CONSERVATIVES AND GOP ESTABLISHMENT; A GETTYSBURG MOMENT (HOSTAGE)

TODAY'S CHALLENGE In the second week following the tsunami of mid-term elections in favor of Republicans, the possibility of the GOP Establishment setting the agenda of the next Congress against a backdrop of catfights between republican moderates and the Conservative base ... has obsured the source of this very significant victory which stems from the hard, bitter and agonizing choices taken by Conservatives in years past.

The awful Hobbesian choices (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hobson's_choice) presented to Conservatives in the past 8 years have been painful and demoralizing to them but theyhave risen to the occasion to choose wisely and they were right.

GOP Establishment and Elites (GOPe) and their moderate faction are likely missing the historical significance of the Conservative stance in the past elections of 2006, 2008, 2010, 2012 and 2014. Some Conservatives may also not see how wise their decisions were and how those decisions have resulted in the latest rout of only eleven days ago.

Sarah Palin brilliantly summed up the recent victory and wrapped it in a message to the GOPe:

http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/sarah-palin-to-gop-establishment-you-didnt-build-this/article/2555809

Today's challenge is to get the GOP Establishment out of the driver's seat and replace them with known and reliable Conservatives. In fact it is vital to do precise this.

BACKGROUND Starting in 2006, Conservatives had had enough of GW Bush and his Ring of RINOs (Republicans In Name Only) as he pushed for Comprehensive Immigration Reform and quipped "See you at the Signing!" when Congress was due back from recess.

The result of GW Bush's abandonment of his Conservative Base was in the melting down of the Capitol Hill Switchboard and fax machines by Conservative calls to their Congressional Members in opposition to the proposed amnesty of 10 to 20 million of illegal Latino migrants. This 2006 fiasco led to the democrats taking over Congress as a result of the mid-term elections Pelosi chosen as Speaker.

Conservatives shook their heads in anger as they felt betrayed by GW Bush whereas GW Bush and his people sulked in disbelief as they watched the 2006 election returns. The GOP Party had become a divided Party.

Which half of the divide was responsible? Were Conservatives responsible for allowing the likes of Pelosi to ascend to national leadership? Or was it Bush?

Bush had run as a Conservative. He talked the talk and seemingly at first walked the walk until his handlers steered him back to the New World Order meme of his father, Kissinger and apparently his very liberal wife. He abandoned Conservative principles that possibly he never really embraced to begin with. In other words, Bush had reneged on his promises to the Conservative Base. Some would say he lied.

Conservatives could not have felt worse as they walked away from GW Bush while all around them the media and democrats were chanting "Bush Lied! People Died!". It was hard to argue against the charge that Bush had lied to Conservatives. Maybe he hadn't. Maybe he just weakened and gave in to those around him. Whatever. His actions led to the fiasco of the 2006 elections. It wasn't the fault of Conservatives. They couldn't vote for more Bushies for Congress that would support Mass Amnesty and the New World Order that would see American freedoms supplanted by UN directives and treaties that were made by unelected policy wonks. Many Conservatives made the agonizing choice to sit home. Some held their noses but they were not enough in number to overcome the ineffectiveness of Bush's record in 2006 especially his nonsensical push for Comprehensive Immigration Reform. Democrats seeing the division within the GOP stepped right in and took advantage. Bush's fault? Unfortunately, yes.

Did the GOPe get the message from 2006? No. One would think they would have seen the overwhelming opposition from every corner of American society to any proposal for mass amnesty especially in light of the failure of Ronald Reagan's amnesty of 1986. But Ronald Reagan did not have hindsight; GW Bush and the GOPe did.

The GOPe wrongly thought the base could be fooled by running to the right and packaging moderates as conservatives. What mattered most to the GOPe were those with the 'Juice' meaning the money and secondarily those that would be sure to tow the GOPe line.

The licentiousness following repeal of Glass-Steagall had Wall Street swimming in illusory and dirty profits. Wall Street Stock Exchanges gave GW Bush standing ovations when he walked on their floors in 2006 and they put their money into GOP PACs that would keep their casino going.

In return GW Bush turned a blind eye to SEC enforcement of so many egregiously fraudulent banking and finance practices that later in 2008 would bring the nation to its knees. And of course the democrats exploited the weaknesses in banking regulation as opportunities for them to increase the severity of the coming crash.

Symptoms of the Crash were felt and seen in July 2007 when oil futures collapsed and it was reported that Goldman Sachs had gamed the market for their own purposes. Suddenly the focus shifted to Wall Street but not enough to wake up significant numbers of Americans. Still there was an air of something smelly going on in Wall Street banking.

As the 2008 presidential campaigns were ramping up, the GOP field was populated with Romney, McCain and a few other GOPe selections. McCain was selected by the GOPe. He never had rousing support from the base and Romney had practically none. But ... the GOPe thought the conservative base would just love a 'War Hero' story about McCain and, like throwing a dog a bone, they thought such stories would placate conservatives. They were wrong. Conservatives knew John McCain had refused to sign a confession guaranteeing his release from the Hanoi Hilton because Admiral Stockdale (also a POW and the Commanding officer of the POWs in the HH) ordered him not to. McCain was no 'hero', he was a survivor and a victim but not a hero. He deserved praise for his faithful service and sympathy for having greatly suffered for his country but the 'War Hero' media narrative was a ploy to get conservatives in line while the GOPe pursued its plan for the NWO, North American Union, Comprehensive Immigration Reform and all other subjects that were rarely spoken of publicly in order to keep the Conservative Base quiet and in the dark.

Conservatives saw through the deceptive tactics of the GOPe and this resulted in John McCain trailing in the polls throughout 2008 until McCain did the only smart thing of his entire campaign which was to choose Sarah Palin for VP. At once Conservatives were galvanized and excited by this rising star (and she truly was and still is). Suddenly the polls shifted for the first time in McCain's favor and the democrats were thrown into shock until Wall Street's impending collapse became evident.

The executive and moral reticence of GW Bush is his handing of the Wall Street Casino had come to the democrat's rescue and McCain played right into their hands with suspension of his campaign and recording a vote for TARP, the nearly trillion dollar bailout of Wall Street originally passed to stanch the subprime crisis but later directed wherever the powers over it (e.g. Bush's Secretary of Treasury Henry Paulson) decided it should be directed. It was clear that Congress had been bought and both sides of the aisle were involved.

The GOP Conservative Base had yet another soul-searching moment to either abstain from voting for Phony McCain or hold their noses. Just as in 2006 many of them stayed home and the 2008 election handed the country over to a socialist con-man named Barack Obama.

The legacy of GW Bush and the phoniness of John McCain were too much for the Conservative Base and their agony grew worse. GW Bush had betrayed conservative principles. John McCain was a known liar and phony. All that Conservatives wanted was a leader that they could trust to stay true to conservative principles. That leader was not expected to be perfect or to be as inspiring as a Ronald Reagan or even a great orator. The leader that was sought needed only elucidate the principles of conservatism and show by their actions their adherence to the principles.

Such a leader would have won the presidency handily in 2008 even in the backdrop of GW Bush's failures and the incessant media attacks on those failures. Conservatives registered as Republican or Independent significantly outnumber moderates and progressives. When these Conservatives are galvanized behind a candidate they can trust and believe, there is nothing to stop them. Asking them to hold their noses over GOPe selected candidates is a huge risk to success and does nothing to strengthen the unity inside the GOP.

RISE OF THE TEA PARTY Republican and Independent Conservatives rallied in 2010 when the socialist fruit and Chicago style tactics of the Obama people became known. The 2010 elections gave rise to a new force in American politics: 'The Tea Party', a state of mind among the GOP base and patriotic independents. The Tea Party 2010 mid-term election sweep had handed control of the House of Representatives back to the GOP and brought true conservatives to the US Senate with such persons as Ted Cruz and Mike Lee. And just as importantly and significantly, the Tea Party sweep had altered on a vast scale the state legislatures and governorships to the benefit of conservatism.

For a small time it seemed that Tea Party Conservatives had taught the GOPe a lesson and were gearing up to address the past wrongs of the Bush Presidency and the boneheaded decision to 'select' McCain for nominee in 2008. But in a lame and naive moment the new Tea Party minded members of Congress agreed to accept John Boehner as Speaker. Thus, the GOPe had their hands on the House leadership and began to tighten their control over the House committees and their chairpersons.

ROMNEY In 2012 the GOPe was in the driver's seat with their 'selection' of Mitt Romney as the GOP Standard bearer for President. Romney was a liar of the first order and he knew how to sound 'conservative' when necessary. But his past caught up with him and Conservatives were not fooled. Romney tried to pull a McCain by selecting Paul Ryan as his pick for VP but again Conservatives were not fooled. Ryan was no Palin; not by a long shot.

But in 2012 socialism was on the march in the USA led by Obama and once again Conservatives were asked to 'hold their noses' as the alternative was four more years of Obama. The turnout was not enough to overcome those that stayed home. The need for Conservatives, especially Independent Conservatives, the Perot Blue Collar Conservatives. the Reagan Democrats, the plea for them to hold their noses was not enough for them to ignore the phoniness and lies of Romney and his ring of RINOs.

The key question a conservative had to grapple with "Was it worth it to turn down Romney, his lies and phoniness and risk real serious damage by the Obama people?".

The fact that Romney lost was a horrible realization to GOP moderates who could not fathom for an instant how it was that the Conservative Base would hand four more years to Obama. It was to them unthinkable that any rational voter would allow such an outcome.

But it was the outcome needed. It was not at all to support Barack Obama or allow him to act as the bull in the china shop. It was a decision made by Conservatives to prevent losing the Republican Party to people that had no allegiance to Conservative Principles and to traditional American values. The Conservative no-show in 2012 was a retreat to preserve the Idea that is America so that the Idea would survive to fight another day.

Conservative principles and traditional American values are more important than political party labels (which are just words). North Korea is known as the People's Democratic Republic of Korea. Does anyone believe there is democracy there? Words mean nothing without the values that underlie them. The Republican Party means nothing without Conservative Principles and traditional American values.

GETTYSBURG In America's Civil War, the War Of Northern Aggression or the War Between The States, however referred, the defining battle is generally agreed to as the Battle of Gettysburg and is recognized to be the turning point of that war.

The history of the Battle of Gettysburg is vast and can fill entire rooms of large libraries. There are parallels in decision making within the Confederate Command at Gettysburg and that of today's GOP that are informative.

The history of Gettysburg's decision-making among the Confederate Command is itself extensive just as the coming history of the decision-making between Conservatives and the GOPe over the next two years will be extensive and will likely lead to events of history with democrats that fills volumes on a Gettysburg scale.

What is different is the outcome of the 2016 grand battle is not known but it is believed that if the correct decisions are made, the outcome will certainly favor the GOP.

A comparison can be drawn with a perspective from the Confederate Command side and a few singular points can be raised to draw analogies for discussion. Civil War historians will have plenty to criticize in these very brief summaries. It is impossible to do this subject any sort of justice in a few paragraphs.

General Robert E. Lee was the commanding general of the Confederate Army at Gettysburg. The Confederate forces were well-trained and disciplined, valiant and courageous and more importantly they had been victorious but the length of the war was wearing on them and General Lee was war-weary as well.

It is important to understand General Lee was seeking a strategy to end the war as quickly as possible. This possibly sentimental longing of General Lee to find a way to end the war quickly was perhaps the biggest factor in bringing about the Confederate loss at the Battle of Gettysburg.

General Lee had presented to his generals a plan for a full frontal assault led by Pickett's Division which entailed 15,000 confederate soldiers running exposed over an open field about 3/4's mile in length. The assault came to be known as "Pickett's Charge".

Lieutenant General James Longstreet had argued this plan would be a disaster (it was) and laid out an idea to take a defensive position and let the Union forces come to them.

But General Lee proclaimed that his plan to charge the center of the Union defense was one where he "could see a path to Washington" and "end the war quickly".

Lt. Gen. Longstreet and others 'held their noses' and fell in line with General Lee's plan.

What if General Lee had been replaced before or after Gettysburg and Generals such as Longstreet had been promoted? Would such action have changed the outcome of that war? Very likely yes.

What was the view of Lee versus Longstreet? Lee wanted to attack and end the war. Longstreet wanted to defend and win battles regardless of a possibly protracted long enduring war because that is the way Confederate forces won battles.

TEA PARTY VS. GOP-E STRATEGY Perhaps more than any other issue, Tea Party minded Conservatives of both GOP and Independent voting blocs seek to reign in the federal government from its reckless course set to socialism, central planning, loss of personal freedoms and uncontrolled spending.

Tea Party minded voters want an era where their standard of living increases and the quality of their lives improves through choices of their own making. They want a federal government that controls and secures national borders and executes common sense foreign policies. Simply put, Tea Party Conservatives want more local control, they want the federal government's role to reset closer to that for which it was created and they want the US Constitution to be adhered to and revered.

The GOPe has only one goal and that is power. It embarks towards the same destination as democrats but follows at a slower pace in different lanes. Both GOPe and democrats seek greater control over the lives of ordinary citizens.

Tea Party conservatism is more in line with Longstreet's view to defend locally and win.

GOPe is more in line with Lee's view to win major battles and end the war with democrats ostensibly by becoming democrats themselves.

The deciding moment is already here. The next few weeks are the time when the leadership is chosen and the course is set. The GOP is encamped in a Gettysburg context and is now in deliberation about what course to set.

over the past couple election cycles, there have been and continue to be a significant number of freepers that openly express disdain for the mere idea of sticking to principle if it means not voting for a RINO.

There are about 5 off hand I can think of that have gone full moonbat arguing with everyone in defense of Mitt Romney a full two years after tanking his own election. There are a great many that follow their lead. The end result is that we can’t get our crap together on the right with these RINO supporters doing everything within their power to keep us on the reservation. None of those people agree with or understand the things the article mentions. If they did, they wouldn’t have the position they do.

As for love of leadership, what difference does it ultimately make? They vote for them. They demand others vote for them when given the choice to vote for a conservative because winning with a liberal that hates them is preferable to ‘maybe’ winning with a conservative. Because Winning is all important regardless of principle.

Which is the entire thing that underscores the article.

And we’ve come full circle.

For instance, voting for Romney instead of 0bama does not indicate a freeper is a rino lover. In that case, it more often than not indicates they voted *against* 0bama more so than voting *for* Romney. That in no way means they are oblivious to the GOPe problem.

That there are 5 freepers out of thousands who aim low is statistically insignificant to me. Hence I said *practically* all freepers are aware of the GOPe problem.

I think we all want a conservative majority -and- we want it right now! Being a grown-up and sane, I understand and accept that sometimes gratification will be delayed and we have to keep chipping away at things.

So, we are constantly bombarded with restatement of the problems. We’ve all heard enough about that -OR- at the very least, those sorts of posts are all over the forums like a severe rash. You can’t scroll a page of posts without seeing them. Like I’ve said, it’s reached the point of ubiquity.

And I guess to refine my point, parroting the problems ad nauseum has gotten us nowhere. Let’s do something instead of sitting around b*tching about it. It’s time for those congress critters to start earning their keep. Here is something that I have yet to see at all: What procedural/parliamentary options are available to the conservative congressmen to force the GOPe leadership’s hand or at least try to steer them to the right? Give us something reasonable and plausible that we can contact the conservative congressmen about to pressure them, so that they will in turn apply that pressure forward to the GOPe squishes. I have no idea what the specifics of that sort of campaign would be and would have to lean on someone a lot smarter than me. BUT, we all should know how to contact congressmen and those campaigns are always most effective when coordinated. There’s a start.

I don’t see how we ‘start doing something about it’ when we can’t even agree on the basic principles of conservatism as a whole. What exactly should we do?

that’s the whole problem. If we keep ignoring the root cause, the fact that people vote to whn ‘no matter what’ and principles be damned, then what are we voting for? The answer is that we are voting in our own demise.

Now I fully get that people don’t like admitting they made mistakes. Their ego won’t allow it. But they did make a mistake and voting in RINOs is the whole of the problem.

You/we collectively cannot reelect RINOS over year after year and credibly say you believe in conservatism. You can credibly do that and say you are a RINO. If you believe in conservative values, then voting RINO is situational ethics. Because you cannot believe that both philosophies are reconcilable. Not credibly.

Our system of govt. is that you vote ‘for’. There is no box for ‘against’. Thats not semantics. Thats a reality. When we elect people we did it by voting for them. If a person votes for Romney or any other hard left GOP candidate, they voted FOR hard leftism in their supposed interest.

That is not remotely debateable. It’s basic civics. Yet many try inventing the one extraspecialsuperexcusejust for me that exempst them from their actions.

Rape someone and tell the judge it wasn’t rape rape. Tell the dad whose daughter you got caught with in the back seat you were doing homework. Tell the cop that your 18-mph Ferrari speedometer was broke when he clocked you at 170 on the interstate. Tell America that you are against abortion and amnesty ans all the rest when you vote for their biggest champions. None of that is remotely logical and people saying that stuff aren’t acting logically. They are being pragmatic. They are being emotional. They are being dishonest and they are flatly full of sXit.

None of this is rocket surgery. People vote RINO and continue the Great 30 year Fail because they want more of it. If they didn’t they would vote for what they believe in. Because they do not, this article is justified and because they don’t, they have proven they probably shouldn’t be voting at all.

You/we collectively cannot reelect RINOS over year after year and credibly say you believe in conservatism.

Not discounting the fact that you/we collectively *DID* elect some conservatives this time... What, 11 or more freshman conservatives? Plus Cantor getting his butt handed to him? Still, some rinos - the worst ones - did get re-elected. But, because we didn't manage a wholesale GOPe replacement, I wouldn't say F.R. is full of rino lovers.

As for voting against - that's not rocket surgery either. Given a choice between 0bama and a pile of dog poop... I don't like dog poop, but I don't like 0bama *FAR MORE* than I don't like dog poop. Guess how I'm voting? On the other hand, give me a conservative to vote for and I do. Every time.

And because some rinos got re-elected, doesn't mean that one of the most, if not *the* most conservative forums on the interwebs is full of rino voters that need constant reminders of the dangers of voting rino. The OH and KY voters supporting the likes of Boehner and McConnell probably aren't on FR. They're probably on one of the more GOPe tolerant, karl rove approved sites like Red State or whatever.

My point stands. The article is preaching to the dang choir. Instead of sitting around parroting the problem, we need someone way smarter than you or me to come up with some actions we can/should take. We have new freshman conservatives in congress. What support do they need? What can we do to keep them aiming high and pressuring the GOPe? Stuff like that.

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.