Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

Jamaal510

(10,893 posts)
Sat Nov 8, 2014, 12:09 AM Nov 2014

National Review advice for Republican Congress: "Don't govern"

More: http://www.bbc.com/news/blogs-echochambers-29942241
[IMG][/IMG]

The political reality is that as long as President Barack Obama is in office and can veto bills he doesn't like, Republicans aren't going to be able to achieve any of their legislative objectives. So why try?

"If Republicans proclaim that they have to govern now that they run Congress, they maximise the incentive for the Democrats to filibuster everything they can - and for President Obama to veto the remainder," they write. "Then the Democrats will explain that the Republicans are too extreme to get anything done."

Not only that, they say, attempting to pass legislation will risk opening the divide between the establishment and hard-core conservative wings of their party.

The alternative, the editors write, is for Republicans to do what they can to lay the groundwork for a presidential victory in 2016. Then, with control of both the executive and legislative branches, the party will be able to effectively implement its agenda.


What is this, a merry-go-round?
8 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies

KinMd

(966 posts)
1. In 1994 Republicans won the House for the first time in 40 years..
Sat Nov 8, 2014, 12:30 AM
Nov 2014

..2 years later Clinton won reelection easily. In 2010 there was a Republican 'wave" and in 2012..well you all know the Romney landslide fell a bit short..I see a pattern here. But if they want to try to waste two years doing nothing, it's good for Democrats

Prophet 451

(9,796 posts)
3. Predictable
Sat Nov 8, 2014, 04:26 AM
Nov 2014

Trying to govern would A) prove that government can work; B) is something they ideologically oppose and C) would crate concrete results they could be judged on, instead of their usual formula of smearing Democrats as the devil and then saying they're better than devils.

bluesbassman

(19,368 posts)
4. So the National Review is basically suggesting that they should defraud the American taxpayers?
Sat Nov 8, 2014, 05:00 AM
Nov 2014

Just sit on their asses for two years while collecting their paychecks?

Words cannot express the level of disgust and contempt I have for these hypocritical scumbags.

Major Hogwash

(17,656 posts)
5. Rush Limbaugh said the same thing on Thursday after McConnell wanted to pretend like he was . . .
Sat Nov 8, 2014, 05:07 AM
Nov 2014

. . . a statesman and would govern over the Republicans in the Senate to "get things done".

Rush went ballistic on his program bitching about McConnell's stance on what they should do next.
Rush went on to say that the Republicans shouldn't govern, they should listen to other members in their party, people like Michele Bachmann and Ted Cruz.

In other words, talk about jumping off of the cliff!!!!!

Latest Discussions»General Discussion»National Review advice fo...