RushLimbaugh:Whyaren’tChristie’sRINOpalsrushing

Rush Limbaugh: Why aren’t Christie’s RINO pals rushing to his side?

posted at 5:21 pm on January 9, 2014 by Allahpundit

Via the Daily Rushbo, the wildebeest analogy made me chuckle. I think this is more of a shot at RINOs for having poor taste in aligning themselves with Christie in the first place then a shot at them for being cowardly in not backing their guy up in his hour of need, but the two aren’t mutually exclusive. As a noted RINO myself (albeit one who’s skeptical of Christie’s claims of innocence), I’m not sure what any of his allies could have said to defend him yesterday. If your strongest argument for your guy is “well, there’s no proof that he’s involved yet,” you’re probably better off sitting tight and hoping for the best. For what it’s worth, my Twitter timeline this morning was overflowing with praise for Christie from center-righties for his quick firing of Bridget Kelly and extended apologetics at today’s presser. By closing time tomorrow, I’d bet, they’ll have moved on to “it’s old news.” Big-name RINOs will be backing him up before you know it.

Since I needled S.E. Cupp last night for thinking Christie could resign and then rebound to run for president anyway (what?), let me take a swig of what she’s drinking and float this idea: Could Bridgegate have slightly increased the chance of him running as an independent in 2016? Those odds are lo-o-o-ong, but I can kinda sorta imagine a scenario in which Christie becomes so alienated from conservative voters through centrist policy moves, petty scandals, and abrasive anti-Republican rhetoric that he concludes he has no path through the primaries. Scott Walker’s too appealing as a centrist PEU-smashing alternative, the rest of the field’s too strong, he’s too damaged, and so the door is, realistically, closed — as a Republican. As an independent, though, he’d be a player again. He’d get tons of free media from the press, which would find the drama of a paradigm-shifting centrist candidacy irresistible (at first), and he’d probably do okay with fundraising between Christie loyalists in the national GOP donor class, Wall Street players eager to see a moderate local guy win the White House (Mike Bloomberg foremost among them), and disaffected small donors who are looking for a new Perot to end “business as usual” in politics. If Bridgegate is followed by a few more setbacks and his star starts to dim inside the GOP, his best (longshot) bet might be to jump in as an indie and declare the age of the two-party system over or whatever. He might not win — in fact, he almost certainly wouldn’t — but launching a viable third-party candidacy would be a major achievement in its own right and doubtless highly flattering to his giant ego. And it’d be true to his personal brand, which isn’t really Republican anymore anyway. When he talks national politics, you’re more likely to hear him inveigh against gridlock and “Washington” than against Obama and the Democrats. If he won the GOP nomination, he’d run in the general election as an independent for all intents and purposes anyway. If he starts to fade over the next two years with the party, I wonder if that’s the route he’ll go.

Tags: bridge, Chris Christie, democratic, establishment, fort lee, jersey, kelly, Republicans In Name Only, Rush Limbaugh, traffic

Related Posts:

Source from: hotair

RushLimbaugh:Itwouldbeagrosserror

Rush Limbaugh: It would be a gross error for Republicans to let Obama delay the individual mandate

posted at 7:21 pm on November 8, 2013 by Allahpundit

Via MFP, didn’t House Republicans demand a delay of the mandate at one point in late September as their price for averting a shutdown? Yes, says Rush, but that was then. Obama refused to defund the law before it started wreaking havoc so now his reward is getting to watch this car crash play out. In fact, that was a core argument among establishment Republicans against “defund.” Why stop a program that the Democrats own if you’re convinced it’ll be a wreck? Allow it to launch and then, when it wrecks, their credibility will wreck with it. Let it burn.

I’ve written about this problem before, as have other righty bloggers, but it’s newly urgent now that Obama’s website czar is hinting that the site won’t be ready by the end of the month. Delay is coming, and like I said at the end of that last link, there are two ways Obama can play it. He can do what he did with the employer mandate and unilaterally declare that the individual mandate won’t be enforced, at least temporarily. That’s probably illegal but that never stopped him before. Or he can call on both parties in Congress to pass something to delay the mandate for awhile, at least until the website is up and running. Marco Rubio introduced a bill two weeks ago that would do exactly that — yet here’s Rush insisting that it would be the height of stupidity to ease the pain caused by ObamaCare by granting Obama a delay. Simple dilemma for the GOP, then: If they agree to a delay, they’re helping to reduce near-term suffering caused by the law. Like Rush says, that’ll make it easier later for Democrats to claim that it’s working okay. If they don’t agree to a delay, they’re contradicting a position they held as recently as six weeks ago and giving Obama an opening to claim that Republicans want people to suffer. They’re so vindictive towards him, he’ll say, that they’d rather see people forced to pay a penalty next year for not having insurance even though the website makes it next to impossible to obtain insurance. Remember, none other than Ted Cruz rejected the “let it burn” strategy in an interview a few weeks ago because, he said, it’d be terrible to stand by while Americans are suffering just to score some political points. That was his rationale for pursuing “defund” — he tried to stop the law before it could do harm. How does he feel about mitigating the harm now that the law’s taken effect?

What the GOP’s going to end up doing, I assume, is granting a delay if Obama asks for one but only if he gives them other concessions. What those might be, I don’t know; they could ask for a sunset clause on the entire law by a certain date if things aren’t working, as Ace suggests, although who knows if Obama would dare risk that. Whatever happens, it’s crucial that they make sure people understand that delaying the mandate has bad consequences. It’s unfortunately necessary because you can’t penalize people for not buying a product that the government’s website won’t let them buy, but it’s only going to increase the risk of adverse selection to the insurance industry. Instead of healthy people signing up en masse and tossing their money at insurers every month starting in April, those insurers will have to wait until May — or June, or July, or who knows when. And meanwhile, untold numbers of sick people will be signing up, month after month. Job one for the GOP is making that clear so that the public understands that Obama’s colossal screw-up is going to do damage even after mitigating action like delay is taken. Meanwhile, if O refuses to grant them any concessions, they should simply vote present on delay, in fine Obama tradition, instead. Let Democrats continue to own this. No “yes” votes from Republicans, even if the politics of this force them to relent on the mandate for now.

Tags: adverse selection, death spiral, Department of Health and Human Services, error, mandate, obama, ObamaCare, Rush Limbaugh, sebelius

Related Posts:

Source from: hotair