As far as Rove goes... He's just another Beltway mercenary.
Posted on 02/06/2013 5:07:11 AM PST by Kaslin
During the 2012 election cycle, Tea Partiers were told by their supposed betters that their ignorance of everyday politics meant that they should take a back seat to the Republican Party establishment. Brandishing the so-called Buckley Rule with quasi-religious fervor -- the notion that Republicans should run the most conservative candidate who can win -- the establishment GOP proclaimed that the only presidential candidate who could win was Republican Gov. Mitt Romney of Massachusetts. They suggested that four-term former Wisconsin Governor Tommy Thompson was a shoe-in for the Senate. They explained that the Tea Party was responsible for failed Senate candidates like Todd Akin (false) and Richard Mourdock (true).
They knew best.
The only trouble was, they didn't.
As it turns out, the Buckley Rule relies on prophecy. No good political strategy relies on Carnac-style crystal ball reading; a better rule would have been to nominate conservatives who are articulate (Pat Toomey, Rand Paul, Mike Lee, Marco Rubio, Ted Cruz), regardless of whether the wise men who loved John McCain and Mitt Romney think conservative positions make candidates unelectable.
But despite their 2012 losses, the establishment has decided that the problem in 2012 wasn't their own incompetence -- it was the dastardly Tea Party, which in its zealotry for conservatism, has ignored the need for victory.
And so the Karl Rove establishment leaked to the far-left New York Times that the "biggest donors in the Republican Party" were working with the leaders of Rove's American Crossroads super PAC to "recruit seasoned candidates and protect Senate incumbents from challenges by far-right conservatives and Tea Party enthusiasts who Republican leaders worry could complicate the party's effort to win control of the Senate."
Why didn't Rove and company tell the Times that they were interested in training conservative candidates in media fluency? Why didn't they approach the Tea Party instead, and offer their get-out-the-vote services and electoral strategies?
Because, at root, there is a clash at the heart of today's Republican Party. The Tea Party wants to change tactics. The establishment wants to discard principle.
The question is whether this will be the party of Ronald Reagan or the party of George W. Bush. The establishment opposed Ronald Reagan in 1980; they backed George H.W. Bush, convinced that Reagan was too extreme, not quick enough on his feet, no match for the more intellectual Jimmy Carter. Thank God they lost.
Today, though, the establishment is ascendant. While George W. Bush did a great many good things, including slashing taxes and protecting Americans in the aftermath of 9/11, the second term of George W. Bush looked like a replay of Herbert Hoover's government-growing presidency, replete with concessions on spending and socialistic stimulus programs. The "compassionate conservatism," which largely identified government spending with compassion, dovetailed into the rise of Barack Obama.
This divide doesn't have to continue. The establishment GOP could seek to rectify the breach with the Tea Party by embracing their enthusiasm for basic conservative principle and offering their expertise -- whatever expertise they have -- in helping them achieve victory. Instead, they're focusing on the next dollar and the next dinner party.
That wasn’t the outcome in our county. The Old Guard will not allow us, newcomers, to become a factor....at least not yet. We will keep working on it.
It comes down to organization and planning.
You need grassroots conservatives to spend some time and effort to identify a slate of candidates to run the county party committee and Bonus Board Members for JDs, Districts, and State.
Chair, Vice-Chair, Treas, Sec,
This starts lower at the Precinct and Dist. Capt. levels.
Rove you want a fight... Bring it on... (We will win...you and the GOP-e will lose!)
It would have been nice to have this fight during the primary, instead of having the eGOP go progressive and shut down debate. Too bad. Whatever might have came out of that primary discussion could have then challenged Team obama on a more open field. We might be looking forward to a different world now as a result.
But, you know?..maybe it's better this way and at this time, you know...after they lost. Again.
After their ideas and their approach lost. Again.
So, Mr. Rove, what does the eGOP have to stand on other than a record of appeasement, political failure and record spending?
So with this record to stand on, now Rove wants to fight about heart and soul? Great! Let's have that fight.
The eGOP's republican party stands for compromise and appeasement. Is that something you want to fight for? Or vote for?
Clearly, the answer has been "NO!!!"
The only way people say "yes" to that is if they are scared and have no other option, and even that wasn't enough this last time. Even once loyal Republicans still stayed home!
How about disconnecting Dick Morris, too?
As far as Rove goes... He's just another Beltway mercenary.
So is its cadaverous bad breath. Dubya didn't call Rove "Turd Blossom" for nothing.
This is b.s. -- and it's been going on since the 1880's, when the money boys derided us as "the Mugwumps". It's about four generations past time to fix bayonets and drive the bagmen and lobbyists from the cockpit of the GOP and replace their Bonesmen and bundlers with Main Street Republicans.
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.