From the prospect of becoming a regional party that needs to lurch left, to the assertion that what we really need to do is embrace our own ostensible principles and refuse to compromise them — all in the course of two years!
Looks like we are all Tea Partiers now!
It doesn’t take a roomful of political scientists to figure it out. Americans voted for change in the last two elections because of two long and difficult wars and because they hoped a changing of the guard would stabilize the economy and get America moving again. And then the people they elected set about dismantling the free market, handing out political favors at taxpayer expense, expanding government, and creating a more precarious future for our children. In other words, Democrat leaders used the crisis of the moment to advance an agenda Americans didn’t ask for and couldn’t afford. And then they ignored and dismissed anyone who dared to speak out against it.
So the voters didn’t suddenly fall in love with Republicans; they fell out of love with Democrats. And while they may have voted to send more Republicans to Washington, they’re sending them here with clear marching orders: stop the big-government freight train and respect the will of the people who sent you there.
As Churchill once observed, “Courage is what it takes to stand up and speak; [and] courage is also what it takes to sit down and listen.” And I can’t think of a better way to sum up Tuesday’s election than that.
This morning, I would like to talk a little bit more about how we got here, and the task ahead. And I wanted to do it here at the Heritage Foundation, because for nearly 40 years Heritage has played a crucial role in promoting and defending the principles of free enterprise, limited government, freedom and a strong defense — in other words, the very principles the American people voted to uphold in Tuesday’s historic election.
[…]
what can Americans expect from Republicans now?
Let’s start with the big picture. Over the past week, some have said it was indelicate of me to suggest that our top political priority over the next two years should be to deny President Obama a second term in office. But the fact is, if our primary legislative goals are to repeal and replace the health spending bill; to end the bailouts; cut spending; and shrink the size and scope of government, the only way to do all these things it is to put someone in the White House who won’t veto any of these things. We can hope the President will start listening to the electorate after Tuesday’s election. But we can’t plan on it. And it would be foolish to expect that Republicans will be able to completely reverse the damage Democrats have done as long as a Democrat holds the veto pen.
There’s just no getting around it.
By their own admission, leaders of the Republican Revolution of 1994 think their greatest mistake was overlooking the power of the veto. They gave the impression they were somehow in charge when they weren’t. And after President Clinton vetoed their bills, making it impossible for them to accomplish all their goals, they ended up being viewed as failures, sellouts, or both. Today, Democrats not only have the White House. They have the Senate too. So we have to be realistic about what we can and cannot achieve, while at the same recognizing that realism should never be confused with capitulation.
On health care, that means we can — and should — propose and vote on straight repeal, repeatedly. But we can’t expect the president to sign it. So we’ll also have to work, in the House, on denying funds for implementation, and, in the Senate, on votes against its most egregious provisions. At the same time, we’ll need to continue educating the public about the ill-effects of this bill on individuals young and old, families, and small businesses.
And this is why oversight will play a crucial role in Republican efforts going forward.
We may not be able to bring about straight repeal in the next two years, and we may not win every vote against targeted provisions, even though we should have bipartisan support for some. But we can compel administration officials to attempt to defend this indefensible health spending bill and other costly, government-driven measures, like the Stimulus and financial reform.
[…]
Another obstacle is the temptation to over-read our task. It’s my view that Americans are no more interested in a Republican plan for using government to reengineer society than they were in the Democrats’ plan to do so. Government has limits, thank heavens, and voters want us to respect them. That’s why Republicans will focus on doing a few things well.
We will stop the liberal onslaught. We will make the case for repeal of the health spending bill even as we vote to eliminate its worst parts. We will vote to freeze and cut discretionary spending. We will fight to make sure that any spending bill that reaches the Senate floor is amendable, so members can vote for the spending cuts Americans are asking for. We will push to bring up and vote for House passed spending rescission bills.
On the economy, we will work hard to ensure Democrats don’t raise taxes on anybody, especially in the middle of a recession. We will loudly oppose future stimulus bills that only stimulate the deficit and fight any further job-killing regulations. We will fight tooth and nail on behalf of Americans struggling to find and create jobs.
And when it comes to educating the public about the effects of Democrat legislation, we will fulfill our constitutional duty to oversee the Executive Branch through smart, aggressive oversight.
We will scrutinize Democrat legislation and force them to defend it. And we will continue to make the case that the Democrats’ big-government vision hinders freedom, prosperity, and opportunity — and that while it may benefit some in the short-term, it exposes everyone to calamity down the road.
If we do these things well over the next two years, I believe the voters will be pleased with what they did on Tuesday, and Republicans will be in a much better position to reverse the worst excesses of the past two years and lay the groundwork for the kind of change we want and need. Meanwhile, Republican governors will help by showing at the state level that the kind of change we want is not only possible but also effective in cutting waste, creating jobs, and showing that government can work for people, not against them. Think tanks like Heritage will help too by arming us with ideas and tools like this week’s Checklist for getting America back on track. And Tea Party activists will continue to energize our party and challenge us to follow through on our commitments.
None of this is to say that Republicans have given up cooperating with the President. The American people reminded us this week that we work for them, and we owe it to them and future generations to work together to find solutions to present troubles and to help guide our nation to better days. But, as I see it, the White House has a choice: they can change course, or they can double down on a vision of government that the American people have roundly rejected. If they choose the former, they’ll find a partner in Republicans. If they don’t, we will have more disagreements ahead.
Strikes all the right notes, sure.
Now follow through.
Because we’re watching. And we’re engaged.
To take back the country from the socialist onslaught, we have first to believe in our own ideology — and believe in it enough that we are willing to defend it openly, even if we risk people “laughing” at us because the people who happen to be loudest about defending our principles aren’t the polished, managed, and — frankly — manufactured figures our own “pragmatic” elite desires.
But what’s wrong with showing that we are America — that we are its founding principles made manifest — by having real Americans represent and espouse our ideals?
To me, the only “deficient” speakers for our classical liberal ideology are those who hit its notes, but who don’t really believe what they say — and will change their ideology at the first sign of a political wind blowing against it.
We aren’t looking for entrenched ideologues or “purists.” We are looking for conservatives and classical liberals whose ideals can’t be compromised precisely because to compromise those ideals would be to repudiate their classical liberalism.
That’s not a call for purity. That’s an acknowledgment that our principles can’t be compromised.
Sorry, Lindsey. You lose.
B-b-but Lindsey says that if we bend over and (his)pander enough, we might get 40% of that vote!
Paul Ryan drilling down on real numbers with some Dem staffer. Could replace M*A*S*H as the longest running comedy in US history.
Build the dang fence!
But Seriously, McConnell sounded about right in this address, albeit to a friendly crowd. Now they have to follow through.
I think that he’s found an interesting way to reject Obama’s policies while shielding himself from the race card; by referring to the election where the President’s far left agenda was repudiated. Although Obama is doubling down on the meme that his ideas and agenda didn’t fail, only the Democrats communication skills.
I also like how he points out the abuse of the crisis to cram the socialist agenda through.
It’s my view that Americans are no more interested in a Republican plan for using government to reengineer society than they were in the Democrats’ plan to do so. Government has limits, thank heavens, and voters want us to respect them.
hallelujah!!!
What’s interesting is that the Democrats are now, REALLY, a regional party, not the because of the proclamations of some liberal commentator’s fever dream, but because the American people have rejected them completely.
Since we had a Teapocalypse and all.
The divide isn’t regional in any meaningful sense. The divide is between the urban (Democrats) and the suburban and rural (Republicans). My goodness, look at any of the color coded congressional district maps. Pick a state like, say, Missouri where I live. The only blue areas are St. Louis and Kansas City. Everything else is red. Missouri is a bellweather state in more ways than one.
If the Democrat dominated cash spigots emanating from Washington can be dried up those deep blue bastions will fade. A whole lot of people, from community organizers to college administrators, need to learn that political activism is hard when you also need to earn an honest living.
here is the checklist Mr. McConnell references
Quite honestly, McConnell’s not worth the electrons this purty speech is written with UNTIL I see actions commensurate with the language.
All GOPers are on notice: Toe the line, or you’re out of the ring.
I heard Rush talking about this today (I also heard Rush going through the Heritage Foundation principals a day or two ago). Rush was suggesting that it is curious Mitch McConnell chose the Heritage Foundation to give this speech.
Then Rush lambasted all so called Republicans who are 1) attacking Sarah Palin, 2) attacking tea partiers. He said if they do not want to win, keep infighting. The tea partiers are right. They are wrong.
I heard this on the way to the gun store to buy my wife a new pistol.
Oh please please please grant this guy the strength to follow through. Please.
But we can always follow Lindsay Graham and David Frum’s advice and have a future of quality independents like Lincoln Chafee and republicans like Mike Castle winning a handful of races, conceeding the rest to the Dems.
I like Mr. McConnell’s speech as far as it goes… but I don’t like the tone at all… there’s an urgency what should pertain – I should have liked him to have conveyed a sense of understanding that our little country is in big big trouble – that the wolfy wolf is at the door – a bit more danger Will Robinson danger.
Mr. Ryan and Mr. Daniels are very very good about hitting these notes. Mr. McConnell should spend some time on the youtube learning up on how to do the same.
This process will require a measured and sustained approach. A sense of urgency is one thing – we need to start solving things right now. But creating any expectations that this situation can be resolved rapidly is something else entirely. It is a set-up for failure, followed by a return to business as usual. That cannot be allowed to happen.
We expect to see tangible progress yes, and the sooner the better, but tearing apart leviathan is gonna take more than one election and everyone better understand that right now.
Breaking News: Olbermann suspended indefinitely by MSNBC over breaking its policy on donating to political campaigns.
suspended without pay.
Is it Christmas already? I don’t even remember the turkey?
He’s right about the veto pen. Now is the time to get done what can be done with only 1 legislative body on board and to lay the framework for getting the rest done later.
Convenient way to break Olbermann’s huge contract. The execs at Comcast ain’t no dummies.
Joe
I bet the suspension will last about 72 hours … long enough for NBC to pretend to have disciplined him and long enough to Slobberman to pretend to be humbled.
Darleen, I doubt they will dump Keith. But the public chastisement is still most excellent.
This is not really about campaign contributions. This is about MSNBC’s out of control election night coverage and the embarassment that followed. They are beating Olbermann in front of the other children, hoping they will get the message.
I kind of like this new, improved Mitch McConnell. I pray that the follow-through accompanies this new Republican direction.
Someone is weeping bitter tears.
meh.
I agree Simmons was the better candidate. But I do not live in Connecticut. So I did not get a vote. So they picked McMahon. I hoped she would win but she did not.
Just like I do not live in Delaware, where they picked O’Donnell. I hoped she would win too, but she did not. But I doubt I could have pulled the lever for Castle if I lived there. I guess I am just not blue chicken enough.
There is a huge difference between looking at a losing candidate after a race and saying what could the candidate have done better? Was the candidate flawed? Was the campaign flawed? What can we do better next time…
vs.
Working actively or passively agressively to fuck up a candidate because they were not the one you would have picked.
Urban vs. not is regional in a more meaningful way than south vs. midwest.
The election results, the articles, the reaction by those in power to it, and even the comments on this and other blogs are nothing short of exciting.
The outlook for the country is slowly moving from pessimistic to cautiously optimistic. As Larry Bird once said, “Bury the mothers.”
after reading the whole speech I thought he did fine as far as hitting a few notes of dire warning goes
You mean like the California state GOP?