Whatever happened to "the will of the people"?

Reacting to the Boston Globes's Scott Brown swearing-in would be stalled to pass health care reform Cold Fury wrote this: 

I probably ought to say that none of this should be taken to mean I don’t think it’s worth working to get Brown elected; it most certainly is. But it ought to be clear enough by now to even the thickest-skulled Pollyanna out there that the health-care takeover fight is over, and we lost. The Democrat Socialists have shown they’ll stick at absolutely nothing whatsoever — fair, foul, or outright illegal — to get this thing rammed through, and rammed through NOW. They’ve been fighting to open this big-government Pandora’s box for decades; they want it more than they’ve ever wanted anything. And they have no scruples, no honor, no integrity, and no regard for the American Constitution to slow them down one iota in their rush to get it.

We won’t undo six decades of statist creep with one election, and we won’t turn back the socialized-medicine juggernaut with the election of one Senator from one of our most liberal states. Might as well put your faith in Obama to stem the rise of the oceans, end war and poverty, and all that other tommyrot while you’re at it.

Of course I hope that Scott Brown is elected.  I have been following the news of the election via Legal Insurrection where Prof. Jacobson has been informing and updating daily.  But has Cold Fury points out, this one election will not change what has been in the making for decades:  the discounting of the will of the people. 

I would love to blame our loss of voice on the Democratic party but Republicans are equally guilty, as are the voting public that has allowed our country reach a crisis point before having a "hey, wait a minute" epiphany.  Our elected officials have ignored the citizenry and have enacted their will contrary to the wishes of the people.  Should Massachusetts not seat Brown until after the health care vote, it would simply be par for the course.

This is a prime example of why the Tea Party movement is so important.  We need to put the people back in charge of the process and return to the small government principals that made this country great.  The Tea Party represents the growing number of citizens who want a return to the time when government answered to "the little guy" not Big Business, Big Labor, Big Environment and whoever dropped a couple of coins in their pockets.

Conservatives need to get over the idea that victory consists getting people elected who have a (R) after their name.  Victory is electing people who vote according to the will of the people.

The Republican Party doesn't need to re-invent, it needs to get back to basics

In What the GOP Can Learn from a Pizza Chain Jonah Goldberg makes the case that the Republican Party would do well to look to Dominos Pizza as an example of how to win back loyalty:

...But if I were giving my two cents — and whaddya know? I am! — I’d tell the GOP to look not to Reagan in 1980 or Gingrich in 1994, as so many pundits suggest.

I’d look to Domino’s in 2010.

You may have seen the commercials or the YouTube video touting the iconic pizza-delivery chain’s reinvention. But if you haven’t, Domino’s new campaign can be summed up easily enough: “We blew it.”

Focus groups and consumer surveys revealed something pretty much everyone outside of Domino’s has known for years: Their pizza stinks. It tastes as if aliens tried to copy real pizza but just couldn’t capture its essence.

In their four-minute video (search YouTube for “the Pizza Turnaround”), executives, employees, and chefs at the company confront their harshest reviews head-on. They talk about how much it hurts to hear that their product “tastes like cardboard” and is worse than microwave pizza. But they admit the truth and commit themselves to starting over with more flavor, better crusts, and cheese that doesn’t taste like discount weather caulking. Domino’s says that the American palate has improved, and they want to update their recipe to take account of that fact.

The appeal of the campaign should be obvious: honesty. Domino’s admits they lost their way, and they want a second chance. They’re confronting the criticism head-on rather than denying it.

Obviously, the analogy to the GOP isn’t perfect. For example, last I checked, Domino’s didn’t get bogged down in an unpopular war.

But the GOP’s troubles over the last decade have a lot to do with the fact that Americans didn’t stop liking what the Republican party is supposed to deliver. They stopped liking what the GOP actually delivered.

Exactly.  Once upon a time the words "republican" and "conservative" were interchangeable.  Anymore, it seems that the (R) after many congressman's name could be just as easily read (D) and vice versa.  When presented with a homogeneous product the voters have either chosen the candidate with the flashiest advertising campaign or decided "why bother?".  For better or worse, and it has turned out to be worse, Obama distinguished himself in 2008 and McCain did not.

As a conservative who cares more about policies than partisan success, I would hate to see the GOP abandon conservative policies in order to be more popular. That would be like Domino’s listening to critics and then deciding to get into the Chinese-food business. Indeed, by my lights, that’s what George W. Bush tried to do with his “compassionate conservatism.” He surrendered to liberal arguments about the role, size, and scope of government on too many fronts. In effect, he said you can have your pizza and Kung Pao chicken all in the same dish. That’s not a good meal, it’s a bad mess.

Moreover, abandoning conservatism would be silly. According to Gallup, Americans identify themselves as conservative over liberal by a margin of 2–1, the same proportion as just after 9/11.

So what would a GOP-turnaround recipe look like? That’s a subject for any number of other columns. But for starters, I’d look to young political chefs like Rep. Paul Ryan (R., Wisc.). He’s been the leader in attacking “crony capitalism” — the corrupt merger of big business and big government, a hallmark of the Obama administration. For too long Republicans confused supporting big business with supporting free markets, when big business is often the biggest impediment to fair competition. Other fresh new ingredients would almost surely include pro-family tax policies and the de-linking of legal and illegal immigration as interchangeable terms.

If the Republican Party were to follow Goldberg's advice I could easily see myself getting back on board.  Unfortunately, the "big tent" Republicans such as NRSC chairman Sen. Cornyn appears disinclined to get back to basics and instead supports RINO candidates over conservatives.  Sen. Lindsay Graham has thrown in with John Kerry and is thumbing his nose at party members who are clearly appalled by Cap & Trade.  The examples are nearly endless. 

Republicans have the opportunity to capitalize on Obama's disastrous first year but they won't do it by smugly claiming that they deserve the public's confidence simply because they represent a different party than is currently in power. 

If the party is to regain the trust that it betrayed they need to make big changes and make them soon.

And Speaking of Rasmussen...

Partisan Trends
Number of Democrats Falls to New Low, Down Six Points Since Election 2008:

In December, the number of Americans identifying themselves as Democrats fell to the lowest level recorded in more than seven years of monthly tracking by Rasmussen Reports.

Currently, 35.5% of American adults view themselves as Democrats. That’s down from 36.0 a month ago and from 37.8% in October. Prior to December, the lowest total ever recorded for Democrats was 35.9%, a figure that was reached twice in 2005. See the History of Party Trends from January 2004 to the present.

The number of Republicans inched up by a point in December to 34.0%. That’s the highest total for Republicans since December 2007, just before the 2008 presidential campaign season began.

I wouldn't expect to see any large increase in the number of people who self identify as Republicans. If anything, Conservatives care more about conservative candidates than they do about party affiliation. Unfortunately, Sen. John Cornyn, head of the NRSC, shows no sign that he has any understanding of the Conservative voter.

On the other hand, I know more than one Democrat who is embarrassed by their vote in 2008. They may not have gone to the trouble of officially changing their party affiliation but they also aren't eager to be identified as Democrats.

By an almost 2 to 1 ratio more people identify as "conservative" rather than "liberal". Further, more people identify as "conservative" than "moderate".

If more people vote their ideology rather than by party affiliation it will force the political parties and candidates to be more responsive to the voters. The days when people automatically vote according to party may be behind us. If so, it will benefit the country as a whole.

Why O' Why Won't Dems Defend Obama?

Giggle Alert! Doofus Crossing! Hmmmm:

Are Democrats so cowed by Republican attacks on Obama’s foreign policy that they’re unwilling to defend him?

It’s now been five days since the attempted bombing of Flight 253 in Detroit, and Congressional Democrats are still turning the other cheek to Republicans who are using the incident to attack Obama’s entire approach to national security.

At first, I thought this line of attack, pushed by Rep. Peter Hoekstra and Rep. Peter King, might fizzle out, but this is clearly not going away. Take South Carolina Republican Senator Jim DeMint’s comments to Fox News yesterday, which were featured in this morning’s lead POLITICO article on the Republican response:

“[S]oft talk about engagement, closing Gitmo, these things are not going to appease the terrorists,” he said. “They’re going to keep coming after us, and we can’t have politics as usual in Washington, and I’m afraid that’s what we’ve got right now with airport security.”

Once again, these are not just complaints about the Homeland Security bureaucracy; Republicans are calling Obama, and his strategy, weak on terrorism. While Democrats have shown a willingness to ding DeMint for putting a hold on Obama’s nominee to head the TSA, they have been completely silent in the face of these wider criticisms, even after the president articulated a defense of his foreign policy yesterday.

Yada, yada, yada. I don’t suppose anybody ever told His Verklemptness that you can’t defend the indefensible? After spending more political capitol than they process (see: Nelson, Ben) Democrats sure aren’t going to climb out on the ledge for Obama over this. Let’s face it, it took Obama three days to respond and then his response sucked. And, there is plenty of blame to go around, so it isn’t surprising that Democrats prefer to engage in a rousing game of “duck and cover.”

As far as Republicans calling Obama weak on terrorism, if it walks like a duck and quacks like a duck…

h/t Instapundit

What is He Suggesting?

Consider this from Matthew Yglesias:

We’re suffering from an incoherent institutional set-up in the senate. You can have a system in which a defeated minority still gets a share of governing authority and participates constructively in the victorious majority’s governing agenda, shaping policy around the margins in ways more to their liking. Or you can have a system in which a defeated minority rejects the majority’s governing agenda out of hand, seeks opening for attack, and hopes that failure on the part of the majority will bring them to power. But right now we have both simultaneously. It’s a system in which the minority benefits if the government fails, and the minority has the power to ensure failure. It’s insane, and it needs to be changed. (emphasis added)

How does Yglesias suggest that it be changed? I would remind Yglesias that the Democrats have the White House, the Senate and the House. They can do any damn thing they want and there is not a whole lot the Republicans can do about it. The Left's problem has nothing to do with "the minority"; their problem is that even Democrats face re-election and as such, some of them, and occasionally enough of them, balk at backing a far Left agenda. So unless Yglesias is suggesting that the entire election process be chucked and instead hand-picked Leftist are permanently installed in the halls of power I would suggest that he adjust to the messy mechanisms of democracy.

Update:

American Power has an incredible post on this. Donald makes the point that the majority, in this case "progressives", who care care about the poor, down trodden minority when it suits their agenda.

How Would You Like to be a Democrat Facing Re-election in 2010?

Earlier today I wrote that the election in 2010 will be about the economy. This realty favors Conservatives over RINOs (DIABLOs) and Liberals. This dynamic was also picked up by Donald Douglas at American Power who wrote Vulnerable Democratic Incumbents to Obama, Pelosi, Reid: Your Socialist Agenda is Killing Us!

Yep, there's a bit of angst out there and I wouldn't want to be to be a big spender from either party right now though vulnerable Democrats definitely have the bumpier road to travel.

It has been said that election seasons last longer and longer these days. Like it or not, the 2010 election cycle just began.

More Bad News For Charlie

The Fix is asking its readers to vote on the most overrated Governor in the country. It is my dubious honor to announce that at this point my governor, Gov. Charlie Crist is in the lead.

Charlie took quite a spanking in the poll's comments although he did receive one favorable review from a reader who noted that Crist well liked by Democrats. Judging from their article asking if Crist is America's Worst Governor, I think it is safe to assume that Crist is not a favorite of Forbes:

Charlie Crist is an extraordinarily gifted politician, known for his unpretentious and warm demeanor. He might also be America's worst governor. Given that there is a great deal of competition for this dubious honor, that's saying rather a lot.

Among liberals and progressives, there is a puzzling admiration for Crist,long considered by Democratic and Republican veterans of Florida's political scene to be something of an opportunist if not a lightweight. In May, Washington Post columnist E.J. Dionne wrote a column suggesting that conservative discontent with Crist reflected an overemphasis on doctrinal purity. In Dionne's view, Crist raised the ire of Florida conservatives when he embraced President Obama's stimulus plan, and indeed when he physically embraced the president
himself. While it is certainly true that Republican primary voters tend to be
highly ideological, perhaps excessively so, it's worth recounting Crist's
reasons for backing the stimulus plan.

When Marc Caputo and Steve Bousquet of the Miami Herald asked Crist about the
virtues of the plan, he said, "I think it's fantastic. Are you kidding me? We
don't have to raise taxes." Moreover, Crist continued, "we might be able to cut
property taxes some more. We have more money for education, so we can increase
per-student spending. We can spend more money on our roads and infrastructure.
We can provide health care for our people. I mean, it's remarkable." Indeed, something is remarkable, namely Crist's rigid adherence to an ideology more pernicious than orthodox progressivism or conservatism or nudism or anarchoprimitivism. I'm referring, of course, to free-lunchism. (my emphasis)

Yes, Charlie, the darling of liberals and progressives, does embrace "free-lunchism," though the free lunch didn't prevent Floridians from losing their jobs and their home values (if not their homes themselves) while contrary to Crist's pledge, their taxes increased. The article continues:

Incredibly, Crist demanded that Florida use one-time funds to pay for 12% of the state budget. When Republicans in the state legislature took the difficult step of passing a budget that included unpopular spending cuts, Crist turned around and vetoed hundreds of millions in cuts, despite the continuing
deterioration of state revenues. It could be that Crist believes that the
federal government will simply pass a stimulus plan every year, one that will
grow ever larger without consequence to Florida taxpayers. This, of course,
can't possibly be true. As a result, Crist has committed Florida to a fiscal
nightmare, one that will lead to draconian tax hikes and spending cuts long
after he makes a break for the U.S. Senate or finds some other comfortable
sinecure thanks to the good graces of his many wealthy friends. (Emphasis
mine)

Crist is one of those Republicans that we Conservatives are trying to "purge" according to Newt Gingrich. In Newt & Company's "big tent" there is room for free-lunchers, tax and spenders, cap and traders and abortionists. But while that tent swells with what we used to call "Democrats", Newt tells Conservatives to be quiet and go sit in the corner. Is it any wonder that Conservatives find that they are more comfortable outside the tent?

Other bloggers weighing in on the recent RINO onslaught:

The Daley Gator
Cold Fury
The Other McCain
Michelle Malkin
Paco Enterprises
The Camp of Saints
Another Black Conservative
And So it Goes In Shreveport

Republicans, Straighten Up!

Michelle Malkin makes the excellent point that Republicans are falling short in the housekeeping department:

The rotten American Conservative Union/David Keene pay-for-play scandal underscores a point I’ve made over and over and over again:

The GOP can’t attack the Democrat culture of corruption (my new book comes out July 27) until it cleans its own house first.

The John Ensign mess keeps getting worse.

Stubborn, selfish, prevaricating Mark Sanford keeps embarrassing himself and conservatism.
And there’s another sex scandal on C Street.

Grass-roots conservatives are livid and lashing out.

We’ve got major battles on the Hill and fundamental principles to defend.
Show the corrupted, Beltway-infected, power-drunk Republicans the door.
And get back to work.

Too Be Aggrieved...Or Not

In Dear Angry Gay Democrats Stacy McCain invites gays and lesbians who have found themselves screwed over by the Democrats, again, to rethink their position and join the dark side. The Democratic Party is composed of:

A. Aggrieved women
B. Aggrieved people of color
C. Aggrieved gays and lesbians
D. Aggrieved Jews
E.. The people who use all of the above

I am a woman but I am not aggrieved therefore, Democrats have relegated me to the “Women Who Don’t Count Club” and I am eternally grateful for it. Democrats have no use for women in my club because we can’t be used. It is a situation which I find, to borrow from my aggrieved sisters, empowering. I can dive face first in to the deep end of the libertarian pool and people in my party may shake their heads, disagree or depending on the particular issue become completely flumboozled, but so far, no one from my party has called me a c**t or kicked me to the curb. And, if there is any using going on I have to admit I use my party to further my agenda.

I’m good with the dark side. I like the energy and passion and freedom that the free exchange brings to my life. I would strongly recommend my party to anyone in A-D above. We're very inclusive but please leave your grievances at the door. We don’t do whiners.