Meta-Blog

SEARCH QandO

Email:
Jon Henke
Bruce "McQ" McQuain
Dale Franks
Bryan Pick
Billy Hollis
Lance Paddock
MichaelW

BLOGROLL QandO

 
 
Recent Posts
The Ayers Resurrection Tour
Special Friends Get Special Breaks
One Hour
The Hope and Change Express - stalled in the slow lane
Michael Steele New RNC Chairman
Things that make you go "hmmmm"...
Oh yeah, that "rule of law" thing ...
Putting Dollar Signs in Front Of The AGW Hoax
Moving toward a 60 vote majority?
Do As I Say ....
 
 
QandO Newsroom

Newsroom Home Page

US News

US National News
Politics
Business
Science
Technology
Health
Entertainment
Sports
Opinion/Editorial

International News

Top World New
Iraq News
Mideast Conflict

Blogging

Blogpulse Daily Highlights
Daypop Top 40 Links

Regional

Regional News

Publications

News Publications

 
I endorse John Shadegg for minority whip
Posted by: McQ on Monday, November 13, 2006

MULTIPLE UPDATES


I've been doing a lot of thinking and weighing of options this past week concerning the now minority leadership for the House Republicans in the upcoming 110th Congress. I've come to at least once firm conclusion. Somehow, some way, John Shadegg needs to be involved in that leadership. The Arizona Republic pretty well expressed my feelings with their endorsement of Shadegg (who is, of course, a favorite son):
We're going to learn very quickly, likely this week, whether a lick of sense has been pounded into the craniums of congressional Republicans following their midterm disaster last Tuesday.

Rep. John Shadegg, R-Ariz., is running for minority whip, the second-highest leadership post among Republicans in the House. Likely, he will have to defeat the current GOP whip, Missouri Rep. Roy Blunt.

Shadegg and Blunt have been down this road before. Earlier this year, the two competed for the House majority leader spot vacated by outgoing Rep. Tom Delay of Texas. They lost to Rep. John Boehner of Ohio.

If House Republicans leave either of those gentlemen - Boehner or Blunt - in charge when they vote for new leaders later this week, they will be declaring themselves even more blithering than voters thought. And voters thought Republicans were pretty blithering this election cycle, if you hadn't noticed.
A lot of times when you hear the coach of a losing team explain how he plans to get his team back on track, he says "we have to get back to basics". Well that's precisely what Republicans have to do. And that requires leadership which is actively committed to those basics and steering its members that way. As we've documented, Roy "fire ants one a stick" Blunt is not that guy. John Shadegg is.

I'm also leaning heavily to the candidacy of Mike Pence for Minority leader over John Boehner. Again, in my opinion at least, a clean break is necessary to remove the taint the 109th Congress leaves with Republicans. They need new leadership which is unambiguous about where it wants to take Republicans in the House (fiscal conservative, less spending, smaller government) and seem willing to do that and not just talk the game. Pence seems to be that sort of leader, and while I'm withholding my full endorsement for the moment, he certainly seems to be that candidate.

I hope to sit in on a few conference calls with these candidates if I can arrange my schedule to do so. It would be useful to have some appropriate questions to ask them. If you are so inclined, feel free to leave them in the comments here or you can go over to where NZ Bear is collecting them and leave them there. And, in the if your question has been asked, you can vote for it to move it up on the priority list. In either case, it's an opportunity to have your concerns and questions expressed.

UPDATE: Captain Ed makes a point with which I agree:
First off, the Republicans are holding this election much too soon. The party needs to digest the loss, the data that resulted from it, and determine how best to recover its majority. Holding a leadership election before that process amounts to putting the cart before the horse. New leadership eliminates the possibility of having that debate in any meaningful fashion. Instead of electing leadership that will support the new, revamped agenda, we will get an agenda that meets the requirements of the new leadership — two very different propositions.
UPDATE [Jon Henke]

To McQ's endorsement of Shadegg, I'll add my strong personal approval of Mike Pence and John Shadegg. Indeed, they are among the Republicans I believe could — and should — be the intellectual future of the Party. I'm not sure, from a tactical standpoint, who would be best in the Republican leadership roles, but I believe the GOP could do much worse than those two gentlemen. I've said often that I'd leap at a chance to work for a Pence or Shadegg Senate campaign as their blogger and New Media Coordinator.

In any event, in the spirit of this quest for new leadership, here's an image created by Red State to push for the best "limited government" people available in the Republican leadership.



ALSO: One Republican who really is making an effort to engage the blogosphere is Jack Kingston. He's also gunning for the Conference Chairman position, which he explains in a YouTube video posted at his blog. I wish him well, inclusively because more Republicans need to be as forward-thinking as Kingston on the subject of new media engagement.

UPDATE: I want to make it clear my lack of a full endorsement of Mike Pence at this point really has nothing to do with reservations about him as much as it does with me learning a little more about him. So far, so good.
 
TrackBacks
Return to Main Blog Page
 
 

Previous Comments to this Post 

Comments
And we Republicans could give a Sh#te about what McQ thinks because? Did McQ vote Republican in 2004 or 2006? Is McQ an "Indepedent?" No, McQ is a libertarian...who wants "Dvided Government." McQ doesn’t do much for the R ticket so who really cares what McQ wants?

The point I’ve been trying to convey to you McQ is that unless you’re in the tent, no one really cares about your opinion. You’ve made your electoral call for the last two cycles and that call has been to vote OTHER THAN REPUBLICAN, so why do the R’s really care?

We’re not polling the likes of Glasnost or MK. because they aren’t Republicans, either. I guess we could ask Scott Erb, but his vote don’t do much for us either.

McQ you place yourself in the position of being an MK, Scott Erb and the like, you AREN’T a team player, why should this team care what you think?

Dale Responds: Because they’d rather win elections with libertarian-leaning voters rather than lose them, when those voters stay home on election day?

I mean, if I was just guessing, you pompous ass.
 
Written By: Joe
URL: http://
Pence/Shadegg all the way. I applied to intern for Shadegg, actually... no dice.
I hope to sit in on a few conference calls with these candidates if I can arrange my schedule to do so. It would be useful to have some appropriate questions to ask them. If you are so inclined, feel free to leave them in the comments here
The simple, essential stuff:
What are you going to do to change the perception that the Republican Party has lost its way?
What are you going to do to change the reality that the Republican Party has lost its way?
How do you plan to engage the more conservative-leaning Democrats and make Pelosi’s job less pleasant?
-=-=-=-=-
Joe -

You want some of us neolibertarians to vote Republican? Some of us are known to do so; in fact, some neolibertarians work for Republican candidates (Henke) or for organizations that help push certain causes (me, for example). I split my ballot this year between Libertarians and Republicans, so my vote is out there for the deserving. I’d much rather vote for a Pence or Shadegg than, well, you know.
 
Written By: OrneryWP
URL: http://
You’d like to vote for Pence and Shadegg...Ornery I didn’t realize you were in the Congress!
so my vote is out there for the deserving. I’d much rather vote for a Pence or Shadegg than, well, you know.

Good your vote is available, that’s good, who’s "you know? The Democrats? Give’em a whirl...IF getting your vote costs the R’s my and my wife’s vote for the R’s.
 
Written By: Joe
URL: http://

The point I’ve been trying to convey to you McQ is that unless you’re in the tent, no one really cares about your opinion. You’ve made your electoral call for the last two cycles and that call has been to vote OTHER THAN REPUBLICAN, so why do the R’s really care?
Um, its seems a little obvious, but should they care so that he will vote for him next time? If they only cared about the opinions of people who voted for them this time, they probably get only those people to vote for them again, and that didn’t seem like enough to win the last election. How are you going to win an election like that? Try to out-breed the competition?
 
Written By: ChrisB
URL: http://
You’d like to vote for Pence and Shadegg...Ornery I didn’t realize you were in the Congress!
If you’re trying to say you don’t know what I meant, you’re only insulting yourself, Joe.
Good your vote is available, that’s good, who’s "you know? The Democrats? Give’em a whirl...IF getting your vote costs the R’s my and my wife’s vote for the R’s.
Joe, have you not read any of my posts over the last several months? Did you not read my post above, in which I stated that I split my ballot between Republicans and Libertarians?
Do you read for comprehension?
 
Written By: OrneryWP
URL: http://
And we Republicans could give a Sh#te about what McQ thinks because?
That mirrors my feelings about what you have to say Joe. Go figure.
 
Written By: McQ
URL: http://www.qando.net/blog
McQ, shouldn’t you be endorsing Dems for leadership positions as well if you truly are not a Republican?

What are your choices for the Dems, and why don’t you have a little ad telling people like Glasnost and Mona who to call to keep the Dems more responsible as well?

Just curious...
 
Written By: Harun
URL: http://
Well harun, I believe he has done that to an extent with the intelligence committee chair position and house majority leader position. But the bottom line is that mcq and other libertarians don’t regard the democrats as being a vehicle for libertarian change, but rather a tool to use to change to republicans.
 
Written By: ChrisB
URL: http://
Harun - maybe because the victors have long since divided the spoils and Mona and Glasnost can stand out in the cold if they don’t like the way the loot was split up.

 
Written By: looker
URL: http://
McQ, shouldn’t you be endorsing Dems for leadership positions as well if you truly are not a Republican?
I thought it was obvious that I’d rather see Steny Hoyer vs. John Murtha in the Majority leader’s slot since he has the backing of the Blue Dog Dems.

As for the Speaker of the House and the Majority Leader in the Senate, unless I’m mistaken, there is no real race going on for them.
 
Written By: McQ
URL: http://www.qando.net/blog
If you want to remove the taint that gave the GOP minority status you need to support those who aren’t kindred spirits to the evangelicals. And it doesn’t look like that’s going to change regardless of who you support. Minority status is here to stay.
 
Written By: Alan
URL: http://
Dale I’m a pompous Ass because I point out that taking advice from those who HAVEN’T VOTED FOR US FOR SEVERAL ELECTORAL CYCLES, doesn’t make a lot of sense. Hey dude, I’d say you and McQ are the ones with the problem...

Just explain to me what it takes to get your votes and why your votes, as a generic representation of voters is a net-plus to the R-party? Given the fact that you both freely admit you haven’t voted for the R’s recently?

And let’s toss the Evangelicals off the bus, too...You want minorty status that’s the way to go. What I hear as a Social Conservative-Pompous Ar$e- when I hear about Evangelicals is, "We’ll take your votes for lower taxers, but we won’t go for saving Terry Schiavo, when she’s inconvenient to her husband."

You will note that many "Conservatives"-not libertarians, also opposed the Bush spending plan, BUT I don’t see many libertarians standing with us when we object to what we consider murder, and I have news for you...WE NEED EACH OTHER. So all you libertarians want to purge the GOP of the Fundie/Evangelical/Jesus Freaks better plan on being the much smaller minority party in the future. In short, playing politics means we need to get along...to the extent that Ornery and the GOP can get along and others.

But Dale and McQ you guys, we probably can’t get you, and IF we did get you we’d lose 1.5 votes for every McQ and Dale we got, so really you’re not worth it. So to repeat, why would the GOP care about McQ’s opinion concerning who ought to be GOP leaders?
 
Written By: Joe
URL: http://
Dale I’m a pompous Ass because I point out that taking advice from those who HAVEN’T VOTED FOR US FOR SEVERAL ELECTORAL CYCLES, doesn’t make a lot of sense.
Heh ... yeah you guys did so well last week, why listen to other ideas?

Makes perfect sense to me Joe.
 
Written By: McQ
URL: http://www.qando.net/blog
"I point out that taking advice from those who HAVEN’T VOTED FOR US FOR SEVERAL ELECTORAL CYCLES, doesn’t make a lot of sense"

It makes a certain amount of sense to me if you want to get their votes in future. Taking the advice only of life-long Republicans who run the party now hasn’t seemed to produce good results, has it? But then, being conservative, I suppose Republicans must listen to their elders and stick to habit and tradition, whether it works or not.
 
Written By: timactual
URL: http://
Maybe if we are lucky, we can get Bob Dole to come out of retirement and lead us to victory again.
 
Written By: timactual
URL: http://
It makes a certain amount of sense to me if you want to get their votes in future.
Well let’s see neither voted for Bush in 2004...now they didn’t vote for the R’s in 2006. Now ’06 is understandable, mayhap, except for the rationale of "divided government" but the pattern is that Neo-Libertarians, are libertarians that support the war in Iraq. Gaining their, small, number of votes is going to cost us the votes of a LARGER number of other voters. So nope, can’t say that getting the McQ/Dale vote is a smart one for the R’s. ’Fraid Dale and McQ will have to keep on keep’n on OR vote R every now and then to support the War(s) they deem important.
Heh ... yeah you guys did so well last week, why listen to other ideas?
My kick with the likes of you is that you don’t want the Democrat New ideas, you just voted, to replace Danny Hastert becasue he wasn’t Michael Badnarik. And to me that makes no sense...You won’t join us, I see we’re supposed to join YOU? You might take a look the libertarians, whilst a crucial swing vote in several elections, were a MINORITY "protest" vote...Again you guys are welcome in the R party, and welcome to make your policy preferences the party’s, if you can. But why the Party should worry about the opinion of people that haven’t voted R’s , unlike say the religious and independents or women...well you know the majority of folks that vote R, is a mystery that surpasseth understanding.

McQ and Dale and MK and Glasnost and Scott Erb, who has suggestions for the GOP I’m sure, can advocate whatever they want, but it just astounds me that we would care. We haven’t gotten the McQ/Dale/MK/ so why would we care now? The goal is to recapture past voters, not voters that don’t vote for us...
 
Written By: Joe
URL: http://
The goal is to recapture past voters, not voters that don’t vote for us...
And who do you think those past voters you want to recapture voted for?
 
Written By: ChrisB
URL: http://
Well let’s see neither voted for Bush in 2004...now they didn’t vote for the R’s in 2006.
You have no idea how I voted in 2006 (hint: John Linder represents my district), nor, other than Bush, how I voted in 2004. All I said about 2006 is I preferred a Democratic House and split government.

But no problem, Joe ... keep the status quo and live with being out of power. No skin of my posterior.
 
Written By: McQ
URL: http://www.qando.net/blog
ChrisB they either didn’t vote or they voted "D", mostly...why do you think they voted some variant of "L"?
 
Written By: Joe
URL: http://
ChrisB they either didn’t vote or they voted "D", mostly.
Prove I "didn’t vote" or mostly "voted D", Joe.

As for Dale, please point to the "D" he voted for:
Governor: Art Olivier (L)
Lt. Governor: Lynnette Shaw (L)
Sec State: Gail K. Lightfoot (L)
Controller: Donna Tello (L)
Treasurer: Marian Smithson (L)
Attorney General: Kenneth A. Weissman (L)
Insurance Commissioner: Dale F. Ogden (L)
Senator: Michael S. Metti (L)
US Representative: Paul King (L)
State Senator: Brian A. Klea (L)
State Assembly: Martin Garrick (R)
Board of Equalization: Michelle Steel (R)
Mayor: Lori Holt Pfeiler (R)
You know, your unfortunate problem is you let your alligator mouth overload your hummingbird ass when you ought to just learn to STFU.
 
Written By: McQ
URL: http://www.qando.net/blog
ChrisB they either didn’t vote or they voted "D", mostly...why do you think they voted some variant of "L"?
I don’t know that they did, though it seems that more people are voting "L" than ever before. But my point is that by your logic, those people didn’t vote for republicans, much the same way Bruce, Dale, and Ornery didn’t vote republican. So why should you try to capture their votes but not Bruce, Dale and Ornery’s (and mine)? Whats the difference between them? I mean I can understand you maybe not agreeing with us that republicans should move to a more limited govt and libertarian approach, but I don’t understand you telling Bruce to shut up while you stick your fingers in your ears.
 
Written By: ChrisB
URL: http://
Well let’s see neither voted for Bush in 2004...
Uh, except, that I did. Moreover, that isn’t the only thing I did for the Bush Campaign in 2004, either.

But you sure are quick to make assertions you don’t know jack about.
 
Written By: Dale Franks
URL: http://www.qando.net

 
Add Your Comment
  NOTICE: While we don't wish to censor your thoughts, we do blacklist certain terms of profanity or obscenity. This is not to muzzle you, but to ensure that the blog remains work-safe for our readers. If you wish to use profanity, simply insert asterisks (*) where the vowels usually go. Your meaning will still be clear, but our readers will be able to view the blog without worrying that content monitoring will get them in trouble when reading it.
Comments for this entry are closed.
Name:
Email:
URL:
HTML Tools:
Bold Italic Blockquote Hyperlink
Comment:
   
 
Vicious Capitalism

Divider

Buy Dale's Book!
Slackernomics by Dale Franks

Divider

Divider