Why Republicans should NOT co-operate with Democrats

November 16, 2012
By

We should fight Obama with every breath. We should fight him on immigration, we should fight him on taxes and spending, we should fight him on Obamacare, and we should pursue to the fullest our investigations of Benghazi and Fast and Furious.

Why? Consider how our economy will look in four years. Possibilities:

  1. The Reagan scenario, where it comes roaring back to life.

    We’d lose the presidential election in 2016, and become a minority party for a while. No amount of “bipartisanship” (AKA doing exactly what Democrats want) would change that.

  2. The Japan scenario, where zero interest rates and skyrocketing national debt have no apparent impact on the economy. It stays anemic, but not terrible.

    We’d be back to 2004/2012 trench warfare. Democrats have proven that they can demagogue us to death by dividing the country every which way. Why co-operate with them when that’d only let them make further gains among, say, Hispanics, by taking credit for legalizing illegal aliens? In trench warfare, you don’t cross the trenches to hold hands and sing Kumbaya.

  3. The Weimar/Argentina/Greece scenario.

    Will this happen? Everyone assumes that it’ll take more than a decade. But there is a real possibility that our economy may be terrifyingly bad in 2016: Europe could finally run out of ways to stave off collapse. The world could finally realize that we’re in even worse shape than Europe, leading to massive inflation and skyrocketing interest rates and unemployment. In that case, the party that is out of power will benefit greatly. Perhaps white voters, who vote Republican by “merely” 59-39 now, will finally respond to their status as an oppressed group by becoming 65-35 Republican. That would give Republicans large victories up and down the ballot.

In each of these scenarios, Republicans would benefit by not co-operating with Democrats.

Whether we co-operate with them or not, they’ll get credit if things get better.

Whether we co-operate with them or not, they’ll suffer if things get worse.

Our duty is to give voters a choice, not an echo. The rest is up to Ladies Fortune and Justice, both of whom owe us.

54 Responses to Why Republicans should NOT co-operate with Democrats

  1. Dismantle ObamaCare on November 16, 2012 at 7:00 am

    Poli – I couldn’t agree with you more. If the cooperation theory worked, Sen. Obama would have worked with Sen. McCain and President Bush to pass immigration reform and Bush would be hailed as a maverick who took on his party to help thousands of immigrants! Of course, that never happened – Bush is still a lying war criminal in the eyes of the left and the media.

    If George Bush taught us anything, it’s that compassionate conservatism is an abject failure. We’ll never out “left” the left on any of these issues so we need to be careful trying. The best advice for the GOP is to take Obama down and let the cards fall where they may. If voters oust us in ’14, then so be it. At least we died trying.

  2. artist on November 16, 2012 at 7:02 am

    You know it’s over when you have to BEG the GOP to oppose Obama’s agenda.

    • Jim,MtnViewCA,USA on November 16, 2012 at 9:12 am

      Good point.

  3. Eric W. on November 16, 2012 at 7:10 am

    Except for amnesty,I would let him do whatever he wantrs. Fuck the country.

  4. Lyle on November 16, 2012 at 7:12 am

    Bobby Jindal seems to be trying to outleft the left, and succeeding.

  5. Eric W. on November 16, 2012 at 7:15 am

    Jindal has dropped down quite a few notches in my book. Romney was right. Obama did give gifts,like amnesty,99 weeks of unemployment,food stamps,obamaphones.

  6. E L Frederick on November 16, 2012 at 7:17 am

    I completely disagree. R’s are going to get blamed for everything if they dig in their heels. The MSM will crucify us. Just give the baby in the white house what he wants, gift wrap it, and then shove it up his ass when the world goes to hell because of it.

    • IP727 on November 16, 2012 at 7:30 am

      We will be blamed no matter what happens. We are either the loyal opposition
      or we throw in the towel. We didn’t elect the GOP to rubber stamp the enemy.

      • Dismantle ObamaCare on November 16, 2012 at 8:27 am

        Agreed … If the GOP is going to be blamed anyway, then let’s make this one count. Off with HIS head! Obstruct, censure and IMPEACH!

  7. artist on November 16, 2012 at 7:22 am

    Most of the GOP pols have betrayed its supporters. Even the new TP guys.

    We have a one party system.

  8. Gerry Owen on November 16, 2012 at 9:00 am

    Scenario three is closer than people realize.
    Couple in the growing disaffection and obvious regional divisions, this has more of a potential to get worse than get better.

    I do agree, we stand for nothing if we capitualate. But I’m almost to the point that I’m going to realign my investment strategies to guns, gold, and canned goods.

    • Jim,MtnViewCA,USA on November 16, 2012 at 9:13 am

      Agree it is closer than expected but they can stave off for a while:
      Strip the rich of their wealth (the wealthy will get away but they can collapse the working class)
      Cut our military to the bone
      That’ll keep the balls in the air for a couple of years.

      • IP727 on November 16, 2012 at 10:07 am

        Our balls are on the anvil now, we don’t have years.

  9. Gerry Owen on November 16, 2012 at 10:05 am

    I think part of the problem has been how we allow the argument to be framed.
    Our candidates spend way to much time talking about abortion, an issue they have next to no say on whatsoever. Sure, we should defund Planned Parenthood- not only because abortion is wrong, but because we are BROKE. We sacrificed two seats in the Senate because our candidates tried the Santorum appraoch of “out pro-lifing” everyone in a 30 mile radius, giving convoluted personal opinions to something that they have absolutely no way (not to mention chance) of bringing those opinions into law.

    We allow ourselves to fall into the trap of “defending the rich”, never mind the fact the ultra rich tend to support democrats due to access and control.
    The argument should be “Rich won’t mind the additional taxes, they can afford it- the people who cannot afford it are the ones who will lose their jobs, the ones who will not be hired, and the people who will not see the rich buying their products, using their services, our expanding their businesses.”

    Immigration reform should not be tied to border control. Border control should be a national security matter. We shouldn’t even being discussing this until the border is secured, particularly with a veritable civil war occurring in northern Mexico. Simple argument to make, this would also allow time for the current laws to continue weeding out illegals, E-verify to get passed in more states, etc.
    4 or 5 years down the road, then lets have the battle. No point in having it now. Amnesty talk will only send more people streaming into the country.

    • Rational on November 16, 2012 at 12:21 pm

      Can not agree more. Unfortunately, not many have the wisdom and vision like you in the r world.

    • rightwingyahoo on November 16, 2012 at 3:43 pm

      We shouldn’t even being discussing this until the border is secured, particularly with a veritable civil war occurring in northern Mexico

      Wrong, we shouldnt be discussing it ever, regardless of what happens on the border. We already have immigration laws. No reform is needed. We already admit a million a year legally.

      No reform is needed. Anyone who says border security first, then amnesty, is just as much a traitor to the nation as one who says do them together.

      • Gerry Owen on November 18, 2012 at 1:31 pm

        Hey, Dumbass-
        they are discussing it. WHETHER YOU LIKE IT OR NOT.

        You can keep preaching your absolutist “my way or the highway” crap all you like, but right now, there is ZERO chance of securing the border without some sort of immigration reform, because these issues are joined at the hip.
        Sever the two- otherwise we will have millions continuing to pour in.

        Are you for a secure border, or just for whining against any immigration reform?

        • rightwingyahoo on November 18, 2012 at 3:53 pm

          You worthless piece of RINO shit….

          What “they” are discussing does not matter. They will be thrown of of office if they do it, by we conservatives, and by the new democrat voters.

          So FUCK YOU.

          You can keep talking like a capitulationist RINO, and we will keep LAUGHING AT YOUR WORTHLESS ASS.

          Esplain something to me lucy… what the fuck good will it do to secure the border, and then grant amnesty to 20 million new DEMOCRAT voters AND THEIR FAMILIES.

          If they can come in legally anyway, what good does a secure border do?

          Tell me that. YOU DUMB TEXAS FUCK.

          Now your WORTHLESS TEXAS RINO ASS needs to understand. WE are not RINOS like you and your Rick Perry/Jeb Bush/Newt Gingrich buddies. WE don’t fall for your pro-amnesty horse shit, your “AAHM from TEXAS GODDAMMIT so YALL better GIT IN LINE behind AMNESTY” Rovian DEM-LITE foolishnes.

          GET this thru your fucking RINO head: If you want amnesty, after the border is secure or before, or any other time, you FUCKWIT….. then you’re no damn good to conservatives anyway, so you might as well join the DEMOCRAT party.

          Eff you very much amnesty RINO bastard.

          • Gerry Owen on November 18, 2012 at 4:34 pm

            They haven’t been thrown out.
            You’ve been harping the same, tired ass old “line in the sand” argument for years, and the illegals still keep streaming across.

            We have to seal the border. They are already talking new amnesty laws, which will send millions more across-
            meanwhile dipshits like you are are more worried about draining the boat without stopping the leak.

          • rightwingyahoo on November 19, 2012 at 3:23 pm

            They will be thrown out….

            Try sealing the border in Tx. You shit. Try it. The border is TX will ALWAYS be open, and the people of TX and their representatives crow about it openly.

            Of course we can seal the border. WE WONT is my point.

            Just don’t legalize any illegals, until we get someone who will. If that takes 50 year so be it.

            So STFU about offering amnesty once the border is secure you traitor.

        • rightwingyahoo on November 18, 2012 at 3:58 pm

          The goddamned border can be unsecure, or secured, at any time, depending on politics.

          You can NEVER count on a secure border to save you, unless you literally station the armed forces all along it, which no one wants to do.

          There is not, and NEVER WILL BE, a secure border.

          So whe3n FUCKWITS LIKE GERRY say, oh we can have amnesty as soon as the border is secure, what difference is that, from having CIR right now?

          There is no difference, the country is swamped by Dem voters either way.

          Secure borders come and go. Amnesty is forever. YOUR WORTHLESS TEXAS RINO ASS has no excuse after what Reagan did in 1986.

          So FUCK YOU you dumbass RINO.

        • rightwingyahoo on November 18, 2012 at 4:18 pm

          You don’t need immigration reform when we are admitting a million a year legally.

          ok?

          Here is the law: You follow the rules, you can stay and be welcome, no matter who you are. Race, gender, doesnt matter.

          You break the rules, you cannot stay, no matter who you are. Race, gender, doesnt matter.

          Now what is there to reform about that? YOU GODDAMNED WORTHLESS TEXAS RINO tell me what is unfair about that?

          Tell me.

          You want to be the guy that plants the seed of “Hey if youre loud enough long enough, we’ll break the rules for you and make a fool of all those who follow them..” ?

          You want to be that guy? I guess you do.

          Well that makes sense doesnt it. Since youre the guy who had your head up his RINO ass on Libya, and the budget sellout, I guess you’d be the FOOL to fall for this too.

          Yep. That’s what you are, Gerry. Biggest lay down, tits-up fuck for the left since GWB.

          • Gerry Owen on November 18, 2012 at 5:02 pm

            Unfortunately, They keep coming, and no one is enforcing the laws.
            In fact, the Fed actively prevents the law from being enforced!
            I did not realize you were opposed to E-Verify? If you read my point, it was about framing the debate, buying time, perhaps getting a net outflow of illegals for once.
            You go full stupid on this issue, and provide no solution.

            You keep bitching that the boat is filling up with water, but will do nothing to plug the leak.

            Now you say the border CAN’T be secured- Al Qaeda take notice- so what the hell is the point now?
            We cannot control the border, the laws are not ridding us of them, and you say do nothing???

          • rightwingyahoo on November 19, 2012 at 3:25 pm

            Im not opposed to E vErify you idiot.

            The point is, to keep all current illegals in their illegal status until we either get a party that wants to enforce the laws, or lose all power and get swamped.

            One or the other.

            Don’t sign your own death warrant, is my point, you RINO amnesty lover.

        • rightwingyahoo on November 18, 2012 at 4:20 pm

          Before, I called you a “Big spending, capitulationist Bushland amnesty RINO”…..

          I think I’ll just call you “tits-up Gerry” from now on..

          Have nice day, Tits-up.

        • rightwingyahoo on November 18, 2012 at 4:22 pm

          Damn, I’m a cussing fool, probably gonna get banned now….. well, at least I gave ol tits-up a good broadside on my way out.

    • rightwingyahoo on November 16, 2012 at 3:46 pm

      And a secure border is a subjective term, anyway. According to the Senate, the border is already more than secure….

      So “secure the border first, then amnesty” is just as much a gutless, mindless cave as CIR is….

      figures a gutless RINO like Gerry would never stop trumpeting it, no matter how many time he’s proven a fool on this in the past.

    • rightwingyahoo on November 16, 2012 at 3:53 pm

      Anyone who advocates allowing 20 plus million new voters into the country at a 7:3 ratio for the Dems does not get to talk about how to fix the R party, any more than Jeb Bush does.

      • Anonymous Paulbot on November 16, 2012 at 9:03 pm

        Ron Paul is eactly that advocate of which you speak!!

        Ron Paul and his ilk have stated that they will not enforce border security and that they WILL NOT build a fence to stop the illegal foriegn tresspassers.

        FUCK RON PAUL and the amnesty enabling fools who support him!!

        Again — FUCK YOU RON PAUL you amnesty loving freaks you support him!!!!!!!

        • Anonymous Un-Paultard on November 16, 2012 at 10:22 pm

          another spin-off of myself that I agree with

          • Rubio's RINO on November 19, 2012 at 11:32 am

            more like you two are the same RINO-boy! but hey, keep those multiple sock puppets goin if it makes you feel better!

      • bc3b on November 17, 2012 at 2:49 pm

        Actually, the ratio of 7:3 includes Hispanics who have been in this country for decades and are middle managers and small business owners. The ratio for illegals who become citizens will more likely be 9:1.

  10. RedStateGal on November 16, 2012 at 10:35 am

    The reason Republicans lose to Democrats is pretty simple, I think. Democrat leaders believe in their principals (such as they are) and defend them to the end. Republican leaders get up in the morning and decide in the shower whose side they are going to be on: their own base or the other guy’s. Then they wonder why turnout is down.

    They don’t call us the Stupid Party for nuthin’.

    • Rational on November 16, 2012 at 12:26 pm

      Well said!

      I would say not only republican party does sometime seem a pretty stupid party but a hypocritical party as well.

      At least, democrats does what it says no matter how much we hate what it does.

  11. IP727 on November 16, 2012 at 10:50 am

    The nutless party.

  12. jay in Peru on November 16, 2012 at 2:08 pm

    I am down here in Perù which I jokingly refer to as “Galthaven”, but alas it is not.
    Poli, you are 100% right. Conservative principles correctly presented and pushed hard enough during the next four years can get through the libshield of the presstitutes.
    This can only work if we all pull together.If the Republican leadership in the house, senate and governors grows a spine or at least a pair of good tusks or something else and decide on a path of resistance we have nothing to lose. Right now we have to prepare the elections of 2014 as we did with the victory of 2010 with conservatives who can win according to the Buckley rule.NEVER,NEVER,NEVER compromise with liberals!

  13. Mad Dog on November 17, 2012 at 7:18 am

    Today’s republican party the party of Fuck You America! And you wonder why people voted for the other guy.

    The new republicans where the grass roots tea party is funded by millionaires like the Koch brothers and has the exact talking points the richest 1% want them to have.

    • IP727 on November 17, 2012 at 8:33 am

      Still the same old class envy prick you always were.

      • Where is ATTILA? on November 17, 2012 at 3:13 pm

        On this thread IP727 has referred to nuts, balls and pricks.

        Like ATTILA, he is crying out to open the closet door, so that he can be free.

        • IP727 on November 17, 2012 at 4:05 pm

          THAT IS WHAT THE DEM PARTY IS MADE UP OF, WHAT ELSE WOULD YOU CALL THEM.

          • Where is ATTILA? on November 17, 2012 at 8:05 pm

            Oh, oh, ATTILA is typing in all caps…the talk of balls and pricks has him…aroused.

        • Anita Black Cox on November 18, 2012 at 8:01 am

          Chicks dig that kinda talk.

    • Eric W. on November 17, 2012 at 10:07 am

      Damn right. FUCK YOU to America. They voted in this clostcase mother fucker after all he has done. FUCK EM! And you too.

      • ODS alert on November 17, 2012 at 3:59 pm

        Looks like 4 more years of ODS for Eric W.

        Look at the bright side, things are getting better with O. as Prez, versus 8 years of a downhill slide under Bush. Or is there a double standard in play?

        • Eric W. on November 17, 2012 at 4:07 pm

          Ambassador Stevens and the other 3 Obama let die might disagree.

          • Eric W. has ODS on November 18, 2012 at 2:32 pm

            Eric, you have ODS, that is why you are obsessing over Libya. You wish, so, so very much that there is something there. But there is nothing there.

            Why do you wish so muh for dirt?

            Your double standard is showing, since you let far, far worse pass by under Bush/Cheney.

        • Setnaffa on November 19, 2012 at 4:44 am

          How many US Ambassadors died while Bush watched impotently, afraid to react? How often did Bush withhold permission from the military to save US diplomats? How many times did Bush blame Americans for an al Qaeda attack?

    • bc3b on November 17, 2012 at 2:38 pm

      You sound like you’re pretty f#cked-up yourself Mad Dog. By the way, you have a very descriptive handle.

  14. Mildred Smith on November 17, 2012 at 7:43 am

    Like Grandma always said, “It’s when they like you that you should start worrying.”

  15. bc3b on November 17, 2012 at 2:36 pm

    Every time Republicans cooperate with the Democrats, they get outsmarted and lose, Amnesty of 1986 and No Child Left behind being prime examples,

  16. Goonions on November 17, 2012 at 7:51 pm

    This might be slightly off topic but a great article from a link on Powerline on why the urbanites vote the way they do. They are not exactly enlightened people after all.

    http://www.forbes.com/sites/markhendrickson/2012/11/15/what-explains-the-partisan-divide-between-urban-and-non-urban-areas/

    I still say let the do the tax hikes on the rich. That one is a lost cause for us as we are basically seen as defending the rich and when it does not instantly cure the national debt maybe those people clamoring for this will get the message. It also shuts the mouths of the Warren Buffet and hollywood crowd types.

  17. Setnaffa on November 17, 2012 at 7:55 pm

    “The rich” will be continually be redefined until it’s anyone not on their knees in front of a bureaucrat begging for a handful of rice with nowhere else to go…

    • Anonymous Un-Paultard on November 18, 2012 at 8:46 pm

      yep

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *