Who is Destroying the Republican Party?

The thrust of an October 10th article at PJ Media by its founding light, Roger L. Simon, is that Senator Cruz is destroying it. I disagree. Senator Cruz is doing his best to save what little is left of the Republican Party.
It may be a lost cause


This has worked so well for Obama and RINOs
that they have to do it some more.

According to this article at Commentary Magazine on the morning of October 11th,

If Washington conventional wisdom is right this morning, Republicans are about to start walking away from the ledge onto which they climbed with the government shutdown. Indications are that the House Republican proposals for a short-term extension of the debt ceiling will be the starting point for talks that will end the shutdown as well as ensure that the U.S. doesn’t default. It’s far from clear what the GOP will get in exchange for giving up their leverage over budget negotiations, but no one expects it to be much. If so, President Obama’s stonewalling tactics in which he dared the Republicans to shut down the government will be vindicated. And hardly a soul is talking about the fate of ObamaCare, the defunding of which was supposed to be the whole point of the exercise. [Emphasis added.]

Howard Nemerov posted an article titled Is the Republican Party Committing Suicide? on October 12th at PJ Tatler

Now that the Republican party plans to “compromise” on Obamacare and the budget, the end is near for the pretense that we have a two party system.

. . . .

[T]he GOP has capitulated to Obama’s demands. This, in itself, may not be a death blow, but you must understand the underlying consequences.

The GOP’s actions demonstrate that they accept total blame for the government shutdown, and that what they did was wrong. Three weeks ago, they said it was more important to defund Obamacare than to create a budget resolution. Today, they say that action was wrong, and that all of Obama’s demands were right.

The GOP has acknowledged that slimming down government spending, either through sequester cuts or by the government shutdown, was the wrong thing to do. They acknowledge by their actions that increased government spending and unrestricted government growth are the correct actions, which Obama and the Democrats have declared to be the right path for America.

The GOP’s actions declare to America that anybody who still believes in smaller, more fiscally accountable government has no place in America’s political landscape.

The GOP ostensibly claims support for the Second Amendment, as well as the rest of the Bill of Rights and Constitution. After Obamacare, what new “taxes” will they help dream up? As your tax load increases, do you think there will be money left for guns and ammo?

I agree. What need is there for a Republican Party that is an obedient clone of the Democrat Party? On the other hand, it may not yet have become that. According to this article, at Time-Swampland,

House Republicans left an early morning meeting in the basement of the Capitol on Saturday in agreement: the ball remains in the President’s court. “There is no deal. No negotiations,” said Rep. Richard Hudson (R-N.C.).

. . . .

House Republicans left an early morning meeting in the basement of the Capitol on Saturday in agreement: the ball remains in the President’s court. “There is no deal. No negotiations,” said Rep. Richard Hudson (R-N.C.).

. . . .

“I went into the meeting thinking that we might be going to surrender to the President,” said Rep. Thomas Massie (R-Ky.), who, along with Gohmert and 10 other House Republicans, tried in January to take away the Speaker’s gavel. “What I got out of the meeting is that we’re still standing strong.” [Emphasis added.]

If Rep. Massie turns out to have been correct, and enough Republicans continue to stand strong, may they be fruitful and multiply. Maybe, just maybe, enough Republicans — including even some RINOs — are beginning to realize that since President Obama is “He Who Will Not Negotiate,” yielding to His whims is senseless. Might the principled views of Senator Cruz have had a role in shaping their positions? I think so.

Bill Whittle argues his position in this video.

Plainly, President Obama is a dictatorial jerk and We the People are well on the way to becoming non-essential, except as taxpayers. However — or perhaps even because of it — His popularity remains high. On October 12th, Rasmussen reported that its most recent poll gave Him a fifty-one percent approval rating and a forty-eight percent disapproval rating. Since being a dictatorial jerk works quite well for Him, why should He stop? Why not do it with even more vigor, determination and success?

Should principles be abandoned? 

Roger L. Simon’s PJ Media article, ObamaCare: they Don’t Call ‘Em The “stupid party” for nothing, argues that

Well, they don’t call ‘em ‘The Stupid Party’ for nothing.

Ironically, however, the person I think most responsible for this (let’s hope temporary) debacle is anything but stupid — Princeton graduate Ted Cruz. [Emphasis added.]

I was quite intrigued with the Texas senator, with whom I agree on many matters, when I first heard about him. A feisty conservative with a Cuban background and a fair amount of smarts — what could be bad?

Well, the human ego, I’m afraid. It seems to get to all of us. Mr. Cruz took his justifiable disdain for ObamaCare and ran with it to such a degree that it became less about the legislation and far more about him, as he, in envious imitation of Rand Paul perhaps, took to the Senate floor and stayed and stayed and stayed until the entire Congress collapsed. [Emphasis added.]

Cruz never had a real strategy for defunding ObamaCare, his avowed intention in this extravaganza. That was painfully obvious on several occasions, including his appearance on the opening of Megyn Kelly’s new show Monday. He was still dodging about how he intended to defund the new law against a Democratic-controled [sic] Senate that wasn’t about to budge on the issue, even less against a president for whom Affordable Care is, Obama thinks anyway, the one jewel in a very tarnished crown.

No way this defunding would occur, yet Cruz went on and on, dragging us all along with him. He pressed a lot of people’s anger buttons, so that many on talk radio and in Congress felt they had to go along with his Alamo Complex lest they be accused of being wimps or, worse, RINOs. But to what end? [Emphasis added.]

“Alamo complex?” Dr. Ben Carson — hardly a fire-spewing lunatic wearing a suicide vest — recently characterized ObamaCare as “the worst thing to happen to the U.S. since slavery.”

“It is slavery because it aims to make all of us subservient to the government,” he said. “It was never about health care. It was about control.”

Dr. Carson further compared the new health care reform to policies envisioned by Vladimir Lenin, one of the fathers of socialism and communism.

“Socialized medicine is the keystone in the establishment of a socialist state,” Dr. Carson told the audience of some 2,000 supporters of traditional values.

Such a comment may seem paranoid to some, he said, “but I would say if you know anything about history, how could you not bring it up?”

When people in the executive and legislative branch don’t have to participate, but everybody else has to, “that’s not America, that’s Russia,” he added.

Accepting, but only for the sake of argument, that Senator Cruz should have realized that President Obama would not budge on His pride and joy ObamaSlavery, perhaps Senator Cruz should simply have abandoned his principles and skipped that fight. It now seems that President Obama will not negotiate on any aspect of the Government slowdown, or in any meaningful sense on the debt ceiling. Based on the argument that Senator Cruz should not have bothered, should the RINOs just abandon any stray principles that may lurk within them, give President Obama whatever He demands and have done with it?  That would be consistent with the arguments against Senator Cruz’s position, i.e., if He won’t budge, don’t bother. 

There are multiple problems with yielding to an unyielding President. As Alan Caruba notes here,

The President has been insisting for days that he would not negotiate. Well, we all knew he would not negotiate anything regarding Obamacare, including something sensible like delaying its implementation for a year. He already gave a delay to Big Business. How about the rest of the population?

. . . .

This isn’t “politics as usual.” This is one part of the government, the House of Representatives, doing what the Constitution says it must, overseeing the expenditure of every last penny the government spends. And it is two other parts, the Senate and the White House, controlled by the Democratic Party, refusing to compromise. [Emphasis added.]

It is the American people waking up to discover that (1) President Obama is content to inflict as much pain as possible on them and (2) that a frayed and divided Republican Party cannot, will not hold firm to secure some protection against Obamacare and a reduction in government spending.

At this writing, the biggest losers will be the American people. Well, at least those who do not work for the government and live outside the Beltway.

At what point, if ever, might they take a firm and principled stand against President Obama’s radical transformation of America? When He stubbornly refuses to negotiate on everything? When He purports to eliminate the debt ceiling by executive decree? When all civilian firearms are confiscated? When Federal troops take over “rebellious” red States? When He declares martial law and dissolves the Congress? When troops start rolling down Pennsylvania Avenue in tanks to arrest any Republicans who won’t shut up and go away? Is there any point at which the RINOs will do anything, beyond yield?


Senator Cruz has taken and continues to take a principled stand against ObamaCare — despite the apparent willingness of many in the Republican Party to bow to the Obama Machine. On October 11th, he and other conservatives

took turns throwing out red-meat lines about the horribleness of the law. Sen.Ted Cruz (R-Texas) called Obamacare a “disaster” and a “trainwreck” that violates the Constitution before commending the House of Representatives for “standing strong” amid the government shutdown. Sen.Tim Scott (R-S.C.) said President Obama “didn’t even like the Obamacare law, so he delayed portions of the law for a year.” He added, “We deserve better.”

The ObamaCare “roll out” has been a disaster, as even many followers of the legitimate media must know.

Will RINO cave men continue to cave?

The RINOs have tried to surrender, but President Obama has rejected their offers and wants more.

(WASHINGTON) — With talks having stalled between the White House and House Republicans, a bipartisan group in the Senate is polishing a measure that would reopen the government and prevent a first-ever default on the country’s bills.

The negotiations in the Senate come as the chamber meets in a rare Saturday session to vote on a Democratic measure to lift the government’s borrowing cap through the end of next year. Republicans are poised to reject it amid talks among the group of rank-and-file senators — talks monitored with the full attention of Senate leaders.

. . . .

Publicly, top House Republicans said negotiations were on track. Obama called House Speaker John Boehner at midafternoon Friday, and Michael Steel, a spokesman for the leader of House Republicans, said, “They agreed that we should all keep talking.”

Privately, the channel between the White House and the House wasn’t bearing fruit, said aides on both sides. The aides required anonymity because the talks were private and they weren’t authorized to discuss them by name.

President Obama has rejected a short term debt ceiling increase because it would mean just kicking the can down a short road to the holidays. Then, it would have to be kicked again. He wants to kick the can down a long if not endless road and avoid any meaningful discussions about a budget.

“It wouldn’t be wise, as some suggest, to just kick the debt-ceiling can down the road for a couple months, and flirt with a first-ever intentional default right in the middle of the holiday shopping season,” Obama said in his Saturday radio and Internet address.

That’s an Obama Flip Flop, of the sort which we should by now have come to expect.

This has every appearance of being an ad-hoc strategy. The president knows he has the GOP by the short hairs and will now extract maximum concessions, humiliating Republicans in the bargain.

Bryan Peterson notes at PJ Tatler that 

I’ve written a piece or two on how the 1990s shutdown had a far less dramatic effect than the current media lets on. It didn’t actually change very much in the next election. It did play a role in forcing Bill Clinton to agree to the Republicans’ balanced budgets. (It also introduced him to Monica Lewinsky.) No shutdown now, however, is likely to have much effect on Barack Obama’s policy or strategy. He’s just a very different political animal from Clinton. He doesn’t want any real budget at all. A strategy that worked on Clinton is not guaranteed to work on Obama or change much in Congress. [Emphasis added.]

The Republican Party seems not to be doing well.

The right wing

Here’s an October 11th Town Hall “conservative” cartoon.

Cruz at little big horn

The rest of the Republican Party

This screen shot of a recent Gallup Poll indicates that the Republican Party is not doing well.

Gallup poll Rep v dems

How could that be? Might significant numbers of those who still call themselves “Republicans” not have a “favorable” view of their party because it is fractured and has been dominated by those willing to cave in to Democrats far too often? That’s my view. Might significant numbers of Democrats now be proud of their party and their President for their apparent steadfastness? The Republican Party may have outlived its usefulness and it may soon be time to euthanize it (before it commits suicide) so that the nation can look for better ways of finding a better path.

How does one negotiate with He Who Will Not Negotiate?

Victor Davis Hanson, in an article published several days ago at PJ Media titled Obama as Chaos, wrote,

Amid all the charges and countercharges in Washington over the government shutdown, there is at least one common theme: Barack Obama’s various charges always lead to a dead end. They are chaos, and chaos is hard to understand, much less refute.

By that I mean when the president takes up a line of argument against his opponents, it cannot really be taken seriously — not just because it is usually not factual, but also because it always contradicts positions that Obama himself has taken earlier or things he has previously asserted. Whom to believe — Obama 1.0, Obama 2.0, or Obama 3.0?

When the president derides the idea of shutting down the government over the debt ceiling, we almost automatically assume that he himself tried to do just that when as a senator he voted against the Bush administration request in 2006, when the debt was about $6 trillion less than it is now.

. . . .

When the president laments the loss of civility and reminds the public that he uses “calm” rhetoric during the impasse, we know he has accused his opponents of being on an “ideological crusade” and of being hostage takers and blackmailers who have “a gun held to the head of the American people,” while his top media adviser Dan Pfeiffer has said that they had “a bomb strapped to their chest.”

When the president insists that the Republican effort to hold up the budget is unprecedented, we automatically deduce that, in fact, the action has many precedents, and on frequent prior occasions was a favored ploy of Democrats to gain leverage over Republican administrations.

In short, whenever the president prefaces a sweeping statement with one of his many emphatics — “make no mistake about it,” “I’m not making this up,” “in point of fact,” “let me be perfectly clear” — we know that the reverse is always true. For Obama, how something is said matters far more than what is said. If he stumbles, as is his wont, through an un-teleprompted remark that on rare occasions can be mostly accurate, that is a serious lapse; if, more frequently, he mellifluously asserts a teleprompted falsehood, there is little worry. The result is not so much untruth, lies, or distortions, as virtual chaos. Is what he says untrue, contradictory of what he said or did earlier, or just nonsensical?

. . . .

Obama simply couldn’t care less about what he says at any given moment, whether it is weighing in on the football name “Redskins” or the Travyon Martin trial. He is detached and unconcerned about the history of an issue, about which he is usually poorly informed. Raising the debt ceiling is an abstraction; all that matters is that when he is president it is a good thing and when he is opposing a president it is a bad one. Let aides sort out the chaos. Obamacare will lower premiums, not affect existing medical plans, and not require increased taxes; that all of the above are untrue matters nothing. Who could sort out the chaos? [Emphasis added.]

Even attempting to negotiate with a chaotic President Obama and his obedient minions can be a very taxing experience. In that context, the word “taxing” has a double meaning, neither of which is good or otherwise conducive to negotiating.


I still think this old guy would be a pretty good President, even though he died years ago.

Maybe I’ll just climb into a fantasy machine and stay there, where Grandpa Jones can also be cloned into as many CongressCritters as there are seats there.


Here is a Day-by-Day cartoon that I just noticed and rather enjoyed.

DaybyDay Rep Party is dead

I do hope there’s still some go-juice left in the GOP and maybe, just maybe, there is. Much depends on what happens between now and when the debt ceiling is breached.


An article by Roger Kimball at PJ Media titled It’s Always Worse Than You Think, D.C. Edition is well worth reading. Mr. Kimball observes,

Pantywaists from both parties are screaming that Ted Cruz is an extremist who is wrecking the GOP, but is he?  Or is he rather an almost lone voice of reason campaigning vigorously for the principles he espouses: limited government, fiscal restraint, individual responsibility? Of course, all GOPers emit those phrases on the hustings.  How many follow through with action? Hardly any.

How dare Senator Cruz do something as unorthodox as “follow through with action!” Please read the article.

About danmillerinpanama

I was graduated from Yale University in 1963 with a B.A. in economics and from the University of Virginia School of law, where I was the notes editor of the Virginia Law Review in 1966. Following four years of active duty with the Army JAG Corps, with two tours in Korea, I entered private practice in Washington, D.C. specializing in communications law. I retired in 1996 to sail with my wife, Jeanie, on our sailboat Namaste to and in the Caribbean. In 2002, we settled in the Republic of Panama and live in a very rural area up in the mountains. I have contributed to Pajamas Media and Pajamas Tatler. In addition to my own blog, Dan Miller in Panama, I an an editor of Warsclerotic and contribute to China Daily Mail when I have something to write about North Korea.
This entry was posted in 2016 Obama's America, Afterburner, Appeasement, Bill Whittle, Boehner, Debt limit, Democracy, Democrats, Federal budget, Fiscal Cliff, Good stuff for everone free, Government reliance, Grand Pa Jones, Health Control, Kiking the can down the road, Nanny state, Obama, ObamaCare, PJ Media, Political class, Politics, Principles, Republicans, RINOs, Socialism, United States, Waste in Government and tagged , , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

10 Responses to Who is Destroying the Republican Party?

  1. Pingback: Government Shutdown Backfires on Republicans and Makes Obamacare More Popular | Ye Olde Soapbox

  2. bunkerville says:

    Great post. His “tells” come as well with his stutter and high pitched voice. The question, is there any thought in his mind that what he says is not true.

  3. Tom Carter says:

    After all is said and done, what really matters is that Democrats control the executive branch and half the legislative branch. They are the party in power, and it’s to be expected that they generally will have their way.

    The only way to change this reality is to elect more Republicans to Congress and a Republican as president. That cannot be accomplished by a Republican party torn by internal dissent. It also cannot be accomplished by a third party of a conservative bent — Perot in 1992 virtually assured the election of Clinton.

    The most important long-term influence of a presidency is the appointment of federal judges, especially Supreme Court justices. So far, Obama hasn’t had the opportunity to appoint replacements for conservative justices, and he may not be able to. But the next president almost certainly will, and if the Republicans don’t get their act together by 2016 the Court will become very liberal for many years to come.

    Every student in Politics 101 is taught that “politics is the art of the possible.” If the Republican Party doesn’t factor that immutable truth into their thinking and behavior, they’ll never be able to function in a unified and effective way. They’ll continue stabbing each other in the back at every opportunity, and Democrats will continue to control the government.

    Anyone who believes that ideological purity is more important than winning elections doesn’t belong in politics.

    • Unexpectedly, I have been modestly pleased with the way things have been going. Perhaps, but only perhaps, the Republican Party has begun shifting to the right. If so, I attribute it in large part to Senator Cruz and his colleagues. If that has happened, and if that shift continues, we can have two parties.

      Assuming that that happens, I don’t know which party will win in 2014 or in 2016. However, strength of conviction and actions consistent with that strength seem to have more popular appeal than weakness and vacillation.

      Maybe the Republican leadership has noticed the polls and ascribed the recent downward Republican trajectory to their wuss-like behavior. I hope so, and that they will continue to assume a more forceful posture.

    • Mike says:

      You Identify the problem when you point out “Every student in Politics 101 (I’m assuming you mean political science classes) is taught that “politics is the art of the possible.””
      Your right… they should instead be taught about ideology and why the U.S. is different from every country in the world. Why Natural Law and protection of the Individual is sacred. But instead they are taught to compromise these ideas.
      You also fail to see the forest for the trees. The most important part of the upcoming elections will be the primaries. While I agreed with your premise regarding control of the branches of government you conveniently overlook the primary elections. This is what the Liberal Republicans fear, as they should. The current movement does not bode well for those who assume because they have a “R” behind their name they should be able to run unopposed.

      • Maybe politics is changing and Politics 101 will have to be rewritten.

        I agree that primaries are important, to the extent that they are not controlled by the RINOs Republican “leadership.” It was suggested at Conservatives on Fire that if Speaker Boehner wins his primary, conservatives should vote Democrat and get rid of him that way. It could work, with little damage. At the moment, however, it strikes me as a bit extreme since Boehner seems to have been swayed by the conservatives more than I had expected. That may well change and, if it does, I may agree with the suggestion.

        Perhaps a third, conservative, party might help for the 2014 elections. Its winners could caucus with some Republicans, or even some Democrats, on appropriate legislation and perhaps even on occasion get a rare majority in one or both houses. I recall having suggested that late last year, but with only a cursory review I haven’t found the article yet.

        The chances of a Democrat takeover of the House are said by most to be remote and of a Republican takeover of the Senate at least as remote. With a third conservative party, perhaps Republicans who caucus with newly elected conservatives could control the House and maybe even the Senate on some legislation. Of course, President Obama would likely veto whatever got passed that way.

        It’s a mess and I haven’t figured out any better possible solutions.

  4. Mike says:

    I agree with you here. Not so much on Granpa Jones… but on the main point. Those calling themselves Republicans are waking up the fact that a majority of those they believed in are down deep inside members of the Socialist Lite party. They Hate Cruz because he forces attention to the differences within the party. They just want their turn to tell you what to do… that is when the Progressives let them.
    He sheds undesired light upon those who have survived hiding behind Reagan’s 11th Commandment. While the Democrats want to appear to enjoy this infighting they are terrified that the likes of Cruz et al could be successful in solidifying control over the Republican Party. This is genuine fear. When they state it would be a catastrophe for the country, they mean it… because they have crafted a socialist paradigm right here in America and that’s the country they are referring to. Cruz knew full well he had no hope in defunding Obama Care… and his filibuster was not really about that. It was about painting in bold colors. So it’s no wonder the likes of McConnell, McCain, and the rest of the RINO herd is agitated.
    The folks criticizing Cruz are simply showing their colors… and they are pale indeed.
    Sharpen that pencil and write down those names while they’re easy to see.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s