The New York Times: Do We Need a New Republican Party?

http://www.chron.com/news/article/Friedman-Few-answers-from-today-s-GOP-3307718.php

Thomas Friedman is completely wrong (as usual), in the post at Chron from the New York Times.

Friedman postulates that because the country has challenges ahead, therefore an old party (not nearly as old as the Democrat Party, however) would be unable to meet them.

Balderdash. Until you can point to a bold new solution or program to meet the challenges of tomorrow that the Republican Party refuses to adopt, other than for being truly stupid or a bad idea, then you have no complaint.

Chances are, if someone comes up with a bold new solution or program for tomorrow's challenges (a) Newt Gingrich already proposed it 20 years ago, taught it extensively through GOPAC and his satellite TV training program, and is ready to pull the trigger on it on January 21, 2013, (b) the entire Republican party would quickly embrace such an idea from whatever source long before the unionized Democrat Party figures out what the idea is all about.

But Friedman then parades a list of issues which clearly belong in the private sector, in which the government should not play any role. Unless Friedman's plan is to convert the USA into the USSR, his list of priorities burnishes his socialist credentials, but does not a convincing argument make.

Case in point: When Bill Gates was creating MICROSOFT in his parent's garage, WHAT GOVERNMENT AGENCY, REGULATION, OR PROGRAM WAS IT that was in the Gates' garage with them?

Hint: If the government had been involved, Microsoft would have gone bankrupt before delivering its first operating system, costing the goverment millions of dollars in bad loans.

The only plausible example Friedman offers is his claim that Republicans would not accept $1 of tax increases for $10 of spending cuts.

But this ignores the obvious reality that Congressional DEMOCRATS LIE -- and we have figured that out by now. We've seen that movie before.... over and over and over. How many times do you think we should believe promises of spending cuts that never happen, before we figure out "You know, those $10 of spending cuts will probably NEVER HAPPEN."

The fact that Republicans would not take that deal shows what is RIGHT about the GOP, not a defect. We've been taken to the cleaners before. We learned not to trust Democrats any more. And the GOP hung together to toe the line. That is a sign of the GOP's strength, not its weakness.