Previously on Ricochet...
Last night, perhaps I went a little too far when I suggested that taking back the Senate might be a bad thing. Certainly, that's what Alert Reader Patrick Shanahan thought. He said:
I am generally on board with you Stephen, but I wince at the notion that any strategy that accepts losing as a "smart" deal.
And Patrick's comment immediately took me back to 1990, and Ralph Peters' dystopian techno-thriller, The War in 2020. I won't bore you with too much of the plot, but you need to know the broad outline. After a devastating pandemic and global economic collapse, an Arab-Iranian coalition is invading (Re-)Soviet Central Asia, with the help of Japanese armaments and "advisors." Japan, of course, is looking to control, by proxy, the vast mineral deposits there. Naturally, in comes the United States Seventh Cavalry (Heavy), with new wonder-weapons to stop the bad guys and save our Soviet "friends."
As the battle unfolds and the Seventh begins to kick booty and take names in a very serious way, the good folks at Foggy Bottom start to worry that maybe we're hurting Japan too much, and strengthening the Russians too much -- when what we should really be doing is maintaining the precarious balance of power.
Now, I'll have to paraphrase a bit, because I don't remember the line exactly, but when he hears this conversation, the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs says, "The only thing to worry about is winning. You can sort out the rest of that [expletive] afterwords."
So, yes, Patrick is probably right.
But as we see yet more signs that this is a White House in a state of near-collapse, I can't help but wonder if a GOP-controlled Senate wouldn't act as a crutch, helping prop this feckless poser up just enough to win him a second (and even more-disastrous) term in 2012.
Taping a PJTV Trifecta segment earlier today, I argued that the old adage has it wrong; when your enemy is digging a hole for himself, don't do nothing -- run and get him a bigger shovel. And I don't know about you, but I can't think of a better [expletive]-shoveler than Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid.
Obama and Reid versus the Tea Party Congress?
Bring it on!
- Comment (10)
- · Quote
- · UnfollowFollow (1)
Comments :
Jul '10
Re: Previously on Ricochet...
Bazzinga. I have elsewhere used the "jujitsu" metaphor. The liberal (and moderate) angst about O'Donnell, Angle and others creates a terrific amount of energy that we (meaning people smarter than me) need to figure out how to leverage to throw our opponent even harded and farther.
That is why Rove's recent comments are so disappointing. He could be of great value in this effort.
But it is a good thing that the energy has been created.
Jun '10
Re: Previously on Ricochet...
Slow down there, cowboy. Time is on our side. We have no idea how the Obama administration will react after an electoral rout. You provoke a wounded animal at your own peril. Mr. Obama is still the chief executive. Let him put some cards on the table before planning the counter-attack. The Republicans might be able to truncate some of the more egregious legislation of the last two years through negotiation.
Come January there is still a budget to be drafted, the one the Democrats failed to draft prior to the election. Assuming the Democrats don't commit ritual suicide by attempting to pass legislation during a lame duck session, a balanced budget with no earmarks would be a fine first step by the new majority.
The Republicans will have two years prior to 2012 to demonstrate that they stand on principle. And there are still wild cards in the deck both domestically and internationally. Be patient. We are looking for a return to (small "r") republican principles, not another change from Tweedle-dee to Tweedle-dum. Count on the Tea Parties to put some heat to the feet of the new congress. We stand on principle.
Sep '10
Re: Previously on Ricochet...
"We stand on principle." Yes. Exactly. Or we sink in quicksand.
May '10
Re: Previously on Ricochet...
The Presidency has gone from 'near-collapse' to 'structural failure', and we have video proof!
Jul '10
Re: Previously on Ricochet...
Stephen Green, Guest Contributor:
But as we see yet more signs that this is a White House in a state of near-collapse, I can't help but wonder if a GOP-controlled Senate wouldn't act as a crutch, helping prop this feckless poser up just enough to win him a second (and even more-disastrous) term in 2012.
Stephen, did you check the comments at that story you linked? They are spectacular.
My favorite so far: "it's the second best dream ticket (my first pick would have been Clinton/Obama)" via Jacob.
Yes Jacob, having a 1st term opposition President run for VP would be dreamy. How can I contribute?
Jun '10
Re: Previously on Ricochet...
Stephen, your assumptions are based on a static view of the future, when in fact the future is dynamic, meaning multiple unpredictable changes are in store no matter what the makeup of both houses. The mistake we all make when predicting the future is that we extrapolate from the present. Who would have thought when Obama was first elected that he and the Dems would meltdown so quickly. If you can agree with that last sentence, you can certainly appreciate that in all cases and in all battles, because they are fought today, one must play to will irrespective of some grand hypothetical strategy that will never unfold as you might think.
Re: Previously on Ricochet...
Isn't a big part of this that we all want change -- a dynamic shift in the national political direction, with major tax reform and Obamacare repeal and a lot of other energetic stuff that usually gets started in the scrappier, younger House?
I mean, does anyone look at Mitch McConnell and think, "That guy has a lean and hungry look! He'll be a force for dynamic change!"
Sep '10
Re: Previously on Ricochet...
If there weren't still a couple of seats in play on the Supreme Court, I'd be right there with you. After Sotomayor and Kagan, I have to say I'd like to see the Republican bench as deep as possible.
Sep '10
Re: Previously on Ricochet...
Metzger --
Even without control of the Senate, that august body is about to shift dramatically to the right.
Right now, for the Democrats to beat a filibuster, they need Olympia Snowe or Scott Brown -- both leftish or moderate Republicans. When the GOP controls 46-49 seats, now which members (and how many more!) does Reid need to get to break a filibuster?
May '10
Re: Previously on Ricochet...
Stephen Green, Guest Contributor: "The only thing to worry about is winning. You can sort out the rest of that [expletive] afterwords."
So, yes, Patrick is probably right.
Not "probably, but exactly right. A good coach will tell you that any athlete that begins to consider how "defeat won't be so bad" is toast. And we are not competing for trophies here. These election have a real impact on our lives and on the lives of generations to come.
If the Republicans are not confident that they can and will do well for the country, if they are really worried about what happens when they gain power, then let them stand down and give others a chance to fight. The U.S. is worth a good fight before we disappear into debt and defeatism.
I'm genuinely concerned that we not get caught up in the "game" of politics and forget that real power and the real future of our country is at stake. This stuff matters.