Tone-Deaf Republicans – Part 3

For too long, Republicans and their purported supporters have watched helplessly as progressive Democrats bulldozed their way through much of what America used to stand for.  In my opinion, it’s way past the time to sit back and let it happen if you still care about the future of our country – for the sake of our children and grandchildren, if not for ourselves.  

Recently, Speaker Mike Johnson was asked about the “lawfare” [a recent term for using the legal system to wage war against someone] being waged against former President Trump. This was in the context of Johnson showing up at the Alvin Bragg circus trial in New York, and Johnson made some strong remarks about how ludicrous the lion’s share of charges against Trump are – not just in Bragg’s trial, but across the board in all the cases.  A reporter asked a logical, not a “gotcha” question:  "Since you’re so against what’s going on, why don’t you defund special prosecutor Jack Smith?  Don’t you have the power as the Speaker to put this into motion?"  

Here is where Johnson stopped being a stand-up guy and turned into a wallflower: “Well, no, I’m not considering defunding.” Really? Why not? Was this another of those, “that’s not who we are” moments we’ve heard way too many times over the years? Anyway, the Speaker’s mealy-mouthed response perfectly illustrates the Republicans’ inability to play hardball like the Dems do. Johnson’s example is the quintessential “talk tough and act wimpy” schtick that the party of George W. Bush and Mitt Romney have practiced for years. And people still wonder why Donald Trump, for all of his flaws, has struck such a chord with so many Americans.

Richard Nixon has been accused of many things, but long before he was president and Watergate came crashing down around him, he was actually a pretty good politician who knew how to play the game, without breaking the law. In 1952, he was embroiled in a fund-raising “scandal” that was really much ado about nothing (sound familiar?). This was only two months out from the presidential election, and Nixon was seen as a risky pick for Vice President, not due so much to shadiness but because he was still relatively new to Washington. Further, as a junior senator, he’d gone after a highly respected official (Alger Hiss), a suspected communist. Nixon was right about Hiss, which put him in the left’s crosshairs. He was accused of improper usage of campaign funds and, instead of apologizing profusely and folding his tent as many of today’s Republicans would do, he went on television and gave his famous “Checkers” speech. Nixon not only did not back down in defending himself, he added some frosting on the cake by vowing to keep the puppy that one of his supporters “donated” to him (thus the name “Checkers”). Whether the speech helped the Eisenhower-Nixon ticket in 1952 is questionable, but it certainly didn’t hurt as they cruised to an easy victory.

When did the Republicans start being fearful of taking decisive actions to back up their words? 

In my opinion, the seeds were planted, ironically enough, during Ronald Reagan’s presidency. Although Reagan took many decisive actions to back up his bold words, some in his own party inwardly cringed as they thought more about public and media reaction than what was good for the country. And even those within his inner circle felt the boss could not always be trusted. A classic example of this is Reagan’s renowned speech at the Brandenburg Gate in 1987, where he demanded that Gorbachev “tear down this (Berlin) wall!” His speechwriters kept trying to edit that part out, but Reagan to his everlasting credit insisted on keeping it in. The rest, as we know, is history.

The trend continued with George H.W. Bush who promised a “kinder, gentler nation.” Those were his code words for playing nice with the Democrats who were out to sabotage his presidency in any way possible. When Bush broke his “no new taxes” pledge in 1990, it was with the promise from the Dems that there would be two dollars reduction in the budget for every dollar of increased taxes. When the Dems reneged on this promise, which Bush in hindsight should have realized would be the case, he failed to call them out loudly for their broken promise. Was he afraid he’d sound like a hypocrite since he broke his own? Maybe. But it might have been worth a primetime address to the nation to explain why he agreed to the deal in the first place and how much he counted on the Dems to hold up their end of it, and actually hold them to account for failing to do so.

It just gets more depressing from there, as George W. Bush allowed Ted Kennedy to write the “No Child Left Behind” legislation and was thanked a few months later by Kennedy’s claim that the Iraq War was “George Bush’s Vietnam.” Mitt Romney had Barack Obama on the ropes about Benghazi, but somehow let Obama off the hook (granted with a big assist from a left-leaning debate moderator). Then, as only Obama could, he somehow made Romney the fall guy with his snarky “shoot first, then aim” comment about Romney’s expertise in such matters. Bottom line: Romney lost an eminently winnable election by being too nice.

Please understand, that nothing I’m pointing out or suggesting here is even remotely close to asking Republicans to “get down in the mud” with their opponents and play dirty or do anything illegal or immoral. But like the old saying goes, “politics ain’t beanbag.” And part of playing the game right, as with any sporting endeavor, is to stay on the offensive. Republican policy positions (if they really believe in what they say) make a lot more sense than much of what the crazed cultural-Marxist Democrats mob espouse. They just need to be a lot more confident in presenting their case, and not worry about the feathers they will ruffle. Surely there’s someone out there besides Trump (Ron DeSantis perhaps) who’s both willing and able to withstand the slings and arrows it will entail. Isn’t there?