Gay Patriot Header Image

House Republicans’ Job: “not to mollify Beltway pundits”

For there to be a real change in the legislative landscape in 2011, Republicans elected to represent congressional districts or states in Washington must remember that they serve the people in those various jurisdictions and not the permanent denizens of the nation’s capital, a notion which many elected Republicans neglected in the past.

In her post on Republican investigations into Administration misconduct, Michelle Malkin reminds those Republicans of their duties:

Just a humble reminder: [Incoming House House Oversight Committee chairman Darrell] Issa’s job — and this goes for every GOP House leader — is not to mollify Beltway pundits.

Their job is not to manage White House p.r. and “reach across the aisle” and “get things done” for the sake of bipartisanship.

Their job is to protect taxpayers’ best interests, rein in a bloated, out-of-control federal government, and abide by their oaths of office.

Republicans need remember that Americans did not embrace the GOP this fall so much as they rejected the Democrats.  They gave us back our House majority on a kind of “trial basis.”  Should Republicans stand up to the Beltway establishment and for over-regulated individual and entrepreneur, they may well lose favor with the in-crowd in Washington, but retain the good will of the taxpaying folk beyond the Beltway for years to come.



  1. If real investigations and fixing government is on their agenda then that will be great. If all they are doing is mock trials, frivilious Troopergate crap and high platitudes to please the outside-the-beltway media then they will fail as miserably as the Democrats did in maintaining their tenuous hold on the nation’s power strings. As I reminded Democrats in 2008, just over 50% is not a mandate. Stop pretending that it is.

    Comment by Mr. Moderate — January 4, 2011 @ 12:09 am - January 4, 2011

  2. Expose! Expose! Expose!

    I want to see who is funding every idea, and who is profiting from the implimentation. The government’s job is to protect the rights of all Americans, not to pick their favorites. Favoritism towards one is discrimination against all others.

    Hatch Act violations are high on my list of importance. If any elected official uses his position to redirect the taxpayers money, to his own supporters and then back to his own campaign coffer, i want to know about it. Public employee unions are also employees of the government. They should not be able to press for a raise (higher taxes) only to split the money with their favorite legislator…….who then gets them another raise.

    I’d like to see a more direct rule to compliment the Hatch Act; a group shouldn’t be able to use public money to campaign for more public money.

    Comment by gastorgrab — January 4, 2011 @ 12:48 am - January 4, 2011

  3. […] the original article herePossibly related posts: (automatically generated)Related posts on HouseGayPatriot » House Republicans' Job: “not to mollify Beltway pundits”South Capitol Street › House Republicans Vow to Repeal Health Care …Related posts on […]

    Pingback by Townhall: House GOP to Vote on Obamacare Repeal Within Weeks | Katy Pundit — January 4, 2011 @ 1:39 am - January 4, 2011

  4. […] posts on michelle malkinColumnist to speak at Vanguard School – Colorado Springs Gazette …GayPatriot » House Republicans' Job: “not to mollify Beltway pundits”Obamacare repeal document drop: Waiver-mania for all! | NewsNetUSA …Related posts on witch […]

    Pingback by Michelle Malkin: Snort: Now the Dems are worried about wasteful “witch hunts” | Katy Pundit — January 4, 2011 @ 3:24 am - January 4, 2011

  5. And by “Beltway Pundits” you mean Joe “Stockholm Syndrome” Scarborough.

    Comment by V the K — January 4, 2011 @ 5:23 am - January 4, 2011

  6. @gastorgrab me too. The perpetual cycle of legislator to industrial/special interest lobbyist is pathetically transparent yet we continue to sit idly by as if it’s no big deal.

    Comment by Mr. Moderate — January 4, 2011 @ 7:57 am - January 4, 2011

  7. It would seem that if the vaunted “non-partisan” Congressional Budget Office can “score” Obamacare in a matter of days, that the same CBO could compile the numbers on a law to see if the Hatch Act has been violated.

    I would like to see the “non-partisan” CBO be freed to operate without rules that make them find the necessary outcome for those ordering the study.

    Actually, just once, I would love to hear the CBO say that they can not understand a word of the bill. Their work is akin to dumpster diving at thewholesale fish market and coming up with a pearl necklace. How do they do it?

    Comment by Heliotrope — January 4, 2011 @ 8:41 am - January 4, 2011

  8. It would appear GOP Congressman Fred “Ban the Bulb” Upton didn’t get the memo.

    Comment by V the K — January 4, 2011 @ 9:23 am - January 4, 2011

  9. Gastorgab:
    You say you want to know who’s behind every piece of legislation. You never will as long as campaigns are funded by committees and legislators are bought by groups. It will take more, a Constitutional Ammedment, for the voice of the individual to be both heard and identified. Here’s my thoughts on such anammendment:

    (Commentary in {..}, not part of proposed Amendment}

    No candidate for the Presidency or either house of Congress shall accept contributions in cash or in kind from any organization or group of persons for expenses incurred in a campaign for that office. All such contributions shall be made only by individual citizens who shall attest that the funds or other items of value are from their own resources and that they have not received, nor have they been promised, offsetting items of value from any other party in exchange for their contribution. The identity and extent of contributions to such campaigns shall be made public for a period of thirty days from receipt before being employed or used as collateral for a loan by such campaigns. Organizations of any type, {i.e. corporations, unions, gun rights advocates, environmental protection groups, even “Susie’s Flower Shop”, a theoretical small business cited in the Citizen’s United Case,} may, without restriction, expend money to advocate a position on any issue before or likely to come before the electorate insofar as no candidate’s name or description is included in their expressions of advocacy.

    No person may be elected or appointed to either house of Congress more than two times.
    {The intent of the above is to bring “transparency” to campaign financing by removing any group from the process whereby that group may conceal the identity of an individual contributor as well as limiting the influence of such groups or “special interests”. It further prevents an organization from making such contributions when an individual within that organization, such as a union member or corporation stockholder, may oppose the candidate. Considering the large equity position in certain corporations that the federal government has recently taken in response to the economic crises, this is particularly important in excluding such influence. The money from “special interest” groups will then go to promote that for which they exist, their “special interest”. The media will be directed to expositions on the issues facing the electorate, thus enhancing discussion and hopefully understanding of issues, bereft of personalities.

    Comment by Arch — January 4, 2011 @ 10:09 am - January 4, 2011

  10. […] This post was mentioned on Twitter by allen emmall, DNC Fail!. DNC Fail! said: House Republicans’ Job: “not to mollify Beltway pundits” #tcot #tlot […]

    Pingback by Tweets that mention GayPatriot » House Republicans’ Job: “not to mollify Beltway pundits” -- — January 4, 2011 @ 11:22 am - January 4, 2011

  11. The Republicans also need to put a spotlight on all of Obama’s czars who hold cabinet level powers; in other words, Obama is using the czars to not fill his cabinet. He has yet to fill several important positions to date while his czars remain in the shadows. Once exposed, his czars will resign because they are too radical & Obama knows it. He’s also using his czars to bypass Congress.

    Comment by Sebastian Shaw — January 4, 2011 @ 11:25 am - January 4, 2011

  12. Anther idea:

    RICO laws should be expanded to included public labor union activity. For some reason, the law currently doesn’t consider it a ‘protection racket’ when New York Sanitation workers refuse to plow snow because the want to pressure city officials into giving them a raise.

    “This is a nice place ya got here, Mr Jones. It would be a shame if something were to happen to it.”


    “Your assertion that the Commissioner was wrong cannot justify the wrong of leaving the city unguarded. That furnished the opportunity; the criminal element furnished the action. There is no right to strike against the public safety by anyone, anywhere, any time.”

    – Governor Calvin Coolidge, on the Boston Police Strike, September 14, 1919.

    Comment by gastorgrab — January 4, 2011 @ 12:02 pm - January 4, 2011

  13. Too many people are trying to turn government into a business. They are using OUR money for their own purposes.

    To limit the risk that taxpayer funding will be directed at partisan interests, ALL FREE SPEECH SHOULD BE PRIVATELY FUNDED. Any speech that is funded by government, by definition, should be considered a ‘public service announcement’, and must remain neutral in all political matters.

    Again, you shouldn’t be able to use taxpayer money to lobby for more taxpayer money. If your interest is esoteric, so should your funding be.

    There should be no money limit on free speech that is privately funded.

    Comment by gastorgrab — January 4, 2011 @ 2:36 pm - January 4, 2011

  14. I found a good example.

    This should be a crime! Until Obama gets it’s funding, it’s not fully enacted. Any manipulation that uses taxpayer money to lobby for a partisan interest (to pay for ObamaCare) should be prosecuted as a crime.

    They are still selling this product!


    Politico’s Ben Smith, in a post entitled “HHS Buys ‘ObamaCare,'” quotes an official from Secretary Kathleen Sebelius’s Department of Health and Human Services (HHS), who confirms that this clear attempt to influence what Americans read about Obamacare does, indeed, represent your tax dollars at work: “‘We are using a bunch of search term[s] to help point people to [It’s] [p]art of our online efforts to help get accurate information to people about the new law (i.e. [we] also use Facebook, Twitter, blogs and webcasts),’ an HHS official confirmed by e-mail.”

    Comment by gastorgrab — January 5, 2011 @ 9:16 pm - January 5, 2011

RSS feed for comments on this post.

Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.