Looks like John Feehery has turned his Limbaugh back on. As a moderate republican a couple months ago he worried me as a commentator. I'm sad to say that he's down to spouting watered down versions of standard conservative talking points.
If the Republican Party were a stock, the smart investor would start buying it now. Yes, things look grim at the present time, but things change. The GOP is not dead yet, and Speaker Pelosi may see her wish of a resurgent Republican Party come true quicker than she anticipated.
I call bull. Let's dismantle his arguments point by point below the fold.
Overreach: The liberal Democrats that currently run the Congress are destined to overreach on the legislative front.
When the nominal leadership of your party has ceded control of the party platform and ideology to a frothing at the mouth druggie; you know there is a problem. We've see how Eric Cantor most recently, and before that plenty of others, have apologized to Limbaugh for merely disagreeing with him. The problem here is that since 80% of the country (plus or minus a few percentage points) has rejected the frothing-at-the-mouth "conservative" principles of the Limbaugh-GOP, the real divide in Congress is between moderate and liberal democrats. Conservative and moderate democrats make up approximately 20% (depending on definition) of the Congress. This means that republicans, by being the stonewall party, have ceded the debate to the democrats. This is a shallow attempt to point to the Pelosi bogeyman and scare people; a classic republican tactic.
Checks and balances...they do think that one-party government tends to lead to excess and corruption
I find highly ironic that republicans call for 'divided government', praising its virtues and the good things it leads to when they are on the down and outs as a party. It wasn't too long ago that I remember the "permanent republican majority" BS. Where was this "divided government" theory when republicans gained in 2002 and 2004?
Crisis breeds renewal: When things are going well, a political party tends to discourage independent thought and enforce philosophical orthodoxy. But when a political party faces crisis, all of that goes out the window. It is a wide-open world right now for Republicans as they debate amongst themselves what the party truly stands for.
There is another option for a group in crisis. This is true of tolerant groups, but for groups that are fundamentally intolerant, something else happens. The group looks around for 'outsiders' and 'disloyal' members to oust and scapegoat. The group becomes progressively smaller. As the group shrinks, the most extreme segment of the group asserts more and more control, until the group becomes susceptible to manipulation and petty internal politics. Is mr Feehery's narrative or the alternative more apt for the GOP at the moment?
Talent senses opportunity...Talented political entrepreneurs look to the GOP and see nothing but opportunity.
Just because someone is a "talented political entrepreneur" doesn't mean they'll be good for the country. And as the politicians Feehery call out back away from the stage (Tom Ridge), I can't see this argument holding water at all. I read this as "the republicans are particularly vulnerable at the moment to crass political manipulation. If the whole teaparty thing doesn't point out what I mean, nothing does.
The Republican Party is the de facto Libertarian Party: They tend to want government to stay out of their lives as much as possible.
This statement is only half true in two different ways. First, the republicans only want the government out of their lives until they screw up; then they're perfectly happy to run to the government trough and shoulder everyone else out of the way. I love republicans voting against the stimulus package and then making political hay out of the bacon they're bringing home. Second, while it may be that republicans believe that the government should stay out of the lives of republicans, this courtesy is not extended to non-republicans. Republicans have no problem lobbying to have the government poke their noses into the bedrooms of "deviants" or "foreigners" or "unions" or other dangerous words.
Take a read and have a chuckle at Feehery's expense with me.
***update***
Personally I think the republicans are toast, and the libertarian political party will attract more thoughtful conservatives and emerge as the loyal opposition. Already as fewer and fewer conservatives around me are willing to call themselves republican; the word 'libertarian' is coming into vogue.