I have great understanding of and respect for the frustration Erick (at Redstate) expresses concerning our Senate Republican leadership. Many times it seems as if they don’t know what they are doing and they are missing – or even fighting against - golden opportunities. (Certainly they are demonstrating such error in judgment by supporting the, shall we say, less-than-conservative candidate in some key Republican Senate primaries.)
But then I consider: What would I really and truly be thinking and doing if I were in Mitch McConnell’s shoes during this healthcare fiasco? Could it be that in reality he IS doing the best that can be done in this circumstance? Well,… maybe.
Senators McConnell and Reid are engaged in the ultimate herding cats contest. I do not envy Mitch in the least. Can you imagine having to try to hold together a united block of 40 Republicans (including the likes of Snowe, Collins, Voinovich and Bennett – not to mention the usual suspects on some other issues – Graham, Lugar and McCain) and also attract at least 1 non-Republican to side with this motley crew? While I would love to see the Republican leadership stand firmly on effectively articulated, conservative principles, the simple fact is that Snowe and Collins will not allow any firm foundation upon which to take such a stand in this debate.
So, how do you solve a problem like Olympia? Maybe we have to take the path Mitch is currently forging.
Two key takeaways:
1) The cloture rules that frustrate us when in the majority are also the basis of our last stand against the incredibly harmful legislation we currently face (cap & trade, healthcare takeover). What once was a curse is now our blessing. Reid’s struggles to corral 60 cats reveals the difficulties McConnell had - even back when leading a 55 seat majority.
2) We need 41 reliably conservative cats ASAP. For 2010, 51 Republicans is not nearly as important as is 41 genuine conservatives. It is crucial to pick the right primary battles to focus our energy toward selecting solid conservatives. Rubio’s defeat of Crist in Florida and seeking to replacing Bennett in Utah are the types of activities that will strengthen the Minority Leader’s hand to thwart Obama, Reid and Pelosi.
Tuesday, December 15, 2009
Saturday, December 5, 2009
Thus the Name
Ruminate: “To turn a matter over and over in the mind.”
Rumination: “The act of pondering; meditation.”
Aspire: “To strive toward an end.”
Aspiration: “A strong desire for high achievement.”
(Definitions selected from The American Heritage Dictionary)
Many seeds are planted in one’s education and upbringing. Some are fruitful while others turn out to be thorns and weeds. With age comes the opportunity for sober-minded reflection on one’s observations and experiences.
“Ruminations” carries with it an indication of the seriousness with which one should consider how to learn from past experiences and interpret current events. Yet, left alone, rumination can lead to a negative end – a combination of pessimism and frustration that may even devolve toward theories of conspiracy – a mindset that will not bear fruit to the benefit of self or others. “Aspirations” call us away from this potential pit to reach for better and higher ways. Foundational to maintaining such aspirations for an improved tomorrow is the worldview that springs forth from a proper recognition of God and the blessings that come when heeding His correction and guidance.
May we all beneficially ruminate and aspire.
Rumination: “The act of pondering; meditation.”
Aspire: “To strive toward an end.”
Aspiration: “A strong desire for high achievement.”
(Definitions selected from The American Heritage Dictionary)
Many seeds are planted in one’s education and upbringing. Some are fruitful while others turn out to be thorns and weeds. With age comes the opportunity for sober-minded reflection on one’s observations and experiences.
“Ruminations” carries with it an indication of the seriousness with which one should consider how to learn from past experiences and interpret current events. Yet, left alone, rumination can lead to a negative end – a combination of pessimism and frustration that may even devolve toward theories of conspiracy – a mindset that will not bear fruit to the benefit of self or others. “Aspirations” call us away from this potential pit to reach for better and higher ways. Foundational to maintaining such aspirations for an improved tomorrow is the worldview that springs forth from a proper recognition of God and the blessings that come when heeding His correction and guidance.
May we all beneficially ruminate and aspire.
Sunday, November 22, 2009
Strategic Voting on Senate Healthcare Amendments
Let's just consider this to be a political application of the principle... "Behold, I send you forth as sheep in the midst of wolves: be ye therefore wise as serpents, and harmless as doves." Matthew 10:16
The completely partisan vote on the motion to proceed draws a clear line of distinction that conservatives should leverage to full advantage. To accomplish this, the final version of the Senate healthcare bill for consideration of the cloture vote should be identical to the current Reid proposal.
All Republicans are on record that the Reid bill in current form is not worthy of passage - such that cloture on the current content should be opposed as well. Meanwhile, some of the 60 Democrats are trying to cover themselves by saying that their vote on the motion to proceed does not indicate that they support the bill in its current form. They claim to merely want the opportunity to consider an improved bill through the amendment process.
What should conservative Senators do?
Conservative Senators recognize that beneficial compromise is not possible in the current legislative environment. So the questions are simply: What is the most effective way to get this bill defeated at the cloture vote? How can conservatives force votes that will expose these "moderate Democrats" to the full level of scrutiny for 2010 and 2012? What will stop the bill AND inflict the most damage to the self-proclaimed "moderate Democrats" who are willing to flirt with and thus enable government take-over of healthcare?
1) Use every Senate procedure at our disposal to lengthen the debate (force readings of the bill (Coburn), offer amendments, etc.).
2) Offer up the full range of amendments that force "moderate Democrats" to reveal their voting record on every key issue - to be used in 2010 and 2012.
3) While conservative Senators are offering up these amendments, they should strategically vote NO to ensure that NO CHANGE HAPPENS TO THE REID BILL. These "moderate Democrats" should not be given any fig leaf by which they might claim that improvements were made.
Is the Reid bill really not acceptable to some "moderate Democrat" Senators in current form? Then make sure that the final bill has no changes. That will kill the bill at cloture.
One final note: On this bill of such great consequence, vote monitoring entities who score lawmakers' voting record should have some wisdom in scoring the upcoming amendments. Example: As quoted by Kathryn Jean Lopez in The Corner on National Review Online, the Susan B. Anthony List response to the vote was: “If this health care bill makes it to conference committee without an authentic abortion exclusion, Senators Casey, Landrieu, Lincoln, Nelson and Reid will be held especially accountable.” Surely the Susan B. Anthony List is intelligent enough to know that regardless of what might go into conference, once the bill is past cloture concerns it will lurch leftward regarding life issues. They should understand that Democrats who voted YES to proceed must be held accountable to vote YES on pro-life amendments - but conservative Republicans (who voted NO regarding proceeding) with an excellent pro-life voting record are serving the wishes of the Susan B. Anthony List by voting NO on these amendments in order to keep the Reid bill in its objectionable form prior to the final cloture vote.
The completely partisan vote on the motion to proceed draws a clear line of distinction that conservatives should leverage to full advantage. To accomplish this, the final version of the Senate healthcare bill for consideration of the cloture vote should be identical to the current Reid proposal.
All Republicans are on record that the Reid bill in current form is not worthy of passage - such that cloture on the current content should be opposed as well. Meanwhile, some of the 60 Democrats are trying to cover themselves by saying that their vote on the motion to proceed does not indicate that they support the bill in its current form. They claim to merely want the opportunity to consider an improved bill through the amendment process.
What should conservative Senators do?
Conservative Senators recognize that beneficial compromise is not possible in the current legislative environment. So the questions are simply: What is the most effective way to get this bill defeated at the cloture vote? How can conservatives force votes that will expose these "moderate Democrats" to the full level of scrutiny for 2010 and 2012? What will stop the bill AND inflict the most damage to the self-proclaimed "moderate Democrats" who are willing to flirt with and thus enable government take-over of healthcare?
1) Use every Senate procedure at our disposal to lengthen the debate (force readings of the bill (Coburn), offer amendments, etc.).
2) Offer up the full range of amendments that force "moderate Democrats" to reveal their voting record on every key issue - to be used in 2010 and 2012.
3) While conservative Senators are offering up these amendments, they should strategically vote NO to ensure that NO CHANGE HAPPENS TO THE REID BILL. These "moderate Democrats" should not be given any fig leaf by which they might claim that improvements were made.
Is the Reid bill really not acceptable to some "moderate Democrat" Senators in current form? Then make sure that the final bill has no changes. That will kill the bill at cloture.
One final note: On this bill of such great consequence, vote monitoring entities who score lawmakers' voting record should have some wisdom in scoring the upcoming amendments. Example: As quoted by Kathryn Jean Lopez in The Corner on National Review Online, the Susan B. Anthony List response to the vote was: “If this health care bill makes it to conference committee without an authentic abortion exclusion, Senators Casey, Landrieu, Lincoln, Nelson and Reid will be held especially accountable.” Surely the Susan B. Anthony List is intelligent enough to know that regardless of what might go into conference, once the bill is past cloture concerns it will lurch leftward regarding life issues. They should understand that Democrats who voted YES to proceed must be held accountable to vote YES on pro-life amendments - but conservative Republicans (who voted NO regarding proceeding) with an excellent pro-life voting record are serving the wishes of the Susan B. Anthony List by voting NO on these amendments in order to keep the Reid bill in its objectionable form prior to the final cloture vote.
Tuesday, November 3, 2009
Who will rise to serve?
Who will rise to serve?
Who will answer the call?
Who will step forward to fill the void of sound governance where you live?
Who will stand upon the solid principles of economic freedom, peace through strength, respect for life, and legislative restraint to offer your community, state and nation the opportunity to choose between two distinct visions for our future?
Who will articulate a clear message of conservatism that will educate and resonate in this important time?
Who will rise to serve?
How will you serve?
Who will answer the call?
Who will step forward to fill the void of sound governance where you live?
Who will stand upon the solid principles of economic freedom, peace through strength, respect for life, and legislative restraint to offer your community, state and nation the opportunity to choose between two distinct visions for our future?
Who will articulate a clear message of conservatism that will educate and resonate in this important time?
Who will rise to serve?
How will you serve?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)