If John Boehner is a moderate, we have a problem

"I heard someone use the term "moderate Republican" the other day, and I looked around for Mac Mathias. Of course, the great Maryland senator departed this life in January 2010, at the age of 87. He had retired in 1987, having served in Congress for 25 years. Once upon a time, Senator Mathias was aligned with something called the "influential liberal wing of the Republican Party," a phrase you could never conjure today without first doing some herb — and, even then, it would have to be really good stuff.

Once upon a time, there were Republicans in the middle and the middle-left. Rockefeller Republicans, they were called — fiscal conservatives, skeptical of big government social programs, but supporters of sensible government investment in education, health care and the environment for the good of the nation."...............

http://www.baltimoresun.com/news/opinio ... 136.column

neptunechimney wrote: "I heard someone use the term "moderate Republican" the other day, and I looked around for Mac Mathias. Of course, the great Maryland senator departed this life in January 2010, at the age of 87. He had retired in 1987, having served in Congress for 25 years. Once upon a time, Senator Mathias was aligned with something called the "influential liberal wing of the Republican Party," a phrase you could never conjure today without first doing some herb — and, even then, it would have to be really good stuff.

Once upon a time, there were Republicans in the middle and the middle-left. Rockefeller Republicans, they were called — fiscal conservatives, skeptical of big government social programs, but supporters of sensible government investment in education, health care and the environment for the good of the nation."...............

http://www.baltimoresun.com/news/opinio ... 136.column

Excellent article. Thanks for posting.

Sceptical of big goverment social programs? I think not. They easily approved Medicare and Medicaid.
The Rockefeller Republicans were just rubber stamps for the big social spending. Like Nixon, supposedly a Republican but he supported wage and price controls like a good Democrat. If that is what Republicans used to be, I am glad that they have evolved.

And if you don't think the new Republican Party is what the people want, I only have to look at all the TEA Party Republicans in Congress right now.

Yep...That's why I'm going to re-register... I have looked at the TEA Party in Congress right now... I'm going to have to work on controlling my gag-reflex, but I'm going to re-register next month!

SS109 wrote: Sceptical of big goverment social programs? I think not. They easily approved Medicare and Medicaid.
The Rockefeller Republicans were just rubber stamps for the big social spending. Like Nixon, supposedly a Republican but he supported wage and price controls like a good Democrat. If that is what Republicans used to be, I am glad that they have evolved.

And if you don't think the new Republican Party is what the people want, I only have to look at all the TEA Party Republicans in Congress right now.

"Skeptical" is not the same thing as "adamantly opposed under any circumstances". Skeptical means you need to be convinced, not that nothing on earth would convince you.

Nixon and the wage and price controls? Can't say I ever understood that from ANYONEs perspective. And I wouldn't exactly hold him up as a sterling example of ANY kind of a Republican anyway.

And as far as "looking at all the Tea Party" Republicans in Congress, yeah, PLEASE DO LOOK AT THEM. I suspect a lot of people who voted for them on the promise of "jobs, jobs, jobs" are wondering what happened to that and wondering why instead they are getting insane ideological battles over the budget that may end up costing the taxpayers billions of dollars in extra interest payments when they screw up the national credit rating over it.

I don't think they have a clue what they are doing, quite honestly, they think they can somehow get by on just being righteously indignant.

AspenValley wrote:
I don't think they have a clue what they are doing, quite honestly, they think they can somehow get by on just being righteously indignant.

Sounds a lot like President Obama. A man who finds the office of President above his pay grade. The Peter Principle to the highest level.

SS109 wrote:

AspenValley wrote:
I don't think they have a clue what they are doing, quite honestly, they think they can somehow get by on just being righteously indignant.

Sounds a lot like President Obama. A man who finds the office of President above his pay grade. The Peter Principle to the highest level.

You know, I hear that from you guys all the time but I really don't see how you can think so, especially compared to his predecessor....
:Whistle
But that's beside the point. I have differences with the President but they revolve around disappointment at his apparent desire to appear collegial and adult when trying to work out "agreement" with a bunch of ravening ideologues who appear to think that it would be better to destroy the nation than compromise with that "Muslim Marxist". He ought to tell them to take their ideology and put it where the sun don't shine.

LadyJazzer wrote: Yep...That's why I'm going to re-register... I have looked at the TEA Party in Congress right now... I'm going to have to work on controlling my gag-reflex, but I'm going to re-register next month!

You had better beware of unintended consequences. If enough dems re register as r's, I predict the democratic party will become more tea party than the tea party in the blink of an eye.

Only if I were to actually VOTE Republican in the General election... Do you REALLY think I would do that?

Do you think there's anything in the Democratic primary that I would miss out on in Jefferson County?

I'll let you worry about the "unintended consequences"... I'll just vote in the Primary, and move on...