Posted on 04/20/2012 8:09:50 AM PDT by xzins
Fourth, Remember the Difference Between Republicans and Conservatives.
Conservatives look at the endorsements Mitt Romney has garnered from such establishment figures as former President George H.W. Bush and former Florida Governor Jeb Bush, and most importantly from business-as-usual Washington insiders, such as lobbyist Ed Gillespie, and they see advocates of positions they often opposed, not friends of the transformational agenda that won the Tea Party wave election of 2010.
Surveying Romney’s record and agenda, and most importantly the people he is likely to bring to Washington to implement his agenda, movement conservatives see little likelihood a Romney administration will differ from a Bush administration, or a McCain administration, or a Dole or Ford administration.
This is why conservatives remain so deeply skeptical of Mitt Romney’s candidacy for President. They look at his record as Governor of Massachusetts and the policies he espouses and see no commitment to the kind of transformational change the conservative movement has been working for the past 50 years to achieve.
Republican Party insiders still can’t come to grips with the reality that the rebellion of the small government constitutional conservatives of the Tea Party is as much a rejection of their stewardship of the government – the earmarks and massive spending and debt of the Bush years – as it is a rejection of Obamacare and Obamanomics.
Let’s be quite clear – there is a difference between Republicans and conservatives. The goal of the Republican political party is to elect its candidates to control the levers of government power. Conservatives should not get so swept-up in the Republican Party’s campaign for power, that they loose sight of the fact that the goal of the conservative movement is to hold the government to constitutional principles, no matter what political party is in power, and in the process rejuvenate our society and culture.
Fifth, Don’t Get Suckered into Supporting the Republican Party.
If the difference between conservatives and Republicans is based in the conservative movement’s commitment to holding the government to constitutional principles, no matter which Party is in power, then one of the most important things conservatives can do is to support organizations that are committed to that same goal.
This also means declining to support organizations, including the national, state and local Republican Parties if they are not committed to holding the government to constitutional principles.
The folly of conservatives supporting the Republican National Committee, and many state Republican Party committees was made readily apparent during the presidential primary. In state after state the establishment GOP did its best to thwart the will of the grassroots conservative voters by using its power to tip the scales toward Mitt Romney to the disadvantage of the conservative candidates in the race.
In the same vein the Republican National Congressional Committee and the National Republican Senatorial Committee have become virtual incumbent protection rackets – appearing to sell influence and access in return for donations to keep incumbent members of Congress in power.
Thanks in part to the ability of the new and alternative media, especially the internet, to empower grassroots activists it is now possible to bypass the establishment Republican Party. There are now dozens of sound organizations committed to constitutional conservative principles that are doing everything from training volunteers in grassroots campaign techniques to recruiting and training conservative candidates to run for Congress and their state legislatures.
Just because an organization has conservative in its name doesn’t mean the organization is actually conservative – especially if it is headquartered in Washington DC. Too many Washington-based organizations, even ones that began with the intention of fostering conservative government, have become part of the inside-the-Beltway Republican establishment.
Very often the best organizations to support are not the state parties and national committees, but the local groups; County Republican Committees and Tea Party organizations who share our values and are doing the hard work to elect conservative candidates to office up and down the ballot. By supporting these local organizations, which are always struggling to raise money, it is possible to know their leadership, know whether or not they share our values and determine whether they are accountable and effective.
During the Bush – Hastert – Frist years too many Washington-based policy organizations sold their souls for a few tickets to the White House Christmas party or a seat at the State of the Union Address. They failed in the real test of whether they were effective advocates of conservative policy – holding the government to constitutional principles, no matter which Party is in power.
Don’t get suckered into supporting the Republican Party’s incumbent protection racket. Donate only to small government constitutional conservative organizations and committees dedicated to holding the government to constitutional principles, no matter which Party is in power, and electing small government constitutional conservatives to office. Avoid establishment Republican-oriented organizations and Party committees that don’t hew to conservative principles, and work against conservative candidates and blindly support Republican incumbents even when they oppose conservative policies.
Sixth, It’s the Primaries, Stupid – Support Small Government, Constitutional Conservative Candidates
If 2012 is another big wave election, like 2010, but it sweeps into office the usual big-government, establishment Republicans, then we will have missed the opportunity of a lifetime.
Supporting small government, constitutional conservatives, no matter how far down the ballot they are is crucial to our long-term success, and running for any office, no matter how far down the ballot, is worthy of your efforts.
If constitutional conservatives are to govern America, we must not only elect a President and a Congress, but also city council members, school board members, state legislators, Secretaries of State, Lt. Governors, etc.
Of course, there are many good candidates already running who are with the Tea Party movement. However, the vast majority of positions on the ballot this year do not have small government constitutional conservatives running, and many will have incumbents who have not faced a contest in years.
We who want constitutional, small-government should be running candidates even when it appears they have little or no chance of victory. The mistake of assuming good candidates will emerge from the regular party process does not work most of the time because the establishment Republican Party has no real interest in the kind of transformational change sought by conservatives.
Do you really trust Party leaders like Mitch McConnell and John Boehner to build a Republican majority of small government constitutional conservatives? If we leave it to the national congressional and Party leadership to recruit the candidates we will end-up with a Congress just like them; incumbents such as Bob Bennett and establishment figures such as Charlie Crist, and Trey Grayson.
When making decisions about where to put their financial support, conservatives should remember that if the national Republican committees had their way, such now-stalwart conservative Senators as Rand Paul, Marco Rubio and Mike Lee would never have been elected.
The only time we are guaranteed to lose is when we don’t compete. In today’s volatile political environment, no establishment candidate is truly safe. The American people want the chance to take out the big-government, establishment politicians; put your money and your hard work directly behind those candidates who are committed to small government, constitutional principles.
So should we support the Constitution Party?
I’ll be voting to remove Debbie Stabenow but only because my choices are acceptable though imperfect.
With Romney, I have yet to find one conservative ideal that doesn’t need to be sacrificed for him.
I am not advocating Romney; I am advocating doing what is needed to ensure that obama is a one term president. Deal with the real and present danger now, deal with extrapolated threats when they arise.
When making your choice factor this: Which party programs, ideas and actions are closer to Karl Marx or which are closer to the Constitution. Then the choice, although sometimes difficult becomes a bit easier.
I have no reason to engage a debate with Romney supporters because they all think the same:
“Either you vote for Bullsh*t or you’re going to get Chicken sh*t.”
I say to Romney supporters:
“Eat Sh*t and Die!”
I haven’t supported the republican party since 2006.
Only individual candidates.
If you give the RNC money it gets flushed down the RINO sewer.
Anyway, I don’t need them to tell me who to support — I can decide all by myself.
exactly
I haven’t given money to the GOP for longer than that. I give directly to the candidates I want in office
I received a Republican questionnaire in the mail not long ago. The survey was addressed to me, which I found odd because I’m registered as “unenrolled” in Massachusetts.
I started filling out the survey, with such answers as “Tea Party” as my political leaning and yes I would vote for Romney if forced to but not willingly.
But then it occurred to me that the survey came from the BIG GOP and not the real, conservative, local sort of Republicans. The “elites” are the ones who shoved Romney down our throats and have no apparent love for Tea Party conservative thinking. Defeating the GOP-e strikes me as nearly as important as throwing out the Dems.
So the survey was tossed in the trash, uncompleted.
Romney is going to be President. Conservatives are going to have to live with that fact, elect as many conservatives to the Congress, and hold Romney’s feet to the fire.
If he is not to be the nominee in 2016, the time to find the challenger is now—not three weeks before the end of the 2016 primary season.
Conservatives should support whoever is willing to go after zer0 on his obvious ineligibility, and go after Republicans for being such complicit cowards. Conservatives will have to run their own candidates.
I know I'm in. The Repubs exist to frustrate conservatives, and I'm ready for a change. While I don't agree with every position of the USCP 100%, it's a whole lot more hospitable to conservatives than the Whigs.
Romney was never meant to defeat Obama and thusly will not. This year gives conservatives an opportunity to field-test another alternative.
The Conservative Cause is clearly served by an Obama re-election rather than a Romney win.
A Right leaning/Conservative Congress can easily remain united behind an Obama re-election....whereas the same Congress will be sliced and diced by the RINOS if Romney is in the White House.
The Powers That Be fully understand this....
I think I would prefer to see Obama facing a republican congress that has the balls to remove him for fraud and solve our current constitutional crisis, rather than vote for Mitt Romney who is the father of the individual health care mandate.
That is what I’m doing too. My congressman is first on list - here id DFW and then a conservative senator.
“I am not advocating Romney; I am advocating doing what is needed to ensure that obama is a one term president”...
Like a laser...this must be the focus for now. The dangerous boy socialist must go!
>> I haven’t given money to the GOP for longer than that.
You’re a faster learner than I, but I figured it out eventually. :-)
Like and many others are saying, we need to institute the “Tea Party” as a political group, dump the GOPe. Period.
I don’t want Obama simply defeated in the polls.
I want him prosecuted for what he has done.
Vote him out of office, and that will never happen.
I want EVERYTHING Obama has signed into law and EVERY appointment he has made voided.
Your dreaming on that one. The Republican’s have no “Balls” or anything else.
Nothing and I mean nothing is going to change.
If Romney is the GOP nominee, I will no longer be a republican.
I agree 100% with your comment....oh, wait, you are my husband!!! Haa!
I also support Newt Gingrich and have a sticker on my car and a copy of his campaign issues in my purse. So when I am questioned I can give this to the person and ask which issue they do not think will work. Newt has history of success with successful leadership that made Clinton look good even though Clinton did not agree with the reforms. They worked for America!
The RNC calls us and mails us but I tell them I am a Tea Party Conservative and not interested in wasting my money to support RINOs.
Then since your goal is to advance the conservative cause, you must be intending to vote for Obama yourself.
And don't tell me I'm not conservative. I have been since most of you were born. It is ingrained in my very being. We have always been our own worst enemy.
That is not going to happen. Ever. Even if the Supreme Court somehow concluded he was inelible, which they won't, they would not undue everything he did. Believing there is even the slightest possibility of that happening is borderline delusional.
Actually, scratch "delusional".
Knock me over with a feather! 100% agreement is... unusual. Does this mean I get to sleep inside tonight? :-)
I think the Republican party has begun to understand this. However, instead of attempting to regain conservatives trust, they have decided to oppose conservative at every turn. This became readily apparent in 2010, when the likes of Rove and other party elites attempted to thwart TEA party candidacies. It has only continued with the way they insured that everyone who would be even mildly appealing to the Right, was destroyed in this primary season.
I don't accept that, though. I believe he will be the nominee, but president? How is a liberal with a leftwing record going to offer himself as a clear choice when the opponent is a Marxist? Romney simply cannot run on his record, and saying "Well, at least I'm not Obama" won't cut it. And even if he does win, you expect Boehner and the GOP-e to hold his feet to the fire? Really?? Did they ever do that with Bush?
The only thing I'm sure of, though, is that I won't have to live with the fact that I cast a vote for the abortion/homosexual lover Willard.
I have a grand idea; why don’t you half-wits go out and FRAGMENT THE VOTE AGAIN so we can put this Commie POS back in office for another four years! Will that make you feel like you got even?
If you want to dump the GOPe....you should be taking OVER THE GOPe!!! Are you a Precinct Committee person? Do you go to their meetings, help elect conservative PCP’s? If not, then you’re just talking trash.
technically speaking, another’s vote is none of yours or mine business. I can wield a pencil however.
He's dead right on this and boy did we screw the pooch.
Insulting the people you are trying to convince has never been a good way to win an argument.
On election day , I will be writing in the Tina Fey look-a-like from Alaska.
All other candidates will be Tea Party backed.
Like Michael was to Fredo, I’m done with the GOP establishment. They mean nothing to me.
If you read those surveys all the way through they are nothing but fund raising letters for the GOP-e. I’ve heard tales of people at the mailing address opening them, taking out the check then tossing the rest into the trash. By you throwing it out, you saved yourself cash and aggravation.
I haven't given a dime to the Neo-Whig party since Bush I.
I am in a precinct, but how will that change the higher ups? Hm?
I am in a precinct, but how will that change the higher ups? Hm?
Of course it is. If other peoples' votes weren't our business, nobody would campaign or try to convince people how to vote. And if you're going to say that it would be much better for conservatism if Obama won, then it is perfectly legitimate for others to point out that the logical conclusion of your position is for conservatives to vote for Obama, thereby advancing the cause of conservatism.
If you don't have a rebuttal to that argument, I'd suggest you check your premises.
Over the last 60 years, the GOP has controlled the White House about 60% of the time. Yet, the GOP has not significantly slowed the growth of government - which is our biggest problem. In fact, some of the most egregious big-government legislation has been passed under GOP Presidents.
So, in practice, both parties' programs are closer to Karl Marx than to the constitution.
The only edge I could give to the GOP is that a GOP President seems to appoint Supreme Court Justices that are more conservative, although that has in some cases backfired.
The test will come in June when the Supreme Court delivers its verdict on Obamacare. If the Court doesn't at least find the Obamacare mandate unconstitutional, I'll know for certain that there's not a dime's worth of difference between a GOP and a Rat presidency. If that's the case, I will certainly not vote for Romney.
A case could be made that it might be better for our country to have GOP House and an Obama Presidency. The resulting gridlock would better keep the bastards in both parties in check.
I wouldn’t presume to “tell” another how to vote; a write in ballot is always perfectly acceptable, however.
Any logician should be able to clearly perceive that a Republican Congress with a Romney presidency is more damaging to the Conservative Cause than ANY alternative in the White House.
Count me in too if the Conservative party promises to withdraw all combat soldiers from wars that have not been Constitutionally formally declared by Congress. No Presidential work-arounds on UN resolutions.
So instead of saying people who do this are wrong, I want to give them something to think about. Perhaps it will help them see things a little differently.
What we have been trying hasn't worked. We slide farther left every single year. At some point this has to stop, or we lose the nation we love no matter which party is in power.
I don't find anything wrong with that argument as written, but it certainly implies a causal link that hasn't been proven. Namely, that the reason the country has slipped to the left is because conservatives or Republicans are willing to vote for the lesser of two evils. But I don't think that has anything to do with it.
The problem isn't conservatives voting for the lesser of two evils. The problem is that the horde of liberals and mushy-minded moderates all get to vote too, and they don't want the same people we do. The stark reality is that conservatives are not the majority in this country. So if we want conservatives to win Presidential elections, we have to be fortunate enough to either 1) be running against a really crummy, uncharismatic Democrat, or 2) have a truly great conservative candidate.
Unfortunately, neither of those was available to us in this campaign cycle. I don't see that as a justification to give up on opposing the greater of two evils because of the greater damage that can be done by that greater evil. And, it seems obvious to me that conservatives are certainly going to have more influence over a GOP President than a Democrat who will be pandering to his base heavily his entire second term.
Just because the President is a Republican doesn't mean conservatives can't loudly and strongly oppose his policies with which we disagree. As much of a squishy moderate as Bush was on some issues, I think most of us would agree this country would be in even worse shape if Gore of Kerry had been elected in his stead. And it does us no good if the patient dies before we can find the right doctor.
You say: “If you want to dump the GOPe....you should be taking OVER THE GOPe!!! Are you a Precinct Committee person? Do you go to their meetings, help elect conservative PCP’s? If not, then you’re just talking trash.”
Response: “I am in a precinct, but how will that change the higher ups? Hm?”
Guess you better try getting Civics reinstituted as a subject taught in the public schools before trying to get people to understand that we are where we are because conservatives abandoned participating in the process,
As I've said before, unfortunately, in the unlikely event Romney should get the presidency, he will become the head of the Republican party and will therefore put those individuals of like minds in key positions. Just going by his past history pertaining to his conduct in and out of office, it will take decades, if ever, for the conservative movement to again gain the foothold and the power that it now has. Among vast number of conservative Republicans (I use that term advisedly) there will be such a "wailing and gnashing of teeth" lamenting how could this have happened to us and this great country of ours? My retort will be...... look in the mirror! The "Republican Establishment" is playing a successful game of rope-a-dope.
As for myself, I'll no longer vote for the lesser of two evils because evil is still evil no matter how much lipstick you put on it. My word, I've gone down the voting list from Sarah Palin to Newt and I'm going no further. I'll not vote for someone who should actually be running on the Democrat ticket as a moderate Democrat. That's how we got into this mess! Let'r rip!
So the dangerous man socialist can take his place? (Romneycare, gun grabber) I don't think so. Not a spit of difference between them and don't go saying it's about the judges. Romey put in judges that were just as liberal as the Obama picks.
I will never vote for Romney. He does not hold one value that I do. He may reluctantly claim that he is a Republican but he is no conservative.
No, but the tea party does and that's who we should be supporting, not the Republican party.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.