Wednesday, February 15, 2012

Truth Comes Out

It's finally become clear why Rs are okay with the idea of Mitt "You-Name-It-I'll-Say-It" Romney as president (and, by inference, why they began to worry about Newt): They're expecting to take control of both houses of Congress come December, and all they want from Romney is what exactly what they think he is: a president who'll sit meekly and do what Congress tells him:

They have reconciled themselves to a Romney candidacy because they see Romney as essentially a weak and passive president who will concede leadership to congressional conservatives:

All we have to do is replace Obama. ... We are not auditioning for fearless leader. We don't need a president to tell us in what direction to go. We know what direction to go. We want the Ryan budget. ... We just need a president to sign this stuff. We don't need someone to think it up or design it. The leadership now for the modern conservative movement for the next 20 years will be coming out of the House and the Senate.

The requirement for president?

Pick a Republican with enough working digits to handle a pen to become president of the United States. This is a change for Republicans: the House and Senate doing the work with the president signing bills. His job is to be captain of the team, to sign the legislation that has already been prepared.

(The quotes within the quote are from Grover Norquist, recently delivered to an adoring crowd at CPAC.)

I think they're absolutely right about Mitt: he hasn't proposed a single idea nor produced a vision for what his presidency would be, other than the unwinding of everything Obama and the reestablishment of everything Bush. The question -- the really truly awful question -- is whether Rs will, indeed, take over Congress.

It'll be bad enough if the coming election leaves Obama in the White House with teabaggRs in control of the House, and Rs either in control of the Senate or, like now, willing to filibuster everything but Obama's choice of schools for his kids. But in control of it all? Able to activate their regressive agenda, against women, against the poor, against benefitting anyone but the most wealthy? Against education, research, infrastructure? Against, in short, the future? Just give us Mitt, and he'll do what he's told.

In the full article, the author, Republican David Frum points out that speaking such truth might not be a great idea, given the exceeding low regard people have for Congress in general, and, even more so, for Congressional Rs in particular. And, to be clear: he's not saying he's against the perversity and devastation of the Ryan plan. Just that he wishes Norquist wouldn't have let the cat out of the bag.

1 comment:

jre said...

Ah, Grover Norquist. Now, there. is. a. piece. of. work.

I was given Jack Abramoff's memoir as a kind of practical joke gift, and my jaw has dropped with every turned page. Norquist (college bud of Abramoff) is now, and has apparently always been, what they call "one white cat shy of a Bond villain." He not only has zero scruples about lying, cheating and stealing his way to any prize he desires, he absolutely glories in his ability and willingness to dive to the depths of any cesspit for his cause. This is the guy that gives pond scum such a bad name.

Popular posts