You are hereBlogs / Suzi LeVeaux's blog / The "New" GOP

The "New" GOP


By Suzi LeVeaux - Posted on 10 September 2011

The current GOP has strayed far from its traditional roots. Yet most Republicans today have no idea of what the party has traditionally stood for. They question us and our motives, accuse us of not being "real" Republicans. What they fail to grasp is they are the ones who are not real Republicans, in the truest sense of the word. The same applies to many on the liberal side, who think real Republicanism is the party we see today. I hope and pray that someday we can return to being a party of sanity, headed by statesmen, doing what's actually best for our nation, instead of being slaves to corporate America.
 
This is not your father's (or mother's) GOP. During a time of national crisis, the President has submitted an urgently-needed jobs bill that is well within the mainstream for Republicans as well as Democrats. But today's Republicans are a new breed, dedicated not to their country or even an ideology.

Who could best express the absurd lengths these politicians will go to destroy anything that stands in their way? Nobody I can think of - except Groucho Marx. But before Groucho has his say, let's have ours.

Their refusal to pass the strongest provisions in Obama's jobs bill, if that's what they choose to do, will be conclusive proof that their only allegiances are to their own re-elections and the massive corporations that they serve. This bill is far from perfect, but it's a start.

Rejecting this bill wouldn't just be a vote against jobs, although it would certainly be that. It wouldn't just be a vote against children, although it would condemn them to oversized classrooms in crumbling buildings. It wouldn't just be a vote against bridges and highways and a safer, more prosperous country.

It would also be a vote against business. It would be a vote against the real "wealth creators" and "job creators" in this country. Strangest of all, it would be a vote against the Republican Party and what it has historically stood for: pro-business policies, but commonsense policies that actually made those businesses more prosperous.

What would it be a vote for? It would be a vote for cynicism and self-interest. It would be a vote for the wealthiest among us who aren't paying their fair share. And it would be a vote for the fattest, laziest, richest, and least productive Wall Street businesses who profit most when American crumbles and its middle class withers.

America, meet your new Republican Party.

It was Milton Friedman, godfather of modern economic conservatism, who first said "We are all Keynesians now." And it was Richard Nixon who repeated the phrase during another, much milder financial crisis than the one we face today. They recognized that smart incentives helped the private sector expand, and they found ways to do it.

Today, as we struggle with long-term unemployment and no prospects for change, Republicans like Richard Nixon would understand the need to put people back to work.

William Howard Taft built up the Interstate Commerce Commission and the Postal Service winning the 1908 Presidential election. It was another Republican President, Dwight D. Eisenhower, who created our modern highway system in the 1950's. How did he pay for it? With new taxes.

Being a Republican, he imposed a non-progressive gasoline tax. We would have suggested another way. But Eisenhower understood the need for highways, and he understood that they would bring prosperity by shipping people and goods from one shining sea to another.

Ronald Reagan signed the Surface Transportation Assistance Act, which raised that tax by a nickel to pay for transportation infrastructure spending. "As this bill becomes law," said Reagan, "America ends a period of decline in her vast and world-famous transportation system.

Another President signed $286 billion bill that provided funds for roads, bridges, and mass transit. His name was George W. Bush. President Bush traveled to a Caterpillar Co. factory for the signing ceremony. "there's going to be more demand for the machines you make here,'' he said. "And because there's more demand for the machines you make here there is going to be more jobs created around this facility.''

President Bush understood that government spending creates jobs. Here's an excerpt from a Bloomberg News report (not available online) about the bill's signing:

Hastert said Caterpillar workers at the Montgomery plant represented the thousands of U.S. workers and their employers who will benefit.
"That is what this legislation is all about,'' Hastert, a Republican, said.

That would be John Boehner's predecessor, "Coach" Denny Hastert.

What do today's Republicans have to say in this time of national emergency? Rick Perry: "President Obama's call for nearly a half-trillion dollars in more government stimulus when America has more than $14 trillion in debt is guided by his mistaken belief that we can spend our way to prosperity."

More than half of President Obama's $447 billion proposal comes in the form of tax cuts. Why is it that Republicans get to call these cuts "government stimulus," but don't have to use the same term for their trillion-dollar tax giveaways to the ultra-wealthy and outsourcing corporations? They keep telling us that we should keep the top tax rate at 35% (it was briefly 91% under Eisenhower) because the ultra-wealthy are "job creators." That means they're claiming it's a stimulus. So why the double standard?

It is a stimulus - a gigantic one. It just happens to be a stimulus that doesn't work. So let's close it down and replace it with one that works.

Mitt Romney, who claims to be a savvy businessman, said merely "Mr. President, you are 960 days late." Well, what's that expression? Better late than never? For all his "moderate" posturing, the Romney "plan" is one more radical departure from common-sense policies of the past. And for all his supposed business acumen, his policies would devastate all but the least economically productive businesses in this country.

Businesses - the medium and small ones that really do create jobs - would benefit from the President's proposal. It would help a desperate nation start to get on its feet. And it would help to spare more than $3 billion in lost growth over the next nine years, according to study by the Society of Civil Engineers. That's not just good sense. It's also good business sense.

Republicans from Taft to Bush have done the right thing for their country. But today's Republicans are a nihilistic pack who would turn against everything their predecessors believed in, in the name of selfishness and greed.

I have one yardstick by which I test every major problem," said Dwight D. Eisenhower, "and that yardstick is: Is it good for America?" Where are the Republicans of yesteryear?   (emphasis mine)

 
 

I was fascinated by Rick Perry during the Republican debate last week.  He stated his desire for the federal government's #1 priority to be job creation, yet earlier he stated the need for smaller government?  How would a small government go about creating jobs?  I still think Obama is doing a great job, but he is still cleaning up a huge mess.  The least his critics could do would be to give him a bigger shovel.

I agree Brant.  Another thing I notice is the candidates all say government doesn't create jobs, the private sector does.  Yet in the next breath, they brag on how many jobs they created as governor, congress critter etc.  Huh?????

And to expand on that thought: if the government doesn't create jobs, then why is the current drag on our unemployment rate the public sector? Anyone?

Good morning, everyone:

I don't consider myself a Republican and though I tend to vote for Democrats, I believe that too much corporate money is influencing both parties in Congress. I knew there were people like you (moderate Republicans) out there but your voices aren't heard. Many of us on the other side of the aisle feel the same way. I'm writing today (fittingly, on the Equinox) to extend my hand in friendship.

I think we all have more in common than our political leaders would have us believe. None of my Republican friends disagree with me on the issues facing the middle class and most, like me, are concerned with protecting the environment, ending the wars abroad, rebuilding our nation's infrastructure, and seeing that our citizens have fair access to education, jobs, home ownership, and health care. We believe in the separation of Church and State. We want peace. None of us believes in hand-outs; being a citizen entails responsibility and that includes voting. We all believe in the necessity of a social safety net. We want to foster small businesses, including the family farmers who feed the nation. (I can't speak for all, but I am particularly opposed to corporations -- global agribusinesses -- that would monopolize our food supply.) We want a country with a strong defense but don't want our national wealth spent on war and rebuilding other nations while ours founders.

If the Republican Party platform for 2012 was like it was in 1956, I would probably call myself a Republican. I consider Teddy Roosevelt and Abraham Lincoln to be among our six greatest presidents.

http://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/ws/index.php?pid=25838#axzz1YmwJdhlX

These few quotes from that platform encourage me in the belief that we can all come together as a nation if we refuse to let the political theatre and media manipulation divide us. We are Americans, and neighbors, first.

"Our great President Dwight D. Eisenhower has counseled us further: 'In all those things which deal with people, be liberal, be human. In all those things which deal with people's money, or their economy, or their form of government, be conservative.'

While jealously guarding the free institutions and preserving the principles upon which our Republic was founded and has flourished, the purpose of the Republican Party is to establish and maintain a peaceful world and build at home a dynamic prosperity in which every citizen fairly shares.

We shall ever build anew, that our children and their children, without distinction because of race, creed or color, may know the blessings of our free land.

We believe that basic to governmental integrity are unimpeachable ethical standards and irreproachable personal conduct by all people in government. We shall continue our insistence on honesty as an indispensable requirement of public service. We shall continue to root out corruption whenever and wherever it appears.

We are proud of and shall continue our far-reaching and sound advances in matters of basic human needs—expansion of social security—broadened coverage in unemployment insurance —improved housing—and better health protection for all our people. We are determined that our government remain warmly responsive to the urgent social and economic problems of our people."

Peace, friends.
 
Judith

It is refreshing to hear that  Republicans do understand how the GOP has strayed from its traditional roots. In history past Republican Presidents did care for " The peolple" of the nation and were not being bought buy "big business'. During this time of national crisis, the GOP need to remember what the ideas that The Republican Party were founded.

Follow RFO:

TwitterCafe PressFacebook

RSS

 

 

RFO Gear

Subscribe to General RFO Newsletter

General news and announcements for republicansforobama.org. We will never share or sell your email address.