Here is Why The GOP is Its and Our Worst Enemy

There aren’t really two major parties in our political system. There are three. Sure there are Democrats–the extreme liberal, Euro-like party–and, yes, there are Republicans. But Republicans are not the conservative party. The GOP is the moderate party. The third party is made of the conservatives and even as they are forced to call themselves Republicans, they have a higher calling than mere party power plays.

Of course, the problem is that since the moderate party and the conservative party are encompassed in the same party, the constant struggle causes the “Republican” Party to lose too often.

The latest example of this struggle can be seen in last week’s incident where the moderate party “leaders” purposefully stuck their finger in the eyes of the conservative caucus with the sudden voice vote on “Doc Fix.”

The conservative faction is still furious at the maneuver meant to defeat them launched by their own supposed leaders.

If you missed this maneuver, it occurred on March 27 where the GOP leadership launched a voice vote on a bill that they knew did not have enough GOP votes to pass. Leadership struck a deal with the Democrats to pass the bill that averted a pay hike for doctors (hence the name “Doc Fix”) by calling for a quick voice vote passage at a time when they knew that many conservatives were not in the chamber.

A voice vote is a procedure where the two parties agree that an issue is easily passable and so they will dispense with the regular, full debate and roll call vote.

So, when the time was right and not many conservative critics of the bill were in the chamber, Arkansas Republican Rep. Steve Womack took the gavel and banged in a voice vote then deemed the bill passed.

Conservatives were apoplectic that their vote on the measure was maneuvered away from them and they wondered why their own leaders sold them out to work with Democrats.

In fact, even as late as April 2 conservatives were still hopping mad that the GOP leadership worked to eliminate their voice in the Doc Fix debate.

But you do see what this means, don’t you? It means that the GOP works harder to defeat its own members (on the conservative side of the aisle) than they do to defeat Democrats. And this is why the Democrats–who have no appreciable governing loggerheads, they are all extreme leftists–can more easily get their agenda passed when they have the power to do so. Democrats have comparatively little internal resistance to the extreme, left-wing, anti-American agenda.

Of course, this shows another thing that is a somewhat positive attribution, at least. It shows that the Republican Party is really the American party. It has relatively liberal members, it has moderate members and it has conservative members. This is something the Democrats don’t have. Democrats only have extreme liberals. No moderates. That means the GOP has a wider, more American breadth of opinion.

That the Democrats are the bigoted, extreme party is beyond question.

In the end, sadly, the conservatives can’t split from the Republican Party and neither can the GOP afford to have them go or both would be out of power for generations. It is a fight that will go on until one or the other is defeated, unfortunately.

Being a party that has so much breadth of opinion, sadly, sets the seeds for its own demise, though.

Shortlink:

Posted by on April 3, 2014.
Filed under Constitutional Issues, corruption, Culture, Culture Of Corruption, Elections, House of Representatives, Liberals, Politicians, Politics, Republicans.
Warner Todd Huston is a Chicago-based freelance writer, has been writing opinion editorials and social criticism since early 2001 and is featured on many websites such as Andrew Breitbart's BigGovernment.com and BigJournalism.com, RightWingNews.com, CanadaFreePress.com, RightPundits.com, StoptheACLU.com, Human Events Magazine, among many, many others. Additionally, he has been a frequent guest on talk-radio programs to discuss his opinion editorials and current events.He has also written for several history magazines and appears in the new book "Americans on Politics, Policy and Pop Culture" which can be purchased on amazon.com. He is also the owner and operator of PubliusForum.com. Feel free to contact him with any comments or questions, EMAIL Warner Todd Huston: igcolonel .at. hotmail.com"The only end of writing is to enable the reader better to enjoy life, or better to endure it." --Samuel Johnson

You can leave a response or trackback to this entry
  • Hank_M

    “the GOP works harder to defeat its own members (on the conservative side of the aisle) than they do to defeat Democrats.”

    Excellent article. And a great explanation of why the Republican party will not be around much longer.

  • Paul Hooson

    Both parties have liberal, moderate and conservative members. Even here in Oregon, a group of conservative Democrat state legislators who tended to vote with the the Republicans called themselves “The Capitol Hornets”. – States like West Virginia, have strong Democratic voter registration roots, but tend to vote Republican in national elections in more recent years since George W. Bush. And in many states in the South, many conservative voters identify as Democrats for historic reasons, but vote Republican in elections if the Republican is the more conservative candidate in an election.
    Even Gallup in 2013 found that 19% of Democrats consider themselves as conservatives, 36% as moderates, and 43% as liberal. So liberals don’t even comprise even half of all Democrat voters. Among Republicans, 70% consider themselves as conservatives, 23% as moderates, and just 5% as liberals. Independents tend to be more conservative than the Democrats as a whole, but less conservative than the Republicans as a whole. 40% of independents consider themselves as moderates, 35% as conservatives and 20% as liberals. – Among all voters as a whole, 38% of all voters consider themselves as conservatives, 34% as moderates, and 23% as liberals. Gallup did find the number of voters who consider themselves as liberals reaching a new high in 2013 of 23% of all voters, which has shown a steady increase since 1992 when liberals were only 17% of voters. Conservative identifying voters have remained virtually constant during that same time frame as being 38% of all voters, compared to 36% in 1992. Moderates have seen some decline, going from 43% of all voters in 1992 to 34% today. But, compared to some conservatives, many moderates could see themselves as appearing liberal by comparison these days.

    • warnertoddhuston

      I was talking about the politicians in the party, not the voters. Try and keep up, won’t you? There ARE no moderate Democrat politicians. Even Markos Moulitsas noted that they’ve destroyed all the moderates.

      • jim_m

        That can’t possibly be true. We keep hearing how obama is a conservative.

        • warnertoddhuston

          LOL. As “conservative” as Stalin.

          • Commander_Chico

            Obama is a neocon.

          • jim_m

            As I was saying…

          • Paul Hooson

            That seems about right to me. As a senator he was a definite liberal, but with actions such as the revelation today of using a service like Twitter to undermine Cuba’s Communist government I see a true neocon who will steadfastly defend America’s interests. Foreign policy is his strongest area, as he stills seem weakest in domestic policy with problems with the economy or with Obamacare failures and shortcomings.

          • jim_m

            Are you nuts? Obama has worked steadfastly against US interest from the start. Citing some abberation as evidence that he is somehow a conservative os simply idiotic. This idiot was the most extreme left politician in the already far left Illinois Senate. He was by far the most liberal member of the US Senare.

            To call foreign policy his strongest area is farcical since he has failed over and over again in all regions of the globe. We are measurably weaker than we were, most of our allies now ignore us, our enemies count on our ineptitude and inaction.

            It is this sort of ignorance and inability to recognize fact that shreds whatever credibility lefties might have.

          • Hank_M

            Jim, I think Paul is right. Foreign policy is Obama’s strongest area. It’s been a complete disaster in every respect with events spiraling out of control everywhere resulting in the US generally, and Obama specifically being an international laughing-stock.

            Unfortunately, things are even worse here in the US.

            So, yes, Paul is ironically, correct.

          • jim_m

            Nice one.

          • Paul Hooson

            The State Department under both Clinton and Kerry has witnessed events such as the successful mission to assassinate Bin Laden, and other efforts to weaken al Qaeda through drone strikes. In addition, just yesterday it was revealed how the U.S. used a service like Twitter to weaken the Communist government in Cuba among other good efforts to further U.S. interests. – Compared to weakness in domestic policy, the foreign policy of this administration has been a stronger area. But, a lot of Administrations are the same way. The administration of the first Bush presidency was characterized by the fall of Communism in Europe as well as a successful Gulf War, but it was his weakness in the economy that was the undoing of his presidency in the end. In 1988 he garnered about 54% of the vote that declined to around 38% in the 1992 election. Obama witnessed some decline in 2012 from his wider win in 2008, as disenchantment with the economy and domestic issues seemed to outweigh his successful efforts against al Qaeda and Bin Laden.

          • Ace

            True again in the ironic sense. State did “witness” the successful op against OBL. They were uninvolved. BHO only said go on OBL after it would have come out that we knew where he was. Jarrret did her best to derail the op.

            A few Wahhabi scum taken out by drones hasn’t made AQ break sweat.

            Enough with the kidding around, pls. I’m begging you!

          • jim_m

            Idiot. I wasn’t aware that the State Dept had an assassinations bureau. I suppose it comes as news to your ears that Bin Laden was taken out, not by obama, and Hilary but by the Navy Seals and only after months of obama refusing to approve the operation.

            Last I saw Cuba was still run by the Castro family and US Intelligence had failed to predict Russia invading the Ukraine, Benghazi, and other incidents around the globe because they are spending all their time spying on US citizens for the obama admin’s benefit.

            Go out and buy yourself a clue.

          • Paul Hooson

            Both Clinton and Obama are neocons in the area of foreign affairs and photos from inside a war room during the Seals mission to get Bin Laden show how closely this mission was followed while it was being undertaken. Officially, the State Department is not involved in some covert activity, but off the record Clinton certainly has been an active participant to undermine our nation’s adversaries such as Cuba or al Qaeda.
            Using a service like Twitter, the U.S. has made some attempts to get news of the outside world into Cuba to counter all of the government propaganda news. It was pretty clear that Russia was amassing troops on the border, and used units like the Spetsnaz with no military markings to secure the airport and other vital areas to make way for the invasion. That was a classic military invasion move to secure the airport.
            It was only two days ago that the Cuban government is feeling the heat of U.S. government covert operations and formally asked the U.S. to stop undermining their government. Obama may have a lot of weakness in domestic policy, but in foreign policy he has been much stronger and willing to doggedly protect U.S. interests.

          • Ace

            Had me going there.

          • Commander_Chico

            You’re a neocon, too, Jim, not sure why you don’t love Obama.

          • jim_m

            Brcsusebobama is not any sort of cpnservative at all. He’s a far left socialist. I cannot help you if you think that because he makes a couple of concessions to reality with regard to gitmo and the warvon terror, that he must be a conservative. None of his policies or aims are the least bit conservative.

          • Ace

            Hoo boy. You had me going, thinking you were a sensible fellow. Foreign policy? SYJMGM. The Lybia Lurch, The Benghazi Fiascophe, The Syrian Afterthought, The Arab Spring Break, The Crimea Comeuppance, Comrade Lead from Behindski?

            Someone who grabs his crotch when the national anthem is played and bows and scrapes in front of every hotel doorman east of Gibraltar is steadfast only in undermining the national interest.

            Trust me on this one.

      • Paul Hooson

        I think it may be safe to say that many, but not all Democratic politicians are more liberal than many Democratic voters. And that many Republican politicians may be more conservative than many Republican voters. – But, there is still the Democratic Leadership Council of moderate politicians. – I think you generalize a great deal, Warner. – But, you lay out good premises to spur a discussion always. That’s why you are my favorite writer here.

        • jim_m

          Not to mention that it has often been the case that he is the only writer here

          • Paul Hooson

            He does take on a great deal of duties. -I’m a very busy man myself, but I like to find time to write as well. With inspiration, writing just flows with me.

    • Ace

      And the converse is also true:

      But, compared to some liberals, many moderates could see themselves as appearing conservative by comparison these days.