The duty of Republican opposition

Posted by SamTheCat, Thursday, January 15, 2009, 12:49 am Just as the Republicans stood firm on the issue of digging for more oil, and cannily got publicity and public support, so too they should stand firm-- and united-- on taxes, energy, and un-socialized health care. The defection of 40 House Republicans on the SCHIP vote-- a vote for a huge regressive tax, and paving for the good-intentioned path to Hillarycare isn't a good start.

Posted by debbieqd, Thursday, January 15, 2009, 4:47 am "Republicans would do well to avoid being maneuvered into the role of mindless oppositionists." Your good advice to your party may be too late. Have you beenwatching Mitch McConnell lately? Eric Cantor? The southern senators against the auto loans? They are entrenched in mindless opposition! Your advice is right-on, however. Our country is at its best when the issues are intelligently and calmly discussed on both sides. Unfortunately, your party hasn't had a new, innovative idea in years and we are living the result from that lack of thought. One cannot live by faith alone.

Posted by darryl becker, Thursday, January 15, 2009, 5:51 am It's sad, the problem isn't "Republicanism." It's "Know Nothingism" attitude led by the so-called Conservatives of talk radio. They have made a joke of a once proud party.--Darryl Becker--author of "All The President's Costumed Characters"

Posted by Eric Dondero, Thursday, January 15, 2009, 6:29 am That may be the role for conservatives, but we libertarians will fight Obama on 100% of his proposals. He is the complete opposite of a pro-liberty supporter. Obama is the closest individual in the history of the US to a genuine Socialist as President. If conservatives wish to wuss out, that's their decision. We libertarians will stand and fight, and fight we will, on everything. Something tells me it's the fighters who will benefit at the polls in 2010.

Posted by WM, Thursday, January 15, 2009, 8:41 am This article is foolishness. Pure suicide. It starts off recognizing the reality that the left must be opposed, then urges more of the same cooperation that Irving Kristol pedaled and which led to the trouble we are in today. What is needed is a new mental model, a way of thinking about the nature of opposition. To oppose means to oppose, not make loud noises and then give in at the last minute for "practical" reasons like we have been doing. How practical is it to be a permanent minority party? You have to understand that the stimulus package is inherently leftist, corrupt, and destructive. It does not matter if you tweak the tax policy or earmarks here or there or reduce the Keynesian spending somewhat. The overall package is a leftist one in and of itself. There is no way to make it consistent with free market principles because it is an abrogation of laissez faire in and of itself. It must therefore be opposed completely. If it gets passed, it should be done over the heads of the GOP and the left should have to own it and its horrendous results. There is no gain to be had over the long run by cooperating with the left to mitigate some of the damage of their programs. We must risk a little extra short-term pain for long-term gain. That is the only way to differentiate the party and save it over the long run. When will you people learn to start thinking in principles and the long term?

Posted by richtfan, Thursday, January 15, 2009, 8:44 am You've got to be kidding. "Action on climate change is essential"? Unless you've figured out a way to control sun spots and solar storms, there is NO action that any human can make that will either hurt or harm climate change. There is NO manmade effect on the earth's climate, and conservatives have to resist any and all attempts to regulate a free society in the name of "helping the planet". What a load of crap that is. There is NO mandate for universal health care. There is a mandate to change the system we already have, but I can only imagine the utter outrage when people start having their care rationed by the federal government. Now you're talking about a full scale revolution. Americans won't put up with it.

Posted by Voice of Reason, Thursday, January 15, 2009, 8:47 am Some of these plans may have some merit on their own, and where they do, Republicans can do themselves and the country a favor by seeing if it’s possible to work cooperatively. With action on health likely inevitable, it’s better that Republicans participate in the work to ensure a result that’s market-sensitive. Action on climate change and the environment is essential, so Republicans should promote nuclear power, the cheapest alternative to dirty coal, and should resist further subsidies to costly fantasies like wind and solar. But Republicans also should never forget that Obama is a Chicago pol. His plans will be larded with special favors and ripe for abuse. We already know where the worst will be. Chicago style, Obama will cram them into the one department to which he has named a Republican as cabinet secretary (the better to share the blame). Look for the Department of Transportation to be chock full of bridges to nowhere, roads to everywhere and hands out all around. In a similar vein, the Troubled Asset Relief Program, the government’s $700-billion bailout engine, is an enigma wrapped in a mystery, dispensing billions in tax dollars on nobody knows what. Likewise, impending cap-and-trade plans to create carbon dioxide pollution permits will create billions in new money—which is essentially what emissions permits are—and distribute them to favored industries. So clearly, there will be a role in Obama’s Washington for an opposition party that protects taxpayers and exposes corruption. --------------------------------- the above post is where your article started sinking...from your audience point of view the GOP would do well to ignore your comment and focus their opposition on provide opposing ideas rather than just looking for things to expose... or risk being shoved out of Washington...completely

Posted by ottovbvs, Thursday, January 15, 2009, 8:55 am Frum is an astute political observer and he showed some guts in speaking up about the Palin idiocy, but he's married to a set of beliefs that are in the main either completely false or deeply flawed. He also makes his living by telling the conservative base what they want to hear though he knows that the conservative ideas he's married to have been rejected by the majority of the country. Thus he is thrown back upon the guilt by association maneuver. If you are a politician from Chicago you are a crook. It's a bit like old claim that if you were an Italian politician you were in the pocket of the mafia. True in some cases but not universal as Fiorella La Guardia demonstrated. Frum is of course totally correct in the danger of being maneuvered in a position of mindless obstructionism. The congressional leadership get this in the main which is why they are tamping down the rhetoric but many of their congressional followers and Republicans in the party machinery haven't got the memo. Neither have most of the pundits or think tanks like the American Enterprise Institute where Mr Frum himself perches. They are still cranking out oped pieces and good old slash and burn ideas as a brief perusal of venues like the WSJ ed page will rapidly confirm. And of course the conservative blogosphere remains certifiably off it's rocker as it continures to rant on about the birth certificates and the need to purge Rinos from the GOP. I'm afraid Mr Shrum made a better case for the current state of affairs than Frum does.

Posted by ottovbvs, Thursday, January 15, 2009, 9:04 am "richtfan | Thursday, January 15, 2009, 2:44 pm You've got to be kidding. "Action on climate change is essential"? Unless you've figured out a way to control sun spots and solar storms, there is NO action that any human can make that will either hurt or harm climate change. There is NO manmade effect on the earth's climate, and conservatives have to resist any and all attempts to regulate a free society in the name of "helping the planet". What a load of crap that is. There is NO mandate for universal health care. There is a mandate to change the system we already have, but I can only imagine the utter outrage when people start having their care rationed by the federal government. Now you're talking about a full scale revolution. Americans won't put up with it. " I rest my case.

Posted by Jan, Thursday, January 15, 2009, 9:28 am In order to recover, the Republicans will need to stop being hypocrites. Just screaming buzzwords like "Socialism" won't cut it anymore. George W. Bush is the most incompetent President in modern history, but the Republicans are still whining about Clinton's personal life. I left the Republican Party when the GOP thought it was "good governing" to impeach a twice-elected President, or that it was fiscally responsible to waste millions and millions of our tax-dollars to un-do an election they didn't like. Bill Clinton brought America peace and prosperity. Barack Obama represents the smart way that Americans WANT government to run. George W. Bush represents the way we do NOT want government to run: 1) being on watch for the deadliest attack on US soil in US history 2) allowing the master planner of that attack to escape justice 3) taking America into a war of choice, based on a national security risk that did NOT exist 4) expressing gratitude for utter failure dealing with a Cat 5 hurricane that was on the horizon for nearly a week 5) being such a bad steward of the economy that he not only replaced record surpluses with record deficits and expanded government to an even more bloated bureaucracy, but also governing us into a depression that might rival The Great Depression if we don't throw our tax dollars at the problem. That's Republican? Bush brags that he has kept us safe for eight years, after the Al Qaida attack on the WTC in Sept 2001. Bill Clinton also kept us safe for eight years, after the Al Qaida attack on the WTC in Feb 1993. In fact, we were safe from another attack until GWBush was on watch. If Al Qaida attacks us on Barack Obama's watch, do we get to blame George W. Bush? The sooner the GOP throws George W. Bush off the bus, the sooner the GOP will recover its own reputation. If they don't, more power to President Obama. And that's just fine by about 80% of America. Bye bye, GOP.

Posted by Kit, Thursday, January 15, 2009, 9:31 am David, You know better than this "But Republicans also should never forget that Obama is a Chicago pol. His plans will be larded with special favors and ripe for abuse. We already know where the worst will be. Chicago style, " You've shown yourself to be more Hannity than loyal opposition. Did you want to have a conversation or did you want to toss red meat to the base?

Posted by Danno, Thursday, January 15, 2009, 9:47 am First and foremost, conservative Republicans (fiscal conservatives) need to stand by the core principle of smaller government. Frum is suggesting exactly what got Republicans in trouble in the first place: playing the this-big-government-plan-is good/bad game. The problem is most American's think "why can't I have it all - I never see a bill in my mailbox?". Republicans also have failed to frame the debate in terms the average Joe understands e.g. every American, man, woman, and child's share of the national debt is $35,000. If Republicans consistently and emphatically put the cost of government in terms the individual can relate to, they would soon realize government isn't a huge money tree to be put in the hands of politicians who can shake it the hardest.

Posted by Keith JOhnsen, Thursday, January 15, 2009, 9:56 am "His plans will be larded with special favors and ripe for abuse." What's your basis for saying that? Sounds like someone might be projecting the failures of Bush on to his successor...

Posted by Anthony, Thursday, January 15, 2009, 10:12 am "Look for the Department of Transportation to be chock full of bridges to nowhere, roads to everywhere and hands out all around." Huh? How do you draw this conclusion? Obviously, money is going to be spent on refining our infrastructure (which the country does need) both to fix what is now crumbling and to create jobs in the short-term. But why would he spend the money on unhelpful projects like a bridge to nowhere that was actually requested by Republicans from Alaska, not city-based Democrats.

Posted by disrutive skeptic, Thursday, January 15, 2009, 11:32 am Republicans must learn to deal with a concept known as " will of the people". It is with the democrats now, as they reversed themselves on a number of issues,such as the termination of gun rights. Just think Joe " aint nobody takin my guns" Biden. We must concede in a similar way on our problematic stances. There is no long term in this battle. It is a war. We need new leaders, new voices, new weapons, and tactics. Instead, our voice is the most the most out of touch man in America. Women especially detest that boorish loudmouth. My wife is my barometer on women and politics. She is a registered nurse in Boston, unafraid to challenge union leaders in her midst when they bash Bush and Cheney, but how she detests Limbaugh. " Consveratism works every time you try it ", is as big a lie as " Bush lied, people died". Santorum, Pearce you'll never hear about these slaughters from the golden mike.

Posted by Aaron Levitt, Thursday, January 15, 2009, 12:59 pm Hmm...so the Libertarians in Congress will fight everything, will they? And the hens' teeth will give them moral support, no doubt.

Posted by bob dole, Thursday, January 15, 2009, 1:07 pm "So clearly, there will be a role in Obama’s Washington for an opposition party that protects taxpayers and exposes corruption." Too bad the Republican Party has a history of doing neither.

Posted by Anthony, Thursday, January 15, 2009, 2:19 pm I guess the kinder, gentler, Mr. Frum hasn't heard that Speaker Pelosi intends to deprive the Republican minority in the House of the ability to offer changes and amendments to legislation, or even have the ability to speak against the Democrat's hegemonistic socialistic wave, not to mention, they need not show up to committee meetings either. Ah yes Mr. Frum, change we can believe in and you and your ilk seem to have no problem with it. Yikes!!!

Posted by Anthony, Thursday, January 15, 2009, 2:32 pm Oh yes, I forgot, Mr. Frum, a charter member of the conservative intelligencia, also led the "conservative" charge against Governor Palin. So Mr. Frum buys into the alternative reality that Obama has real popularity and a mandate. Assuming arguendo that is correct on its face, that is as far as it should go, these are superficial and shallow assumptions foisted on us by a slavish leftist media and our pop culture. What possible mandate does Obama have? Noone knows what his policies are, including he and his staff. Yet Gov Palin was not ready for prime time. So says our conservative elites.

Posted by alec, Thursday, January 15, 2009, 3:42 pm this piece leaves a strange impression. it gives Obama credit where none is particularly needed but matter of fact assumes Obama's flagrant ultra-corruptedness despite President Elect's overt promises to avoid ear-marks and conflict of interest. Sounds like Frum likes Obama to some extent, against his conservative instincts, his opposition draws up an overused cliche. It is truly truly weird to see conservative blow-hards use words like health-care in a non-negative sentences. Whatever tricks Obama's using he might win over enough support among everybody to actually deliver on some of this promises.

Posted by Oakley, Thursday, January 15, 2009, 11:10 pm Unfortunately there is NO ONE to LEAD the opposition!!!

Posted by Cathy, Friday, January 16, 2009, 9:34 am Promote nuclear, while resisting subsidies to costly fantasies like wind and solar? Mr. Frum, get out of whatever century you are in and wake up in the 21st century. You are as correct today as you were praising Bush in early 2003 as a wonderful president. I do always enjoy reading you, it always makes me laugh.

Posted by uudeem, Friday, January 16, 2009, 9:53 am I am amazed to see that Frum sees an advantage here: "So clearly, there will be a role in Obama’s Washington for an opposition party that protects taxpayers and exposes corruption." Have we missed something in this election? Where is this third party that will protect taxpayers and expose corruption? Surely he is not suggesting that the Republican party would dare to take up that mantle after having rubber stamped the most corrupt regime in American history, is he?

Posted by Al Perry, Friday, January 16, 2009, 11:00 am You had your run, it was a disaster; step asside now, your plan did not work. Watch and learn.

Posted by PJ, Wednesday, January 21, 2009, 12:09 pm Give me a break. You say "the Troubled Asset Relief Program, the government’s $700-billion bailout engine, is an enigma wrapped in a mystery, dispensing billions in tax dollars on nobody knows what." But this is equally true of the bailout package put through just a couple of months ago by the Bush administration. Where are your calls for accountability on where THAT money went? For once I'd like to see Republicans (and Libertarians, too, for that matter) put the greater good ahead of personal gain. How about using your freedom in service to something bigger than yourself?