Posted on 11/06/2010 1:35:51 PM PDT by Brices Crossroads
Yeah it's called the Bush wing of the GOP. As we speak they are on the attack against Palin using their minions Of Rove and others to try to destroy her. the Bush wing hated Reagan and they hate Palin.
the Renee ellmers story is a good case to use. the story by Watts on how the establishment failed to support Col west in FL ans Tim Scott in SC. How the establishment directed resources to the wrong races, how they used friendly fire on COD, Miller and Angle to suppress the vote in those races and nationally.
Yes it is inside baseball stuff but it is like I said the first battle in the primary.
The establishment is out of touch, they had no narrative for the race, they failed to promote and defend gogg candidates because they fell to the media lies of which were extreme and which were not. they failed to use their star power correctly having many people campaign in CA but not enough in states like NC or NY because they considered them lost causes. how the establishment failed to use new media and old media to push back on the smears of extreme candidates, racist Tea partiers. How they had no national narrative, how they were afraid to take on Obama directly because they though the was too popular. How they lost us CO race, how they did not rebuke the SC GOP for its nasty attacks on Haley or the DE gop for its attacks on COD.
How they failed to strip Lisa of her posts. how they invested $8million in CA instead of GOTV efforts in NV.
The establishment cost us the 100+ seats and they need to be publicly blamed for it. We need facts, figures, voter turnouts, campaign figures and donations. Who did the NRCC help who did they not. Which candidates won despite of them national party.
how did the state GOP win so many house and senate state seats without the establishment. How the national establishment never even saw the trends within the state races. How they failed to target key 2012.
That works for me, no worries!
Excellent analogy and marvelous piece of writing. General Grizzly, hmmmmmm...
BTTT
Brilliant article.
OKAY. NOW that we’re finally talking tactics and strategy in war terms, ask yourself: When we go into a battle, what is among the first targets?
It is time to take out the media, as they are an integral part of the opponent’s communications and coordination. Yes? Start filing FEC lawsuits maybe? Start buying them up and firing all the leftists? Quit buying the papers, and call your cable channels to complain about news channel content?
Thanks for the ping. Very good article, BC. BTTT!
“It is time to take out the media, as they are an integral part of the opponents communications and coordination. Yes? Start filing FEC lawsuits maybe? Start buying them up and firing all the leftists? Quit buying the papers, and call your cable channels to complain about news channel content?”
Thanks. The media seems to be the equivalent of an army’s communications corps. In the case of the LSM, it is actually much more like a Propaganda Ministry.
Excellent read, and thanks for your permission. Already
posted to my list and it will probably go viral on conservative sites.
Not bad for a warm-up to the revolution...TEA-force is just getting started. :)~
Glad you enjoyed it.
I think it gives the lie to the notion that Palin was somehow a drag or impediment for us in 2010. This is the lie that is being pushed by the Establishment, and it has to be met and refuted over and over again.
The Establishment GOP like Mitch Daniels, Chris Christie, Romney and Haley Barbour did very little other than steer money and take credit. They didn’t generate the first GOP turnout advantage in a primaries since the 1930s.
That was Sarah Palin and the Tea Party. We have to keep countering their revisionist propaganda.
Wrong again. Or was this more of your "figurative" speaking?
I've made substantive comments about the article as well, and I don't share your opinion on it.
I also don't believe Palin was as much of a factor in the last election as some people here think; that's not about liking or not liking Palin, it's about figuring out exactly why people are motivated to vote, and what brings them out and determines who they vote for.
I think there are some people who are so driven to try to build up Palin that they look to credit her for all sorts of things; this goes along with times when they try to dismiss things she does that they disagree with, and sometimes contributes to attititudes about her that seem insulting to me, but are supposedly meant to build her up -- like those who claimed that she lied about endorsing some people out of a sense of loyalty, or that she simply didn't "understand" how her endorsements "hurt" her.
I prefer to take her at her word, and when she does things, I assume it's because she knows what she is doing.
As to the article, I don't really know what her strategy is for 2012, or if she is even planning to run for election in 2012. But she clearly has supported candidates across the republican political spectrum, which should build good will necessary. And she has apparently worked to smooth over any rough spots between her and the establishment, to the point where some suggest she could be the next RNC chair (I don't think that is in the cards).
I do think the cult of personality set up by some of her more avid supporters does a disservice to her.
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.