Dick Armey Explains Why the GOP Deserves To Lose Big Next Week

In yesterday's Washington Post, retired GOP muckety-muck Dick Armey, now the leader of the activist group Freedom Works, tells the Republicans exactly why they deserve to lose their majority:

The leadership must remember that the modern conservative movement is a fusion of social and fiscal conservatives united in their belief in limited government. The party must keep both in the fold. Republicans also need to get back to being the party of big ideas. The greatest threat to American prosperity today is a catastrophic fiscal meltdown resulting from long-term entitlements. Democrats have already lined up behind the solution of raising taxes and reducing benefits. But Americans want more freedom and choice in education, health care and retirement security. Republicans -- too busy dreaming up wedge issues to score cheap points against Democrats -- have lost sight of their broad national agenda.

Whole thing, well worth reading, here.

Back in 1997, Reason interviewed Armey when he was still majority leader of the House of Representatives.

And don't miss his engaging recent broadside against Focus on the Family's James Dobson and other social cons. Check it all out here.

Comments

[Syd]

It's amazing how much better Armey got after he left the House.

[Evan!]

Syd,

I think it's a true sign of the fact that the establishmentarianism of public office corrupts these people like a possessed soul. The desire to get - and stay - elected drives them to populism and to simply trying to appease everyone. Which is in itself a magnificent argument for Congressional term limits.

[Umbriel]

I'd buy most of Armey's quote, but while I've seen plenty of Democrats espousing "pay as you go", I haven't heard any seriously discussing "reducing benefits". Unfortunately, I'm not sure there's much taste for such a thing on either side of the aisle these days.

And I think there's always been a strong segment of the social conservative wing that's fairly eager to legislate morality, and not especially pro-"limited government" in sentiment. Reagan was always able to keep them in line by seeming to commiserate with them without actually expending much political capital on their agenda. They've been less patient and more disruptive with his Republican successors.

[db]

I am a Dick Armey of One.

[biologist]

db:

you had me at "dick"

[P Brooks]

"The leadership must remember that the modern conservative movement is a fusion of social and fiscal conservatives united in their belief in limited government."

That made me laugh.

[Schempf]

My Dick is an army of one

Much better

[Warren]

Dick Army as a has-been,
Jack Kemp as an also ran,
Clarence Thomas in dissent.

The only time power-wielding people resort to libertarianism, is when they aren't wielding power.

[Ted]

"But Americans want more freedom and choice in education, health care and retirement security." Did he offer any evidence on any of these three points? I thought polls showed pretty strong opposition to vouchers and privatizing Social Security, at least. Health care, maybe, but not the Republican version of more choice, where when you, for example, have a stroke, the first thing you're supposed to do is comparison shop doctors on price to keep your costs down.

[Ken Shultz]

I hear that Warren, but I sure wish we had some Dick Armeys, Jack Kemps and Phil Gramms today. ...Lately, I've been thinkin' that maybe the rotten bastards of yesterday really were better than the rotten bastards of today.

[Mr. Nice Guy]

Umbriel:

You beat me to it. I haven't the slightest clue where Dick is getting the "reducing benefits" claim.

For the Boomers, it's all about free goodies. The only time that benefit reduction will truly kick in is when Gen X retires. Gen Y is totally fucked when their time comes.

I don't need to turn on my thermostat in the winter to keep me hot. All I have to do is look at my social security reduction on my paycheck.

[de stijl]

Dick Armey does more before 9 AM than most people do all day.