The Party of No

I was in the car listening to NPR and there was an interview between the host and two people who were complaining that the Republicans have just been the party of “no” for the past two years and that if the Senate remains next week with a Democratic majority and the House goes Republican that the Republicans are going to have to stop just being the party of no for the sake of no.

I don’t think so.  You don’t say “yes” just so its not a “no” if what it is you’re voting on is a bad idea time after time.  If you are presented with virtually nothing but what you think are bad ideas, why would you agree to them just for the sake of agreeing to them?

Would you agree to drive your car off the cliff just so you weren’t called the person of “no”?

What if you were presented with nothing but “drive the car off the cliff” choices time after time, would that make you hard headed to say no just for the sake of it?  No, you say no for a reason.

The past two years, rationally speaking, has been about containing damage.  There is absolutely no reason to cooperate with people that are hell bent on destruction.  You don’t vote with them, you vote against them.  You don’t cooperate, you block, you don’t quietly sit there, you shine a light on the matter.

The premise of the question is wrong.  Since President Obama’s election, and in fact well before that even, the Democrats have been the majority in Congress.  So why all the complaining by the Left?  For the past two years the Left has had all the votes they needed in both houses of Congress plus the White House to pass anything they wanted to pass without any help whatsoever by the Republican in Congress.  So why all the anger?  What gives?

The question in the NPR interview could have also been asked like this.  “Why does President Obama and the Congress continue to propose ideas and legislation that are destructive to the country?  Why have the Democrats blocked the Republicans from contributing their ideas to the agenda?  Do they like to be seen as the party of no?”

The NPR interview had the interviewer asking the genius on the other end if the Republican controlled House would just stop saying no and would start to go along with Obama on important matters.  The answer is that Obama is not going to change, he is who he is.  You don’t “go along” to get along, you contain him, you prevent him from going down the path he wants to force on the country, and you vote him out in two years and relegate him to a nothing but a blip on the timeline of history.

President Obama is an egomaniac, has not the character for the office, could care less about what makes America exceptional, has a chip on his shoulder that he was sent there to make things right, and if you ask me is frankly a trojan horse.  The party of no is actually the party of “yes”.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s