I vented to my reps office (in a reasonably nice way) listing my objections to Boehner and Blunt. I kept asking, "Do you people realize how angry voters are out here? Do you realize how betrayed we feel by the Republican party?" I told him we need Pence and Shadegg. Certainly not the same old faces who are cozy and loyal to each other rather than the voters.
He then said to call Rep. Cantor's office as he heard he was working to get the Friday vote delayed. I asked if they were receiving any calls up there, he said the American Conservative Union was working pretty hard on this.
Encouraged, I called Cantor's office, only to be told that Cantor was not wanting to delay the vote and Cantor was in fact working to elect Blunt. He said Cantor had to help Blunt because he was deputy something to him.
I then went off again about things I said in paragraph 1. There's that buddy loyalty instead of the voters again! I added how disappointing it is to be represented by the Republicans in DC anymore. People think of Republicans as crooks and big spenders. Blunt and Boehner's faces are on that perception. That is why we need new faces with real conviction.
Now I'm going to call my friends and to do the same.
Life is not fair, but It's still a Wonderful Life!
I'm interested to see how the RSC members vote. With close to, or over, 100 members of the RSC, this election should be a no brainer. How many of these allegedly fiscal responsibility conservatives are going to go out and vote for Boehner and Blunt for the leadership?
I'm not one for purges, but RSC membership should be for those who back up their professed conservatism with important votes - especially these leadership votes.
I agree, Boehner must go.
Maybe we can discuss this with a focus on issues and a little less backwash.
I mean, I would expect to see some of the comments about abramoff, etc on Kos.
Lets engage the discussion on merrits and win it there.
I think the leadership didn't lead in this last election. I don't think Boehner and Blunt are good enough spokesmen to champion a conservative movement. They haven't walked the walk close enough in many people's minds.
And because of the lack of leadership, as WuWei points out we've handed the power over to people I don't trust to have the best interest of this country at this critical time of fighting GWOT and terrorists seriously plotting our destruction daily.
I worked closely for then Cong Talent in '94 when that group took the majority. They strongly immediately demonstrated in large and small ways the new approach they were going to take.
Boehner and Blunt, after this earthquake of an election, are just wanting to adjust things around the edges. I remember Boehner back during that Contract with America time. I liked him. But along the way after twelve years, B&B are not revolutionaries with bold ideas.
There is a leadership election coming up and we should put fresh faces out there. We are going to need bold ideas to get back on track for 2008. Repubs can't stay in the doldrums. What you mean by backwash, I'm not sure. I'm wanting to turn the page on this election.
I'm a very positive person who doesn't yell or cuss at people. But I will speak out. Maybe you can glean from my signature what my friends hear from me all the time.
Life is not fair, but It's still a Wonderful Life!
I'm 50/50 on Boehner. I like the fresh direct approach of Mike Pence, but I'm not sure if we need to take such a HARD right hand turn in reaction to the election results.
If anything, we need to reevaluate our stance on stem cell research. How in the world can we really be against stem cell research? I cast my last vote this past election cycle for anyone against stem cell research. When you survive cancer or live with any other dreaded disease, then you can preach to me about morality issues, but for now, stem cell research represents hope and those that stand in the way of it represent the opposite. I never thought that stem cell research would be something that would turn me into a single issue voter, but I'm close.
Back to House Leadership. The one person that must go is special interest whip Blunt. More so than Boehner to me, Blunt personally represents the lasting memory of the DeLay era that must be eradicated. We must say to the American public, we reject the politics of corruption and thus, we reject Roy Blunt, then he can retire (we'll retain the seat) and go join his wife Abby as a lobbyist. Hopefully Democrats will enact a ban on House floor access to anyone who is a lobbyist or married to a lobbyist.
As for Joe Barton, don't get me started again on stem cells... Joe Barton is the LAST thing we need. Can you imagine Don Imus going off every morning of everyday for the next two years against Republicans? That's what will happen. We'll never regain the trust and respect of the American public. Joe Barton is the antithesis of reform and an obstacle for medical research.
I like the fresh direct approach of Mike Pence, but I'm not sure if we need to take such a HARD right hand turn in reaction to the election results.
I'm interested in your definition of what constitutes being on the "HARD right." What positions are clearly so out of the pale that they deserve that sobriquet?
And by the way, Joe Barton actually was for "Embryonic" Stem Cell Research. Not against.
Second; Tom DeLay has had accusations levelled against him and an indictment filed under very un-kosher circumstances. He has not been convicted of anything and he has committed no crime other than getting the Press to really dislike him.
How in the world can we really be against stem cell research?
Third; Who said the GOP is against stem cell research? Let me inform you that there are two types of stem cell research.
One has already demonstrated results in humans and has proven effective in many cases and better yet, it does not bring up any ethical issues. The GOP is a 100% behind that. It uses that variant of stem cell known as Adult Stem Cell - available in cord blood and even the bone marrow (among other places).
Embryonic Stem Cells on the other hand have not proven effective in one single case. In many situations where they have been used, instead of heart cells they became tooth, hair or skin cells.
To this day, I wonder why the GOP has never made this stuff clear.
No Republican in the world is against stem-cell research! What many Republicans or Conservatives are against is EMBRYONIC stem-cell research.
There have been major strides and promise regarding stem-cells taken from adults, umbillacle cord blood, and even from tumors. However, there has been virtually NO Promise or any leads on any drugs derrived from embryonic stem cells. The truth is, the stem cells from embryos are too early in development to have any practical use. The whole stem cell research issue is a myth, as real science has not found the slightest bit of promise with embryonic stem cells, but has found it with adult and other types of stem cells. Why can't we focus where everyone agrees, rather than taking a human life in the hopes of a medical cure?
Last Tuesday was a huge loss for the Republican party, and this Friday appears as though it will be a major loss for the conservative movement. Conservatives form the voting backbone of the Republican party, but we get the treatment of a crazy uncle. Until that changes, the Republican party will continue to shed seats in both the House and the Senate. It's obvious that the Republican party cannot exist without the conservative base, but it doesn't appear as though that message has made it to the powers that be. The reelection of John Boehner and Roy Blunt will prove that. These two men will lead the Republican party back to the 1970's. The country club, blue blood Republicans are back in control.