LINCOLN CLUB: We Refuse to Support a Permanent Minority
Posted by: Editorial Staff | 07/07/2008 10:33 AM
Lincoln Club president Rich Wagner and board member, Chip Hanlon have just penned a piece for Red County titled, "We Refuse to Support a Permanent Minority". The article appears in the current issue of Red County magazine, here or (http://www.redcounty.com/magazine/2008/07/we-refuse-to-support-a-permane.php).
The article got the attention of Robert Novak who just published his syndicated column in the Washington Post titled, "Ultimatum to the GOP" in which he references the Lincoln Club extensively. Novak's article is located here.
Excerpt of the We Refuse to Support a Permanent Minority article:
Excerpt from Novak's column:
The article got the attention of Robert Novak who just published his syndicated column in the Washington Post titled, "Ultimatum to the GOP" in which he references the Lincoln Club extensively. Novak's article is located here.
Excerpt of the We Refuse to Support a Permanent Minority article:
Still oblivious to the source of our discontent, a number of free-spending Republicans recently rushed to meet House GOP leader John Boehner, urging him not to back an earmark reform proposal from the Republican Study Committee. The idea they fought so mightily against? A ban on earmark requests from Republican members of Congress for one year.
The porkers' struggle is typified by Rep. Jack Kingston of Georgia--sponsor or co-sponsor of $83MM in earmarks in last year's budget alone--who, amazingly, defended earmarks as "being entrepreneurial about bringing something home."In response to us on that remark, former Speaker Newt Gingrich scathingly replied, "There's nothing entrepreneurial about the Appropriations Committee spending other people's money."
Alas, bold GOP leadership on earmark reform is still nearly absent in Washington. Michigan's Thad McCotter highlights this by arguing the futility of fighting for earmark reform, saying members of the House can't lead on the issue because, "...we are not the field marshals, we are the foot soldiers."
Thank goodness Newt Gingrich suffered no such humility in 1994.
Excerpt from Novak's column:
That's the view expressed in the Lincoln Club paper signed by Rich Wagner, the group's president, and Chip Hanlon, a board member. It deplores the refusal by party leaders to support a one-year moratorium on earmarks, whose 285 percent growth when Congress was under Republican control is "the perfect symbol of the GOP-led profligacy that drives us crazy still." Earmarks "epitomize the fiscal recklessness that led to Republicans becoming a minority in 2006. . . . It's no wonder the Republican leadership continued to fail on . . . entitlement reform and a reduction in federal spending."
The Lincoln Club blasts conservative Rep. Jack Kingston of Georgia, whose personal earmarks totaled $83 million last year, for defending his pork as "being entrepreneurial about bringing something home." It also assails conservative Rep. Thaddeus McCotter of Michigan, a member of the leadership who has opposed earmark reform and voted on the floor against only one earmark. With his annual earmarks totaling $22.5 million, McCotter declared a year ago, "I will not unilaterally disarm my donor state."
On June 25, however, McCotter apparently felt enough heat to disarm unilaterally, with a surprise announcement that he had requested no earmarks this year. It may be too late for the 42-year-old third-termer, threatened with losing his House Republican Policy Committee chairmanship after only two years if the Lincoln Club of Orange County gets its clean sweep.
"We urge other Republican donor groups to reinforce this important beginning," read the club's ultimatum. It went on: "It is not credible to ask the American people to return Republicans to the majority when all we offer them is the same group of leaders and policies they so recently rejected."
The statement asserts that these leaders "have no idea what we say when we get together" and are "still oblivious to the source of our discontent." Now, if these contributors have their way, it is too late for the leaders, at least in the House. Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell, who began his campaign for re-election in Kentucky by bragging about his earmarks for the state, probably has more to worry about from his Democratic election foe than insurgent Republican senators. But House Minority Leader John Boehner, who sponsors no earmarks himself but has not backed reform, faces an all-too-serious challenge.
CATEGORY:
FEATURE
you can see the documentary I made about him at recallingrocco "dot" com....
what does Newt think of this? is he going to do a new "drill now" initiative revolving around electing new leadership? that would be awesome!
Once again, the Lincoln Club has the biggest b*lls of any group in this county. Bravo! Carry on!
Steve Greenhut made very similar observations about the disgruntled Republicans in an article in the OC Register this weekend. His article was titled, "An Agenda for a 'Politics of Aspiration'" and subtitled, "The GOP might want to keep it handy after the coming debacle".
You can see the whole article here:
http://www.ocregister.com/articles/government-gop-party-2083930-republican-committed
Good for the Lincoln Club. Money talks in this business. Maybe some of our so called leaders will take notice.
Our own OC Republicans are just as bad as all the rest. When asked to take action on the issue of illegal immigration they all cower in fear. (Except Rohrbacher)
Is this a good idea? It depends on what your goal is. If your goal is to get some earned media for your club, then viola - instant success.
However, if your goal is real reform, attempting to pressure only GOP members (remember we're in the minority) into a ONE YEAR ban on earmarks is ludicrious.
The 'Bridge to Nowhere' is definitely the most egregious example of 'absolute power corrupts absolutely' and is a portion of why some of our GOP Congressmen have lost their GOP base.
It is NOT why the GOP lost the majority in 2006, and since Boehner, Bahner whatever - wasn't the leader then, I don't think we can blame him either. Has everyone forgotten Mark Foley? Duke Cunningham? A little thing called the War in Iraq??
Around the election in 2006 all of those topics were polling at the top of 'Reasons why I vote Democrat.' I don't remember seeing 'Republicans spend too much money' anywhere on that list.
So congratulations to the Lincoln Club, you got your name out there, but let's face it, this is not the way to real reform
Hanlon's on a mission- His programs continue on greenfaucet: http://www.greenfaucet.com/hanlons-pub/methinks-thou-doth-protest-too-much
The thing about throwing down the gauntlet is that you better not be bluffing. The Lincoln Club better be darn sure to get a commitment from its November beneficiaries and review the records of folks like Campbell, Royce, and Rohrbacher.
"Skeptical said:
The thing about throwing down the gauntlet is that you better not be bluffing."
We are serious alright. I am not a member of the Lincoln Club, but their sentiments are reflective of the mood in the GOP from coast to coast. As Novak says, one has to be completely oblivious to the discontent, not to take the Linclon Club seriously.
Novak is merely pointing out the sheer stupidity of many Republican office holders and voters alike who continue to back liberals and porkers in our party.
And it really does not matter any more whether, in the revolt, Republican seats are handed to Democrats. It is time (again) for the GOP to stare starkly at the cold reality that they have gone off course.
"where's Newt? said:
what does Newt think of this? is he going to do a new "drill now" initiative revolving around electing new leadership? that would be awesome!"
Newt Gingrich, unfortunately is part of the problem. He has and will continue to support incumbent moderates and liberals in our party. He came to MD's district 1 to campaign for Wayne Gilchrest, a very liberal congressman. Novak has pointed this out in a previous column saying basically that Newt's support for Gilchrest was the kiss of death for his political ambitions.