Aren’t You Proud Of Your Republican House of Representatives?


12 thoughts on “Aren’t You Proud Of Your Republican House of Representatives?

    1. Fred, this kind of makes the opposite case. Voters elected a Republican House, and did not get a damned thing for it other than the right to hold hearings (which do bring out some facts) that are ghosted by the regime media. To wit, the election had virtually no consequences.

      The ruling class cabal owns both parties. We have a handful of heroes fighting for individual liberty housed in the basement of the Republican Party to create the illusion that the Republican Party stands for something.

  1. Healy :”Elections have consequences’:” Does Obama regret saying that now?

    What do politicians mean when they say ‘elections have consequences’? Often, they’re saying that their party just won an election and they want their way – but the pronouncement can come back to bite.

    Elections have consequences.” It’s the political way for winners to tell losers: “Tough luck, you lost. Get over it.”

    President Obama infamously espoused this view shortly after his 2009 inauguration, during a meeting with congressional Republicans about his economic proposals. Mr. Obama was later quoted as telling GOP leaders that “elections have consequences,” and, in case there was any doubt, “I won.

    Columnist Debra Saunders used it in decrying Obama’s decision to issue a sweeping executive order on immigration.

    CNBC’s Matt Cuddy also brought it out shortly before the recent failed post-election Senate vote on the controversial Keystone XL pipeline: “After six years of discussion, the Keystone pipeline is finally going to get an up or down vote on the U.S. Senate floor, confirming the adage, elections have consequences. What led to this change? Politics.” Along those same lines, Sen. John Hoeven (R) of North Dakota, a leading Keystone supporter, said in a statement: “I have been working for years to pass this legislation, and now the Democratic caucus seems ready to move on it. Elections have consequences.”

    Of course, being on the losing end of an election often changes the views among politicians about how determinative elections should be. During the four-year tenure of Nancy Pelosi as the first House speaker, her Democrats didn’t seem particularly interested in taking into account the viewpoints of minority Republicans. At one point in early 2009, as the $787 billion economic stimulus bill ping-ponged between both Democratic-controlled chambers, Pelosi said: “Yes, we wrote the bill. Yes, we won the election.”


    1. It appears elections have consequences when the victors capitalize on their victory; but they do NOT have consequences when the victors REFUSE to capitalize on their victory.

      1. Fred, Triad puts it right. Certainly, electing a Republican General Assembly in NC since 2010 has had beneficial consequences.

        But on the federal level, notice: The welfare/warfare/regulatory state has grown relentlessly with little regard to whether Republicans or Dems controlled Congress &/or the Presidency since at least 1988. The CIA does whatever it wants with an unlimited budget, including manipulating media & who the criminals who lead us are and what they actually do.

        1. Healey, I would even expand on your response by saying the EARLY Republican majority in Raleigh had beneficial consequences, but the RECENT Republican majority in Raleigh has fallen into some of the same patterns as the GOP majorities in Washington.

          1. You are right, Triad. In time they’ve responded to all the corrupting incentives that are innate to generally unaccountable govt power.

Comments are closed.