U.S. Senate: Burning Down the House

[Spino]

There are very few Rocky Marcianos in politics. Mostly they're like Ali, or Charles, or Leonard, or Louis. They crave the political spotlight -- the power, the sense of DOING something that matters -- more than any methamphetimine addict craves their next dose. And just like the great boxers I mentioned, most of them hang on for "one more term" long after it makes sense, long after their "era" has passed, and mostly long past the peak of their abilities. Byrd should have been done 15 years ago. John Warner should have wrapped up a term...maybe two...earlier. Kennedy should have stopped before this last term. Churchill shouldn't have been booted in 1945, but should have opted out on his own by about 1950. Very few of them sense that the next few years will tarnish what they have done and end it at the right moment.

Specter has had a remarkable career. He's been in the Senate my entire adult life. He fought the good fight, followed his conscience even when he knew it would vex party colleagues. But now, retaining the Senate is more important than what he'll do when he retains it. Like Ali, he thinks he's got one more comeback in him.



The GOP is engaged in an inevitable tightening of the ranks. Virtually all of its critics assert that making moderates uncomfortable and marginalizing them is a sign of the end. That you cannot be a national party unless you are inclusive. This may be true. It is also true, however, that the GOP over the last 10 years did NOT cater effectively or consistently to its base. Which trend is the real harbinger of doom? I think inclusiveness does matter, but the way most critics define it is NOT the way I think it would work best for the GOP.

I would assert that neither is the real problem. Sen. Snowe knocked out the answer smoothly and at least 2 shots under par (though I add a 2 stroke penalty for using the now cliched "they left me" variant. The real problem is that the GOP has no central message that motivates all of its policies and efforts.

How can someone be a RINO when most of the red-dog GOPpers can't tell you what the party is really all about? Are we fiscal conservatives? Then maybe fighting for spending cuts and limiting taxes or reforming taxes would be a good idea. Are we social conservatives? If so, then an all out effort to abolish abortion and codify morality should be made. Are we constitutionalists? If so, we should be paring back the powers and role of the fed government; bringing the military back down to a large cadre size and pulling out of world policing as rapidly as possible?

In short, the GOP has no core. It will not have one until a person or persons come along who, though politicians, seek to teach others why the GOP way is best and make the tent bigger not by watering down the message but by demonstrating its broad appeal -- of course, knowing the message you believe in would help a bit in that endeavor.

You want to be a vague coalescence of fellow travelers and thus appeal to a broad swath of society by carefully juggling between/catering to the various little splinters of belief and opinion? Fine, go join the Democrats.

The GOP has been playing that game for the last 12 years or so, but its not their game and I find little surprise in the fact that the Dems do it better.

Fiscal conservatism along with the curbing of government powers and size while maintaining a strong, effective military has always worked for the Republicans. Americans almost always vote with their wallets, no matter what their 'ideological slant'. It's been my experience that even the most rabidly liberal Americans bitch and moan about paying taxes and government waste even though they spew endlessly about the marvels of socialized healthcare and all that other nonsense. Basically the Republicans need to silence the social conservatives and put them in the back office where they were during Reagan.

As to the rabidly social conservatives, well where else are they going to go? They know if they stay at home and grumble about their lack of representation instead of voting the danger of having even more liberal, ACLU inspired whack jobs running the show increases with every election. If they push for an independent candidate they'll still lose and the result would be the same if they stayed at home and didn't vote at all. If you're forced to choose between partying with someone you're indifferent towards or someone you can barely tolerate and/or despise the answer is pretty obvious.