Divide and conquer

I couldn't help but think as I read this article on certain conservatives in Congress who want to axe No Child Left Behind and Bush's prescription drug plan in the name of fiscal conservancy and this NY Times piece about divergent opinions on how far the GOP should go in trashing saving Social Security that the GOP unity on the Hill is not all that great and should be exploited at every turn.

My favorite part:

"The president should go for a very large account because it's going to take exactly the same amount of energy to get a large account as a small one, and you get a dramatically bigger reward with a large account," said Newt Gingrich, a Republican and former House speaker. "And anything that changes benefits on an involuntary basis will allow the Democrats, the AARP and the unions to beat our brains in. It isn't politically doable."

This actually confuses me. Republicans know they are going to get pounded on the whole idea of privitizing Social Security and rolling back benefits, but are willing to risk their majority just to push it through? Wouldn't this hint that they know that most Americans don't approve of their ideas, which would mean that the GOP doesn't really care about most Americans?

Meanwhile Yglesias makes another point, same article:

"Seeking to head off unhappiness among Republicans who want Mr. Bush to take the bolder route, White House officials have been emphasizing the importance of unifying behind whatever plan has the best chance of being signed into law." In other words, the White House doesn't actually give a damn what happens, as long as they can replace Social Security with something else. Anything else.

Can the rest of America see all this as well? Maybe this is the beating Gingrich expects?