Bob Dole Indicts 2013 Republican Party As Not A Party For Himself, Richard Nixon, Or Ronald Reagan!

Former Senator Bob Dole of Kansas, former Vice Presidential running mate of Gerald Ford in 1976; former Presidential nominee of the Republican Party in 1996; Senate Majority Leader and five term member of the Senate overall; and a total of 36 years in both houses of Congress, was on Fox News Sunday today, and he indicted the present day GOP as a party which would not welcome such venerable political figures as himself, Richard Nixon, and even Ronald Reagan in the 2013 political climate that has been established by a party he does not recognize!

Dole condemned the overuse of the filibuster, making it nearly impossible for any progress to be made on any significant legislation, or nominees for many government positions, including to regulatory commissions and to the judiciary.

Dole suggested a sign “closed for repairs” on the door of the Republican National Committee, as the party tries to come up with positive ideas, and returns to the conservative mainstream, which it has left, with its extremist agenda, with 115 cloture motions in past two years as compared to seven in the first two years that Dole was a Senator during the Nixon Administration!

As long as the Republican Party continues on its present course, it will NEVER win the White House again, and will continue to promote the image that it is only a party that is out to obstruct and block, rather than come up with real solutions to America’s domestic and foreign policy agenda!

31 comments on “Bob Dole Indicts 2013 Republican Party As Not A Party For Himself, Richard Nixon, Or Ronald Reagan!

  1. Engineer Of Knowledge May 26, 2013 6:02 pm

    Yes Professor, Bob Dole and I are of the same mind. I am working hard to purge the reactionary extreme & Tea Party from my family legacy Republican Party.

  2. Engineer Of Knowledge May 27, 2013 8:55 am

    Hello Professor,
    I thought on this Memorial Day I would pay tribute to those who need to be EXPOSED instead of honored.

    Just a few of the Ultra-Conservative, Outspoken, Right Wing Members of my Republican Party who dodged their responsibility when their country called them to serve:
    Mitt Romney
    Donald Trump
    Dick Cheney
    Ted Nugent
    Rush Limbaugh
    Bill O’Reilly

    Oh they talk big today but ran off screaming like little girls when they received their draft notice during Viet Nam. When I was with MIUW we had name for people who talked tough and hawkish, but wet their pants when called to serve their country……it rhymed with woosie.

    Bob Dole is a man I would honor for serving his country with honor.

  3. Juan Domingo Peron May 27, 2013 4:29 pm

    McCain and Dole deserve to be honored as respected for their service, there is no doubt about that. But that said, just because they served, and well, does not mean that they cannot be criticized for their political activities and policies. Both men, have lost and are losers of general elections. Both men are moderates establishment Republicans and were imposed by the always losing Republican establishment. Dole was a loser who opposed Reagan, a winner and supported another loser Gerald Ford in 76. Dole then again in 1980,together with the Republican establishment,supported the Bush clan against Reagan. And we know how the Bush clan left the Party, in shreds, after 92 and 08. McCain today is also in the same position. He lost in 08 and supported another political loser Romney in 2012. All establishment “moderate” ” me too” big government Republicans. All losers. All favorites of the Democrats, because they lose to them and reject conservatism. Conservatism with Reagan, gave the Republicans 2 landslide victories. Neither Dole nor McCain accomplished that but quite the contrary. As we say in Spanish “Silencio es salud” – Silence is healthy.

  4. Juan Domingo Peron May 27, 2013 4:42 pm

    So now if received a legitimate and legal deferment from military service you are a draft dodger? I thought draft dodgers were those who got drafted and has then fled, or those who made a statement by not registering. I don’t believe none of the people you mentioned did that. As a matter of fact during the Vietnam era there were 26,800,000 men in the United States. Of those, 2,215,000 were drafted. The number of deferments during that time was 1,541,000 – more than 50 percent of the population eligible for military service (read online )

  5. Juan Domingo Peron May 28, 2013 9:39 am

    According to Salon: “Take our country back” is among the Tea Party’s more familiar anthems. And among skeptics it is often asked, “Back to what?” – When conservatives use the phrase “Take back our country” it is racist and backward. Of course the left never ever used that phrase..Oh wait a minute…
    – Howard Dean told a crowd in Burlington, Vermont, “You have the power to take our county back!”, when he declared he was running for President 10yrs ago
    (,3070253 ) And repeated it half a year later, when Dean was ousted from the Democratic primary, he said the same thing once again. Nine days later, he again said “I’ll be doing everything that I can to make sure that John Kerry and John Edwards take this country back.” ( )
    – In fact, Howard Dean was such a fan of the phrase, he even wrote two books incorporating it into their titles: “You Have the Power: How to Take Back Our Country and Restore Democracy in America” and “Winning Back America”. From whom? He doesn’t say. But clearly he’s a racist and wants to take back America to the dark ages.
    – In a stunning show of racial bigotry, Clinton opened her 2008 run for president by declaring the she would “take our country back.” ( )& (
    -Hillary even spoke at the “racist” Take Back America conference on June 13, 2006 in Washington, DC. ( )
    -Chuck Schumer: also a racist. After the 2006 midterms, he stated: “We really care about taking our country back… So far, sooo good.”
    – Prominent Democratic strategists James Carville and Paul Begala are also racists. They coauthored a book in the run-up to the last presidential election titled “Take It Back: A Battle Plan for Democratic Victory.”
    -And how about the racist Katrina vanden Hevuel, editor of the far-left, near-bankrupt magazine The Nation. She’s also a racist for penning a book titled “Taking Back America”.
    -Liberal talk show host Thom Hartmann also cannot restrain his racist views. The title of his book, “We the People: A Call to Take Back America” is clearly rooted in bigotry.
    And the list goes on and on. All have used the phrase “take our country back” or some form of it in electoral rallying cries and this is always the context in which the “take our country back” line is used: as an attempt to rally political supporters in the run-up to an election.
    But for liberals, when the Tea Party uses it, it underlines racism and bigotry.
    Newsweek approvingly parroted the claim in an April screed headlined “Are Tea Partiers Racist?” ( )
    Another WaPo columnist, Richard Cohen, recently decried “all this talk about ‘taking back America’ (from whom?).” (
    A Huffington Post columnist claimed that “The idea perpetuated by the Tea Party movement to ‘Take back our country!’ from [insert non-white male here] is no more than racism in drag.” ( )
    And again this line of crap is repeated indefinitely and young minds full of mush read this or hear their college professors repeat it and off they go like drones with tourettes repeating the mantra “The Tea Party are racists” “The Tea Party are racist” “Conservatives are racist” ‘Conservatives are racist” ” They only oppose Obama because he is black” “They only oppose Obama because he is black” and so on and so on.
    So saying you want to take the country back is racist, because…well…I’m not really sure why.
    Well liberals have already been conditioned to believe that the Tea Party is a racist movement – or at least that contains prominent racist elements. So the phrase “take our country back” fits perfect with a view of the movement that already suspects it is a fan of racial discrimination. Liberals, on the other hand, are not racists, the argument goes, so their use of the term doesn’t demonstrate racism.
    And so we arrive at the circular, nonsensical nature of the argument: since the Tea Party is racist, their insistence that they “take the country back” is really a call for a return to institutionalized racism. But how do you know they are racist? Because they want to “take the country back.”But liberals have said they want to take the country back, why isn’t that also indicative of racism? Because liberals aren’t racists.
    It makes no sense, as well as many thoughts within the conditioned liberal mind.

  6. Juan Domingo Peron May 28, 2013 9:41 am

    The author of your link truly has no idea of what is meant by American exceptionalism. Not surprisingly.

  7. Ronald May 28, 2013 9:51 am

    Juan, you are really testing my patience to allow you to have your drivel on this website, with your constant attacks on Democrats as racists, when that is ancient history, and no longer the case for the past 50 years since Southern Democrats moved to the GOP, while the Republican Party and the Tea Party Movement ARE racist to the core, and have alienated African Americans, Hispanics and Latinos, and even Asian Americans.

    You are using the usual right wing code language in a despicable way, and if you continue on this vein, then I will remove all future posts. You sound to me like a maniacal person today, so you need to take your medication, so you can act civil and sane, which you are not displaying today. And your right wing mind is conditioned to promote hate and division, and it is becoming wearing on me and my other readers, so cease and desist NOW! 🙁

  8. Princess Leia May 28, 2013 11:15 am

    Professor –

    Guano has been maniacal all weekend.

  9. Juan Domingo Peron May 28, 2013 1:18 pm

    Ron: Are you totally incapable of discerning when I using irony and when I am not? My post today was 100% ironic. I was just using the same standards Democrats use to label those who today say ” we need to take our country” and “used” it on them. You say I use “code language” , well it must be very well codified because I have not a clue what you are talking about. Again, as I have said before, I don’t speak liberal. Sorry. Finally I am not promoting any hate or division, unless dissenting from the progressive mindset invariably leads to that. But quite the contrary, it is my government that is attacking all us who dissent and it is my government that is promoting hate and division by targeting those of us who dissent. I remember when a few years ago to “dissent” used to be patriotic.
    Why I even have friends, many I may say, who are shutting down their Facebook page in fear of being harassed in the future by the IRS and I can’t convince them not to, that they should fight for their ideals and freedom. But it’s hard to do when you have a family and the threat of the weight of the Federal government is too great. Remember 16,000 new IRS agents will be used to control the application of Obamacare. I wonder who they will target? Of course for all of this is nonsense and conspiratorial. In any event, as Leia says and believes, they deserved it. Right Ron?
    Therefore, my friends would rather “cease and desist” voluntarily from expressing their ideas about the Constitution, limited government, and individual freedom, before the government tells them to “cease and desist now”. Who would have imagined that in America?

  10. Ronald May 28, 2013 4:23 pm

    Juan, you and your “friends” are paranoid, and need mental examinations, if they believe they are in danger from our government. This is what provokes violence and assassinations, this mindset that the “black man” in the White House is a threat to them, when he is no threat to ANYONE!

    Your friends’ idea of freedom and ideals is to exploit others in the name of their wealth and property, rather than realize there has been a tremendous miscarriage of justice since Reagan, added onto by Bush II, and that it is time for rectifying the matter in an equitable way!

    Limited government is a catch word for continued exploitation of the middle class and the poor. It is the reality that if the Tea Party Movement was to succeed, then we would REALLY have a threat to individual freedom, as we would have a Fascist government, ready to victimize “undesired” groups, just as in Fascist Italy, Nazi Germany, and Franco’s Spain, and promoted by McCarthyism, and the John Birch Society in the past, and now the Tea Party Movement, the work of such “limited government” gurus as the Koch Brothers, who are the greatest menace to America’s future!

  11. Princess Leia May 28, 2013 7:19 pm

    New York Times story on how the IRS was right to flag Tea Party groups for closer inspection. These Tea Party groups were participating in election activities despite claiming 501(c)(4) status as social welfare organizations. Interestingly, the Times story doesn’t mention the original IRS language was “exclusively” for social welfare, but was changed to “primarily” without congressional approval in 1959.

  12. Juan Domingo Peron May 28, 2013 7:23 pm

    Ron: What’s the matter with you, calm down. My friends just do not want to be audited and targeted by the IRS, I even have a few who now feel that they have been targeted last year. They just don’t want to spend thousands of dollars if not more defending themselves for a crime they didn’t commit. Can you seriously blame them after what we are finding out about the IRS? Who’s talking about Obama? We’re talking about overzealous fanatics of the modern egalitarian liberal cause over there at the IRS and other government agencies. Do you actually think we believe Obama gave orders to target us? Not at all he doesn’t need to, like I have said. There is no “Black man” in the White House mindset, there is “modern egalitarian liberals” in power mindset! That is the problem, not the color of Obama’s skin, it the whole structure of the progressive egalitarian liberal left in power, whether it be Obama, Clinton, Kerry, Biden, Pelosi, Reid or any other leftist. The problem is modern egalitarian liberalism in power not Obama or his skin color. Ron millions of us actually are not progressives, believe it or not. As a matter of fact the majority still identifies themselves as conservative in any poll. .(
    Now you, on the other hand, do seem to be the real paranoid. To think that if conservatives win the Presidency “we would REALLY have a threat to individual freedom, as we would have a Fascist government, ready to victimize “undesired” groups, just as in Fascist Italy, Nazi Germany, and Franco’s Spain,….” is really paranoid and baseless.
    You just cannot come to terms that there are millions of Americans who are conservatives and really believe that government power should be limited, and that bureaucracies should be curbed. You cannot comprehend it, so they must be the exact opposite, in other words big government of the right or Fascist/Nazis. Because only big government is what people want, so if they aren’t big government leftist they must be big government of the right, that is fascist. For you, people who actually are against big government don’t exist, they are lying , it’s code, it’s false, they really want big government to put minorities in chains and open up internment camps for them. The funny thing is that the only guy who opened up internment camps within the US was FDR, a big government modern egalitarian liberal hero! Yet you imagine that we conservatives are going to do what you liberals have done in the past! Even today modern egalitarian liberals are using the power of government in an abusive manner! How many Americans were killed on foreign soil by drones under this administration? The same man who complained about Gitmo and called weatherboarding of FOREIGNERS “torture” has no problem in vaporizing AMERICANS, yet you have the arrogance to accuse us of fascists/Nazi? You realize the patience we conservative/classic liberals must have with you modern Soros funded egalitarian liberals? See there you have Leia convinced and mindlessly regurgitating the narrative that what the IRS did was correct. Totally oblivious to the First Amendment and our rights. And you insist my friends are the paranoid?

  13. Ronald May 28, 2013 7:35 pm

    To want small government in a nation of 315 million people is living in another century, as we can see how state and local governments have failed to deal with the problems of their citizens, as for instance, the lack of concern about health care being provided through Medicaid in Florida, Texas and over 20 other states. At least, finally, Arizona Governor Jan Brewer has seen the light, and demanded coverage, or she would veto any action of the state legislature on anything, something Rick Scott should have done in Florida, a disgrace in its treatment of the poor, the elderly, and the sick! Shame on the right wing and the libertarians for not caring about life once it is born!

  14. Juan Domingo Peron May 28, 2013 8:20 pm

    But Ron, aren’t you in favor of Democracy? What if the citizens of this country desire a government with limited powers and vote as such and win an election?What if the people want more local government and less federal government? As a matter of fact we do still have the 10th amendment, why don’t you and your modern egalitarian liberals propose abolishing it in favor of a big centralized national government and let the people decide? After all the Constitution doesn’t mandate big centralized government, I would say it mandates the contrary.
    But, In any event, you and I live in Florida, so what is it to you what people in other states decide about anything, such as Medicaid or taxes, as long as they don’t violate the Constitution. It’s their government, not yours or mine. What do you know what is best for them? You don’t live there. I was born on California, and liberals have effectively destroyed my home state, in my opinion they are nuts over there. So? I don’t live there anymore, if they decide to go full throttle to the statist left, well it’s their problem, just don’t count on me to live there. Thank you Founding Fathers for federalism. But if you think a centralized unitarian (as opposed to federalism) government , like the one they have in France, is better for dictating and micromanaging the lives of 300 million people, well then propose it. I on the other hand believe that such a scheme in the end destroys freedom. The bigger more centralized the government the smaller the individual.

  15. Princess Leia May 28, 2013 8:31 pm

    Great article about empathy and progressivism:

    Like that article, empathy also serves as a key basis for a wide array of policies that I strongly support even though I do not directly benefit from them.

  16. Ronald May 28, 2013 9:07 pm

    All citizens should be entitled to the same rights and privileges, not just those in blue states. It is a denial of equal protection and due process, under the 14th Amendment, to have anything else. Why should anyone living in Texas or Florida not have medical care, while in New York or California, they do have it?

  17. Juan Domingo Peron May 28, 2013 9:24 pm

    Just tell me where the right to healthcare exist in the US Constitution. If a blue state, like New York has in its state constitution the right to healthcare or whatever for example , well good for them, but they cannot impose it on Texas. And who says people in blue states have more rights and privileges? I could say in red states they have more freedom. This is nonsense Ron. You can’t establish that for every need their is a right. Well you could, but it doesn’t work very well. If policies were to be judged by good intentions they would all be successful. That’s why modern egalitarian liberals never want policies to be judged by their outcome. And if it ever happens that the outcomes of their interventionist policies are disastrously evident, well they just ask for more power so they can do it right this time around. And so on and so on. Remember in the Clinton years, man libs complained that things were awful, that they needed more government and power to fix this and that, so here we are , living the equivalent of the 90’s Nirvana, and the 60’s wet dream when it comes to government expansion, and what are you libs telling us today? That it isn’t enough that you need more government to fix things that big government still hasn’t fixed. In the meantime, trillions and trillions of debt are added to the backs of our children and grandchildren. Well good luck to them, all I am going to tell them is that I never voted for this insanity and if this blog is still up, I will direct them to you.

  18. Ronald May 28, 2013 9:43 pm

    Juan, a large portion of our national debt is due to overseas military interventions, which were a mistake, and also on massive tax cuts to those who did not need them, both in the 1980s and the 2000s, making for the greatest maldistribution of wealth in the world’s democracies, surpassing Great Britain! It is NOT due to health care, education, and other basic needs of people, which many have not had a fair opportunity to enjoy as part of human rights, particularly in a democracy!

  19. Juan Domingo Peron May 28, 2013 9:46 pm

    I just remembered that Reagan had actually replied to what Bob Dole said this week, he replied back in 1975. Bold Colors – No Pale Pastels.

  20. Juan Domingo Peron May 28, 2013 10:02 pm

    Congress’ official scorekeeper, the Congressional Budget Office, recently released a review [here] of the budget estimate they issued in January 2001 and the factors that turned their $5.6 trillion surplus projection into $6.2 trillion in cummulative deficits by 2011.
    But that $5.6 trillion surplus never existed. It was a projection by the Congressional Budget Office (CBO) in January 2001 to cover the next decade. It assumed that late-1990s economic growth and the stock-market bubble (which had already peaked) would continue forever and generate record-high tax revenues. It assumed no recessions, no terrorist attacks, no wars, no natural disasters, and that all discretionary spending would fall to 1930s levels.
    The much-maligned Bush tax cuts, at $1.7 trillion, caused just 14% of the swing from projected surpluses to actual deficits (and that is according to a “static” analysis, excluding any revenues recovered from faster economic growth induced by the cuts).
    The bulk of the swing resulted from economic and technical revisions (33%), other new spending (32%), net interest on the debt (12%), the 2009 stimulus (6%) and other tax cuts (3%). Specifically, the tax cuts for those earning more than $250,000 are responsible for just 4% of the swing. If there were no Bush tax cuts, runaway spending and economic factors would have guaranteed more than $4 trillion in deficits over the decade and kept the budget in deficit every year except 2007. The wars, tax cuts and the prescription drug program were implemented in the early 2000s, yet by 2007 the deficit stood at only $161 billion. How could these stable policies have suddenly caused trillion-dollar deficits beginning in 2009? Obviously what happened was collapsing revenues from the recession along with stimulus spending.

  21. Ronald May 28, 2013 11:23 pm

    Juan, there is only one Ronald Reagan, as there is NO ONE on the horizon today that can match his ability to communicate the conservative message, just as Barry Goldwater was unable to do so in 1964. When you look at Rand Paul, Paul Ryan, Marco Rubio, Ted Cruz, and the other “young blood”, none of them are Ronald Reagan, and cannot even stand in his shadow!

  22. Juan Domingo Peron May 29, 2013 12:30 am

    Ron: We actually agree that there is only one Ronald Reagan, and I don’t think we as conservatives should expect or even compare anyone to him. We just need to have our principles clear and apply them to today’s issues. The message of individual freedom, equality before the law, strong limited constitutional government, self reliance, solidarity and civil society is a very powerful one. It means believing ,trusting and putting faith on us, the people, instead of the government. The government is their to serve us, not us the government, much less a bureaucracy. In the end, its about you being the sovereign of your destiny, your life.

  23. D May 30, 2013 11:42 am

    When Bob Dole ran as then-incumbent Gerald Ford’s 1976 vice-presidential running mate, base states for the Republicans were not yet in the south. Ronald Reagan, with re-election in 1984, carried all the south (which backs prevailing Republicans) by margins exceeding his then-national margin R+18.22. That was the starting point with the Old Confederacy reliably becoming the base of Team Red with presidential elections they win.

    Gerald Ford carried his home state, Michigan, along with Maine, Connecticut, New Hampshire, and Vermont (which backed Republicans in all elections from their first in 1856 to 1988 except for Barry Goldwater in 1964). Vt. was Barack Obama’s second best performing state in both 2008 and 2012. That’s part of the night-and-day difference between back then and nowadays.

    Along with this, Ford also carried the pacific states of California, Washington, and Oregon, which haven’t carried for a Republican since the 1980s. True of all states in the above paragraph (except N.H., which did carry in 2000 for George W. Bush but tilts blue and backs Democrats in presidential elections won.) Ford also carried Obama’s home state Illinois and New Jersey. (Not that this is a complete listing. Ford was the last losing presidential candidate to carry more than 50 percent of available states. Prior to that, it was Richard Nixon in 1960. They’re the only two with that experience.)

    These are states Republicans and electoral geeks fantasize the GOP can win again. But not with the state of the party as it is today will this happen. Bob Dole, the 1996 Republican presidential nominee who carried none of these states but did hold his native Kansas (which also voted for the Ford/Dole ticket in 1976), knows this. And he knows it’s his Republican party that is at fault and out of touch.

  24. Ronald May 30, 2013 2:38 pm

    D, I want to thank you for your perceptive analysis of the changes in the electoral college from the time of Gerald Ford to now. It demonstrates just how disastrous the GOP has become, with the takeover of the Tea Party radicals and their backward agenda!

  25. Juan Domingo Peron May 30, 2013 6:06 pm

    It is really curious to read all this about the election and the Ford/Dole performance, but not a word that the LOST!!!

  26. Ronald May 30, 2013 6:23 pm

    But, Juan, do you realize how close the 1976 Presidential Election was? If Ford had won Ohio and Hawaii, lost by close votes, he would have been President for a full term!

  27. Juan Domingo Peron May 31, 2013 8:47 pm

    Do you realize that he lost against Jimmy Carter??

  28. Ronald May 31, 2013 9:38 pm

    Of course, Juan, I know Ford lost, but he came VERY CLOSE, and if Hawaii and Ohio had voted differently by a small margin, Ford would have won, and he carried states that NO GOP nominee available today could carry. Note what D explained in detail just yesterday!

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.