Ricochet is the best place on the internet to discuss the issues of the day, either through commenting on posts or writing your own for our active and dynamic community in a fully moderated environment. In addition, the Ricochet Audio Network offers over 50 original podcasts with new episodes released every day.
On Government Shutdowns, Let’s Take Our Own Side
The president of the United States is not going to [defund Planned Parenthood, and all we’re going do is shut the government down … The American people are gonna shake their heads and say, “What’s the story with these Republicans?” … There are ways to do it without having to shut the government down, but I’m sympathetic to the fact that we don’t want this organization to get funding, and the money ought to be reprogrammed for family planning in other organizations that don’t support this tactic. But I would not be for shutting the government down …because I don’t think it’s going to work out.
That’s what John Kasich said during last week’s Republican debate and Karl Rove said something similar this morning in The Wall Street Journal. Honest people can disagree on whether a “shutdown” strategy is a good idea or not, but we need to be truthful and accurate about how this works: Republicans can’t shut down the government; Congress can’t shut down the government; Only the president can shut down the government.
Can’t a conservative politician bring himself to say “We don’t want to shut down the government. In fact, we can’t do that. It’s the president that is threatening to shut down the government. We call on President Obama to keep the government open.”
It isn’t like the two sides are playing chicken. Only one side can commit the childish act of shutting down the government. Only one side is the guilty party.
Even worse, Sen. Ted Cruz was on the same stage when Kasich made the above statement and even Cruz couldn’t bring himself to correct the record. Talk about a conservative communication problem.
Whether or not Congress defunds Planned Parenthood in the face of Obama’s threats, the press will be talking about a possible shutdown and, yes, the press is against us. That’s all the more reason we should tell the plain truth. Honest people can debate the strategy, but we can’t have a proper debate if we can’t describe the situation properly.
We need to take our own side in this argument.
Published in Politics
I’m pleased you said 50,000 officers who work immigration and not 50,000 officers who enforce our immigration and border control laws. The numbers are irrelevant if the job is not done. There were, some significant increases at IRS for enforcing ObamaCare ‘tax’, same result – nothing.
Folks, read Larry Kudlow’s “The Shutdown Message” here on Ricochet.
Kudlow is seeing what is there. I’m a bit surprised by his clarity on this.
Here’s what I’m asking for, folks. You all want to pick a fight. That’s fine. I’m asking that we pick that fight on an issue that matters, and where we have a chance of winning. Is that too much to ask?
A “win” could be getting some legislation passed, or it could be gaining political capital by losing the legislative fight, but getting the voters on our side. The worst thing we could do is to pick a fight where we lose on the substance, and lose support among the voters. Any government shutdown has that “lose” recipe written all over it.
There are a lot of issues that meet my criteria, starting with the Keystone Pipeline and other energy development. America is in the middle of an energy renaissance. Energy development is good for the country, good for jobs, and good for national security. It helps us, and hurts our enemies in the Middle East and Russia. Instead of squabbling among ourselves about throwing out our Party’s leadership, or shutting down the government over a totally symbolic attack on PP, how about putting together a popular energy package that Obama would promise to veto, and pushing it every day?
I would support this.
Some of us think that government support of abortion is an issue worth fighting.
I am one of those.
That’s not the same question as whether it’s worth prioritizing a symbolic fight over it over substantive fights on other issues. If we win the Presidency, this is the last year of PP funding anyway, and that will be an easier fight if we don’t puff it up now (not much, but it makes a difference on the margins).
Not just this, but if we win, and Congress and Obama both take hits to their credibility, what benefit do we earn? Obama’s already on his home stretch. Maybe we can bring his approval rating down a notch or two, but I’m not sure it makes much of a difference.
It would certainly make a big fundraising impact, and the people most inspired to give would be the people who work for the Federal government. If you’re under the impression that moneyed feds will blame Obama, you know a very different crowd of bureaucrats than I do.
Senate terms last six years. The 2014 elections took some of the weight off the shoulders of the House, they meant that it was less likely that Clinton could get a supermajority and more likely that a Republican might. If we repeal Obamacare and Davis Bacon and pass entitlement reform, it will be thanks to the 2014 elections.
Rubio gets it.
In the second half of this six minute audio, Rubio discusses the Republican leadership problem and government shutdowns. Rubio says exactly the right thing about shutdowns.