U.S. Senate candidate and state Rep. Stace Nelson (R-19/Fulton) likes U.S. Senator Ted Cruz a lot. He's happy to promote online buzz that he's a conservative like Cruz.
David Brooks warns Republicans that the last thing they want is another Cruzite like Nelson:
What’s going on in the House, and a bit in the Senate, too, is what you might call the rise of Ted Cruz-ism.... And Ted Cruz, the senator from Canada through Texas, is basically not a legislator in the normal sense, doesn’t have an idea that he’s going to Congress to create coalitions, make alliances, and he is going to pass a lot of legislation. He’s going in more as a media-protest person. And a lot of the House Republicans are in the same mode. They’re not normal members of Congress. They’re not legislators. They want to stop things. And so they’re just being — they just want to obstruct.
...And, remember, what these people, Ted Cruz and some of the tea party people, their object is not to win Obamacare. Their object is to take over the Republican Party. So, they really are running against the Republicans. And for Ted Cruz, it’s potentially to get the nomination. And taking this down, if it can mobilize enough Republicans so he can take over the party and become — really transform the party, then that becomes the object. And one little straw in the wind, the Heritage Foundation, a very prominent conservative think tank, is running against Republicans. And that’s part of the change that is going on here [David Brooks, quoted in Jeff Poor, "David Brooks Warns of ‘The Rise of Ted Cruz-ism,’ Takeover of Republican Party," Daily Caller, 2013.09.14].
That sounds a lot like Stace Nelson to me. But you know, given the folks South Dakota Republicans have elected to Congress, maybe that obstruction is exactly what they are looking for.
Ted Cruz is a slippery weasel, and Stace Nelson is neither. I know that there was no such comparison in your post, Cory, but the problem with the Tea Party GOP in Congress is their puppet masters do their handiwork from outside those hallowed halls. Cruz is incapable of leading anyone. His entire focus, like Palin, is on himself and snatching headlines and getting reactions. Actually, Stace could provide some much needed leadership and direction in the Senate caucus, which seems to be divided between the career ladder climbers (like Thune) and the bomb throwers. If South Dakota should send a Republican to replace Tim Johnson, I would prefer a real, loyal Republican.
I agree with you Rick that Cruz is a slippery weasel and Stace is certainly not that.
But, in my opinion, he won't compromise on anything and that is the problem is now. Nothing gets done because the Tea Party obstructs everything that they don't agree with.
No doubt Stace is a good guy, but we don't need to send more Tea Party members to Washington
I don't know him so not sure about slippery or weasel but from everything I see and read continuously, "snatching headlines and getting reactions" describes Nelson to a tee.
Most Americans are wishing politicians had NOT compromised our futures with the out of control spending & government creation that we have now. Americans are happy that Lincoln did not compromise on slavery, that we did not compromise in fighting the Nazis, etc.
I have a great record of working across the aisle with my Democratic colleagues, there are core things of principle that I will not compromise on. Show me someone without principles, or who will compromise them to go along to get along, and I will show you a country being crushed by $18 trillion++ in national debt & excess government.
But what makes the Tea Party right Stace? Liberals have no ideas at all? George McGovern and Bob Dole worked together for the sake of the country and neither one compromised their principals.
This notion that government is all bad is wrong. Bill Clinton had the budget balanced and he was paying down the national debt. What happened under Bush? The debt exploded.
@Owen Not my words, yours. Ask my Democrat colleagues if work with them and support them on issues, on core principles they know where I stand and I am often their biggest advocate on some issues.
Bill Clinton had a Conservative Congress that he had to work with, and look at the results. I have pointed out repeatedly that our current state of government run amuck is just as much to blame on Republicans who contributed to that problem as Democrats. National polls show that Americans are concerned about the out of control spending and want it stopped. Being Conservative is so popular, we have moderate candidates now claiming they too want to oppose taxes & cut government after careers of doing the opposite (remember that 2011 $127 Million deficit?): https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=10200728132067322&set=pb.1282471868.-2207520000.1379350862.&type=3&theater
It always amuses me that the only time you hear Republican/tea party concern about the national debt is when a Democrat is in the White House.
These Republican politicians in office or running for office, never mention how much they contribute to the national debt while in office. Salaries, office staff, travel, lucrative healthcare and retirement all contribute to the debt. They are "entitled" to increase the debt, yet a family receiving food stamps are scum.
Where was their concern about government spending and debt when Bush was running our national economy into the ground.
Today marks the 5th anniversary of the great recession that knocked Americans on their butts.
If the Republicans had not adopted the policy of obstruction and no compromise, our economy would be seeing a healthier recovery.
There were several news articles I read over the weekend that stated the fear that staunch Republican leadership have about teapublicans, the fear of division in their ranks is real. These teapublicans seem to shoot from the hip and when we pressed, have no viable solutions.
Slippery or not, obstructionist or not, Nelson's able to cruise into Epiphany and line up more than 50 individual donations. That's a lot of people writing checks in a town that doesn't even make the official South Dakota town population list.
@ Stace. Now your putting words in my mouth. I never said you haven't worked with Democrats and on some issues-like the education bill. And I thanked you.
Yes Clinton had to work with a conservative congress but the key word is "worked with." Don't you think there were compromises made on both sides? The congress had to work with Clinton as well, which isn't happening today because of the Tea Party. Why? Because the Tea Party members won't sit down with the President of Democrats and work together.
I'd have to disagree with you on the polls. If it's true that'll change when people realize how good the ACA is and that Republicans want to defund it.
What's wrong today. here's an example. The farm bill where the fight is over safety nets for farmers and cutting food stamps for the poor. Crazy
"Most Americans are wishing politicians had NOT compromised our futures with the out of control spending & government creation that we have now. Americans are happy that Lincoln did not compromise on slavery, that we did not compromise in fighting the Nazis, etc. "
Spending on everything except military waste is not out of control and government creation is not a real problem.
Most Americans, if it is even most Americans, don't understand the nonsense, corporate basis of the propaganda from the right that influences their shot from the lip responses to right-wing push polls.
Democrats who pay lip service to this mindless crap shot themselves in the foot. Tim Johnson regularly falls into this BS mode and in the process makes it hard for other Democrats to get elected to anything. Liberal politicians are scared of their own shadows and don't make a good case for their positions..with a too few exceptions.
The conservative economic mythology doesn't work, hasn't worked, and won't work. It is a dead end leading only to more wealth absorption by the already very, very richest.
It is possible to have all kinds of honesty and consistency and also be totally and completely wrong and wrong for government and governance.
"Democrats who pay lip service to this mindless crap shot themselves in the foot. Tim Johnson regularly falls into this BS mode and in the process makes it hard for other Democrats to get elected to anything. Liberal politicians are scared of their own shadows and don't make a good case for their positions..with a too few exceptions."
As liberal as I am Douglas I'd have to agree with you on this. Liberals can be their own worse enemies.
This discussion is fascinating. As usual, it always comes back to Clinton or Bush. I have some bad news for all of you: neither one is now in office. The current administration owns whatever is happening, as all administrations do. The only thing that counts is that we are on an unsustainable course of action.
I think you need, instead of compromisers, "doers", etc a certain number of people sent to DC to keep the other guys from doing whatever pops into their heads. It was not the intention of the Founders that legislation be that easy to pass. Hear that noise? That is not "gridlock" or "obstructionism", that is the Constitution at work.
Cranky Old Dude,
I would respectfully disagree with you in involving Bush, in particular, and Clinton in this conversation.
True, President Obama now owns the problems of the nation's economy, however if we are to understand where we are going, we have to understand where we have been.
Five years is a relatively short time to expect a full financial recovery from the near 2008 crash. Consider for instance the length of time and legislation required to recover from the "Crash of "29".
We do have "doers", on both sides of the aisle, but when we have the contemporary of the "Do Nothing" party called teapublicans yammering like the village idiot, what can be realistically accomplished?
I fail to see the "do-nothing" connection. I think is it more a matter of "does this need to be done and does it need to be done by government?" For example, the Crash of '29 was turned into the Great Depression by government policy, first by Hoover and then by FDR.
As for looking at where we have been, I understand the value of history (I have a degree in it) but we live in times where circumstances change very quickly and if you spend too much time looking in the rearview mirror, you're going to hit something!
To me the Tea Partiers are a group that is against "business as usual" politics and that is why they give the RINOs the heebie-jeebies. Of course, there are many TP groups and each has its own personality, its own agenda and its own priorities.
The TEA party is a construction of Koch brothers. It gives voice to the ignorant and irrelevant obstructionists easily influenced by corporate deceit and deception.
Blaming the Hoover depression on Roosevelt is interesting to say the least. Republicans and TEA party tools of the very rich are pushing economic voodoo policies much like Hoover's.
Regardless of the name or label you want to assign to the "crash of 29" or the Great Depression, they both happened and their were dire consequences.
As it happens, I too am a historian, and like Wilken, seriously question that FDR was responsible for the depression. I have never heard a true historian make such a statement.
The Koch Brothers funded teapartiers are racist groups around the country came into existence for one reason and one reason only.
The teaparty offers only bumper sticker solutions and hate, and have not once offered any substance to the political debate.
"The teaparty offers only bumper sticker solutions and hate, and have not once offered any substance to the political debate."
You're absolutely right Roger
By the standards of some of the commenters, then I can only assume that the current Democratic Party is the Butt Boy of George Soros and Goldman Sachs! Don't know why this is okay but the Kochs supporting movements they might believe in or find advantageous is not.
George Soros and Goldman Sachs are progressive.
The Koch brothers are regressive.
Does Soros dump money into causes because he wants to dodge taxes and gain drilling rights and pollute freeling or because he sees some policies to be beneficial to all?