On the Corner today, at the National Review Online, Mark Levin and Jonah Goldberg discussed the House Republicans and their impact on the “stimulus” bill.

About the House Republicans [Mark R. Levin] 02/16 02:53 PM

The Republicans were out of the game from Day One. Nancy Pelosi simply was not working with them. And in the Senate, even some of the usual moderate Republicans dropped out of discussions with the Democrats because they could not make any significant headway. This disaster was not about Republicans lacking wise alternatives. It was about power politics. And the Democrats have a lot more plans and will score a lot more victories — for themselves, not the country. Beating up on the Republicans, who, in my view, actually acted strategically and wisely in this case, is a distraction.

Re: About The House Republicans [Jonah Goldberg] 02/16 04:11 PM

Mark L: I dunno. Speaking just for myself, I’ve written three our four whole columns and many blog posts denouncing the stimulus package. I’ve posted two Corner posts with fairly mild and entirely constructive criticisms about how the GOP could have set itself up better for the long fight. And yet, going by your post, that counts as a “distraction”? I don’t see it.

Meanwhile, those interested in being further distracted along these lines should see Douthat and Frum.

Re: Re: About the House Republicans [Mark R. Levin] 02/16 06:26 PM

To Jonah’s point: The Republicans actually put out some pretty good ideas and stood firm against the junk that was thrown at them for several weeks. I have spoken night after night about the Republican failures in the past, but I don’t see it this time. I have read lots of good ideas in that respect, including from Eric Cantor and Paul Ryan. The criticism against them this time, that they failed to embrace the ideas of certain columnists and bloggers, may annoy the columnists and the bloggers who propose them but that doesn’t mean they have not developed a foundation from which they can make future progress. I saw a different GOP last week, smarter and more strategic, which should serve them well in “the long fight.” As for the condemnation being a “distraction,” which was my point, I suppose I could have used the word “irrelevant” rather than “distraction” for, in fact, as best as I can tell, they are irrelevant.