More on the House leadership race
Several readers had some questions about my half-assed "endorsement" of John Shadegg (God bless Arizona Republicans.) In truth, I've been so busy lately that I barely mentioned it, but I'd like to say about more about why I like Shadegg here.
Simply put, I think it's time for a second conservative revolution in Congress. The first, in '94, was against the Democratic leadership. The new one needs to be against the Republican leaders. I want to reclaim the Republican Party as a "conservative" party, not the corrupt vehicle of crass populism which it has become.
Among the three contenders for majority leader, Blunt, Boehner and Shadegg, only Shadegg represents a clean break from current House leadership. I believe he recognizes the malaise of corruption and addiction to power that currently grips the GOP. There's no guarantee he'll actually do anything about it, but I'm convinced Roy Blunt won't even try.
To be fair, I could live with Boehner as majority leader if I had to. He hit all the right notes in an anti-pork editorial in today's Wall Street Journal. He has some drawbacks that concern me, however. For one thing, he's way too cozy with the K Street establishment in the wake of the Abramoff scandal. For another, he doesn't play well on TV. For a third, he's just one of those faces and names that we've become sick of seeing and hearing. He cannot claim to have stood innocently by while House Republicans gleefully trashed the party's reputation for fiscal prudence. He was, after all, largely responsible for whipping the Republican caucus in line to pass Bush's disastrous Medicare bill.
I won't be thrilled if Boehner comes out on top, but I'd be willing to give him a chance before passing judgment. A Blunt win, however, might as well be a victory for Tom DeLay. Should that come to pass, I think conservatives and their remaining libertarian allies will need to recognize that the Republican House has become effectively useless in forwarding our common goals.
Comments
Barry, you didn't note that his father managed Barry Goldwater's first campaign for the Senate a half-century ago.
Posted by: Bo | January 17, 2006 09:47 AM
Wow, a SECOND conservative revolution? Well, let's see, if it goes like the first one we will end up $30 trillion in debt, Repulicans and Big Business will be recruiting at the release gates of all the Country Club prisons for "strong leadership", gas will be $192 an once, all U.S. citizens will wear ankle monitors with GPS and have their DNA banked, the rest of the American jobs will be shipped away for cheap labor, executive salaries will average $250 million a quarter, unemployment, welfare, and medicaid will end and the price of insurance will leap to $28,000 a year ... oh, and we'll be at war with four or five nations that we have deemed security risks.
This doesn't really cover it all, but it's a start.
Posted by: Bailey Hankins | January 17, 2006 11:18 AM
Bailey, you are intellectually challenged.
Posted by: A Dem. | January 17, 2006 11:59 AM
Not by anyone on this board.
Posted by: Bailey Hankins | January 17, 2006 12:38 PM
I'm OK with Boehner but...how exactly is his name pronounced?
If the name is pronounced the way it looks, I don't think I could deal with Brian Williams leading off the evening news with "Republican Boehner stiffens in opposition to Democrat Pelosi's demand for withdrawal."
Posted by: withoutfeathers | January 17, 2006 01:39 PM
I think he pronounces it "Bayner," probably for the same reason Alexander Cockburn insists his name is properly pronounced "Coburn."
Posted by: Barry | January 17, 2006 01:45 PM