The American Spectator

Reader Mail

(Page 3 of 16)

br> Supporting Kramer for President in '08 (could he do worse?) br> Laguna Niguel, California /p> p> I absolutely agree, it is long past time for this blundering, lukewarm RINO to step aside. His vigorous defense of a blatantly corrupt Democrat really is the straw that broke the camel's back. When he decided to defend Wiliam Jefferson, he really stepped in it, and that stink isn't going to go away anytime soon. What a shame that Republicans are giving credence to the Democrats' charge of "a culture of corruption." br> -- G. Sorrentino br> Enterprise, Alabama /p>

Mr. Hillyer's article is one that contains a great deal of good common sense ideas and judgments. I find myself in agreement with it in several particulars. Mr. Hillyer comes up a bit short in a couple of points, however.

The first one may seem minor or picky, but I think not. He cites the late night abomination of a vote on a House bill as a prime example of Hastert's rule by brute force. Well, sir, that was the only way that Hastert (and Tom DeLay) could get that particular piece of George Bush's agenda passed, as such a large number of conservative Republicans were against it. I certainly hope that tactic will NOT be used again in order to pass a compromise immigration bill containing amnesty and citizenship for illegals as George Bush wants.

Secondly, Mr. Hillyer needs to redo some of his historical research on Speakers of the U.S. House of Representatives and how they performed in office. Mr. Hillyer states; "Thus did Hastert institute a culture of brute power in the House divorced from both rules and tradition, not to mention consistency."

Mr. Hillyer, have you ever heard of Speaker Sam Rayburn, or Speaker Tip O'Neill? These two men alone held the post long enough to have established "tradition" in performing the duties of the office. These two men are considered giants in the long line of Speakers of the House. These two men used any and all techniques necessary to pass legislation at a given time. In fact, I would propose that Hastert's main failing has been in NOT using brute force to replace RINOs that hold committee chairs.

Mr. Hastert is wrong in picking this particular fight with the White House over the Jefferson affair. The White House has been wrong in picking many of its fights with the House Republican Caucus. The White House has been wrong in the marginalization and then termination of Mr. Hastert's personal friend and ally, Porter Goss at CIA, and the installation of what seems to be a Negroponte (think State Dept.) ally in his place. What I am suggesting is that the White House in their disrespecting of Congressional sensibilities has conditioned Hastert, and many other Repubs, to take strange, hasty stands.

p>If Hastert is tone deaf on issues of criminal conduct by legislators, George Bush is totally deaf on immigration/illegal alien amnesty issues. Maybe both should go. Would a President Cheney be so bad? br> --

topics:
Taxes, Foreign Policy, Nancy Pelosi, Television, Business, Abortion, Environment, Global Warming, Law, Founding Fathers, Iraq, Iran, NATO, North Korea, Socialism, Immigration