The Republican Pledge to America is getting mixed reviews. (PDF is here, text at the Weekly Standard.) Dems, obviously, offer nothing but ridicule and predictable lib talking points. At least the WH didn’t use their tired car/slurpie metaphor:
The White House immediately attacked the House Republicans’ election agenda rollout Wednesday evening, claiming the 21-page “Pledge to America” plan will “take America back to the same failed economic policies that caused this recession.”
White House Communications Director Dan Pfeiffer, writing on the White House blog, said Republicans “doubled down on the same ideas that hurt America’s middle class,” listing tax cuts for millionaires and billionaires, tax hikes for the middle class, “cutting rules and oversight” for financial services, health care and oil, all while adding to the deficit.
The entirety of this Promise is laughable. Why? It is an illusion that fixates on stuff the GOP already should be doing while not daring to touch on stuff that will have any meaningful longterm effects on the size and scope of the federal government.
This document proves the GOP is more focused on the acquisition of power than the advocacy of long term sound public policy. All the good stuff in it is stuff we expect them to do. What is not in it is more than a little telling that the House GOP has not learned much of anything from 2006.
But his (Erickson’s) point — that the GOP’s effort is mostly “dreck” — is valid. Washington’s so freaking broken that the usual platitudes and rhetoric can’t and won’t suffice.
21 pages? How about starting with two words: THE CONSTITUTION?
Ross provides his idea of what the pledge should look like. It’s all good stuff….but isn’t asking the Republicans to pledge to “ban public sector unions, which exist solely to wage war against the taxpayers who fund their operations“, a bit unrealistic? I understand that we are way past the point where “baby steps” in the right direction will be enough to get us back on track, but they have to get elected, first.
Doug Powers has a more positive reaction, with justifiable concerns about Republican fidelity to their pledge:
I love it, provided the words jump off the paper and into reality at some point soon. Sure, signing off on political pledges is a little like ordering X-Ray glasses from a comic book — you just know it’s not going to be nearly as good as advertised — but I like the GOP’s effort so far. However, it’s a real shame that the Constitution has to be re-branded once in a while — I kind of like the original.
The Pledge is somewhat similar to Newt Gingrich’s Contract With America, which worked wonders… for a while — until a few deals were reached, a couple compromises were made, and a number of handshakes across the aisle, pats on the back, and Republicans who caved in like third world mine shafts caused things to slip back to right where they were, and then some.
Making pledges is easy. Keeping them? Not so much. Just ask Mr. Hope and Change. The new GOP pledge is fine as far as it goes — especially the upfront acknowledgment that government’s powers derive from the consent of the governed, not from the penumbras emanating from the fingertips of all President Obama’s czars.
Here’s Paul Ryan on The Laura Ingraham Show, this morning:
And here he is on Good Morning America:
Don Surber – Not happy: A pledge too long
I refuse to read that dumbass Pledge To America that the Republican Party in Washington came up with.
It is a load of crap.
If you cannot recite a pledge in less than 30 seconds — if schoolboys cannot memorize it — you do not have a pledge.
You have bureaucratic bilge.
How in the hell do you sell people on smaller government when you rattle on for 21 pages about your plans for health care and the like?
Are we just re-arranging deck chairs or are we saving the Titanic?
Here’s a pledge:
“I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America, and to the republic for which it stands, one nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all.”
He updates later after he’s read it to tell us he likes it, LOL. But it’s too long.
Ace weighs in: Erickson Vs. Frum On The Pledge To America
I think they’re both wrong, and in ways that have become wearying predictable, each playing his cliched and exaggerated role.
I liked his pithy response to Frum.
Dan Riehl responds to Erickson point by point: GOP Pledge: My Strong Disagreement With Redstate
Legal Insurrection: GOP Pledge – A Thousand Points of Fight
Now that I have read it, I’m in agreement with the approach, which amounts to A Thousand Points of Fight.
The Pledge recognizes that the problem of an out-of-control federal government was not created overnight, and there are no handful of one-size fits all solutions.
There are thousands of problems, and it will take time.
The Pledge properly focuses on themes of smaller government based on constitutional principles, national security, and individual autonomy.
Linked by Michelle Malkin, Buzzworthy, The Hayride, (taking Doug Ross’ side on the public sector union thing), and Adrienne’s Corner, thanks!