General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsRuh Roh. National Review Advises Surrender
http://www.boomantribune.com/story/2012/11/30/151645/82National Review Advises Surrender
by BooMan
Fri Nov 30th, 2012 at 03:16:45 PM EST
The editors at the National Review are urging surrender. Total surrender. They say it would be "better to pass legislation extending the middle-class tax cuts and to allow the top rates to rise" than it would be to accept anything approaching what Tim Geithner offered them. After advising senators to keep their yaps shut about capitulation in order to avoid undermining the House's negotiating position, they give up on linking the tax hikes to entitlement reform:
What they are saying is unambiguous. They want the House to pass an extension of the middle-class tax cuts without preserving the cuts for the top two percent, and without getting anything in return.
However, they recognize that the base must be appeased somewhat, so they have a proposed script for some Kabuki theatre:
This part needs some translation. They want John Boehner to have the House pass an extension of all of the Bush tax cuts, including on the top two percent. The Republicans will then attempt to argue that they tried and failed to protect the middle class tax cuts. But this advice only makes sense if the Republicans don't follow the editors first piece of advice, which was to give the president precisely what he wants. It's not really about assigning blame after we go over the cliff. It's about avoiding going over the cliff by capitulating, but making it look to the base like you made an honest attempt to stand on your principles.
With advice like this, I don't see much fight left on the right.
senseandsensibility
(17,067 posts)I don't feel comfortable with their newfound defeatism. The right never surrenders, and if they do it is to gain something more important to them.
babylonsister
(171,075 posts)who to lead, who to ignore, etc. Plus they lost badly, and they know a majority of the American people are wise to them...perfect negative storm for them.
customerserviceguy
(25,183 posts)My guess is that it mostly influences the (please pardon this characterization) "intellectual" conservative. I'd say Limpballs, Hannity, and the Faux Noise crew have much more sway on this.
I have to ask, what do the folks at National Review think this stand is going to get them? My guess is that it will lead to cancelled subscriptions.
babylonsister
(171,075 posts)felt compelled to do that. I think it was a good stand, and I just bet a lot of conservative folks agree wholeheartedly with them.
customerserviceguy
(25,183 posts)They're good at shunning the few who occasionally say that the emperor has no clothes. I'd bet Limpballs can generate far more letters to Congress than NR can.