Gay Patriot Header Image

Guidelines for Republicans after the 2010 Elections

Posted by B. Daniel Blatt at 2:36 pm - November 2, 2010.
Filed under: 2010 Elections,Congress (112th),We The People

Via Instapundit, Wyoh offers some guidelines to Republicans who win election today:

No more “stimulus” that stimulates exactly nothing.

No more government “support” of private industry.

No more pushing through legislation that you freely admit you did not read.

No. More.

Either act like adults charged with the responsible management of this country, instead of drunken teenagers with mom’s credit card, or we will un-elect you at the first opportunity.

Those are some good first steps.  This of course will be followed by cutting government spending and reducing federal regulations — or state regulations — as the case may be.



  1. And Republicans should be willing to cooperate with Obama and his Democrats… provided the latter embrace budget cuts, repeal of at least part of ObamaCare, reductions in the size and scope of government, tax cuts, and pro-growth economic policies.

    Otherwise, screw ’em.

    Comment by V the K — November 2, 2010 @ 2:46 pm - November 2, 2010

  2. Add to the list no more earmarks. And why not eliminate foreign aid? Why do we give money away to the middle east countries who are making a fortune selling us oil? I hardly think they need it. In 2007 Egypt received two billion dollars and they vote against the U.S 79% of the time in the U.N. Jordan received 192.8 million and they oted 71% of the time against us. Pakistan 8an alleged ally) received only 67 million but voted 75% against us. India 143.7 million and they voted 81% against us. Obviously we´re not buying good will. This is money down toilet.

    Comment by Roberto — November 2, 2010 @ 3:11 pm - November 2, 2010

  3. No more “stimulus” that stimulates exactly nothing.

    Well, it did stimulate *government*. (Hundreds of thousands of government jobs “created or saved”.)

    Comment by ILoveCapitalism — November 2, 2010 @ 3:27 pm - November 2, 2010

  4. “stimulus”


    That’s a case of ‘identity theft’, where the perpetrators wrote checks on the account of the American people, to all of their friends & co-conspirators.

    A crime has been committed against the American people!

    Comment by gastorgrab — November 2, 2010 @ 3:42 pm - November 2, 2010

  5. GayPatriot » Guidelines for Republicans after the 2010 Elections…

    Here at World Spinner we are debating the same thing……

    Trackback by World Spinner — November 2, 2010 @ 5:05 pm - November 2, 2010

  6. 1. No earmarks.

    2. Borrowed money ONLY for infrastructure, wind-power and R&D.

    3. No more propping-up the general fund and the States’ general funds (pensions, teachers and policemen, etc.) with deficit-monies and “porculus”.

    Comment by Ted B. (Charging Rhino) — November 3, 2010 @ 12:55 am - November 3, 2010

  7. Dan, if the House GOP Majority (God, I love the combination of those words and the promise of success they connote) simply pulls a Contract’ish 94 moment and passes internal rules that mandate members must read a bill or members must act ethically and the Majority stands against things like more debt, another stimulus, tax increases… and recommends modest budget cuts –the Majority ought to lose its lease on the Majority faster than Pelosi did.

    We’ve got to do far, far more substantial and meaningful reforms than jus those… far more.

    Comment by Michigan-Matt — November 3, 2010 @ 7:20 am - November 3, 2010

  8. Now it’s a stand-off.

    The incomplete Obama agenda will prove destructive to American interests, at home and abroad. The Democrats will hold a knife to the throat of uncle Sam, and begin negotiating for “their share” of what’s in Sam’s pockets……while the rest of the world gets on with their lives.

    Democrats would rather put the country at risk, than concede to anything.

    Comment by gastorgrab — November 3, 2010 @ 9:04 am - November 3, 2010

  9. I just hope that the Republicans realize that this was about the economy and the job situation and NOT about gay marriage.

    Comment by David Farrell — November 3, 2010 @ 12:09 pm - November 3, 2010

  10. Hear! Hear!

    Comment by MVH — November 3, 2010 @ 2:30 pm - November 3, 2010

  11. David, it wasn’t about any soc con issues –including the “Let’s lynch the illegals” gangbangers.

    It’s about fisc conservatism and that was the message loud and clear –TPers don’t want their movement highjacked by well-intentioned soc cons pushing the usual band of soc con agenda items. We’ve got enough divisiveness from Obama without adding in farRight soc con issues to the legend of 2010.

    Comment by Michigan-Matt — November 3, 2010 @ 4:58 pm - November 3, 2010

RSS feed for comments on this post.

Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.