Dick Morris presents what is a sociology of the Republican Party. Read the entirely worthwhile article Boehner Eats His Young.
Morris has the perspective of a successful political analyst who has worked both sides of the street. In today’s article he takes Speaker Boehner to task for his dismissivness toward the Tea Party and other conservative groups regarding their criticisms of the recent budget agreement passed in the House, but yet to be voted on in the Senate. He is blunt in his conclusion, calling the Speaker’s comments outrageous and cast real doubt on his ability to lead the House in the future. We agree and raised related concerns in a previous post.
Morris’ piercing commentary is largely a defense of the Tea Party and conservative activists. Unfortunately Morris’s critique of Boehner could be applied to Republican leadership at various levels including Scott County, current and in some past iterations.
If it were not for these groups — the Tea Party Patriots, Heritage Action for America or others — the Republicans would have lost the elections of 2010 and he never would have been Speaker.
The grass- and cyber-roots enthusiasm of these conservative groups animate the Republican Party
Without the tea party, the Republican Party would be an inarticulate, me-too party without ideas or energy.
His presentation of a sociology of the Republican Party has merit.
The Republican Party has always represented a fusion of two broad groups: those who are driven by ideology and those who grew up in geographic areas that are traditionally Republican and joined the party because it was the obvious way to enter politics.
It is broadly useful in identifying the rifts within the Republican Party. Certainly other dynamics pertain . . . internecine motivations in various locals and at various levels, various personalities, circumstances, and histories can either aggravate or ameliorate the differences.
However we think his commentary needs refinement regarding his reference to the “amateurishness” of the Tea Party. There is some to be sure, but we can point to much in the country club Republicans as well. His comment struck us as a reversion to Washington knows best. While it was a fairly kindly in its tone, maybe we object because of the objectionable example he used – the so called government shut down. The truth is what happened did not affect the vast majority of Americans, least of all the government transfer dependent, and what did happen would have no significant lasting consequences, even as a perception, but for Republicans doing Democrats work for them.
The issue would have no legs if Republicans would stop adopting the Democrat narrative, stop apologizing for something they did not do, stop running scared of the boogie man accusation, and find their tongue to point out that the Democrats are primarily culpable. Republicans beating up on their rivals who were honoring a commitment to STOP OBAMACARE, will have more negative affects on Republican interests than the best Democrats can do. Republican detractors of the effort appear insincere about stopping Obamacare, gutless, business as usual politicians who will dampen enthusiasm for the Party as a whole.
The Tea Party conservative movement includes many long time political activists who are fed up with business as usual. Our demands are based on years of experience with the political class including Republicans, and the realization that they cannot be trusted to reduce government significantly even when they have sufficient power. There is always an excuse from them that ends up protecting and even ratcheting forward advances in big government. More importantly our consternation with much Republican leadership is based on the realization that the country is under an existential threat from the Obama regime.
We wish fair use would allow us to repeat and then dissect every word of Morris’s commentary. It is very good. Everybody active in politics needs to read it. That can be done here.
Speaking of sociologies of the Republican Party:
Jim Geraghty, of National Review, in his Morning Jolt (subscription required) column yesterday, also presented a description of attitudes splitting the Republican Party, more so as regards the conservative establishment and Tea Party activists.
And let’s face it, there are pretty strong incentives to pick a “Tea Party” or “Establishment” side and make that a part of your brand or approach to the world. If you’re “Tea Party,” you get authenticity points. You’re part of the Real America outside of the Beltway. You get to proclaim you’re standing on principle. You get to believe that you’re saving this country from a corrupt class of insiders running it into the ground. You’re the Rebel Alliance, the plucky underdogs fighting for all that’s right who will someday overcome overwhelming odds.
If you’re “Establishment,” you get to be reasonable and sensible. Democrats and/or MSNBC may like you or praise you for your willingness to compromise and focus on getting results. You get to believe that you’re serious, and dealing with the facts as they are, instead of living in a make-believe world of imminent revolution. You’re the professional, who knows how to get actual results, as opposed to the amateur who dresses up and pretends to understand politics and government.
Except that the “Establishment” has proven itself lousy at definitive results, unsuccessful at making a significant dent in the size of government and submitting to the Constitution, and not very effective at slowing down the march to socialist oblivion. Being acceptable conservatives as far as MSNBC is concerned is no badge of honor.
R Mall
I am of a mind to think that the hapless Mr. Boehner may well have assured that the GOP will not only fail to win the Senate in 2014, but it will also lose its majority in the House. (The only positive in that event is that Boehner will no longer be the Speaker; everything else will be tragically and disastrously negative.) To attack the very people and organizations that made him Speaker is not the act of a sane person…or at least not one who has the interests of the American people in mind.
Boehner’s signature ineffectivenss throughout his tenure in his current leadership role was certainly enough to question the Party’s judgment. Senator Mitch McConnell’s abject surrender in the debt ceiling fiasco, capped by the $3 billion “Kentucky Payoff”, or “Bluegrass Bribe”, if you prefer, further diminished the GOP “brand” and the Establishment’s “credibility” (and Boehner thinks conservatives have lost all credibility?). Now, Speaker Boehner in effect, has told the conservative base of the Party to “take a hike”.
Having sufficiently alienated the only groups that have shown an ability to get Republicans elected, Boehner and Ryan can bask in the applause of the business interests who despise the Tea Party’s stands on runaway government spending, dictatorial rule by regulation and executive order, and amnesty for illegal aliens. Does anyone doubt that the soon-to-be former Speaker of the House and his “super-conservative” sidekick, Paul Ryan, will ram through an amnesty bill next year? Unless there is a dramatic change in this party’s official attitude, as espoused by Boehner, McConnell, Rove, Ryan, the RNC and echoed by the US Chamber of Commerce and Republican big money guys, I believe many conservatives will sit out the ’14 election…maybe not the wisest course but how many times can one tolerate supporting people who cannot/will not effectively defend conservative principles and values and will yet proclaim their commitment to responsible governance… until they get in office?