Initiated by Rep. Eric Cantor, this group will focus on developing Republican ideas on energy, education, health care, national security and the economy.
Today, we are launching the National Council for a New America (NCNA), a caucus of Congressional leaders gathering the expertise of national leaders and doers. We hope that will form the foundation of a concerted, policy-based forum to listen to, partner with, and empower the American people with ideas and solutions that speak directly to the needs of our great nation. This forum will engage in a conversation with America that seeks to remove ideological filters, addresses the realities we are confronting, and speaks to the challenges our citizens are facing.
[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mGYR_ssmyOo&eurl=http%3A%2F%2Frepublicanwhip%2Ehouse%2Egov%2Fblog%2F&feature=player_embedded[/youtube]
I’ll spare the hyperbole on how this effort will renew the GOP and bring about a sequel to the Contract with America (although it may). This is Race42012, so let me focus on the sexy part of this story/initiative.
Five of the six confirmed ‘figureheads’ of this organization are potential 2012 candidates. Thank you Eric ‘Newt’ Cantor for providing our site with steady content over the next 2-3 years, although I do wonder if it is a coincidence that your national panel of experts include six of the most recognizable Republican faces in the nation, one or two of which may occupy the White House one day.
Over the next two or three years we are going to observe these individuals working together, hosting town hall events and speaking to the media. According to Senator McCain’s Twitter feed, he participated in a NCNA conference call at 11:00AM this morning, so this initiative has already begun. Early this afternoon, Senator McCain confirmed that Governor Palin has joined this team. Will others soon follow?
I appreciate and support Rep. Cantor’s initiative, but the prospect of these individuals working together is more exciting than the actual program itself. I will fly to Guam if it means I have the opportunity to watch Romney, Jindal and Palin conduct a joint town hall, even if it is focuses on fishing rights for the Chamorro people.
What are the thoughts of the R412 readers? Will this initiative benefit any of the potential 2012 candidates? Is this a positive step forward for the GOP? Will this relationship building between prospective candidates, impact the 2012 primary?
Kristofer Lorelli can be contacted at lorville@rogers.com, on Facebook and twitter/Kris_Lorelli.
April 30th, 2009 at 5:18 pm
If anything, it is telling the Republican leaders we are lost and need a new direction. Obviously if it doesn’t catch on, those in the future can look back and say “this candidate tried to buck the system, do we want their flawed views in the white house”? On the other hand, if it breathes life back into a fractured party, then it can be looked upon as part of the improvement of the Republican brand and cement their focus. Risky but necessary way in my opinion.
You’re right, it will be interesting to see these individuals work together and see if they can pull off a unified message.
April 30th, 2009 at 5:20 pm
Which one of them will tackle this “bomb,” pardon the pun?
Gates: Military strike on Iran’s nuclear program won’t work
http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2009/04/30/gates-military-strike-on-irans-nuclear-program-wont-work/
April 30th, 2009 at 5:23 pm
It is a terrific idea to help the party focus on what we have to offer the country. We can not simply oppose Obama! We need to offer solutions to the problems and concerns of the country. Bringing many of the “Best and Brightest” together who have varying levels of expertise and experience dealing with the issues and politics invlvoved is a great idea.
Note: this is not simply a list of everyone who may be interested in running in 2012! While it may offer some collateral benefit to possible candidates this is not going to be a soap box for 2012 for individuals.
As for some of the 2012 candidates, Palin, Romney, Jindal and others will work very well together and have a lot of mutual respect. McCain too. While the McCain camp believed Romney was their chief competition and Romney and McCain battled against each other in last year’s primary, they have gotten along surprisingly well afterwards (in part based upon how well Romney worked for McCain after bowing out). Most of the candidates (even more so than their supporters) understand that once the election or primary is over we are on the same team! Something their supporters really struggle with (very similar to many sports rivalries where the players can keep it on the field but the fans have eternal hatred for each other!).
April 30th, 2009 at 5:31 pm
Excellent comment Brian.
You said:
The reason why Huckabee is off the list, not even mentioned?
April 30th, 2009 at 5:32 pm
It will help the GOP at least get some focus. I don’t know that it will directly translate into a wave of votes for anyone, but hopefully it will give Congressional Pubs some direction, and give the ’12 contenders some more experience (Palin).
April 30th, 2009 at 5:32 pm
Is Paul Ryan on this team? If not, he needs to be.
April 30th, 2009 at 5:33 pm
This is a very, very good idea. We have to work together for us to win.
I am very excited about watching Sarah Palin in this sort of format. I want to see how she performs. That will make a big difference on whether I support her or not. The same goes for Jindal.
I do have one quick question, though…Where’s Mike Huckabee?
April 30th, 2009 at 5:36 pm
Do Cantor and Ryan get along?
I am getting the feeling that maybe Huck is getting the ‘not welcome’ treatment by the establishment?
April 30th, 2009 at 5:38 pm
I don’t know why Huckabee was left off but obviously not every current or former Governor is or can be invited. Obviously many of the ivited particpants do have certain levels of expertise or experience in these issues that they bring to the table. Wouldn’t be surprised to see Huckabee a participant in one of these events in the future.
Other than that I am not going to take the bait and discuss a couple of reasons why Huckabee may not have been on the initial invite list as I don’t want to start a fued with the hucknuts (some of whom will no doubt feel slighted and insulted).
April 30th, 2009 at 5:43 pm
It should be noted that we don’t know whether Sanford or Pawlenty were invited…
April 30th, 2009 at 5:45 pm
This is a GREEEAAAT idea. More ideas in the public arenas. And I consider some of the fab five (or six) the best out there. I’m looking forward to getting this going.
April 30th, 2009 at 5:48 pm
This is just rolling out. I am sure it will ebb and flow bringing in many others, while others will drop out as it doesn’t stick to their views.
April 30th, 2009 at 5:48 pm
“Slighted and insulted” Yeah, that about sums it up.
April 30th, 2009 at 5:48 pm
Look, it seems like everyone is invited but a few power-hitters had to be put on the roster first thing to get attention. Congressman Billy Bob Oklahoma (OK is great don’t get me wrong) wouldn’t be a real draw for people. But don’t kid yourselves, this is another early Tea Party victory and I intend to get my ideas out there and pick up some other winning concepts. We need this.
April 30th, 2009 at 5:49 pm
My advice to the NCNA is invite Sanford and Gregg into your group. They have tons to offer.
April 30th, 2009 at 5:52 pm
#15, it appears as if this groups has decided to form a core (some Senators and Congressmen), but looked for high profile leadership to travel the country and draw attention to the movement and party.
April 30th, 2009 at 5:52 pm
I agree with Brian, we need to be a party of ideas. I think that this could work out to be a really good thing. And I really like that Jindal and Palin are in there with some older, more seasoned folks. It makes me more excited for our and their futures that they can learn from guys like Newt and Mitt.
April 30th, 2009 at 5:53 pm
Well, I see this working in favor of the presidential ambitions of anyone who is a member. That said, I think the top beneficiary at this point would be Palin, because this puts he in a serious leadership/policy position. If she plays her cards right and gets a lot of exposure here – this could be her most powerful weapon in dismantling the “Palin is an airhead” meme (her simple inclusion dismantles the “insiders THINK Palin is and airhead” meme).
Barbour is definitely a beneficiary if he wants to run – this raises his profile big-time.
Romney benefits as well – as this keeps him involved despite his lack of current elective office. Same goes for Jeb Bush, who gets a very small shot of establishing himself as an independent personality if they let him talk for the group a lot.
Jindal get the satisfaction of being the top “fresh face” – a victory over people like T-Paw, Hunstman, crist, etc.
Big losers are definitely T-Paw and Huckabee.
April 30th, 2009 at 5:53 pm
…and Sanford
April 30th, 2009 at 5:53 pm
In all of the information i have read, Palin was not part of this group as of yet. When did that change? Perhaps you could provide sources for that supposed development. I mean I know both you and I like this idea but I don’t see Palin anywhere near it yet.
April 30th, 2009 at 5:54 pm
Oh, Palin is awesome. I bet Romney, Palin, and Jindal dominate the scene because they are thinkers AND doers. I’m glad Newt isn’t in there, he goes blah blah blah on and on and has been in D.C. WAY to long to get anyone’s attention. I think he’s smart and all, but definitely yesterday’s meatloaf. Who knows, some new start might come outta this too. Maybe that Jason Chaffetz upstart. I met him when he was a college kid, he seemed kinda slick. But he sure looks like his head is screwed on right, now.
First thing on the agenda? Let’s get some legislation out there prohibiting the expenditure of even one more taxpayer dollar on Obama’s new, failing car company. That thing is a money pit now if I ever saw one. Then let’s get a ruling that this kind of power grab of private industry is unconstitutional. Then we’ll get onto the nuts and bolts of survival, like how to defend ourselves while Obama is trying to serve us up on a silver platter…..
April 30th, 2009 at 5:54 pm
You might be right, Kris. Also, the reason could be as simple as Huckabee’s TV show won’t allow the time for him to participate, or there could be legal/ethical complications revolving around his contract for the show.
For instance, I don’t see Sean Hannity, Glenn Beck, or Rush Limbaugh on this list, either. The argument could easily be made that these three are some of the most influential Republicans of them all. They certainly are full of ideas on where to take the party.
April 30th, 2009 at 5:57 pm
15: I believe Gregg will certainly be a participant due to his budget expertise. Frankly, don’t see what Sanford brings–keeping in mind this is not just a soap-box for every Governor or pol who may be interested in running in 2012 (and, of course, will have no impact on who runs). Honestly, no disrespect intended to Sanford supporters, but does he bring any degree of expertise or talent to the group beyong that of any current or former GOP governor?
Regardless, I believe that this will ultimately provide all of the current players (Huck, Sanford, etc.) an opportunity to participate and contribute–but you can hardly invite every member of the GOP at the start!
April 30th, 2009 at 5:58 pm
Yes, this is the most exciting development I’ve seen in the GOP since the Contract with America. It has great potential for turning around the party.
Go for it!
April 30th, 2009 at 5:59 pm
What I’ll be watching to see is WHO is responsive to the people? WHO understands the concept of being a public servant? Integrity, and the acceptance of being who you say you are is integral to the conservative party. Lots of us have had enough of Specter-types who think that just by insisting they are principle-based makes it so, in spite of their EVERY action to the contrary. I want to see morals and professional integrity talked up again. THEN we get into policy, with everyone being held to that professional standard, code of conduct. No more Larry Craigs, this kind of business. THe party has to waste TOO much time on clean-up after public embarrassments and scandals of that nature. We need leadership we can be proud of, that really represents the fiscally prudent, morally upright, decent folks of this country. (start balloon drop and band music)
April 30th, 2009 at 6:00 pm
#23
I think you are right. I suspect that this group will have a revolving door on it. Otherwise this nice fresh idea runs the risk of growing stale.
Let’s hope they run it right.
April 30th, 2009 at 6:02 pm
Also watch for spotlight hogs. They’ve gotta go, the ones that get dreamy eyed watching themselves on the little TV camera screen as they speak. I don’t want to bring up Huckabee, but he might fall into this category. Might, I say. Maybe not. Newt Gingrich loves to hear himself talk too. None of that, this is about the people you career politicians.
April 30th, 2009 at 6:03 pm
You know who else should be in this set-up? Normal Americans, like that Katrina Pierson. This should really be representative of people that get it.
April 30th, 2009 at 6:03 pm
‘The Fix’ says Palin is in.
I think Romney wins with this. It keeps him in the spotlight, because he is not an elected official at the moment.
Palin and Jindal benefit because it brings them closer to the DC leadership and exposes them to policy development on a national level.
I am interpreting this ‘front’ group as consisting of high profile Republicans, so i can understand Pawlenty and Sanford being off the list…but why no Huck? It could be the show…
April 30th, 2009 at 6:04 pm
Hmm, I would kinda like to see Ron Paul in there. He has some kooky ideas a lot of the time, but he might come up with some real gold that the others may never think of.
April 30th, 2009 at 6:04 pm
And maybe they could have that runner-up beauty queen bring out liquid refreshment to the panel just to keep viewer ratings up. (I’m so kidding)
April 30th, 2009 at 6:05 pm
btw, I have no doubt that Gingrich wrote the blueprint…some of the wording is copied from his speeches and his American Solutions web site.
April 30th, 2009 at 6:05 pm
Good point, Liz. I don’t know how you can avoid some of that, however. Most of these “front six” are people that are used to being top dog. Ego-clashes are inevitable. So rotating them through on a regular basis might be a good idea.
April 30th, 2009 at 6:06 pm
No, no Ron Paul. He is a real decent person but he is not in sync with most Americans and he would detract initially, we’re going for unity. Maybe later once the ground rules are laid out, he can represent the hard core libertarians, but he detracts at the get-go because of the quirk factor.
April 30th, 2009 at 6:07 pm
MarK, I don’t know that you will see ego clashes. I don’t think that will be the case. Palin, Romney, nor Jindal are the type. Honestly, Romney has a real humility about him. I did have the honor of meeting him. You won’t see arrogance.
April 30th, 2009 at 6:09 pm
National Council for a New America….love it, just love it! They have the right people for start-up too. Don’t let us down, now. This could take off. The climate is right.
April 30th, 2009 at 6:11 pm
Every current and former governor didn’t win several states in the last election. Against all odds Huck is the GOP’s most popular candidate and in their ‘wisdom’ the party gives him the cold shoulder. Amazing.
April 30th, 2009 at 6:12 pm
Liz, there are ego clashes, and there are ego clashes. I double-dog guarantee you that there will be ego-clashes. Whether or not they will be serious enough to impede the work of this council will remain to be seen.
Anyway, this council must bring forth real ideas and real alternatives to the Democrat’s agenda. Otherwise it is just going to be viewed as just being an excuse to shine the spotlight on potential 2012 Presidential candidates.
April 30th, 2009 at 6:13 pm
Oooo oooo oooo, where is Ross Perot?!
April 30th, 2009 at 6:14 pm
Actually, all 6 sort of know each other. Jeb and McCain are friends…Jindal and Romney stayed at the McCain home(s) in Sedona and spent time together and Romney is fundraising for him. Palin and Jindal work together on the RGA. Palin and Romney campaigned together during the election. Haley knows everyone.
April 30th, 2009 at 6:14 pm
mac.#37,
What makes you think it wasn’t the other way around? Or that it wasn’t legal and time conflicts with his TV show.
April 30th, 2009 at 6:15 pm
DanL.
I agree. If not a full time slot, Paul deserves some cameos. Although I don’t always agree with him, he is a thinking man of principle, and we can always use more of them.
BTW, I thought the treatment he got in the primaries was absolutely shameful. Didn’t vote for him, but he deserves respect.
April 30th, 2009 at 6:16 pm
Haley? I know nothing about that man, except Barbour sounds like Burbon. What gets him a spot on this council?
April 30th, 2009 at 6:16 pm
mac,
In fairness, we don’t really know why Huck isn’t there (or at least I don’t). Maybe it was a snub. If so, that’s wrong. Maybe it was Huck’s decision. I don’t know.
April 30th, 2009 at 6:17 pm
“Barbour sounds like Burbon. What gets him a spot on this council?”
He knows people.
April 30th, 2009 at 6:18 pm
Liz,
At one point he was one of the most powerful lobbyists in DC, former RNC chairman during GOP take-over of the House, close friend of the Bushies…etc…
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Haley_Barbour
April 30th, 2009 at 6:18 pm
marK,
“Anyway, this council must bring forth real ideas and real alternatives to the Democrat’s agenda. Otherwise it is just going to be viewed as just being an excuse to shine the spotlight on potential 2012 Presidential candidates.”
Agreed. If it fizzles or flops, then it will reflect poorly on the participants, especially if they (god forbid) turn into cat-fighting prima donnas.
April 30th, 2009 at 6:18 pm
Not to threadjack, but Sen. Jim Bunning is looking more and more like he is not running for another Senate term. Why else would you approve of someone exploring the primary race against you?
http://thehill.com/leading-the-news/sen.-bunning-approves-his-gop-rivals-bid-2009-04-30.html
April 30th, 2009 at 6:19 pm
and Liz, he has been given exceptionally high marks for his handling of Katrina…
April 30th, 2009 at 6:20 pm
Kris, your description in #46 doesn’t sound too encouraging. What’s the good part of his resume?
April 30th, 2009 at 6:21 pm
Liz,
What’s the good part of his resume?
He’s the current governor of MS.
And he talks like it too.
Reminds me of “Sheriff Stukey in Mississippi Burning.
April 30th, 2009 at 6:22 pm
Liz, some people give him credit for laying the groundwork of the Contract with America. He is an excellent Governor.
He actually has said he will never run for President because of his extensive lobbying past….
April 30th, 2009 at 6:22 pm
#50:
Barbour was head of the RNC in 1994, one of Reagan’s biggest supporters in the 76 race against Ford, and he was fantastic in dealing with Katrina. Gov. Barbour is a good public official and a good party insider.
April 30th, 2009 at 6:25 pm
51 well alrighty then, I like those guys with downhome accents. That works then.
April 30th, 2009 at 6:28 pm
It sounds like Barbour gets things done. He has a history of accomplishment. Which is perhaps a common characteristic of all the “front six”. Palin is, perhaps, a bit lacking compared to the other five, but no-one can argue against her pulling herself up by her bootstraps to become governor of her state AND her party’s 2008 VP nominee.
I think Palin runs the greatest risk in this group. If she proves she can hold her own with the best of the best, it will help her immensely. She will prove she deserves to be considered for the 2012 national ticket. If she fumbles this chance, it may take her years to recover.
You have to give her credit for trying.
April 30th, 2009 at 6:33 pm
Sounds like the fix is in.
Creating a Council where certain leaders are included, while others are not, is just the establishment picking favorites.
People like Pawlenty, Huntsman, Sanford, and Huckabee should be included. There is no logic to excluding these people.
April 30th, 2009 at 6:33 pm
marK,
If she fumbles this chance, then we know she wasn’t meant to be! But I think this is a great opportunity for her. This could be exactly what she needs for 2012. Really, she will probably get the bulk of the attention for precisely that reason. Romney’s hoping she trips on stage, of course, but we’ll see…..
April 30th, 2009 at 6:34 pm
Flip,
I agree, but we don’t know if they were excluded. Maybe they’re included but haven’t been highlighted yet. Maybe they turned it down.
April 30th, 2009 at 6:36 pm
Flip,
What makes you think that Pawlenty, Huntsman, Sanford, and Huckabee weren’t invited and they all turned it down — for whatever the reason?
April 30th, 2009 at 6:38 pm
Or, this set of six could be simply the first set of six. There will be others.
You wouldn’t want this council to become stale, would you?
April 30th, 2009 at 6:41 pm
Man we have a talented group of leaders. Anyone of them can easily win in 2012. Our bench is deep and the dems have nobody except for an unpopular messiah who will be a millstone by 2011.
April 30th, 2009 at 6:42 pm
Flip,
If they included every person who could conceivably have a reason to be on it, the council would be about as useful as those 12-people “debates” held all through 2007. You have to limit it somehow. You have to draw the line somewhere. Otherwise “it is a tale. Told by an idiot, full of sound and fury, Signifying nothing.”
Is that what you want?
April 30th, 2009 at 6:43 pm
#58 and #59, I hope you’re right.
But in the end, the GOP establishment can’t invite everybody to serve on this council, right? As a practical matter, some people are going to have to be left out. And who makes those decisions? It just strikes me as an elitist, top-down approach.
April 30th, 2009 at 6:45 pm
Pruce,
I love your enthusiasm.
April 30th, 2009 at 6:46 pm
#62, what I want is a more democratic system where everyone gets a seat at the table. I think this council will do very little good for the party and just end up ticking a lot of people off.
April 30th, 2009 at 6:47 pm
Flip,
I REALLY think that the council will be a dynamic thing with an active revolving door. If the same people were on it week after week, month after month, it would get stale in a real hurry.
So your Huckabees, Pawlentys, and so forth will get their chances. Just not at first. And your present members will have their moments in the sun, and then they will move on. Otherwise there really isn’t much point to it, is there?
April 30th, 2009 at 6:47 pm
ABC News publishes names and photos of the architects of our use of waterboarding:
http://abcnews.go.com/Blotter/story?id=7471217&page=1
Hope these guys get permanent security details.
April 30th, 2009 at 6:49 pm
Flip, #65,
Okay, how would you set it up so that it was more “democratic” yet still be effective? Details please. I would like to hear your proposals.
April 30th, 2009 at 6:57 pm
marK #68, I think a voting system of some kind has to be set up. That’s how the congressional leadership works, that’s how the National Republican Governor’s Assocation chooses its leaders.
These types of decisions shouldn’t be made behind closed doors.
April 30th, 2009 at 7:00 pm
I’ll skip the palin ones. Her ‘base’ is narrow and shallow. As is she. I don’t trust her on so many levels. She’s only out for herself, and can give only lip service to moral standards. The’s the ultimate ‘do as I say, not as I do’ type. Not trustworthy at all, and not leadership quality.
April 30th, 2009 at 7:05 pm
I see this as a Romney idea, with Cantor being allowed to have the credit for it. They worked together so much a few months ago, and Mitt has continually met with Congressional leaders on various issues involving the economy. Unless Palin is on the panel, I believe everyone else there will line up for Mitt and not run. Maybe Sarah will too if she comes on. I can see a lot of media reporting of eyes rolling whenever Sarah says something ‘not so bright’. This may not be good for her, but I could be wrong.
April 30th, 2009 at 7:06 pm
Flip, these think tanks were not elected, they aren’t part of any of the three branches of government. They are not a democracy. They can choose whoever they want.
April 30th, 2009 at 7:08 pm
Come on Illinois. I don’t think too highly of Palin’s intellect either, but this may be a great thing for her to receive tutelage from the heavyweights. This may also be great for the country because she and Jindal are young enough that they could be good candidates for a long time to come, if they don’t blow it in 2012.
April 30th, 2009 at 7:09 pm
Btw, where has Martha been lately?
April 30th, 2009 at 7:12 pm
DanL, I’m not disagreeing with you. I’m talking about that it may not be good for her in terms of running for President in 2012; not saying it wouldn’t be good learning experience. And I was mainly talking about how the media seems to love reporting how some of the other Republicans kinda roll there eyes when someone mentions her name, like they did at the last Governor’s conference.
April 30th, 2009 at 7:13 pm
Flip.#69
And who votes? The congressional members? Republicans in elected office? Party officials? Which ones? Would that be national, state, county, and/or city level? Every Republican in the country? Who pays for this massive vote?
How are the votes tallied? Do we take the top six? Do we take the top vote getter in six different regions? in six different demographic group? Do we choose one ex-governor, one present governor, one former senator, one current senator, one present congressman, one retired congressman? Who votes for each category and/or demographic representative?
It’s not so easy, is it?
April 30th, 2009 at 7:14 pm
Some of you are seriously wrong about Palin. She can easily hold her own. I’m not going to call your remarks what they are, but believe me, I got a lot of the same stuff throughout my early career. It makes her tough as nails. She can watch my back anytime. I can’t say the same about Huckabee. He’s soft.
April 30th, 2009 at 7:17 pm
For those of you that bought into the MSM slander that Palin was a mental lightweight, are you good with Obama’s intellect? How about Gibbsy? Look past the folksy accent and low maintenance appearance. Looking sophisticated and intelligent doesn’t make you so. Good grief. Back to the potential merits of this great panel. Jeb Bush. Discuss.
April 30th, 2009 at 7:17 pm
Flip,
If someone is feeling snubbed by the selection of this council, there is absolutely nothing keeping them from forming their own. In fact, I would welcome it. The more ideas the better, would you not agree?
April 30th, 2009 at 7:19 pm
You know, any successful endeavor I’ve been on begins with at least two to a handful of people that are either friends, or become friends based on mutual respect and similar values. I think this core group is entirely capable of that. Anyone who is already sniping or complaining that they didn’t include me WAAAAAHHH is already not worthy of melding into this exciting new project. Get ahold of yourselves. This is not about you.
April 30th, 2009 at 7:21 pm
Anyone know what involvement Steele has with this program?
April 30th, 2009 at 7:22 pm
Honestly, there has to be a certain degree of unity here. The more united the group, the more effective it’s message.
April 30th, 2009 at 7:22 pm
Palin is the future of the Party – she is Thatcher and Reagan rolled up into one. I’m beginning to believe that we cannot waste her talent by not nominating her in 2012. Besides the democrats are scared to death of her cause they know she can win.
April 30th, 2009 at 7:22 pm
Liz, I am so not a fan of Obama. I despise what he and Pelosi and Reid are doing to our country. But he is smart, brilliant. Look at what he is accomplishing. His accomplishments are all wrong for the country, but he is getting more of his agenda done in 100 days than Bush did in the last 4 years of his presidency. Obama is getting more of his agenda pushed through than any president that I can remember in my life, and that goes back to Carter.
April 30th, 2009 at 7:23 pm
I hope Steele stays out of it for now. This should be independent of the existing Republican establishment because of the existing distrust and disgust with it. I received three bold requests for money from the various arms of the Repubs and they all go in the trash without being opened. I can’t be the only one that feels this way.
April 30th, 2009 at 7:25 pm
85 Liz, I threw away an unopened letter yesterday from the RNC.
April 30th, 2009 at 7:25 pm
JA Pruce, now Palin ain’t no Thatcher yet, don’t overshoot here. But I wouldn’t say the potential isn’t there.
DanL Obama is brilliant at manipulation. He lacks in what I call common sense and understanding. I guess there are many kinds of intelligence.
April 30th, 2009 at 7:26 pm
JA Pruce, whenever I read comments like yours, I get goosebumps… because it scares the &*($ out of me! Palin had her chance, and failed. Let’s give her another 12 years or so to prove herself, not 4. The Democrats ARE NOT scared of her. The beat the crap out of her once, they can do it again.
April 30th, 2009 at 7:27 pm
87 AMEN brother Dan, any others out there finding religion and throwing RNC junkmail in the trash?
April 30th, 2009 at 7:27 pm
Liz,
I have not been that impressed with Sarah Palin’s leadership abilities. I speak as one who was extremely excited at the announcement of her selection, totally blown away by her acceptance speech, and then slowly but surely disillusioned as the campaign wore on. I simply did not like what I saw. That was apart from any spin or filter placed on her news. I have also developed serious doubts about her governing skills while watching her performance since January.
That is why I am looking forward to seeing her on this council. I want to see how she handles herself with the big boys, the best of the best. No spin. No filter. Just her and her abilities. All this and in an atmosphere of cooperation, too. What an opportunity for her to shine! It is a chance to address nearly every concern I have about her. But it is also an opportunity to fall flat on her face. With great risks come great rewards, and I highly admire her for being willing to take those risks.
April 30th, 2009 at 7:29 pm
OhioRepub, you can hardly say Palin failed. Unless you say Huckabee failed, McCain failed, Romney failed, etc. She succeeded wildly in many respects. But she ain’t no Thatcher, she hasn’t suffered enough. (Maybe after a few more frivolous lawsuits….yikes!)
April 30th, 2009 at 7:29 pm
Liz,
I see your point in #85 but Chairman Steele would bring a compelling vision and symbolism of diversity to this council as would Congressman J.C. Watts. Chairman Steele with his leadership and communication skills needs to be a part of this.
April 30th, 2009 at 7:30 pm
marK, your feelings echo mine and MANY other people’s. Some people just never took off the goggles. She won’t run in 2012 if she knows what’s best for her and the country. Sure, she’s an instant celebrity, and that’s great for our image of popular female party members, but if Scarlett Johansen were running for office, I wouldn’t support her either just because of her celebrity status.
April 30th, 2009 at 7:31 pm
Liz, Obama wants at the very least to remake the US into a socialist country. He has a vision of what he wants. He clearly has a plan of how to get there and goals to achieve. He is making progress towards his goals not in baby steps, but in nearly Leninist revolution speed. Dismiss his intelligence at your own jeopardy. He is cunning and brilliant and is getting what he wants.
April 30th, 2009 at 7:31 pm
90 I am good with that assessment. That’s not exactly my feeling, but it all seems very legit. I definitely woulda gambled on her over Bam Bam but there are at least two people on this council that outshine her in terms of competence and seasoning. Still, I think she adds substantially to this group in her own way.
April 30th, 2009 at 7:32 pm
marK in 90 said exactly what I think.
April 30th, 2009 at 7:34 pm
Bam bam has nothing on me in terms of intelligence. Remember the NY flyby? That was just dopey at best. At any rate:
92 Steele is a good communicator, and he is “diverse”. That is insufficient in my mind to put him on the panel. If he backs away from RNC leadership and he wins over the approval of the core 5, maybe then. Not now.
April 30th, 2009 at 7:36 pm
The road back to Republican resurgence and a GOP lock on the White House run through three (or four) paths:
1. Gender parity – winning the women vote (Sarah Palin 2012)
2. Hispanic vote + Florida (Jeb Bush 2016)
3. A Midwestern Catholic Governor (Paul Ryan (future Gov of WI) 2016)
4. A yet unknown Republican Hispanic Governor (George P. anyone? 2020 or 2024)
April 30th, 2009 at 7:37 pm
Jindal can be the token diversity, but he is diversity with the values and merit as far as I know. Let’s stay away from “symbolism”, I’m thinking Americans have had enough of that and are looking for indications that something is the real deal, rather than “symbolic”. You know what I’m saying?
April 30th, 2009 at 7:39 pm
#83: Oh Please. Palin may or may not be the future of the party but that is hardly a fact. Sure, republicans love her and independents and dems for the most part think she is an airhead with a family straight from the trailor park.
Now, that said, and before you get all upset, I, of course, like Palin. Is she the most qualified to be POTUS for the GOP? Of course not. Would I vote for her if she is the nominee? Of course.
Finally, I think Palin is unquestionably the “winner” here if you want to look at it for 2012. That is because she is seen by many as not being the most knowlegable of the candidates. For her to be involved in serious policy discussions is a huge plus.
And this way she gets to learn what all the the big words mean!
April 30th, 2009 at 7:39 pm
Liz, I do, in a way, think Sarah failed. I think she failed on many of her chances to shine when instead, she underwhelmed people. I don’t blame her for McCain losing, I never had much faith in McCain. However, IMO, Sarah failed in her realm of influence she had: several interviews where she came across as a less-than-desirable VP. People didn’t want her “one heart beat away from the Presidency.” I can’t blame them. I was as gung-ho as anyone, but lost faith. If she failed to keep my faith, a die-hard conservative, then how can I blame liberals and moderates for losing their faith in her, too.
April 30th, 2009 at 7:39 pm
*98 should read Paul Ryan in 2020 and George P. in 2024…
April 30th, 2009 at 7:39 pm
98 I reject that mechanical, potentially artificial formula to success way of thinking. I think that stems from Liberalism which insists the packaging is more important than the contents. I’m thinking genuine, hard-core conservative values regardless of their superficial packaging is the key. Anything else loses my trust and enthusiasm.
April 30th, 2009 at 7:41 pm
#98: Nationally, Palin does terrible with the important female vote (presently).
April 30th, 2009 at 7:42 pm
101, she shone alright. She drew crowds. Not because she was messianic Obama style, but because she was one of us. That is worth boatloads right now. Nuf said, we all agree sufficiently to keep her on.
April 30th, 2009 at 7:42 pm
Liz,
What I am proposing is packaging + substance (a formidable combo). Every person I named on that list is a “genuine, hard-core conservative” besides, perception is reality.
April 30th, 2009 at 7:43 pm
This is a great idea.
April 30th, 2009 at 7:46 pm
106 careful JA, so you have to be a “pretty person” to join this club? Use big words? Even the dems let that Florida Go Gator congresswoman on their team, and she can’t string a sentence together to save her life. I appreciate aesthetics like anyone, but sometimes a little ugly on the outside emphasizes the beauty of the message.
April 30th, 2009 at 7:49 pm
A little ugly on the outside, may I reference Thatcher and Churchill, and Abe Lincoln. I love that stuff. Burnished gold.
April 30th, 2009 at 7:52 pm
JA you lost me with the perception is reality. I missed that pop psych class I guess.
April 30th, 2009 at 7:57 pm
Must be dinnertime I gotta go too keep us informed on this one Lorelli. Ciao
April 30th, 2009 at 7:58 pm
Huck, Huntsman, Sanford, Rudy, TPaw and Fred should form their own group and paint these guys as the bunch who drove the GOP into the ground.
April 30th, 2009 at 8:16 pm
mac, please clarify who you want driven into the ground. Yes, arguably, the 6 men whom you have mentioned or at least some of them should have been invited. However, not everybody can be invited and thus who were also have a right to be there. The group may not be regionally diverse, but it is a start.
April 30th, 2009 at 8:16 pm
112: LOL. That’s right: Huck, Rudy and Huntsman–what a team! And Fred and Huck are so close! Stop whining–its unbecoming. My guess is everyone will be invited to offer their thoughts. But Huck was not part of the group that got together and came up with this idea to help the GOP. That means he needs to wait with others to be invited and I’m sure he will be invited.
Perhaps you should be asking yourself why Huck doesn’t have many friends. The truth is that has always been an issue with him from his days with the baptist convention to the governorship and on the campaign trail. The answer, of course, is that he doesn’t play well with others. Something most of us learned in kindergarten.
But again, if I understand this correctly, I’m sure most everyone will be able to participate. But hey, if you want to take your ball and go home be my guest.
April 30th, 2009 at 8:27 pm
I don’t get the sore-loser tone amongst some here. Everyone on that council brings benefits. Palin, for instance, brings flash-mob-like crowds and press attention throughout the region where an event is held.
I’m so far very interested in Sanford. And exclusion from this group is not really “exclusion.” As far as I can tell, there were no Stay Away! notices passed out to anyone.
It’s an excellent attempt, on the other hand, for the GOP congressional leadership to counter-act all the Obama/Dem proposals, since the minority is so weak as to have no effective voice on Capitol Hill.
Those who are not represented have other media. Huck has his TV show and his ABC radio bit (I like that one!). And Sanford, my guy so far, has the head-of-state office for SC, which amplifies messages he occasionally sends out, such as this essay in the recent Human Events:
Obama’s Path to a Lost Decade
http://www.humanevents.com/article.php?id=31646
April 30th, 2009 at 8:34 pm
Chris Cilizza’s “spin” is that the group “seemed” to leave out the “movement” conservatives….he focuses on Palin in this write-up but he also notes Hucakbee and Sanford.
Palin Likely to Be a Part of National Council
http://voices.washingtonpost.com/thefix/republican-party/palin-to-be-a-part-of-national.html#comments
“Absent from the initial release were the more prominent “movement” conservatives including Palin, Gov. Mark Sanford (S.C.) and former governor Mike Huckabee (Ark.) — all three of whom are considered potential 2012 candidates.”
April 30th, 2009 at 9:25 pm
I wonder who is/are the real power(s) behind this? More importantly, from where and whom are they going to get the “new, fresh ideas”? And who among this motley crew has the skill to appear competent and convincing to those who once were potential GOP voters but who have been turned off in recent years? I’ll bet that they are paying some PR consultant types big bucks to do this. Hell, I can tell them one very simple easy straightforward thing that the GOP could do that would accomplish more than all this—get out of the bedroom and back to the KITCHEN TABLE around which most normal people do their political thinking! And, I won’t even charge for the advice!
April 30th, 2009 at 9:27 pm
What does Cilizza mean by “movement” conservatives when describing Sanford and Huckabee? Anybody know?
April 30th, 2009 at 10:09 pm
ugh. mc cain is involved? i thought republicans wanted to win. how can we take this council seriously now?
April 30th, 2009 at 10:31 pm
119: I see a few hucknuts have arrived. Pretty pathetic that because Huck isn’t yet mentioned–but could be tomorrow–you try and discredit the cause. As if a few mindless words on a blog are going to do anything. LOL. Going to look pretty stupid if Huck contributes in the future. Grow up.
April 30th, 2009 at 10:40 pm
119:Yeah-Palin, Jindal, Romney, Cantor, Jeb, etc. and what is sure to be many, MANY others. All losers! Right. LOL. How does Huck manage to attract supporters who are are as petty and mean-spirited as he is. One of the great mysteries of life. Try not disrespecting all the other candidates and maybe you get invited.
April 30th, 2009 at 10:41 pm
If these are the faces of the group for speaking purposes, it will be interesting to see who shows as the (excuse me) Alpha Male.
I expect Barbour to be the wise counselor, and Jeb as a great fabulous guy (but he can’t run yet). Of Palin, Jindal and Romney, hard not to see Romney being the lead.
Don’t miss how deeply Romney is connecting to grass roots state organizations through F&SA. He will be the featured draw in 4 weeks in Richmond in the first real convention of the new era.
April 30th, 2009 at 10:52 pm
Whoa, whoa there everyone ~
Unless I read the official intro letter wrong, Palin is NOT listed as one of the 6 experts. The list is Romney, Barbour, Jindal, Bush and McCain.
In repsonse to the Palin question, Cantor said no one is exlcuded.
Kris, this is a little off the mark as far as Palin is concerned.
Illinois – I’m out of town visiting my mother. Thanks for wondering!
April 30th, 2009 at 10:55 pm
Prediction: Adam Graham is going to write a post about how “good old boy” this group is and what a dumb idea it is since Huck isn’t included.
(Wait for it . . . )
April 30th, 2009 at 10:58 pm
Here’s the announcement letter:
Dear Friends,
The United States is the greatest country in the world, a beacon of hope, strength, and prosperity that Democracies worldwide seek to emulate. Our nation and its people have persevered through past challenges with strength derived from our common belief in freedom, liberty, and personal responsibility. Like every American, we look to the future with optimism for the great possibilities of tomorrow. Although today we face some of the toughest times in recent history, together, like so many generations before, we march forward with a vision for an even brighter future for our children.
Today, we are launching the National Council for a New America (NCNA), a caucus of Congressional leaders gathering the expertise of national leaders and doers. We hope that will form the foundation of a concerted, policy-based forum to listen to, partner with, and empower the American people with ideas and solutions that speak directly to the needs of our great nation. This forum will engage in a conversation with America that seeks to remove ideological filters, addresses the realities we are confronting, and speaks to the challenges our citizens are facing.
The NCNA will bring together citizens from across the country to begin a dialogue with the American people through a series of forums, town halls, and an online effort that will engage people in a discussion to meet our common challenges and build a stronger country through common-sense ideas. The NCNA will be a dynamic, forward-looking organization that will amplify the common-sense and wisdom of our fellow citizens through a grassroots dialogue with Republican leaders.
However, this is not a Republican-only forum. While we will be guided by our principles of freedom and security, we will seek to include more than just our ideas. This forum will include a wide open policy debate that every American can feel free to participate in. We do this not just to offer an alternative point of view or to be disagreeable. Instead, we want to ask the American people what their hopes and dreams are. Since January, the President and the Democratic Majority in Congress have – rightfully so – put forward their plan for the future, now we must listen, learn and lead through an honest, open conversation with the American people that will result in building policy proposals that will yield the best results for our nation’s long-term success.
Ultimately, however, we are only launching this effort. The real drivers will have to be the American people. We invite Americans from all walks of life to speak with us as we begin anew rebuilding and reenergizing our nation. We do not pretend to have all the answers nor do we expect the NCNA to remain a static forum. Instead, this is going to be a living, breathing, expanding group that engages Americans from all walks of life. We hope to engage other national leaders, grassroots activists and citizens and invite them to work with us to solve problems with common-sense conservative solutions.
A Blueprint for our Conversation with America
Economy: Real Solutions for Economic Recovery
As the country battles through the worst economic crisis in a generation, we must remain focused on the foundations and institutions that have made us the most prosperous people in the world and the ideas that create jobs and grow our economy. At the same time, we must learn from the mistakes that led to the current crisis and to prevent similar situations from ever occurring again.
Healthcare: Building a 21st Century, Patient-Centered System
No one doubts that our nation’s health care system is in need of reform, but we must strike the right balance that builds on what works and fixes what is broken. All Americans deserve access to high-quality, affordable care. But such coverage cannot come at the expense of their ability to choose their own doctor and have access to the right care, at the right time, in the right setting without waiting in line while sick. In addition, we must continue to focus on the innovation and science that have resulted in thousands of treatments and cures for life-threatening or debilitating diseases while allowing America to remain the leader in research and development worldwide.
Education: Preparing Our Children to Succeed
A high-quality education should not be dependent upon a parent’s income or address. All of America’s children deserve an education that will prepare them for the opportunities and the challenges that await them in the global economy. Yet today, thousands of American children, especially in our inner cities, receive a substandard education or find post-secondary education unaffordable. We must return power from Washington to parents and well-paid teachers who know what’s best for our children.
Energy: Solutions for Energy Independence
American families and businesses cannot afford an energy policy where we are held hostage by foreign oil cartels and dictators. As a nation, we can no longer send billions of dollars overseas each year, often to countries that help fund our enemies. We must implement a comprehensive energy policy that includes traditional fuels, alternative energy, and conservation resulting in affordable, reliable domestic energy. Such a policy will stabilize costs for families and businesses while at the same time creating much-needed jobs here at home.
National Security: Defending American Liberty and Freedom
The threats posed to our nation are more varied and evolving more than perhaps at any other time in our history. Modern communications, technology and the proliferation of weapons of all types have empowered our enemies and those who support them. Our national security policy must reflect these realities while allowing us to maintain technological superiority, support the most well-trained and well-equipped military in the world and have the intelligence capabilities to uncover and prevent attacks before they occur.
Our National Panel of Experts:
Governor Haley Barbour
Governor Jeb Bush
Governor Bobby Jindal
Senator John McCain
Governor Mitt Romney
These are not the only issue areas where we will engage America, but they form a starting point in our revitalization effort. In the coming months, the NCNA will focus our attention outside of Washington where American families are living and raising their children, working toward the promise of a better tomorrow, and where common-sense ideals are valued over pundits and the political winds. We know America’s best days are ahead, but we need to work hard to ensure that promise. We also know that the American people want choices and alternatives – that there is no one right solution for what America and its people need. This is what our country was founded on, this is what we stand for, this is what we hope the National Council for a New America will provide and we ask our fellow citizens to join with us.
Sincerely,
John Boehner, Eric Cantor, Mike Pence, Cathy McMorris Rodgers, John Carter, Pete Sessions, David Dreier, Kevin McCarthy, Roy Blunt
Mitch McConnell, Jon Kyl, Lamar Alexander, John Cornyn, John Thune
April 30th, 2009 at 11:04 pm
Martha,
I know you are trying to make a statement about Palin but read this link for the reason why she wasn’t named in the letter….she was invited but she hasn’t accepted according to Cantor’s own spokesman.
GOP establishment steps in
http://www.politico.com/blogs/bensmith/0409/GOP_establishment_steps_in.html#comments
“UPDATE: Cantor spokesman Brad Dayspring says Palin was invited to join the group, but they haven’t heard back. Dayspring said Steele and Gingrich, because Steele heads a party and Gingrich a 527, were too explicitly partisan a figures to be involved in an organization that’s meant to be non-partisan.”
April 30th, 2009 at 11:05 pm
McCain confirms the invitation that was sent to her, unless you think he and Cantor’s spokesperson are lying…
An invite for Palin
http://www.politico.com/blogs/bensmith/0409/An_invite_for_Palin.html#comments
Sen. John McCain confirms Brad Dayspring’s mention to me last night that the leaders of the new National Council for a New America had invited Alaska Governor Sarah Palin to join — but hadn’t heard back.
“Governor Palin is hopefully going to be involved as well,” McCain said. “We’ve reached out to her.”
April 30th, 2009 at 11:13 pm
I’m not too crazy about McCain being in. They are trying to be inclusive, I guess, but he pretty well represents the problem people are having with the old GOP.
April 30th, 2009 at 11:17 pm
You see a list of governors (read “doers”) and one career politician Senator. One of these “experts” is not like the others. McCain still leaves a nasty aftertaste in the mouths of many. I think he elbowed his way on. That’s alright, I reckon townhallers will point out his irrelevance to this renewal effort. Anyone care to defend the war hero?
April 30th, 2009 at 11:21 pm
Man oh man I would like to see this be a new start…but how do you ban career politicians without seeming exclusive? I think the people have to holler about what ideas are in, which ones are out, and who represents the will of the people- no mavericks here acting independently of the will of the people. I’ve had enough of that. No amnesty, no McCain/Feingold…that guy had better start out his first appearance with a big ol’ apology. Or I will just tune him out…again.
April 30th, 2009 at 11:23 pm
I also argue the recognition of the Judeo/Christian foundation for the conservative party. Let’s get it out there in the open. I’m tired of religious persecution myself, let’s tilt the balance back in favor of religious freedom.
April 30th, 2009 at 11:26 pm
And what about the judicial activism tearing down the traditional marriage building block of America? You cannot reNEW America without patching up it’s crumbling foundations. I say get the chair and whip and put the celebration and institutionalization of sexual deviance back into it’s cage. It has become a snarling, wild animal forcing everyone to hide their true opinions and live in fear. I’d like to see the tide turn on that one. Make America child-friendly again.
April 30th, 2009 at 11:27 pm
Gag Perez Hilton’s hate speech, not Miss America’s honest opinion.
April 30th, 2009 at 11:41 pm
Well Liz, to me it looks like they’ve included conservatives who represent the entire spectrum of the Republican Party, also ones that represent gender, differing nationalities and also their location in the US.
April 30th, 2009 at 11:44 pm
It also appears that the concept might be based upon state’s rights.
April 30th, 2009 at 11:51 pm
But I really don’t think this is going to be some sort of think tank…it’ll be more of a club that promotes the newest line of Republicans that have a future for 2012 and beyond. They’re taking the imaginary gavel away from Limbaugh.
April 30th, 2009 at 11:58 pm
Unfortunately my biggest problem with this panel is Mitt Romney…I know I’m going to offend a majority of people on this site but I just don’t see what he really brings to the table? He was a successful businessman, he helped turn around the Salt Lake Olympics…no big deal…if we can’t host the Olympics properly, then we probably shouldn’t be the most influential nation in the world, and he was a one term governor that hasn’t governed under the current economic downturn. He does fight the good fight and endlessly supports many Republicans but I don’t see him as the future of the party. I’m not even sure he will run.
May 1st, 2009 at 12:00 am
McCain’s great, Liz. Career politicians and insiders spend their time accumulating lobbyist money and under-the-table deals. McCain is one of the few that we can be confident is on our side.
His career is built on skewering those types, who he seems to naturally clash with, so he happily gets my support and trust.
May 1st, 2009 at 12:03 am
Also McCain has the experience and knowledge on foreign affairs, he can bring a lot of insight about foreign policy. Not to mention average people like and respect McCain…Independents and Democrats as well. They didn’t like him enough to elect him President but he is still pretty respected in this nation.
May 1st, 2009 at 12:04 am
Jersey, If you don’t see what Romney brings to the table, then you’re not looking.
May 1st, 2009 at 12:04 am
Jersey, what does Palin bring to the table beyond personality?
May 1st, 2009 at 12:05 am
Jersey, what insight does Palin bring?
May 1st, 2009 at 12:06 am
I don’t see Palin bringing much. She has no vision, does not care to know the issues and has no plans or policy ideas.
May 1st, 2009 at 12:12 am
Truthfully, the only thing Palin brings to this table is that she is popular with a group of people whose support for her is persona-based. She is still a popular figure. But she is losing in the credibility dept pretty fast.
They most certainly did not invite Palin because she brings intellectual heft or knowledge on issues.
May 1st, 2009 at 12:13 am
Martha, in reality I don’t really see the point of this entire council…I mean, I guess it’s better than doing nothing but the idea that the congressional leaders/members are bringing in experts that have less experience in Government to advise them on how to implement ideas in Government is kind of silly if you think about it. I’m not making this a Romney vs. Palin match I just don’t like Romney and do not believe he is capable of winning a general election…esp against Obama. I could be wrong it is just my feelings. For yours and illinoisguy’s mental and emotional well being I hope I am wrong.
May 1st, 2009 at 12:20 am
It’s telling that of the five major issues the Council included in its “blueprint” – the economy, health care, education, energy and national security, four appear in Jeb Bush’s appraisal of the five critical issues Republicans should focus on in campaigns (Jeb added government/budget reform, instead of national security – not surprising for an ex-governor with no Washington experience). That shows that the Council members think very much alike or that they value Jeb’s expertise.
Source: http://voices.washingtonpost.com/thefix/the-rising/jeb-bush-and-the-politics-of-p.html
May 1st, 2009 at 12:28 am
I understand you feel Romney is the best candidate ever for the Republican Party but I just don’t see it. He was a successful businessman, he was a semi-successful Governor who had to make a lot of concessions and left the state with a rather unremarkable economy. BUT, I understand he has a good history of turning around failing companies and Olympics…so maybe I am wrong…I just don’t care for him that much.
May 1st, 2009 at 12:29 am
I will say I am interested in seeing what comes out of this council and I hope that can make some headway with the public…it should be interesting!!!
May 1st, 2009 at 12:35 am
147 – Since both businesses and the government seem to be running huge deficits, it might be nice to have the perspective of someone who has dealt with and understands both. That’s what Romney brings to this group.
May 1st, 2009 at 1:04 am
149 – I understand that, but to say this group of experts are solely there due to their expertise is a bit disingenuous…not that any of them don’t provide a certain level of expertise to one of the key elements of the blueprint but this is obviously a way of spotlighting the upcoming crop of Presidential hopefuls and policy makers that will mold our party for years to come. If Romney is there solely for his economic expertise, then that is one thing, even though his days as Governor didn’t really help the economy of Massachusetts. If he is there for his standing as the future of the Republican Party, then I think they should have started this council about 5 or 10 years ago. JMO! not sure why everybody gets so up in arms when someone doesn’t like Romney…some people like chocolate some people like vanilla. I like Palin…I’m sure you and others hate her…that’s okay.
May 1st, 2009 at 4:32 am
For the record, I do not oppose Mr. Romney being in this group. Of course I and not in his camp and I do not think that he is the best thing since slice bread, but he is basically a very good Conservative and a Republican who brings a lot to the table. Like most everybody else, he is stronger in some areas of expertise than others and although he can add to the discussion in all topics, his input would be especially welcome in some areas (i.e. his general business expertise.)
While this council is a good idea, it is not the be all end all. As a Palinite, I welcome both her presence and her contributions to this council should she actually come. If she does not come, I will not be panicked that her career will end (she does have other things to do) or upset that she is not part of the group. I would wish the rest of the group well and leave it at that. However, I will turn the tables on Martha and say if one does not see what Mrs. Palin brings to the table, one is not looking. First of all, she deals with all of these issues as Governor, I’ll concede that like most others, her expertise is more valuable in some areas than others. Yes her persona is valuable, but if she does not have intellectual any heft, how do you explain Alaska succeeding despite the fact that most of North America is suffering a rather serious recession.
As an Ohioan, I am offended than there is nobody from my state represented, haha. But, in all seriousness, Jersey is correct that this is a well geographically balance panel (at least as long as we disagree with Mr. Limbaugh and consider Louisiana part of the South, haha.)
Mac, with respect, you did put forth some good name. Mr. Huckabee could certainly add to the discussion on Health care and among other things it would be good to have all of the Big 3 there. However, he may have been asked and could not make it. It would be good to have Mr. Thompson there as well with both his expertise and perspective. Mr. Sanford has his own strong points, but he could be busy running a state. It is also surprising that Mr. Pawlenty is not there, bur he too has a few things to do. In short, I would not automatically assume that this is an old boys club and thus be insulted. Let’s find out the behind the scenes story first.
May 1st, 2009 at 6:16 am
151
OJ
Yeah, 112 was my second imprudent comment of the day, I called them a bunch of punk jerks in an earlier thread. I was letting emotions get the best of me.
I’ll take your and MWS’s wise advice and wait for details. Regardless, I know such comments are wrong and won’t make similar comments in the future, even if Huck continues to get snubbed. My apologies to anyone I offended.
The council sounds like a great idea.
May 1st, 2009 at 6:55 am
What goes around comes around. When one acts in his/her own interest over a long period of time, it may be cause for why one is not invited to participate in a group that involves a team effort, especially when that person has taken personal stabs an others of the group over a long period of time. There is a certain trust issue that some people mouths could get in the way of progress for the group.
May 1st, 2009 at 12:21 pm
Jersey.#150:“…not sure why everybody gets so up in arms when someone doesn’t like Romney.”
Oh, I don’t think anyone particularly minds the fact you don’t like Romney. We all have our own tastes and opinions. The issue is when someone criticizes Romney or anyone else unfairly. Should that someone be surprised when others step in to defend their target?
May 1st, 2009 at 1:01 pm
marK, I don’t feel I criticized him unfairly. I gave him credit where credit is due and noted where his record does not correlate with the hype, the state of the Massachusett’s economy when he finished his term, for instance. The rest is basically my opinion.
May 1st, 2009 at 1:05 pm
150 – I certainly don’t hate Governor Palin. I just think we have some people who would make better presidents she would, including my current personal preference of Mitt Romney. I would definitely vote for her if she wins the nomination. She’s a far sight better than the person currently occupying the White House.
May 1st, 2009 at 1:11 pm
155 – I think that’s holding Romney to unfair standards. He closed a huge deficit in the state. Working the with MA ultra-liberal, veto-proof legislature, all a Republican governor can really hope to do is hold the line on the economy. On the other hand, under Democrats it largely goes downhill, rather than remain static, which is when they bring a Republican back in, as I imagine they’ll do next election.
May 1st, 2009 at 1:14 pm
156 – I completely agree with you…I don’t care for Romney, mostly based on personal character issues I have with him but I don’t hate him and I would pull the lever for him in 2012 if he were to win the nomination…unless, of course, there is a great third party candidate like Rudy Giuliani, or something, but I highly doubt that will ever happen.
May 1st, 2009 at 1:30 pm
157 – but when you run almost completely on an economic platform and you leave the state not much better than it was before he got into office…other than the deficit which was only lessened due to the the raise in capital gains…I’m not sure how he can say he successfully an conservatively ran Massachusetts economy. He didn’t run it into the ground, by any means but to say it was successful is an overstatement.
May 1st, 2009 at 1:34 pm
I’m not sure what you’re eluding to on his economic handling of Massachusetts Jersey. He came in with a 3 billion dollar deficit, or thereabouts, and left with over a billion surplus. He did this with only adjusting fees totaling 240 million. The rest was his tightening the screws on the expenditures. To me, that’s extraordinarily good handling of the economy, so what are you talking about?
May 1st, 2009 at 1:36 pm
Mitt Romney did not increase capital gains taxes!!!
May 1st, 2009 at 1:45 pm
illinoisguy – I have to admit that I knew very little about Mitt Romney until recently. I took everything I heard about him at face value. I recently decided to google his record and there are some inconsistencies with what is peddled as truth and what he actually did in Massachusetts…that’s all I am saying.
http://www.reuters.com/article/politicsNews/idUSN2033704120080120?pageNumber=2&virtualBrandChannel=0&sp=true
Sorry if what I wrote, “raise in capital gains,” was confusing, I meant it to read a surge in capital gains. Sorry for the confusion. I’m not saying he isn’t a great businessman I’m just saying we have to look at his record honestly…as we do with all potential candidates!!!
May 1st, 2009 at 1:53 pm
Jersey: your post 158 did make me chuckle. Romney has “personal” character issues so we need someone like Rudy to lead the way. While I’m sure you are refering to his taking a pro-life view on the role of government and abortion, have to admit that made me chuckle.
May 1st, 2009 at 1:57 pm
If we stay within those that are not deity, I defy you to find any past president with a higher ‘personal’ character than Mitt Romney. He wasn’t talking about his stance on life, Brian, because Jersey is pro-choice, as are some of the other Palin lovers on here.
May 1st, 2009 at 2:16 pm
Jersey, personal character issues – funny. In the field of candidates, there isn’t a man with more character than Romney. I guess you weren’t paying attention in 08 after all.
Ohio, Palin’s performance in Alaska is less than impressive at this point. She does not have any intellectual heft, and she she’s losing the great executive mantle at an alarming speed. I don’t see any reason to include her other than her large fan base.
May 1st, 2009 at 2:23 pm
“because Jersey is pro-choice, as are some of the other Palin lovers on here.” Yes, Illiniosguy, like your camp, we have a large and diverse camp. Not all Palinites believe in Palinism 100% and that is OK with me. Not all of your camp members are Pro-Life Illinoisguy. Do you have a problem with Romneyites not believing in Romneyism 100%?
May 1st, 2009 at 2:34 pm
First of all, I’m not starting to use the isms as you are Ohio. I embrace all that would like to support and vote for Mitt. Considering the number on here that are Mitt supporters, there are not a high percentage that are pro-choice, but there are a few, and we’re glad to have them on board. I’m really not sure why you use the ism thing so much. If you were to attempt to describe the difference in Palinism and Romneyism, what would you say? I don’t see much difference other than that of knowledge, experience, intellect, and competence. Ideologically, I don’t see Sarah as being much different other than she can see a lot farther than the rest of us!
May 1st, 2009 at 2:36 pm
I know sight is not an ideology, just trying to inject a little humor!
May 1st, 2009 at 2:55 pm
Everyone on the Panel can get press at anytime they want. They are also doing it because they want the Republican Party and America as we know it to survive. We should all get behind them because this might be the last chance. At least somebody is doing something.
May 1st, 2009 at 3:29 pm
There is not a whole lot of different between Romneyism and Palinism; no, sight is not ideological, but it is useful to have.
May 1st, 2009 at 3:45 pm
First off, I have the personal issues with Romney’s character…not Romney’s personal issues. The issue I have with him is the way he cut off Giuliani’s and McCain’s concession speeches in Florida and Michigan. I’m sure it’s not a big deal to anyone else but it really bothers me and IMO it says a lot about the man. I also do not like the way he embellishes his record. Most people who support Palin are honest enough to recognize the hurdles she must overcome and the flaws she has shown in the past but not some of the Romney supporters, they live in a world where justification rules and it’s okay to bend the truths about Romney’s past successes.
May 1st, 2009 at 3:49 pm
illinoisguy – “If we stay within those that are not deity…” I like that, is that from the bible or did you write it? If you wrote it, then you have a good way with words and I’d recommend you start your own blog.
May 1st, 2009 at 4:04 pm
165 – Martha, as I said before ’08 is the reason why I have issues with his character.
May 1st, 2009 at 4:32 pm
162- The article you included is basically rehashing an OpEd to the Boston Globe by A. Sum. If your doing research on Romney’s Economic record as Gov of MA, you should probably check out the Club for Growth piece on Romney’s record when he was running for prez which, by no means perfect, is a bit more comprehensive and includes a variety of sources (not just an OpEd). The article presents both sides… both the good and the bad (well good/bad according to the criteria for Club for Growth, which you may/may not agree with).
For me, seeing a summary of successes and failures, as well as the context for decisions, and ultimate progression from mistakes is often a bit more revealing when formulating opinions.
http://www.clubforgrowth.org/2007/08/mitt_romneys_record_on_economi.php
May 1st, 2009 at 5:17 pm
I wrote it jersey, thanks!
May 1st, 2009 at 5:42 pm
Thanks palkins, I’ll check that out!
May 1st, 2009 at 5:48 pm
173. Yes, I know you said it, but you weren’t paying attention in 08 if you didn’t see that Romney is a man of true character every which way from Sunday.
I’m sorry Jersey. You can think he was wrong to change his position on abortion, but to besmirch the man’s character for that is just wrong.
May 1st, 2009 at 5:59 pm
7 contenders, thune is on the council too
May 1st, 2009 at 6:11 pm
Martha, I never said that I didn’t like him because he changed his position on abortion, I don’t care about his position on abortion…I don’t think he really cares nor has a true position on abortion either…political expediency.
May 1st, 2009 at 6:46 pm
Why is it not yet clear as to whether or not Palin is a part of this or not? Personally, I hope she is.
May 1st, 2009 at 6:56 pm
Any Republican candidate that runs will have to be a lot more like Ron Paul in order for paleo-conservatives like me to consider voting for them. If not, 2012 will most likely be the year the GOP is seen as a terminally ill lost cause.
I hope 2012 will be the year the GOP produces someone that actually believes in limited government and the free market! If not, I say R.I.P.
May 1st, 2009 at 8:47 pm
180 – how is it not clear, illinois? it was confirmed, by McCain. that she was invited from the beginning and accepted short after…unless you know something I don’t?
May 2nd, 2009 at 12:13 pm
#9 Huckabee’s an entertainer now, that’s why he’s not part of this.
May 4th, 2009 at 10:35 am
National Council of LaRaza………National Council for a New America. Hmmm, wonder what they were thinking?
NEW AMERICA??? I think not.
Geez, the majority of these people are RINOs and AMNESTY lovers. These are many of the people who have participated in the dysfunction of the Republican party! All talk and NO principles.
When the hell are Republicans and Conservatives going to learn their lesson? Same ole – same ole. These self appointed leaders are doing everything they possibly can to subdue and control the Tea Party movement. It shocked them and angered them that, for the most part, no one wanted to hear their forked tongues. Now the game’s on…..how to bring the base to heel? How to get American citizens to eat the proverbial crap sandwich!
They never speak of ‘representative Republic.’ The only time they mention the Constitution is when they believe it will schmooze the base. They cherry pick the laws they wish to uphold and ignore those they don’t like. They are participants in legislating around our Constitution. All they speak of is devastating bipartisanship which eliminates the checks and balances meant to keep this government from acquiring even greater power.
They must destroy the symbol of Reagan and his powerful belief in the U.S. Constitution so that conservatives will finally bend over and accept their disloyalty.
I surely don’t want a “new America.” Conservatives simply want an America returned to our Constitution, which is our only protection from those who would take our liberty and freedoms, as our founders knew so well.
May 4th, 2009 at 3:46 pm
[...] in 1994, winning 21 of 35 Senate seats up for election. Republicans achieved victory by developing a pragmatic agenda, sticking to their principles and by developing a winning election strategy. [...]
May 4th, 2009 at 9:15 pm
I agree with #184 (LilSpitfire). When I read the announcement of the NCNA and saw the list of primary functionaries, it confirmed for me that the leadership of the GOP is lost. “Lost”, as in this is the same group with the same (lack of) ideas that lost the last two election cycles. Reading the NCNA “blueprint”, I find it interesting they list the following: Economy, Healthcare, Education, Energy and National Security, none of which moves the citizenry to march in the streets of America. Economy maybe, but only due to the recent massive amounts of spending and the possible attendant consequences. The one issue that does bring out people by the hundred’s of thousands (May Day marches), or which brings a response such as to shut down the Senate and Congressional phone lines, is immigration. This is the one issue that directly effects the Economy, our Healthcare system, our Educational standards, Energy use, and National Security, and it isn’t even mentioned in the NCNA outline. It is also the one issue with the greatest potential for leading to ethnocentric conflict in the U.S. on a scale we have never seen, and the one issue that could lead to a second conflict with Mexico. I’ll keep an eye on what the NCNA is doing, but from what I see right now, “…marching forward with a vision…”, isn’t exactly what comes to mind.
May 5th, 2009 at 2:02 pm
I’m not a Republican. However, I think we need to re-think and re-invent American politics for the 21st Century. Here are some thoughts:
1. If the 20th Century, from Lochner, through Griswald to Roe v. Wade, was the century of the Civil War Amendments, the 21st should be the Century of the Tenth Amendment.
2. The great, looming realities of the 21st Century are: 1) we will have to compete for foreign capital with everyone else; and 2) we will have a less affluent population and a slower rate of growth.
3. These two constraints mean: 1) we will have to have to allocate a lower percentage of our GDP to government to attract investment; and 2) we will probably have a shrinking tax base in any event.
4. There will, however, be needs that will have to be met and investment rarely comes to unstable nation-states or to those without a properly educated work force.
5. The key to dealing with items 3 and 4 above is the Tenth Amendment.
6. The Federal Government needs to shrink, performing only its Constitutionally enumerated powers, as Madison believed it should.
7. Things like Education, properly a State (or, better, a local) function, would be returned to that level and the Federal Education Department could be eliminated. Property tax funded, free, universal, K-12 public education as we have known it is the first victim of the declining tax base. How do we replace it?
8. Universal health care could be pursued through legal reform and the establishment of not-for-profit buying cooperatives. Instead of creating a centralized government bureaucracy like the DMV (or continuing the current employment-based system), Americans should get their health insurance through competing not-for-profit groups like USAA.
9. If this proves successful, Social Security and pensions could be privatized on a similar model.
10. National defense is a (perhaps “the”) critical function of government but it does not require continuing to buy weapons for the Cold War. More money, time and effort need to be given to State and USAID. The Department of Defense needs to think, not only about the current war(s), but the next. This would best be done through investing in the development and honing of the Military’s current stable of exceptionally experienced Officers and NCOs. Why not try to make them all McMasters and Nagles?
11. The Troop Program Units (“TPUs”) of the Army and Air Force Reserves should be reassigned to the states. State National Guards and Militia ought to be capable enough to handle a disaster at the Hurricane Katrina level on their own. If these forces are deployed in Federal service, there should be Inter-state compacts that handle the issue. As a result, FEMA should be stood-down, saving money and decentralizing disaster response and recovery.
12. Returning Education to the States and allowing individuals to come together to solve common problems though voluntary organizations is not only more efficient, it is more resilient, an issue identified by thinkers like Ramo and Robb and William Lind.
In a world of “Black Swans” it is wise not to put all your eggs in one basket.
May 5th, 2009 at 5:17 pm
#185:
With all due respect………
One cannot be ‘pragmatic’ and maintain ‘principles.’
The very act of pragmatism is devoid of principles and morality. There would, therefore, be no right or wrong {as we are witnessing today.}
A scientist must be pragmatic.
Constitutionalists must be principled. The courts must be principled. Law makers and law enforcers must be principled. Over the past decades, a serious disconnect has purposely been created using ‘pragmatism.’ {sounds awfully intellectual though, eh?}
“Pragmatism” has driven the USA into chaos. With pragmatism has come the degradation of the foundation of the United States of America which is the ‘rule of law.’ We were founded as a country of laws.
I would caution all who believe in the U.S. Constitution and our unalienable rights -NOT the faux rights given by the United Nations of theft and genocide – to think carefully before parroting the progressive/liberal mantra of ‘pragmatism.’
BTW, I am by no means letting bush off the hook, either. He was the leader of the non existent ‘compassionate’ Conservatives who walked us off of the unprincipled AMNESTY cliff with complete disregard for the rule of law and the security of our countrymen. His last act -BAILOUT 1 – absolutely was unconstitutional and demanded the House of Reps to give up their Constitutional responsibilities! {these are only 2 of the multiple reasons for the Repubs’ massacre in the last 2 election cycles.}