Republicans Seem To Be Suicidal In Reluctance To Change Course

The Republican Party is in its death throes more and more each week.

The country is no longer interested in their agenda, in their candidates, in their goals, and in their promotion of fear and hate!

The GOP has lost five of the last six popular vote totals for President, despite spending inordinate amounts of money, the most ever in 2012, due to the Citizens United case of the Supreme Court in 2010.

But they have elements that are destroying them from within like a cancer!

These destructive elements include:

The right wing conservative talk show hosts on radio and Fox News Channel, who are making massive amounts of money promoting hate, fear and division, and until the GOP tells Rush Limbaugh, Glenn Beck, Sean Hannity, Bill O’Reilly, Mark Levin, Michael Savage, Ann Coulter, Michelle Malkin, Laura Ingraham and their ilk to go somewhere, they will be going down the road to destruction!

The power of the National Rifle Association and Wayne La Pierre, and its campaign to defeat any candidate who wants any reasonable gun regulations, is going to cause the defeat of Senators and Congressmen, who are unwilling to sell their souls to this powerful pressure group!

The Tea Party Movement, which wants to wipe out Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid, and is furious at Republican Governors, including the latest convert on ObamaCare, Florida Governor Rick Scott, making it a total of seven Republican Governors who have decided to accept that program, has plans to run candidates against anyone who does not wish to support their desire to go back to the 19th century and wipe out all aspects of the welfare state, so Maine Senator Susan Collins is on a hit list, as is even Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell, for not being conservative enough! Do not forget that the Koch Brothers and other wealthy billionaires are the brains behind this movement, which is lower class populism gone wild, but they have the ability to harm the Republican Party establishment! And Rand Paul and Ted Cruz are the lead elements in this Tea Party uprising, who might cause the Republican Party to go down to defeat in many races, because of their loony libertarianism!

The right wing evangelical Christian movement, which will fight any move toward acceptance of gay rights and gay marriage, abortion rights, immigration reform, and gun regulation, as well as their desire to promote religion in the education curriculum, rejecting science and history, and promotion of a theocracy in states that have large numbers of their believers.

The “NeoCons”, Neoconservatives, who want more money spent on defense, advocate overseas military interventions, and glorify wars in the name of American capitalism and profits! They had power under George W. Bush, but are now trying to defeat Chuck Hagel for Defense Secretary.

And finally, the no tax increase crowd, led by Grover Norquist of Americans For Tax Reform, a group which is starting to see some Republicans abandon them, but not enough, and willing to back corporate loopholes and the wealthy, at the expense of the middle class and the poor, these two groups failing to understand that this elite has no concerns, except to back the establishment on Wall Street and in the corporate world, even at a time when corporate profits are soaring, and the stock market has doubled under Barack Obama!

These are the destructive elements in the Republican Party, and will cause its total dissolution very soon if the direction of the party is not changed to appeal to the moderate center, the tradition of the party under Abraham Lincoln, Theodore Roosevelt, Dwight D. Eisenhower, and YES, even in the time of Ronald Reagan, when moderates were still a major part of the party success, and Reagan a conservative but not an extremist, as these various elements of the party are in 2013!

37 comments on “Republicans Seem To Be Suicidal In Reluctance To Change Course

  1. Juan Domingo Peron February 21, 2013 6:55 pm

    And yet, all we have is moderate establishment Republican candidates losing the Presidential elections…LOL!

  2. Ronald February 21, 2013 6:58 pm

    Well, the above groups will not lead to victory anytime soon, if ever, face it, Juan! We are a nation of 315 million people and BIG government is here to stay!

  3. Juan Domingo Peron February 21, 2013 7:52 pm

    LOL! When the inevitable consequences of the hiper-bureacratic government starts affecting the lives and freedom of everyday people, then we will see. I mean it always happens, people start having less and less disposable income due to either taxes or indirect inflation tax and then they react. It is sad, but well what can I say. And don’t worry , we conservatives don’t want to destroy government because that as well as excessive government leads in the end to anarchy.

  4. Juan Domingo Peron February 21, 2013 7:53 pm

    At least you are honest. Not like Obama. I wonder what would happen if he says, big government is here to stay..LOL

  5. Ronald February 21, 2013 8:35 pm

    I think the right wing media would be alarmed, but most Americans, I think, agree with him and me!

  6. Ronald February 21, 2013 8:36 pm

    I see state and local governments as unreliable and corrupt in comparison to the federal government, as history, I think, teaches that they were inadequate to deal with so many issues on their own, and need the federal government to set standards.

  7. Juan Domingo Peron February 21, 2013 8:40 pm

    If most Americans agree with you and Obama, then why doesn’t Obama say Big government is here to stay. Conservatives have no issue advocating limited constitutional government.

  8. Juan Domingo Peron February 21, 2013 8:43 pm

    As far as local governments are concerned, the issue is not whether they are more corrupt or not,the issue is the 10th amendment. Whether you like it or not it is there. Now again,if you think the majority of Americans agree with you and Obama, propose the repealing of the 10th amendment. Don’t be shy. Go for it!

  9. Maggie February 21, 2013 9:08 pm

    Why Juan, you’re positively pleasant tonight! LOL! That’s a compliment BTW 🙂
    ……Marked evidence that the Professor is rubbing off on you!
    Professor Feinman I think the GOP is on life support, their vital signs are weak, heart function not compatible with life…..
    Professionals agree cause of death will be listed as suicide!

  10. Ronald February 21, 2013 9:11 pm

    I do not believe in repealing constitutional amendments, just in not applying those I think are out of date! LOL

  11. Ronald February 21, 2013 9:15 pm

    Maggie, I LOVE your medical diagnosis! HAHAHA! LOL

  12. Juan Domingo Peron February 21, 2013 9:43 pm

    Ronald: I have to hand it to you, I wish all progressive were as honest about not applying the Constitution as you are! I know, guess what, I think freedom of speech and of the press, that First amendment thing is outdated! So lets shut down and take off the air, The New York Slimes, The Washington Compost,the Huffington Puffington Compost , the Associated Depressed, MSLSD , the Center For Anti-American Progress , Deface the Nation , Meet the Depressed , Al “Not So” Sharpton, Chris “I’ll have another drink” Matthews, Rachel Madcow , Media Doesn’t Matter and the Short, stupid, white-comedian guy a.k.a. Bill Maher!

  13. Ronald February 21, 2013 9:53 pm

    Oh my god, Juan, you are in the wrong profession, as you could be a great stand up comic! LOL But before you do your routine, you need to be “brainwashed” by a psychiatrist! LOL 🙂

    All of the journalistic sources above are my favorites, and I can understand you are intimidated by their brilliance and intelligence! LOL

  14. Hoopster February 21, 2013 10:13 pm

    Will you evertry to type without such a partisan tone and cut down on the hyperbole?

  15. Ronald February 21, 2013 10:17 pm

    Hoopster, the purpose of a blog is to express one’s views on issues. Otherwise, why have a blog at all? You are welcome to disagree, as long as not rude or obscene.

  16. Juan Domingo Peron February 21, 2013 10:22 pm

    I wonder if they ever teach this in History class, the Battle of Athens, when the Rule of Law was restored.?!! . I don’t think this particular event in American history is very popular among progressive who believe the Second Amendments Right to Bear Arms is for hunting!! LOL!!!

  17. Ronald February 21, 2013 10:38 pm

    But this assumes that our national government is abusive of freedom, when it has been state and local governments which have been, Juan. If it was up to the Southern states, for instance, there would still be discrimination as an official policy! The rights of minorities have been protected by the national government, not the states!

  18. Juan Domingo Peron February 21, 2013 11:01 pm

    Ronald. Are you talking about the clip? Because if you are, then you didn’t understand, it was a local town election. It wasn’t a federal election over there in Athens. In any event , what assumes the “Federal” government is abusive??? Theoretically any government can become abusive and if you push me I can give you multiple examples of the Federal government being abusive. As for discrimination in the south, all was due to the SCOTUS terrible Plessy v Ferguson decision which wiped out the effectiveness of the 14th amendment. Had they followed Harlan’s dissent which was based on the original intent of the framers of the 14th amendment it would have been a different story and we not have needed Brown. So even though there is a 10th amendment through the incorporation doctrine it cannot contradict the 14th . It is not that difficult really. As for the rights of minorities I recall it was the Northern States that fought the Southern States to finally end slavery. In any event, just because some southern states implemented discriminatory policies for decades, with the help of the federal government by the way, does not invalidate the 10th amendment nor does it mean that the federal government should have unlimited powers. The more power is divided the better.

  19. Ronald February 21, 2013 11:29 pm

    Depends on the situation, YES!

  20. Juan Domingo Peron February 21, 2013 11:40 pm

    Oh my oh my I just found an example of federal government abuse of liberty. Universal to drop health insurance for part-time workers. “The reason: Universal currently offers part-time workers a limited insurance plan that has low premiums but also caps the payout of benefits. For instance, Universal’s plan costs about $18 a week for employee-only coverage but covers only a maximum of $5,000 a year toward hospital stays. There are similar caps for other services. Those types of insurance plans — sometimes referred to as “mini-med” plans — will no longer be permitted under the federal Affordable Care Act. Beginning in 2014, the law will prohibit insurance plans that impose annual monetary limits on essential medical care such, as hospitalization, or on overall spending.” Imagine that !! These plans have been outlawed!!! Who would have thought that happening in America.

  21. Ronald February 22, 2013 12:25 am

    Considering how much is charged to guests at Universal, they should be able to pay for decent health care coverage for all workers. Many companies are doing so, so it is clear that many companies are simply playing politics, which, hopefully, will get customers and guests to decide to take their business elsewhere in protest that workers are being denied health care, a basic human right that should be guaranteed to everyone! If Starbucks can do it, so can every other corporation! I am not sympathetic to companies that make tremendous profits, and then cheat their workers!

  22. Ronald February 22, 2013 12:26 am

    And promoting health care is NOT an abuse of liberty, but instead the promotion of a human right to all!

  23. Juan Domingo Peron February 22, 2013 10:12 am

    Well, well, I thank you for your candor which only confirms the authoritarianism of the so called “progressives”. First of all, do you know the difference between part-time and full-time employees? Second, Universal did provide coverage for part-time employees and does as it always has provide coverage for full-time employees. Thirds, like always the so called “unintended” consequences of government overreach, which I believe are not unintended in this case, have disastrous effects, in this case , part-time workers left without coverage. Fourth, why all the hatred for companies and people who provide jobs and make a profit? Since when in America do we believe in the Marxist rant that companies make tremendous profits and cheat employees? When you talk of tremendous profit, do you actually know what the profit margin is? Do you know what is the average profit margin in the US? Also don’t you think if employees felt cheated they would leave and work somewhere else.Though I grant you that with today’s stagnant Obama economy that is harder to do. Hey maybe that’s the plan after all! Thank you Mr. President! Fifth,then your simplistic one fits all view, “if Starbucks can do it, so can every other corporation!” That is so incoherent, so illogical , so baseless and way out there in the stratosphere of the latte drinking “big faculty bubble” that it is not even worth my time addressing. Finally, since when is a service provided by a third party (doctors in this case) a human right? I had no idea that we had a human right to force someone to provide us a service. This, together with the shortage of doctors I mentioned the other day, is no way to “promote” healthcare.

  24. Ronald February 22, 2013 11:15 am

    You can call it “authoritarian”, but I am not interested in dictatorship, just fairness for all Americans. And having the right to medical care is a human right! What we have now in America is closer to a corporate dictatorship by the Koch Brothers and others on Wall Street who think they should have the power to dictate conditions for all workers and all Americans. We are closer to Fascism than progressivism, as it has been years since progressivism has been in the so called “drivers” seat!

  25. Juan Domingo Peron February 22, 2013 12:29 pm

    LOL! So you have a right to another person’s service? So do we also have a right to housing? Should an architect and construction company be forced to provide us with a home? Should the banks be forced to loan us money to buy a house even though we cannot pay for it? Yes , I believe we did that and how did that come out? So should the supermarkets be forced to provide me with food? Should the people that work in the cattle industry and provide meat for those that live in the big cities do it without a profit or for free? So we are all entitled to the fruit of the labor of others. You talk about fairness. What is fair about outlawing “mini-med” plans? So fair is only what you,Obama and the government say it is?? How do you know? Do you know everything about the lives and individual circumstances of millions of people and thousands of business to actually state what is fair? There you go again, a one fits all program. Notice that you and the government advocate that we , the people, either individually or when we associate ourselves in a business,have to pay more taxes, do have less profit or no profit, because you know, we can do with less and its not “fair”. But when the government is faced with doing with 1% less of its $3.6 trillion dollar fiscal busting budget, all hell breaks loose!! When the government is asked to spend not $10 trillion more over the next 10 years but only $8.8 trillion more, that is to REDUCE the GROWTH of spending, not the ACTUAL spending, the world is coming to an end! But we, the people who work, provide jobs, pay taxes and provide healthcare and thousands of other services that are freely exchanged with our fellow citizens are looked upon with contempt by people like you and the President! We have to do with less, the government and Obama cannot!This administration according to its own studies has over $120 billion in wasteful spending per year, between over-payments, overlapping programs and the rest! $120 Billion that could be saved! $120 billion each year!! And if that is the government own estimate then imagine the reality! Easily 3 times as much! And who is responsible? The President! He is the head of the Executive Office, it is his administration. And what has he done? Nothing! But dare cut $85 billion (which is really $44 Billion) out of $3.6 TRILLION!! and there he goes threatening Pentagon employees with furloughs! Terrorizing the citizens and employees of the Pentagon and other agencies, blaming anyone except himself! He is never responsible for anything!! It’s either Bush, the Republicans, Conservatives, Reagan , Wall Street, WalMart , corporate jets , millionaires or billionaires, or gun clinging bible reading people and you could go all the way back to Christopher Columbus with this guy! Anyone except him. He seems like a child, never taking responsibilities for his own actions. Its like he is not governing. Anything that goes bad because of his actions is somebody’s else fault. Companies drop insurance coverage because of Obamacare, it’s the greedy company’s fault, not Obama’s. It’s Obama against giant evil forces that don’t allow him to do good! I mean how infantile and immature can you get? So now we have that the government can never do with less, even with an insignificant amount, but we the people just have to. We have to do with less insurance, we now cannot keep our doctors, “go to a nurse you say!” But what if I want to see a doctor? No that doesn’t matter, what we want doesn’t matter. What matters is what the government , Obama and you think is fair.

  26. Ronald February 22, 2013 12:53 pm

    Wow, Juan, so dramatic! LOL I think you are using a bit of hyperbole here, as if the Republic is about to collapse. We have had crises before, and we will survive this one! Imagine if we had NOT had the massive tax cuts of Reagan and Bush II, how much better off we would have been, with far less stratification of the society, worse than Great Britain. It is time to turn things around!

  27. Juan Domingo Peron February 22, 2013 2:30 pm

    There you go again, going back to Reagan. At least you admitted that Obama is a crisis, I’m just not sure we can overcome the utter destruction he is unleashing upon us. As the famous Argentine write/novelist Jorge Luis Borges said about the Peronist, “It’s not that they are bad, it’s just that they are hopelessly incorrigible.” Same can be said about the Progressives/statist/corporatist.

  28. Ronald February 22, 2013 4:44 pm

    Why not go back to Reagan, since that is when reckless tax cuts and vast military spending tripled the national debt, and then Bush II took a surplus and turned it around and doubled the national debt with two wars NOT PAID FOR BY TAXES, as in every other war in American history. We did not pay then, so now the rich have to pay what they did not pay in the first decade of this century, and still the economy was not in good shape, and then finally collapsed. We have the national debt we have now because of these two Presidents and the Gingrich and Hastert House and Republican Senate for so many years! Obama is in crisis BECAUSE of GOP recklessness, favoring the rich and creating the greatest stratification in American history, so time to pay up!

  29. Juan Domingo Peron February 22, 2013 5:00 pm

    Your account of the issues is so factually incorrect on so many levels that it is truly amazing. But you know what, I can show you pages and pages of data, from the own government, from the IRS, the CBO , the labor department all official source that contradicts every single one of your postulates and it would not make a difference. As a leftist you are immune to data. I can show you that revenues went up during the Reagan era, but that won’t matter to you. I can show you that revenues tripled because GDP triple and revenues continued to be on the average of 18% of GDP, but 3 times more revenue came in, but that won’t matter to you. I can show you that the Democrats never ever agreed to any of the cuts Reagan proposed but that would not matter. In other words, again you are hopeless!

  30. Ronald February 22, 2013 5:04 pm

    Revenue may have gone up, but it went to defense, not to needs of average people, and it went to corporations producing war goods, and also lots of corruption, with Reagan the fourth most corrupt administration after Nixon, Grant, Harding! The middle class suffered, and the poor were much poorer, as with the BUSH II years!

  31. Juan Domingo Peron February 22, 2013 6:21 pm

    During the Reagan era production, employment, job creation, and entrepreneurship all surged, soon achieving near-record levels. And, true to the supply-side promise, government revenues soared, during Reagan’s eight years. Yet despite oceans of new money and Reagan’s constant foot on the brake, government continued to spend more than it took in, increasing outlays by nearly 40% in the same period. To restrain spending, Reagan cut a deal with Congress in which the Democrats agreed to hold spending down in return for losing tax loopholes (which really involved raising taxes again, but only in specific industries, such as yachts and pleasure boats). No sooner had Congress closed the deal than it passed new higher spending, generating sizable, but not record, deficits. One of the most oft-repeated mantras of the 1980s—that Reagan’s military buildup accounted for the extra expenditures—was utterly false. Military budgets did grow, but barely. Defense spending never much exceeded $200 billion per year, whereas social spending under the Democrats consistently remained slightly higher. After Reagan left office, domestic non-defense spending was nearly double that of the Pentagon’s budget. None of this seemed to faze average Americans, who could see by their wallets that the economy was growing by leaps and bounds. At the end of eight years of Reaganomics, America’s revived industrial might had produced 14 million net new jobs. This was nothing short of stupendous, given that since 1970, all the European nations combined had not generated a single net new job! Also, even though production as a share of U.S. gross domestic product had dipped in the 1970s, it nevertheless rose throughout the 1980s, reaching 36.1% in 1989, the highest level in American history. The phenomenal expansion put in place by the tax cuts in 1981 had produced astonishing growth. Contrary to Reagan’s critics, who claim the “rich got rich and the poor got poorer,” the blessings reached across the entire racial and class strata of American life. From 1982 to 1988, per capita income for whites rose 14%, and for blacks, 18% (compared to the Carter years of 2.4% for whites and 1% for blacks).Black unemployment was cut in half under Reagan, with 2.6 million African Americans joining the labor force, and the number of black families in the highest income bracket ($50,000 and over) rose by 86%.

  32. Ronald February 22, 2013 9:39 pm

    You are coming up with propaganda from right wing think tanks, as all evidence is that the Reagan years increased poverty in America, and that the majority of jobs were low wage jobs. You are rewriting the 1980s as a glorious time, which I do not recall, having lived through it, and the tripling of the national debt occurred, mostly due to reckless defense spending, which was only justified after the fact by the collapse of the Soviet Union. But the debt had hardly gone up under Carter, and then Reagan started the debt increase, mostly for foreign adventures and military waste, very little for domestic needs! It was a great time for wealthy people and corporations, much like the Bush II years!

  33. Juan Domingo Peron February 22, 2013 10:02 pm

    According to the Congressional Research Service Federal spending for social programs increased from $344.3 billion in 1981 to $412 billion in 1989, a 19.7 percent increase using 1982 dollars. As a percentage of Gross National Product, social spending during Reagan’s two terms averaged 1.73 percent. By contrast, during the Carter years, social spending, as a percentage of GNP, averaged 1.65 percent. From the end of 1982 to 1989, black unemployment dropped 9 percentage points (from 20.4 percent to 11.4 percent), while white unemployment dropped by only 4 percentage points. Black household income went up 84 percent from 1980 to 1990, versus a white household income increase of 68 percent. The number of black-owned businesses increased from 308,000 in 1982 to 424,000 in 1987, a 38 percent rise versus a 14 percent increase in the total number of firms in the United States. Receipts by black-owned firms more than doubled, from $9.6 billion to $19.8 billion. But all this is BS according to Reagan hating leftist. The Census, IRS and CBO be dammed.. right? As for you living the Reagan era, so? You are currently living through the destructive policies of President Barack “Milhouse” ( we can’t say Hussein because its racist) Obama and you don’t even realize it. For you this is “nirvana” !!! LOL!

  34. Ronald February 22, 2013 10:05 pm

    I do not claim we are living in Nirvana, BECAUSE of the destructive policies, both domestic and foreign, of George W. Bush. And I do not claim that Obama is perfect, as no one is so, but certainly a massive improvement over what we had previously! You, on the other hand, glorify Reagan, which view is rapidly being destroyed as the truth comes out!

  35. Juan Domingo Peron February 22, 2013 11:03 pm

    If just putting out the data, objective data , you consider its glorifying him, well what can I say. I think you are the one glorifying him by admitting that the data I post somehow makes for a glorious Presidency. Otherwise you would come out with refutable evidence, not your personal view , experience etc. I at least try to post objective information. If it is glorious for you..well.

  36. D February 26, 2013 5:17 pm

    Ronald writes: “The country is no longer interested in their agenda, in their candidates, in their goals, and in their promotion of fear and hate!”

    The country has changed. And we are likely in a realigning period which has the Republican Party, the beneficiary of the previous realigning presidential election (1968) fallen out of the advantage. The party had won seven of ten presidential elections from 1968 to 2004. They had a really good run.

    What happens with the party now out of favor—that 2008 was a realigning presidential election for the Democrats—is that the one now at a disadvantage goes scrambling, desperately trying to figure out some way to get back in power. That’s why the decision on “Citizens United.” That’s why the Koch brothers and their “Tea Party.” That’s why the 2012 Republican primaries were so hilarious with how Mitt Romney could financially smoke out his competition in the primaries and caucuses states. (And still struggle to carry key states.) That’s why the Republican governors of Indiana (then Mitch Daniels) and Michigan (Rick Snyder) got their state “Right to Work.” And that’s why anyone with a brain knows the party has totally whored itself to their wealthy supporters. It’s the way they figure they will win elections. And especially with winning back the presidency.

    What the Republican Party cannot change is the demographics. That is the force that works against them. Attempts to enact voter suppression didn’t work in 2012. And embracing some of that changing demographic through top-office nominees will not nationally make the difference. (I’m referring to the speculation of nominating for the presidency or vice presidency an official like Florida U.S. Sen. Marco Rubio.)

    The problem is the party.

    When happens with the party out favor, due to realignment, is that they do not react with a willingess to adapt to a changing citizenry. An example is marriage equality. In April 2009, both John McCain’s daughter Meaghan and his 2008 campaign strategist Steve Schmidt went on record to urge the Republican Party to wake up. Meaghan wrote about it at, April 13, 2009, with “Memo to the GOP: Go Gay.” Schmidt followed, as reported by, April 26, 2009, with “McCain’s Chief Strategist Comes Out In Support Of Gay Marriage.” They were attempting to put their party on alert that, hey, if you wanna get back in touch with the American citizenry, you need to be aware of this huge change.

    That is just one issue.

    Another issue is with economic policy being a failure of the Republican Party’s. Part of the 2012 campaign of Mitt Romney was hilarious, what with his (and the party’s) living off the memory of Ronald Reagan. (Just count on the wealthy to give the “47 percent” some of their crumbs.) And Paul Ryan’s embrace of Ayn Rand who, at the end of her life, took Medicare and Social Security (the latter also taken earlier in life by Ryan) which further exposed hypocrisy. (How interesting that Ryan became absent for much of the final stretch of that campaign.)

    A laughable talking point of the Republican Party is with Reagan’s “government being the problem” speak when this country is wanting more government. That they count on government to deliver on, say, unemployment and on health care and on economics. (That was a funny moment from Marco Rubio’s Republican Response: More on how government isn’t the solution, yet his tuition for college was through Federal Aid.)

    What happens to a political party, during a realigning presidential period that goes against their party, is that they fall out of touch. They fritter around, piss in the wind, and manage to win power not at the presidential but at congressional and/or state levels. And they end up spending considerable time continuing to fight the inevitable before finally figuring out, “If you can’t beat them…join them.” It’s just a matter of…when?

  37. Ronald February 26, 2013 5:22 pm

    Again, a great analysis, D, and I thank you again! 🙂

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <s> <strike> <strong>

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.