ShareThis Page
Election 2006 |

Election 2006

| Wednesday, November 8, 2006 12:00 a.m

Republicans Tuesday lost the U.S. House majority they wrested from Democrats in 1994’s rightly ballyhooed “Republican Revolution.” Pork-fueled pomposity and scandalous scapegraces helped to convince the electorate to cancel its tattered remains after 12 years.

The House that Newt Gingrich built collapsed under not only the extraordinary weight of GOP hubris but also the unstoppable (and often inexplicable) train that has been chugging for “change” at full steam.

Relegated to the minority in the coming 110th Congress and facing the prospect of Speaker Nancy Pelosi, Republicans already are plotting a leadership coup.

The fellas whose poor navigational skills helped to crash-land the GOP on the deck of the U.S.S. We Blew It — Speaker Dennis Hastert, Majority Leader John Boehner and Majority Whip Roy Blunt — likely will and should be pushed overboard.

Look for two reformers suddenly with portfolio — Rep. Mike Pence of Indiana, head of the Republican Study Committee, and John Shadegg of Arizona, the guy we endorsed over Mr. Boehner for whip — to attempt to lead the GOP back to sanity and out of exile in 2008.

Indeed, there is no fast or easy cure for the Republican Party, mangled and mismanaged. But at least it will be a start.

Categories: News
TribLIVE commenting policy

You are solely responsible for your comments and by using you agree to our Terms of Service.

We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.

While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.

We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers

We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.

We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.

We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.

We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.