GOP leaders let DEMAGOGUES set tone

[THE MATRIX]

link

WASHINGTON (AP) -- Too many Republican leaders are acquiescing to a poisonous "demagoguery" that threatens the party's long-term credibility, says a veteran GOP House member who was defeated in South Carolina's primary last month.

While not naming names, 12-year incumbent Rep. Bob Inglis suggested in interviews with The Associated Press that tea party favorites such as former vice presidential nominee Sarah Palin and right-wing talk show hosts like Glenn Beck are the culprits.

He cited a claim made famous by Palin that the Democratic health care bill would create "death panels" to decide whether elderly or sick people should get care.

"There were no death panels in the bill ... and to encourage that kind of fear is just the lowest form of political leadership. It's not leadership. It's demagoguery," said Inglis, one of three Republican incumbents who have lost their seats in Congress to primary and state party convention challengers this year.

Inglis said voters eventually will discover that you're "preying on their fears" and turn away.

"I think we have a lot of leaders that are following those (television and talk radio) personalities and not leading," he said. "What it takes to lead is to say, 'You know, that's just not right.'"

Inglis said the rhetoric also distracts from the real problems that politicians should be trying to resolve, such as budget deficits and energy security.

"It's a real concern, because I think what we're doing is dividing the country into partisan camps that really look a lot like Shia and Sunni," he said, referring to the two predominant Islamic denominations that have feuded for centuries. "It's very difficult to come together to find solutions."

So true, so true.

[ninjadude]

Inglis sounded like a real republican from what I read previously. Someone that can work and compromise on issues without radical ideaology. But it seems in todays repub party he has no place. I doubt we'll ever hear from him again because he just failed their purity test.

Edited July 10, 2010 by ninjadude

[Agent X]

Define "real republican".

[ninjadude]

Define "real republican".

sorry. I knew I would get that. By that I mean a majority of republicans of some decades ago. That were not driven by as radical ideologies like today. The republican platform of 20/30 years ago would be too "socialist" for repubs of today. Repubs that didn't vote as much to score political points but advance compromise legislation. By that I mean people like Inglis. I, of course, don't agree with all of his positions. But contrast him with someone like Sharon Angle whose positions are patently insane.

[Agent X]

Well, I do agree with you that the Republicans of today are quite different than 10 to 30 years ago.

However, you need to be a bit more informative than that. What were there beliefs? What was there platform?

[venqax]

sorry. I knew I would get that. By that I mean a majority of republicans of some decades ago. That were not driven by as radical ideologies like today. The republican platform of 20/30 years ago would be too "socialist" for repubs of today. Repubs that didn't vote as much to score political points but advance compromise legislation. By that I mean people like Inglis. I, of course, don't agree with all of his positions. But contrast him with someone like Sharon Angle whose positions are patently insane.

Are the "real" Democrats the ones of some decades ago, too? You know, the segregationists who blocked civil rights and set dogs on protestors? Democrats like George Wallace, Russell Long, Orval Farbus, Theodore Bilbo? You liked the Repubs who were "Democrat Lite", back during the 60 years that Dems had a stranglehold on Congress and the only thing Repubs could do was "compromise" and nap. Those days are GONE. Thanks to heroes like Goldwater, Reagan, Gingrich, Scalia, real conservatives are back. The patriotic masses have been awakened. And there is no compromise, no "splitting the difference" with the minions of national ruin, Obamas, Pelosis, Emanuels, Axelrods, Reids, Durbans, and the rest of leftist radical central committee.

Just for chuckles, what exactly do you think is "radical" or fringe about the present Republcan agenda? Something that probably Jefferson and Hamilton would not have agreed on? If you need to know who they were, and why they were picked as bookends, it's in the same book where you can find out what a govt owned corporation is.

Edited July 11, 2010 by venqax

[questionmark]

Well, I do agree with you that the Republicans of today are quite different than 10 to 30 years ago.

However, you need to be a bit more informative than that. What were there beliefs? What was there platform?

Wrong place to ask the question, that can be learned at lobbying firms like The Downey McGrath Group, but that can change hourly.

[ninjadude]

Just for chuckles, what exactly do you think is "radical" or fringe about the present Republcan agenda? Something that probably Jefferson and Hamilton would not have agreed on?

seriously?! link

[danielost]

seriously?! link

i thought you wanted them to go back to their roots. since this law was passed once in the 1800s i dont know how much further back you can go to get to your roots.