Hagel: Reagan Wouldn’t Identify With Today’s GOP
Reagan wouldn’t identify with this party. There’s a streak of intolerance in the Republican Party today that scares people. Intolerance is a very dangerous thing in a society because it always leads to a tragic ending. Ronald Reagan was never driven by ideology. He was a conservative but he was a practical conservative. He wanted limited government but he used government and he used it many times. And he would work with the other party…
Now the Republican Party is in the hands of the right, I would say the extreme right, more than ever before. You’ve got a Republican Party that is having difficulty facing up to the fact that if you look at what happened during the first 8 years of the century, it was under Republican direction…
The Republican Party is dealing with this schizophrenia. It was the Republican leadership that got us into this mess. If Nixon or Eisenhower were alive today, they would be run out of the party.
(Source: thecable.foreignpolicy.com)
Wait…who is playing politics?
Former Republican Governor of New Jersey Christie Todd Whitman hits Mitt Romney’s Tax Plan: “You can’t just do tax cuts.”
(Source: video.cnbc.com)
Senator Lugar’s Concession Statement
If Mr. Mourdock is elected, I want him to be a good Senator. But that will require him to revise his stated goal of bringing more partisanship to Washington. He and I share many positions, but his embrace of an unrelenting partisan mindset is irreconcilable with my philosophy of governance and my experience of what brings results for Hoosiers in the Senate. In effect, what he has promised in this campaign is reflexive votes for a rejectionist orthodoxy and rigid opposition to the actions and proposals of the other party. His answer to the inevitable roadblocks he will encounter in Congress is merely to campaign for more Republicans who embrace the same partisan outlook. He has pledged his support to groups whose prime mission is to cleanse the Republican party of those who stray from orthodoxy as they see it.
This is not conducive to problem solving and governance. And he will find that unless he modifies his approach, he will achieve little as a legislator. Worse, he will help delay solutions that are totally beyond the capacity of partisan majorities to achieve. The most consequential of these is stabilizing and reversing the Federal debt in an era when millions of baby boomers are retiring. There is little likelihood that either party will be able to impose their favored budget solutions on the other without some degree of compromise.
Unfortunately, we have an increasing number of legislators in both parties who have adopted an unrelenting partisan viewpoint. This shows up in countless vote studies that find diminishing intersections between Democrat and Republican positions. Partisans at both ends of the political spectrum are dominating the political debate in our country. And partisan groups, including outside groups that spent millions against me in this race, are determined to see that this continues. They have worked to make it as difficult as possible for a legislator of either party to hold independent views or engage in constructive compromise. If that attitude prevails in American politics, our government will remain mired in the dysfunction we have witnessed during the last several years. And I believe that if this attitude expands in the Republican Party, we will be relegated to minority status. Parties don’t succeed for long if they stop appealing to voters who may disagree with them on some issues.
Legislators should have an ideological grounding and strong beliefs identifiable to their constituents. I believe I have offered that throughout my career. But ideology cannot be a substitute for a determination to think for yourself, for a willingness to study an issue objectively, and for the fortitude to sometimes disagree with your party or even your constituents. Like Edmund Burke, I believe leaders owe the people they represent their best judgment.
Too often bipartisanship is equated with centrism or deal cutting. Bipartisanship is not the opposite of principle. One can be very conservative or very liberal and still have a bipartisan mindset. Such a mindset acknowledges that the other party is also patriotic and may have some good ideas. It acknowledges that national unity is important, and that aggressive partisanship deepens cynicism, sharpens political vendettas, and depletes the national reserve of good will that is critical to our survival in hard times. Certainly this was understood by President Reagan, who worked with Democrats frequently and showed flexibility that would be ridiculed today — from assenting to tax increases in the 1983 Social Security fix, to compromising on landmark tax reform legislation in 1986, to advancing arms control agreements in his second term.
(Source: politico.com)
(Source: The New York Times)
(Source: thecrimson.com)
In a 2003 letter to George Pataki, Governor Mitt Romney discussed how Massachusetts enacted a cap on carbon and was working to reduce greenhouse gases emissions by the end of Romney’s first term.
Romney also mentioned how the regional cap and trade initiative then being created among northeastern states would help in this effort.
Republicans for Environmental Protection drops “Republicans” from name
Once upon a time, there were green Republicans.
Like John McCain, who sponsored the first climate cap-and-trade bill in the Senate — before getting all bitter about that whole being-crushed-by-Obama thing.
Like former Florida Gov. Charlie Crist, who set bold targets for cutting his state’s greenhouse gas emissions — before getting walloped in a Senate race by Tea Party darling Marco Rubio.
Like Maine Sen. Olympia Snowe, who championed cap-and-trade and got high marks from the League of Conservation Voters — before getting fed up with Senate dysfunction and polarization and GOP anti-contraception lunacy.
Like Arnold Schwarzenegger, who proudly signed California’s groundbreaking climate bill and fought back against oil industry efforts to repeal it — before being exposed as a serial philanderer who had a love child with his family’s housekeeper.
Now the ranks of green Republicans have gotten so thin that the nonprofit Republicans for Environmental Protection is dropping “Republicans” from its name.
Well, that’s not how the group itself explains it. Jim DiPeso, policy director for the newly christened ConservAmerica, says, “We thought it was important to hammer home the connections between conservation and traditional conservative values.”
DiPeso says the Republican trend toward climate denial is “disturbing,” but his group certainly isn’t giving up on the party. ConservAmerica will continue spotlighting green Republican ideas and endorsing green Republican candidates, even if they’re few and far between these days.
(Source: grist.org)
