House GOP: ‘The Party of What?’
I love this. There’s nothing better than catching someone in the act of contradicting themselves, and President Obama’s acknowledgement last week that he has received, read and heard the ideas promulgated by Republicans certainly contradicted all of that “party of no” talk we’ve been hearing for so long.
Take a look at this entry in the House GOP’s “Conference Call” blog:
First, we were the party of no ideas:
“One of our two great parties is now an organization committed to an unprecedented level of lockstep opposition to the president: a ‘Party of No,’ whose political strategy is an investment in failure for our country and paralysis for its institutions…No one expects Republicans to roll over for President Obama. But the ‘Party of No’ strategy is so disappointing because the history of Congress is full of loyal oppositions that shared responsibility for governing in trying times and shaped some of the most important legislation of their eras.” (Speech by Leader Hoyer at Center for American Progress Action Fund 12/7/09)
Then President Obama came to our retreat and acknowledged we have solutions:
- “I suspect I will embrace some of them. Some of them I’ve already embraced.”
- “I’ve read your legislation. I take a look at this stuff.”
- “Actually I’ve gotten many of your ideas. I’ve taken a look at them.”
- “I’ve read it. I can tell you what’s in it”
And all of a sudden those ideas we didn’t have were magically incorporated into Democrat legislation:
“Well I think the president made it clear that he has indeed listened to a number of Republican ideas, in fact, he pointed out that in the stimulus bill he incorporated a number of provisions that historically have been advocated by Republicans and some that were advocated at that time. For example, the small business tax cuts and the bonus depreciation. He pointed out that one third of the economic recovery bill involved tax relief, including tax relief for 95% of the American people.” (Rep. Van Hollen on Today Show, 1/30/10)
Then two days later, the nonexistent Republican ideas incorporated into Democrat legislation were bad ideas:
“I think the Republicans have been able to get away for too long in this last year with a hit-and-run political strategy,” DCCC Chairman Chris Van Hollen told Morning Score. “We’ve been, actually, making this point to our members and, frankly, we’ve been making it to the White House for some time now. It’s not that the Republicans are the party of no; it’s just that their proposals want to take us back to the Bush policies.” (Politico 2/1/10)
And on the very same day that those policies seem bad, maybe they are…maybe they really aren’t…maybe they are:
“The point is not that it was the fault of Bush and the Republicans,” said Rep. Chris Van Hollen (D., Md.), chairman of the House Democrats’ campaign committee. “It’s [to tell voters] that if you elect a Republican to Congress, they’re going to pursue the same Bush economic policies that put us in this mess in the first place.” (The Wall Street Journal, 2/1/10)
So which one is it?
A lesson to liberals: this is what happens when you are devoid of principle, and are acting solely in the interest of political expediency. Principle doesn’t waver — you either like an idea and advance it, or you don’t.
Now, that doesn’t mean that America’s lefties have a monopoly on hypocrisy. Of course they don’t. The political fate of the Democratic Party, however, is sure different a chance for America to see that one side is certainly more prone to it than the other.