NY Times:
But Democrats hope Mr. Bush’s new high profile will help them frame the emerging Republican generation. Mark Mellman, a Democratic strategist, called Mr. Bush’s public tour "great news for Democrats." He added: "The G.O.P. was lucky he was out of sight and out of mind through Tuesday. His reemergence on the national stage will reinforce voters’ already negative views of the G.O.P."
The guy who got us into this mess is back, hawking his memoirs. And they think America's view of him is "softening"? There's a reason he was under wraps until after the election.
The Hill:
New Jersey’s Republican governor Chris Christie told NBC’s "Meet the Press" today: "It's put up or shut up time for our party."
Christie said Republicans had to stick by their election pledges to cut spending and downsize government: "We have to do what we said we’d do or be sent to the wilderness."
The New Jersey governor argued his state is leading the way in curtailing spending: "We’ve made real hard decisions. We’ve cut spending we would have liked to have kept, but we’re broke!
It's put up or shut up time for his party because now they are responsible for governance and can't rely on bumper stickers. And now the country gets to see what they voted for.
HuffPo:
Republican leaders and strategists are muttering that the same tea party activists who elevated Speaker-to-be John Boehner and the party to power in the House simultaneously hobbled the GOP's outside shot of running the Senate. Tea partiers largely spurned establishment candidates in the GOP primaries and helped nominate Christine O'Donnell in Delaware, Sharron Angle in Nevada and Ken Buck in Colorado.
All three lost on Tuesday.
That's what they voted for.
Reuters:
Congressional Republicans said on Sunday they plan a full-scale assault against President Barack Obama's healthcare overhaul next year but acknowledged it could take until after the 2012 presidential election to repeal it.
In other words, they can't repeal it.
Ross Douthat:
Today’s Republicans, by contrast, know what they’re against (the health care bill, tax increases, cap and trade) but have a world of trouble saying what they might actually be for.
Instead, they tend to fall back on the reassuring story they’ve been spinning for the last two years, in which they lost to the Democrats only because they failed to hold the line on spending. It’s a narrative that flatters conservative self-regard, while absolving Republicans of the obligation to think too deeply about policy. All they need to do is say "no" to bigger government, and the rest will take care of itself.
This strategy has worked for them in opposition, thanks to the Democratic Party’s haste and hubris. But it isn’t a blueprint for governance, and it ducks the real reasons that the Republicans lost their majority. While the Bush administration overspent, it wasn’t spending and deficits that turned the country against conservative domestic policy between 2004 and 2008. It was the fact that the Republican majority seemed to have no answers to Middle America’s economic struggles, and no appetite for the structural reforms required to keep the United States competitive.
Paul Krugman:
Eight years ago Ben Bernanke, already a governor at the Federal Reserve although not yet chairman, spoke at a conference honoring Milton Friedman. He closed his talk by addressing Friedman’s famous claim that the Fed was responsible for the Great Depression, because it failed to do what was necessary to save the economy.
"You’re right," said Mr. Bernanke, "we did it. We’re very sorry. But thanks to you, we won’t do it again."
Famous last words. For we are, in fact, doing it again...
his time, much of the noise is coming from foreign governments, many of which are complaining vociferously that the Fed’s actions have weakened the dollar. All I can say about this line of criticism is that the hypocrisy is so thick you could cut it with a knife.
Thank you for the reminder that there are alternatives.