The End of the Republican Party?

As the thrust of the budget and debt ceiling battle shifts, and the Democrats in the Senate gain the upper hand in the overall battle, those Democrats now are making their long-awaited “counteroffer.”

These worthies now are demanding more than that Republicans merely accept an end to the sequester that has cut government spending for two years in a row, if trivially.  In return for being allowed a vote on a budget bill that the Democrats in the Senate will agree, Democrats are demanding that Republicans walk away from their core reason for being: reducing Federal spending.  Senate Democrats are floating a bill that includes outright spending increases.

Republicans already have surrendered on Obamacare, now being reduced to begging for Democrats’ table scraps in the form of token delays in tiny parts of it.  If the Republicans roll on this Democrat demand that Republicans increase Federal spending, that Republicans publicly beg for complete surrender, it’ll be the end of the Republican Party.

And rightfully so.

2 thoughts on “The End of the Republican Party?

  1. “Democrats are demanding that Republicans walk away from their core reason for being: reducing Federal spending.”
    Not quite. See http://tinyurl.com/lpk7db3 (spending) or http://tinyurl.com/7jmpakv (debt).
    Some conclusions:
    When excluding World War II (therefore, 1946 to end of year 2009), the average increase in the federal debt was 4.8% under a Democratic President and 8.2% under a Republican President.
    When excluding World War II (therefore, 1946 to end of year 2009), the average increase in the federal debt was 4.8% under a Democratic President and 8.2% under a Republican President.
    The Republicans’ core reason for being is not, and never has been, reducing Federal spending or the debt. They are not for cutting spending or the debt now; they are merely following an obstructionist agenda and posturing for their primaries. When the impasse is over, they’ll be fighting for space at the feeding trough as always.
    As for Obama (as with many of the Democrats), he is working straight from Bush’s aggressive foreign policy and NSA playbooks. For all the bitter in-fighting in Congress, the two parties are one, and their concern as a body is the maintenance of the state itself more than the preservation of the rights of its citizenry.
    In short, don’t believe what they say; watch what they do.

  2. You’ll get no argument from me over the Republicans’ poor execution.

    On the other hand, a problem with statistics is illustrated by data you’ve omitted: President Obama, in those post-2009 years, has increased our national debt more than all his predecessors in the history of this nation.

    As for President Bush the Younger’s aggressive foreign policy, it doesn’t seem it was all that aggressive in Obama’s eyes. After all, Afghanistan was not being fought with the zeal that Obama thought appropriate. Or so his rhetoric was.

    Eric Hines

Leave a Reply to eehines Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *