Jun 27 2007

Save The GOP Or Save America?

Update: As if to prove my point about the vitriol spewing from the GOP, someone I admired for a long time has jumped the shark and proven what I said below.

Today the MSM announced that yet another Republican has jumped ship and called for retreat from the war in Iraq.

Senator Lugar (channeling John Kerry) is a RINO and thus only a Republican because he can’t get elected as a Democrat (which in this day and age is noteworthy).

That is no way to hold a coalition togethet and it is NOT a public service to ridicule people we needed to keep the troops funded. The white hot anger of the far right is pushing people out of the GOP and out of supporting the biggest responsibilities we have as a nation and to our fighting men and women. The corrosive nature of the far right is spilling out beyond immigration – it now threatens our troops. We cannot keep self destructing like this. Someone needs to ban the phrase “RINO” from the GOP.– end update

Cold political calculation is an ugly thing in America. It usually means desparate self preservation at a cost to others. Here is the perfect example of why this kind of strategy is so bad:

Will George W. Bush try to steal a page from Richard Nixon and, reading the handwriting on the wall after a dismal showing in the congressional elections, begin to pull troops out of Iraq by the end of the year? If he does, will it save the Republican Party?

George Bush doesn’t think in such crass partisan terms. Too many consultants who surround politicians sadly do. There is no salvation down this path. But this might explain some recent comments by Senators Lugar and Voinovich. Both men have now lost their spine and convictions on the Iraq war. In Lugar’s case it may be fall out from the immigration debate (and if so he is truly a dishonorable person). Lugar is very much in favor of the comprehensive immigration bill. And after ‘the base’ (al-Qaeda in Arabic – the irony of it all) went on their scortched Earth drive they may have made Lugar’s support to all things Bush too much. Voinovich seems to be in the same situation – pro immigration reform and most likely getting pummeled by the hysterical talking heads.

This just too disheartening to watch. The divisive nature of the immigration opponents is corrosive and is fracturing GOP resolve. And it will be our troops who pay in the end. Because they are the ones out there fighting and dying for a success which is not back in reach, but they need a strong and united GOP to make all their sacrifices worthwhile.

The rhetoric of “traitor” and “quisling” was always over the top and uncalled for. People have reasonable differing views on immigration. Mine, as I have stated, is based on culling out the hardened criminals here ASAP before they can be recruited by al-Qaeda. Minutiae like provisional status during processing and myths about criminal records checks have never risen to the level to make me divert from the need to reduce our risks from inside our country. In response to these reasonable views I have been called a traitor who thinks on a 5th grade level. OK, I could care less about those comments. But a politician needs to reflect their constituents to stay in office. So all those cries of shoving a bad bill down the throats of America may have backfired as the SAME argument can be made about shoving a tough war down the throats of a non-supportive America.

The wheels are coming off this country thanks to hotheads and those out for self preservation. And the GOP is now crumbling due to the infighting. For the first time in decades I have my doubts this country can pull itself back together again. It is all mob-mentality all the time now.

Update: The GOP is pulling up its stakes on the Iraq war as the far right continues to bash our President and destroy his support.

Anti-war sentiment among Republican poll respondents has suddenly increased with 38 percent of Republicans now saying they oppose the war.

The amnesty hypochondriacs have lost all perspective on the broader issues they are not even thinking about their latest talking points. Hannity and others are upset about a backroom deal being shoved down their throats in opposition to public opinion. A statement and tactic that reflects the current mood surrounding the Iraq war. We do not govern by polls and popular (transient) opinions. Look at the mess CA is in with their referendums. We elect people to do what is right, even when ‘we the people’ might be wrong. And ‘we the people’ have been wrong many, many times. True Americans show their love of country in debating in a civil, respectable manner, and then honoring the process WHEN THEY LOSE.

Being a patriot is easy when the debates go your way. But true patriots shine in how they lose. Those who lost the vote yesterday and cried ‘treason’ where not patriots – they were abysmally sore losers. And they are destroying the GOP and what it NEEDs to stand for. Including the successful conclusion of the Iraq war. I suspect we will see comments from the far right saying they would rather lose Iraq than lose on ‘amnesty’. That is the depth of their obsession and hate.

36 responses so far

36 Responses to “Save The GOP Or Save America?”

  1. Mike M. says:

    I think the surge is working…and I suspect that the Nixonian solution is exactly where Bush is headed.

    But that is a Good Thing. Because the Nixonian solution is not withdrawl, but relying on the locals to do the ground fighting while American forces stick to our strengths…training, communications, and using air and sea superiority.

    Nixon established a policy of Vietnamization – of pulling out most of our ground troops, turning over counterinsurgency missions to the South Vietnamese government. American efforts would focus on supply, training, technical assistance…and using our air and sea power to interdict the battlefield.

    It worked. North Vietnam was forced to make peace.

    Unfortunately, Congress prevented any effort to aid South Vietnam when the North mounted an invasion in 1975. No resupply, no air strikes….the South Vietnamese troops were given ten cartridges and two grenades each. They never had a chance.

    What I think is happening in Iraq is something similar…a massive offensive to knock the enemy down, which will be followed by a turnover of ground security to the Iraqis. They’ll be able to do the job once the hard nuts are cracked. This gets much of the Army and National Guard home…and shifts the American effort to air and sea. Our long suits.

    My biggest worry is that Bush has, over nearly six years of war, shown a serious weakness in communicating his strategy to the public. A public address explaining this plan, including mentioning that it DID work for Nixon, UNTIL the Congress pulled the rug out from under South Vietnam, would be a very good idea.

  2. ivehadit says:

    “For the first time in decades I have my doubts this country can pull itself back together again. It is all mob-mentality all the time now. ”

    Couldn’t agree more, sadly. Often I have thought that it all goes back to Madison Avenue. ..$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$.

  3. smill1953 says:

    …True Americans show their love of country in debating in a civil, respectable manner, and then honoring the process WHEN THEY LOSE…

    It is also the right of true Americans to withdraw their support from a government they believe is very wrong. To think that one should support a government that one believes is wrong is nothing short of a ridiculous thing to say.

    I haven’t seen any civility on your side, either, so that high horse really does not fit.

  4. ivehadit says:

    Mike, where are our statemen in America-democrat and Republican? Lieberman is all I see on the Left… It is dispicable that many have left this job of saving my beloved America to one man: George W. Bush.

    And frankly, it’s because they know he is an outstanding president that they feel the luxury of doing that, imho.

    I am sick of the Bush-bashing. This man is the Commander-in-Chief during the hardest war we have EVER faced, worse than WWII because of the technology and rabid desire to die for religion our enemy possesses. And not to mention China and Russia quietly trying to stick it to us.

    Undermining him, undermines my country and I take that personally as do my children and grandchildren who, btw, many will have a lot of explaining to do as to why they allowed America to be brought down.

  5. loneferret says:

    I’ve gone over most parts of this bill and, like a lot of Congressional actions, there are some things I like and some things I don’t. Having said that, on the whole I could live with it.

    The problem I’m having is that I’m not sure what parts of the bill are actually going to be followed through on. No one seemed that interested in enforcing the previous laws, so why should I believe that this reform will be carried out like it’s written? Don’t get me wrong, I don’t think the current immigration situation is acceptable or that enforcing current laws is the best solution. What worries me about the climate surrounding this bill is such that even if it gets enacted, it will be largely ignored. There will be a lot of smiles and high-fives that we finally tackled the problem and got a half way decent bill out of this mess, but in the end little will change.

    So here’s my question, for both sides: what happens once the bill is passed? Should I have any confidence that it will be enforced given the track record of past laws? Thanks

  6. For Enforcement says:

    LoneFerret, easy question:

    So here’s my question, for both sides: what happens once the bill is passed? Should I have any confidence that it will be enforced given the track record of past laws?

    Legalization of illegals and amnesty will be enforced, the border won’t be.   Do you doubt that for one minute? 

  7. AJStrata says:

    Lone Ferret,

    I honestly think 9-11 made this a critical issue and the first thing the Feds want to do is isolate the criminal element and get them out of here ASAP and keep them from returning. I think that will light a fire under this.

    But, be warned. Just like the FISA court resisted changes that made total sense (yeah, let’s monitor bin laden’s calls into the US!) there will be people who try and oppose this through implementation. That means we need to support those pushing it all the more.

  8. For Enforcement says:

    Anybody watching the Ted and Di morning show? What a sham, must’ve been up all night rehearsing.

  9. stevevvs says:

    So it’s seen, I’ll post this here:

    AJ: While I respect your right to have screwed up priorities, I do not call you a traitor for being so naive!


    ME: I guess I could put you down as well, but I’ll take the high road.

    AJ: You failed. I did not ask you to agree with my view – I demanded it be respected. Which is not something the amnesty hypochondriacs can do.

    Again, I won’t resort to the low road, and name calling.

    AJ: The left says the same thing about the Iraq war…..

    So now you give them an excuse to surrender. Nice job.

    ME: Again, I won’t resort to this.

    Well, I did try to be nice, I don’t know what more I could have said in a polite way. There is a lot of puting people down and name calling here, but it’s not usually by me.

    Take care AJ

  10. retire05 says:

    Let’s just pass the bill and all our woes will be over. We will have virtually eliminated illegals by making the legal. What a concept.

    Never mind that a two year old boy can be killed by an illegal and a wise judge gives him two years in prison and is not even sure that he is in prison under his real name because even though the illegal WAS documented, it was just stolen documentation.
    What does this mean? It means that because the court was unsure of what the killer’s real name is, he could come back to our nation under another name and be allowed to stay.
    Does the bill address that problem? In a word, “NO”.

    AJ wants to tell us that the illegals just have a documentation problem. Well, there is one that doesn’t. He is using my Social Security number and has even gotten credit cards on it. So he is well documented. Does the bill provide relief for those of us who have had their identity stolen. In a word, “NO”.

    How does the bill provide for verifying an illegals real name? It doesn’t. But never fear, I am sure that our government will be able to get documentation on a person’s real name from another nation within 24 hours.

    So we give amnesty to millions of illegals with the signing of the bill. Meanwhile, our borders are wide open, our Border Patrol is being shot at by the Mexican Army, Mexican trucks will be pouring into our nation while Mexico refused to let our truckers enter, and the ACLU is gearing up to challange the fines imposed on those who seek the Z (for Zorro) visa.

  11. For Enforcement says:

    You want to see republican democracy in action, tune to cspan2.
    the Senate. Sen Demint asked that the 400 page amendment that is still to be delivered to the senate for a vote, be read before it is voted on. It was objected to. Even tho it is still being written and has not been printed, Sen Reid says they have had ample opportunity to read it and understand it. He says the majority staff will brief the minority staff on the changes. Sen Vitter asked if the briefing is not complete will the votes made depending on their completeness be considered null and void and Sen Reid said no. We are happy with the bill like it is, we are just making these changes to make the people happy. Reid is missing many opportunities to work as a clown, apparently his true calling.
    Sen Sessions asked if the majority leader would sign a statement with a personal guarantee that the changes in the amendment are insignificant, even tho he, himself has not read the amendment. He would not. Sen Sessions is emphasizing that the majority leader is trying to control the senate in such a way that is rewriting the laws.

    He pointed out that the opposition won’t even promise that there won’t be an amnesty in the future, as they did before.

    Real dog and pony show. 11:48 new amendment delivered, within one minute 2 amendments to that amendment were offered. Sen Reid is again assuring them that this amendment is different, it has 4 billion more for border security, it is a bill that the people should really understand(yes he said that) But he won’t give them time to read it.

    tune in

  12. lurker9876 says:

    Save GOP or America?

    What are the other choices? Allow the Democrats an increased majority in all 3 houses?

    Given 2 choices between the GOP and the Democrats, I’d pick GOP. In spite of my unhappiness with both parties. But GOP won’t save America either. Especially if we have a Democratic US President.

    I’d rather see that our next US President be as strong or stronger than Bush. Bush has been attacked so much that he appear to be weakening of late. He knows that he’s running out of time but also knows that his legacy will be a good one to be reported in the future history books.

    Looks like Iran’s gas rationing is a sign of a near-collapse.

  13. The Macker says:

    Mike M,
    Very thoughtful comments!

    You have built up a lot of grudges.
    Maybe genuine ID’s and a modern database will help.

    There’s that “amnesty” word again.

  14. Sue says:

    But he won’t give them time to read it.

    How charming.

  15. cali_sun says:

    Those turncoats in the GOP are opportunists like dems are. It appears that now the surge being fruitful, they want to pull out. It is a disservice to our soldiers, and the overall WOT. How silly these politicians can be, spineless, and calculating without integrity.

  16. loneferret says:


    I’m trying to figure out how this bill helps the Feds track down the criminal element. I think I see how it works in theory, but I’m wondering how much practical advantage it gives to law enforcement. Were I a criminal (or terrorist), I don’t think I would apply for any kind of visa that required a background check because of the risk I would get caught. Does the fact that everyone else will be applying make it easier to find criminals because they are the ones who are not going for a visa?

    So, assuming for a minute that smart criminals and terrorists aren’t going to voluntarily show up for a background check, how do the Feds go about finding them? I suppose this addresses the broader issue of how the bill deals with immigrants who, for whatever reason, decide to remain undocumented even with a number of avenues available.

  17. AJStrata says:

    Lone ferret, it is pretty simple really.

    Let’s assume 1 million of the 12 million are convicted (key word here) criminals. Let’s say 1 million are not sure they could pass all the gates to get legal status and try and continue to hide out. That means about 10 million will apply and get their tamper proof IDs and be listed in the database of authorized immigrant workers.

    OK, you do a traffic stop and you ask for the Z-Visa number. No number? Have a US Passport? No? Something else to prove citizenship (clearly cannot use driver’s licenses or SS numbers anymore) OK-we will hold you until we find out what’s up. Let’s do a criminal record check? OK – you have been convicted of a felony and your US citizenship is in doubt.

    Will some Americans get caught up because proving US citizenship is not easy without a passport? Yep, but that is the price to pay. Americans will probably start getting Passports so their number and photo will be in the records and easily verified.

    The point is 10 million would be walking around with their Z-visas and can be checked and dismissed because they are in the process (and only those who could weather it would apply).

    So we reduce a 12 million problem down to 2 million. Even if only half apply we cut the problem in half. Rooting out the bad apples is the same problem under both approaches. The big difference is the haystack moves aside so the needles we want to find our exposed. No Z-visas no work, no public support (welfare), no nothing. Will it be foolproof? Hell no! But cutting the problem in half is still a huge step forward.

    It will become harder and harder for those not in the new process to hide out. And therefore easier to find them. Though many will probably hike it out of here since they face no work and no ability to get support and sooner or later they will get the boot.

    This is not complicated. You simply have to see how the process could work as opposed to focusing on things that might not work. Both things will exist. Things will work, things won’t. The ‘will work’ will be plenty to applaud this once it works.

    The naysayers had the same BS about the prescription drug bill which is working incredibly well. Not PERFECTLY. Just damn well.

  18. For Enforcement says:

    The point is 10 million would be walking around with their Z-visas and can be checked and dismissed because they are in the process (and only those who could weather it would apply)

    Now if I were here illegally and were the vilest criminal or terrorist, I would apply, because there will be no checking, no way would the check, which would consist of punching my newly created name into a computer, show that I was a criminal and I would then instantly be handed a permanent irrevocable visa card and made 100% legal for life. Then I could go about my business with no worries. Having to use a newly created name would be nothing new to me, it would probably be only one of several that i applied under just in case they stumbled upon me accidentally.

    This naysayer was FOR the prescription drug plan.

    I am questioning no one. I say this amnesty bill will work, I say let them all in and make them all legal. instantly. give it a chance.

    I have been won over

  19. For Enforcement says:

    “After offering a bleak assessment of the Bush administration’s strategy in Iraq, Senator Richard G. Lugar of Indiana, the ranking Republican on the Foreign Relations Committee, said today that he was urging lawmakers and President Bush to change course quickly to protect a further erosion of America’s standing in the world.”

    I think all he is saying is that Pres Bush and the congress(now Dems) are on the wrong track. I don’t see the word Iraq in that paragraph.

    But then I agree with your assessment, since you’re always 100% correct.

  20. AJStrata says:


    But don’t forget! You are all for doing NOTHING about it.

    And how does the Amnesty crowd plan to use immigration legislation to stop a terrorist without a criminal record??

    LOL! The problem is the same under both scenarios so pass the bill since it is neutral in terms of impact in those areas best handled by our Intel Community!

    Your in the wrong bill if you want to deal with terrorists without convictions. No wonder you folks are so confused!