McConnell: Senate Conservatives Fund ‘giving conservatism a bad name’ (Go away, Mitch!)

Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell smacked at the Senate Conservatives Fund (SCF), saying that the group that is backing his primary challenger — and primary challengers to several other GOP senators — is “giving conservatism a bad name.”

In an interview with The Weekly Standard posted Friday, McConnell attacked SCF as an organization that was more interested in its personal gains than in influencing politics.

“I think it’s important to remember a couple things. No. 1, the Senate Conservatives Fund started the fight with me. They picked the fight — I didn’t,” McConnell said.

“A group that buys a luxury townhouse on Capitol Hill that has a hot tub and a wine cellar strikes me as a group primarily interested in doing well for themselves,” he went on. “We know their business model is only to criticize Republicans, ignoring the fact with their donors that we have a Democratic Senate and that Barack Obama is in the White House.”

SCF is backing McConnell’s primary opponent, businessman Matt Bevin, and has been relentlessly attacking the minority leader. On Friday, they sent an email to supporters attacking McConnell for comments he made to The New York Times in an interview last week in which he said, ““I think we are going to crush them everywhere. I don’t think they are going to have a single nominee anywhere in the country.”

The Times wrote that he was “referring to the network of activist organizations working against him and two Republican incumbents in Kansas and Mississippi while engaging in a handful of other contests.” In the SCF attack, that turned into, “his goal is to defeat conservative candidates across the country.”

McConnell told The Weekly Standard that he was referring specifically to SCF, and no other group.

“[T]hat’s the group that I singled out,” he said. “I’m a fan of the enthusiasm that the tea party movement writ large has brought to our country.”

McConnell suggested that SCF was backing candidates who could not win in a general election, which could prevent Republicans from flipping the six seats they need to take control of the Senate.

“I think it’s important to remind everybody that only winners make policy, losers go home. We’ve lost four or five seats in the last two cycles with candidates who regretfully simply couldn’t get elected in a general election contest,” he said.

Asked for comment, SCF Executive Director Matt Hoskins took shot back: “Mitch McConnell doesn’t care that we rent a townhouse for office space. He is upset that we support Matt Bevin and are running ads that expose his record of helping the Democrats pass bailouts, more debt, higher taxes, and funding for Obamacare.”*

Ann Coulter enthusiastically backed and supported Chris Christie. She now admits that was a mistake.

Now, she's enthusiatically supporting the GOP establishment and slamming Republicans, who are challenging the establishment. Including, specifically arguing that Mitch McConnell deserves the support of conservatives due to McConnell's great reconrd as a conservative. I heard her say this just days before McConnell's quote came out on "crushing the Tea Party" everywhere.

Ann Coulter has made another significant error of judgment. Marco Rubio joined the establishment in pushing immigration "reform". That is such a major error in judgment that Rubio is toast. Ann Coulter is toast as a political advisor. She needs to stick skewering liberals.

People who are responsible feel a sense of responsibility, thus conservatives take a measure of self blame for the shape the nation is in. And to some extent that is warranted.

But consider.... yes, the GOP spent like crazy in the 2000’s, we had just had a massive start to what is effectively WWIII. It took that spending to ramp up our military, remember in the 90’s we radically defunded the military. So we HAD to.

The 2007/8 crash was largely a result of artificially low interest rates brought on by every nation in the world dumping money in America for safe keeping. Tat drove up bond prices, drove down interest rates, and cause banks and lenders to take on excessive risk in lending. Same thing happened in 80’s causing a bank crisis, and the resulting tax changes on commercial real estate.

Can the GOP do better? Of course, no question, absolutely, should we push them to be more conservative? Absolutely. Are there those who wear our badge and then vote with the communist democrats? Of course.

But facts are facts. A guy with an 85% conservative voting records is a much preferred animal than one with a 47% approval rating.

Which tells me the Senate Conservatives and Freedom Works, and Club for Growth should be putting up a TEA Party candidate in my district to run against my congressman. Ed Whitfield is a real RINO, I see his votes, and I see McConnell's.

To me, there is no better example of the misguided nature of the Two Party than my own back yard where they join to fight for Whitfield, and against McConnell.

Not only does this not make sense and show a massive hypocrisy, it puts winning the senate that much further away, and we KNOW, unless we take the senate, kenyan are will remain law of the land.

There are real consequences to this self destructive hypocrisy, consequences for our standard of living, the nation we pass on to our children, and if you believe as I, that America is the only thing that has kept mankind from becoming the barbarian he once was, for the last 200 years. Yes, there are consequences of our immediate losses so unfathomable and unspeakable that it would take nothing less than divine intervention to rectify.

So to that, yes, the folks who want to throw out the folks with 85% conservative voting ratings and cater to the folks with a 47% conservative rating are the enemy within. And while I wish they were not, my wishing will not make it so.

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.