The Four Republican SOTU Responses Couldn't Agree On What To Say

[ProSense]

The Four Republican SOTU Responses Couldn't Agree On What To Say

There was no unified opposition at the conclusion of President Barack Obama's State of the Union address Tuesday night. Instead, four different Republicans -- representing, in some ways, four different factions of the Republican party -- had something to say to the nation.

They shared some of the same talking points: Obamacare is a disaster and Obama's economic agenda is ruining America's future. The GOP is trying to offer some kind of alternative to the electorate. But the similarities largely stopped there, in yet another display of the fractured Republican Party that has a chronic inability to present a coherent and singular vision to the country.

Rep. Cathy McMorris Rodgers (WA) spoke for the party's establishment, with the added bonus of being a woman in leadership at a time when the party's standing with women seems shaky. Sen. Mike Lee (UT) was the self-appointed leader of the tea party, who rebutted the president while attempting to represent that nebulous constituency that has so influenced the party since 2010. Sen. Rand Paul (KY) more or less represented himself, the lone 2016 aspirant to speak Tuesday night, and also gave voice to the libertarian sect. And Rep. Ileana Ros-Lehtinen (FL) addressed the Spanish-speaking audiences on behalf of the party's leadership, another attempt to reach a population with whom Republicans have been unpopular.

That just about covers everybody. Each constituency had a messenger, and ascendant members of the party had an opportunity to showcase themselves in the national spotlight.

The only problem is: It was hard to tell what exactly Republicans, as a whole, wanted Americans to take away from their multi-pronged rebuke of the president, other than their always-fervent opposition to Obama.

- more -

http://talkingpointsmemo.com/dc/gop-sotu-response

[hobbit709]

1. Obama bad, we're good.

that's about the extent of their message.

[Iggo]

2. That's why there were four of them.

[Cha]

3. this tpm comment cracked me up..

stanleyyelnatsdotcom

38 Minutes Ago

'It's the same old flapping of republican gums...whenever the camera panned to republicans, they looked like knots on a log."

[Ikonoklast]

4. The only thing they accomplished is showcasing the current state of disarray, warring factions,

and lack of direction or clear purpose the fractured political mess and failed coalition called the Republican Party finds itself in.

[FSogol]

7. Yup, a disjointed, incoherent mess.

[MissMillie]

5. I don't understand the "libertarian" label for Rand Paul

Libertarians don't typically want to legislate against women's reproductive rights, legalization of marijuana, same-sex marriage, etc.

[geek tragedy]

6. those are secondary concerns for libertarians. their main priority is protecting white male

owners of property and guns.

if one understands libertarianism as supporting the liberty interest of slave owners, it makes a lot more sense.

[FSogol]

8. They don't want to use the real term for him: Common Grifter

[Bluenorthwest]

9. He's a Republican, plain and simple.

There are actual registered Libertarians, but Rand Paul is just another Republican. He's opposed to choice and marriage equality like other conservative Republicans and their international allies in religious orders.

[msanthrope]

10. They do when they want the winger vote. nt