You people can't be serious

A couple of days ago, fellow guest poster Jaybird over at Ordinary Gents offered some 12-step advice for the GOP.
2004: 55 Senators. 231 Representatives. 286 Presidential Electoral Votes.

2008: 41 Senators. 178 Representatives. 173 Presidential Electoral Votes.

First, you have to admit that you have a problem.

If you don’t admit that you have a problem, you can expect to find yourself getting even worse. You could shrug off and say, hey, the pendulum swings. (14 Senators, 53 Representatives, and 113 electoral votes over the course of 4 years is a pendulum swing?) If you don’t admit you have a problem, whether you find yourself on top again depends more on whether the other guys can force the pendulum back quickly enough into your side than on any action (as opposed to reaction) you make. Most importantly, if you don’t admit that you have a problem, you will never achieve *HEALTH*.

At this point in the power dynamic, it’s not about maybe winning an election again (though it will, of course, involve that on some level) but it’s about not being sick. You admit that you have a problem when you realize that, hey, you don’t want to be sick anymore. Even if you can’t have the life you once did, you won’t be sick.

Step two. A power greater than your own can bring you back to sanity.

Now, I had a friend who did the program a few years back and he explained to me that it didn’t have to be the Judeo-Christian God, necessarily. It can be Allah, Buddha, and even that doorknob over there (he said, pointing to a doorknob). The point was that the power to help was external to yourself and not something that could merely be brought about with willpower alone.

How does that apply to the Republicans? Well, one great example is the phenomenon that I’m seeing that we’d only be doing better if Republicans-In-Name-Only would stop criticizing legit Republicans, then the party would be hunky dory… and therefore the best thing to do is to criticize those RINOs as hard as we can! Get them out of leadership! Get them out of the party! As if the House/Senate/Electoral Vote numbers were reversed.

What’s the old saw? If you’re in a hole, stop digging! Well, after you stop digging, look around and look at those numbers again. You’re going to need external help to get out of this hole.


When I think of people likely to be accused of RINO-hood, I think of Lincoln Chafee or Olympia Snowe, or heterodox pundits like David Brooks or Ross Douthat. You know who I wouldn't expect to get tarred with that notably broad brush? Newt Gingrich.

How full of surprises is life. From the Atlantic Wire (via Sully):

Newt Gingrich appeared on talk shows this Sunday and flirted with the idea of a 2012 presidential bid. In a glaring example of just how wide the schism between Republican Party moderates and conservatives has become, pundits on the right were quick to shoot Gingrich down. The man who led the GOP to a 1994 revival is now dismissed being by some on the right as a RINO -- Republican In Name Only. Why? In a contentious New York State Congressional race that has split the Republican Party at the national level, Gingrich irked conservatives by endorsing moderate Dede Scozzafava, and urging Republicans not to support the more conservative third-party candidate Doug Hoffman. In the ongoing battle for tomorrow's GOP, the former speaker of the house isn't gaining any ground with grassroots conservatives.

Look at what brilliant thinker Michelle Malkin has to say:
The most prominent GOP endorser of radical leftist NY-23 congressional candidate Dede Scozzafava is openly musing about running for president in 2012.


The conservative base is wising up and pushing back. And constantly invoking Reagan isn’t going to erase the damage Gingrich has done to his brand over the years by wavering on core issues and teaming up with some of the Left’s biggest clowns.

Picture the cabinet:

Al Sharpton as education secretary.

Scozzafava as labor secretary.

Al Gore as global warming czar.

Noooooo, thanks.

"Radical leftist"? "Al Sharpton"?!???!

Dan Riehl (with whom I am thoroughly unfamiliar) asks this:
Newt In 2012: Yeah, But Which Party, Dude?
I just got my H1N1 vaccine (for which, Gadfly, I have sent President Obama a thank-you note), so maybe I'm feverish and hallucinating. But do I actually dwell in a world in which suddenly Newt Freaking Gingrich is too liberal for the GOP base?

I need to go lie down.


  1. I'm not a Republican, but AFAIK, Mr. Gingrich isn't being excoriated for his RINO-ness. Rather, he's defending an unfortunate pick by the NY GOP. That's Mr. Gingrich playing by Reagan's 11th commandment, but from the little I know, the criticism is spot-on. Ms. Scozzafava is apparently rather dense, setting up for an 'attack' speech outside her opponents HQ. Most political officies do not lack for signs and volunteers, so within moments she was surrounded by Hoffman signs and volunteers. Really bad call on her part, and we don't need more foolish people in DC; right now, it is chock-a-block with stupid.

    Oh, and Gingrich for President? C'mon. The man is bright but a loose cannon. We need some serious executive competence in the WH, and Gingrich isn't up to the job.

    p.s., I'm biting my keyboard, but I made it through without taking a shot at You-Know-Who. 8^)

  2. I'm biting my keyboard, but I made it through without taking a shot at You-Know-Who.

    Well done. I commend your efforts.

  3. And, say whatever you wish about Gingrich and his endorsement about Candidate X, but conflating him with leftists is just cray-zee.

  4. I'm with you, Dan. It feels like the GOP has become a party in which moderates are villified, conservatives are pilloried, and only the bat-shit wackos are considered for president.
    These days, even Pat Buchanan is too liberal for the hardcore Right.
    My only hope is that this schizoid break in the GOP gives Democrats the time to freaking wise up and get something done. Never have I been so disheartened by a group whose values I generally share but whose tactics and confusing tiny-bark-but-no-bite-ism chagrin Americans who might actually agree with them if they could get it together.