Skip to comments.
UNITE OR DIE: THE ‘HOBBITS’ PLAN TO TAKE OVER THE GOP
Breitbart.com ^
| 8-12-2015
| DANIEL J. SCHULTZ
Posted on 08/12/2015 10:42:50 AM PDT by servo1969
Did you know that the Republican Party is only at half strength?
Half strength. What does that mean? It means that in your voting precinct, where you live, the Republican Party only has, probably, one-half of the local, precinct-level, voting member slots of the Party filled with a warm body. These slots are called precinct committeeman in most states. And the reason conservatives have been pretty much impotent when it comes to having a voice inside the BEST political tool for defeating the Democrats the Republican Party is because not enough conservatives are in the Republican Party where it matters: in the local precinct committeeman positions.
****************
Precinct committeemen ARE the Party because they elect, directly or indirectly, ALL of the Party leaders; that is, the local committee officers, the county officers, the state officers and the 168 Republican Party National Committee members, who in turn elect the National Committee officers, including the Chairman.
If the word ever gets out that conservatives can actually take over the Republican Party by becoming precinct committeemen, the current members of the RNC, including the likes of Reince Priebus, are toast in the next round of Party officer elections. Thats why they will never breathe a word of this to you.
Do you receive fund-raising survey letters from the RNC, the National Republican Senatorial Committee and the National Republican Congressional Committee? Have your read them? They ask for your money and they ask you for your views and they ask you to volunteer. But do they ever explain that the Republican Party has only one-half of its voting member precinct committeeman slots filled? NO. Do they ever explain how EASY it is for a Republican voter to become a voting member of the Party? NO! Why not? Isnt it obvious?
(Excerpt) Read more at breitbart.com ...
TOPICS: Constitution/Conservatism; Editorial; News/Current Events; Politics/Elections
KEYWORDS: 2016conservatives; 2016election; 2016gopprimary; bilbobaggins; gop; gopprimary; hobbits; nrsc; precinctcommitteeman; rnc; teaparty; thehobbit; uniparty
1
posted on
08/12/2015 10:42:50 AM PDT
by
servo1969
To: servo1969
To: servo1969
Just went to sign up with my County Party. I’m not telling them I’m a Cruz supporter. I’ll just show up to drive home conservatism after they’ve got me on their lists. Don’t want them to black-ball me because I’m not a corporatist shill.
3
posted on
08/12/2015 10:52:34 AM PDT
by
Uncle Miltie
(We russa consistent fiscal conservative, a social conservative, a national security conservative)
To: servo1969
A favorite of mine.
-PJ
4
posted on
08/12/2015 10:55:46 AM PDT
by
Political Junkie Too
(If you are the Posterity of We the People, then you are a Natural Born Citizen.)
To: servo1969
Me, and many other Christian Conservatives, have always held our breath, plugged our noses, and ALWAYS voted with the establishment. They have left us, we have not left them...
5
posted on
08/12/2015 10:56:20 AM PDT
by
Jan_Sobieski
(Sanctification)
To: Political Junkie Too
very funny! (and who invited Shep, the metrosexual)
6
posted on
08/12/2015 10:58:53 AM PDT
by
Jan_Sobieski
(Sanctification)
To: Jan_Sobieski
Me, and many other Christian Conservatives, have always held our breath, plugged our noses, and ALWAYS voted with the establishment. All that has done is push the party further to the left. I'm guilty of it too. No more, however. I won't be part of the problem. I love my Country far too much to be a low info, ignorant GOPe voter.
7
posted on
08/12/2015 10:59:32 AM PDT
by
dware
(Yeah, so? What are we going to do about it?)
To: servo1969
Been there, done that. It’s like pulling teeth to get someone, especially a movement conservative type, to actively participate. We had a shot when the Tea Party movement was ascendant, but the Country Clubbers couldn’t stand that, and helped Obama stomp it out.
8
posted on
08/12/2015 11:02:44 AM PDT
by
abb
("News reporting is too important to be left to the journalists." Walter Abbott (1950 -))
To: Political Junkie Too
Geraldo could have been Gollum.
9
posted on
08/12/2015 11:03:47 AM PDT
by
demshateGod
(The fool hath said in his heart, There is no God.)
To: servo1969
And the reason conservatives have been pretty much impotent when it comes to having a voice inside the BEST political tool for defeating the Democrats the Republican Party is because not enough conservatives are in the Republican Party where it matters: in the local precinct committeeman positions. The republican party has made it clear that they don't want us in it, at any level. They want our money and our votes but they hate us and would rather lose without us than win with us.
10
posted on
08/12/2015 11:05:20 AM PDT
by
pepsi_junkie
(The only fiscally sound thing dems ever did: create a state run media they don't have to pay for)
To: servo1969
"FIRE, FEAR, FOES, AWAKE!!!"
11
posted on
08/12/2015 11:06:31 AM PDT
by
Kartographer
("We mutually pledge to each other our lives, our fortunes and our sacred honor.")
To: dware
12
posted on
08/12/2015 11:06:34 AM PDT
by
Jan_Sobieski
(Sanctification)
To: servo1969
Like George Will, you're saying we have to go to them?
1776, 1856, 2016
13
posted on
08/12/2015 11:14:36 AM PDT
by
tumblindice
(America's founding fathers: all armed conservatives.)
To: servo1969
14
posted on
08/12/2015 11:59:10 AM PDT
by
Dick Bachert
(This entire "administration" has been a series of Reischstag Fires. We know how that turned out!)
To: servo1969
I WILL VOTE AGAINST ... AND
TO DESTROY ANY "Establishment Republican" ! Compromisers ALWAYS LOSE !
"Establishment Republicans" lose everytime they're listened to.
They wouldn't care if they DO lose.
If they can't be in power,
they don't want US in power. It's just that simple.
It's WAR!
We will never unify under
"Establishment Republicans" .
"Establishment Republicans" have more in common with the Democrats, than they do with Conservatives.
The weak candidates are
"Establishment Republicans", weak on national security, amnesty for illegals, abortion, and government spending.
"Establishment Republicans" scream "COMPROMISE".
And people who study the Bible know that
COMPROMISE almost always leads to destruction.
Someone once said [We're]
'Not victims of "the Establishment." ' I disagree.
I ask you again:
Who was it that dumped all those negative adds on Conservative Candidates in the primary?
Who was it that constantly battered each leading Conservative in the primary with an average of three to one negative ads against our real candidates?
Who's money was dumped against the conservative choices?
It WAS Mitt Romney, leader of the
"Establishment Republicans"and it WAS the
"Establishment Republicans" who funded all those negative ads against Conservatives.
So conservatives, the BASE of the Republican Party, WERE
' victims of "the Establishment." '
These
"Establishment Republicans" are being weeded out, one by one, and slowly but surely, the TEA Party is taking over.
"Establishment Republicans" Want to Redefine the Term "Conservative"
"DO CONSERVATIVES WANT TO WIN IN 2012 OR NOT?"
DO
CONSERVATIVES "ESTABLISHMENT REPUBLICANS" WANT TO WIN IN 2016 OR NOT?
Jack Kerwick wrote an article on May 24, 2011 titled
The Tea Partier versus The Republican and he expressed some important issues that I agree with.
Thus far, the field of GOP presidential contenders, actual and potential, isnt looking too terribly promising.
This, though, isnt meant to suggest that any of the candidates, all things being equal, lack what it takes to insure
that Barack Obama never sees the light of a second term; nor is it the case that I find none of the candidates appealing.
Rather, I simply mean that at this juncture, the party faithful is far from unanimously energized over any of them.
It is true that it was the rapidity and aggressiveness with which President Obama proceeded to impose his perilous designs upon the country
that proved to be the final spark to ignite the Tea Party movement.
But the chain of events that lead to its emergence began long before Obama was elected.
That is, it was actually the disenchantment with the Republican Party under our compassionate conservative president, George W. Bush,
which overcame legions of conservatives that was the initial inspiration that gave rise to the Tea Party.
It is this frustration with the GOPs betrayal of the values that it affirms that accounts for why the overwhelming majority
of those who associate with or otherwise sympathize with the Tea Party movement
refuse to explicitly or formally identify with the Republican Party.
And it is this frustration that informs the Tea Partiers threat to create a third party
in the event that the GOP continues business as usual.
If and when those conservatives and libertarians who compose the bulk of the Tea Party, decided that the Republican establishment
has yet to learn the lessons of 06 and 08, choose to follow through with their promise,
they will invariably be met by Republicans with two distinct but interrelated objections.
First, they will be told that they are utopian, purists foolishly holding out for an ideal candidate.
Second, because virtually all members of the Tea Party would have otherwise voted Republican if not for this new third party, they will be castigated for essentially giving elections away to Democrats.
Both of these criticisms are, at best, misplaced; at worst, they are just disingenuous.
At any rate, they are easily answerable.
Lets begin with the argument against purism. To this line, two replies are in the coming.
No one, as far as I have ever been able to determine, refuses to vote for anyone who isnt an ideal candidate.
Ideal candidates, by definition, dont exist.
This, after all, is what makes them ideal.
This counter-objection alone suffices to expose the argument of the Anti-Purist as so much counterfeit.
But there is another consideration that militates decisively against it.
A Tea Partier who refrains from voting for a Republican candidate who shares few if any of his beliefs
can no more be accused of holding out for an ideal candidate
than can someone who refuses to marry a person with whom he has little to anything in common
be accused of holding out for an ideal spouse.
In other words, the object of the argument against purism is the most glaring of straw men:I will not vote for a thoroughly flawed candidate is one thing;
I will only vote for a perfect candidate is something else entirely.
As for the second objection against the Tea Partiers rejection of those Republican candidates who eschew his values and convictions,
it can be dispensed with just as effortlessly as the first.
Every election seasonand at no time more so than this past seasonRepublicans pledge to reform Washington, trim down the federal government, and so forth.
Once, however, they get elected and they conduct themselves with none of the confidence and enthusiasm with which they expressed themselves on the campaign trail,
those who placed them in office are treated to one lecture after the other on the need for compromise and patience.
Well, when the Tea Partiers impatience with establishment Republican candidates intimates a Democratic victory,
he can use this same line of reasoning against his Republican critics.
My dislike for the Democratic Party is second to none, he can insist.
But in order to advance in the long run my conservative or Constitutionalist values, it may be necessary to compromise some in the short term.
For example,
as Glenn Beck once correctly noted in an interview with Katie Couric,
had John McCain been elected in 2008, it is not at all improbable that, in the final analysis,
the country would have been worse off than it is under a President Obama.
McCain would have furthered the countrys leftward drift,
but because this movement would have been slower,
and because McCain is a Republican, it is not likely that the apparent awakening that occurred under Obama would have occurred under McCain.
It may be worth it, the Tea Partier can tell Republicans, for the GOP to lose some elections if it means that conservativesand the countrywill ultimately win.
If he didnt know it before, the Tea Partier now knows that accepting short-term loss in exchange for long-term gain is the essence of compromise, the essence of politics.
Ironically, he can thank the Republican for impressing this so indelibly upon him.
I'm fresh out of
"patience", and I'm not in the mood for
"compromise".
"COMPROMISE" to me is a dirty word.
Let the
RINO's compromise their values, with the conservatives, for a change.
Take a good long look at where
"Establishment Republicans" ALWAYS take us.
The "Establishment Republicans" can GO TO HELL !
15
posted on
08/12/2015 12:02:02 PM PDT
by
Yosemitest
(It's Simple ! Fight, ... or Die !)
To: servo1969
This is a good idea for those who believe that the gop can become anything more than an evil, kleptocratic bunch of establishment whores and crony capitalists.
I’m not one of those people. I would prefer the gop faction of the uniparty be destroyed so a new conservative party can emerge.
16
posted on
08/12/2015 12:24:57 PM PDT
by
RKBA Democrat
(The ballot is a suggestion box for slaves and fools)
To: RKBA Democrat
17
posted on
08/12/2015 1:09:28 PM PDT
by
pgkdan
(But as for me and my house, we will serve the Lord.)
To: Excellence
18
posted on
08/12/2015 4:09:36 PM PDT
by
Excellence
(Marine mom since April 11, 2014)
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.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson