Conservatives vs. the GOP - Republicans in Congress are warned that they will lose their base if...

Republicans in Congress are warned that they will lose their base if they vote for tax hikes.

Brent Bozell, chairman of ForAmerica

Conservative groups are sending written warnings to both congressional Republicans and the Republican National Committee. If Republicans sign on to a deal that raises taxes, they risk an open break with large portions of their base. “This is a time of testing for you,” more than 70 conservative leaders write in an open letter sent Friday morning to every GOP member of Congress. They warn that if a budget deal that raises taxes is passed with GOP fingerprints on it, conservatives will “see that the current leadership is not an acceptable alternative to the left. Conservatives would then likely repeat what they did in the 1970s, when they systematically and successfully undertook a multi-year effort to replace Republican congressional leadership.”

The letter goes on to warn that there are two ways President Obama and liberal Democrats could turn their economic agenda into law. First, just enough Republicans could vote with the Democrats to provide a narrow majority for tax hikes. Or the Republican leadership in both houses could negotiate a “deal” and pressure Republican congressmen and senators to approve it. “Either of these two courses would be a disaster for conservative principles because they would result in permanent advances for the ‘fundamental changes’ the left wants to impose on our country,” the conservative leaders warn.

Among the leading conservatives who signed the letter are Morton Blackwell, a prominent member of the RNC from Virginia; Colin Hanna, head of Let Freedom Ring; and Tony Perkins, a well-known pro-family leader. Their tough message was amplified and sharpened in a separate letter to Reince Priebus, the RNC’s chair, written this week by Brent Bozell, the chairman of ForAmerica and a noted fundraiser for conservative groups combating media bias and liberal legislation. Bozell noted that he has spent over 30 years raising hundreds of millions of dollars for “an alphabet soup of conservative causes,” including the Media Research Center, which he founded. But his involvement with the Republican party would end with a budget deal that raised taxes.

“Reince, it pains me to say this, but if the Republican Party breaks its word to the American people and goes along with President Obama with tax increases, it will have betrayed conservatives for the final time,” he wrote. “I will make it my mission to ensure that every conservative donor to the Republican Party that I have worked with for the last three decades—and there are many and they have given tens of millions to Republican causes—gives not one penny more to the Republican Party or any member of Congress that votes for tax increases.”

Both letters were prompted by a small group of Republicans in Congress—Senators Saxby Chambliss of Georgia, Bob Corker of Tennessee, and Lindsey Graham of South Carolina—who took to TV news shows to declare they no longer felt bound by the pledge they took not to vote for any net increase in taxes. “Republicans should put revenue on the table,” Graham told CBS News. “We don’t generate enough revenue. Capping deductions will help generate revenue.”

But many of Graham’s fellow Republicans respond that becoming what Newt Gingrich once called “tax collectors for the welfare state” was both bad policy and bad politics. Senator Jim DeMint, Graham’s South Carolina colleague, warns that “if there is a bad deal, I just think you’re going to see conservatives around the country coalesce around better candidates, better-trained candidates, and to recognize the Republican party needs to reflect more conservative principles.” He told The Hill that he knows a lot of conservative donors who have already stopped giving to official Republican groups and are instead sending money to the Club for Growth, FreedomWorks, Americans for Prosperity, or DeMint’s own Senate Conservatives Fund.

It’s unclear just how much attention the letters sent to GOP leaders will get in the rush to avoid the fiscal cliff. But Republicans ignore the message at their peril. The last election showed that many GOP donors are now comfortable with contributing to non-party groups. Tea-party activists are often proud to highlight their independence from the official GOP structures of authority. And Republicans always risk losing voters to upstarts from the Libertarian and Constitution parties. This month’s elections saw the GOP lose several close races probably because of third-party inroads into its base. Most notable was the Montana race, where Dan Cox of the Libertarian party won 7 percent of the vote after GOP Senate nominee Representative Denny Rehberg voted twice against Paul Ryan’s budget in the House because of its budget restraint on entitlements.

But Republicans are feeling enormous pressure to go along with President Obama, the elite media, and much of big business and to approve a budget deal that raises taxes. Republican leaders in Congress should realize, however, the degree to which they risk a civil war over the issue if they break their anti-tax pledge in exchange for another flawed and probably unenforceable budget deal.

— John Fund is national-affairs columnist for NRO.

Amen. It is so amazing how in the run-up to an election the most liberal candidate possible is on the ballot yet the wagons are circled and anyone that points out the candidates flaws is attacked. Yet after the fact so many try to pretend otherwise and finger point.

I unabashedly state I DID NOT vote for Myth, nor will I vote for his GOPE brethren. And that is because I still believe in representative government in this country and they do not represent me. Not the Reagan 75% "I'm your guy" metric; not even 50%

Not on abortion, gay "marriage" (in the military/Boy Scouts etc), taxes, gun rights, foreign policy (arming AQ in Syria etc), not on healthcare, education etc - nary a peep was mentioned in the debates about Benghazi or Fast and Furious to name a few. Many of the issues they don't even care about so they either A - pay lip service to the base or B - pander rather than researching and taking a stand

I feel I am beginning to sound like a broken record but I will reiterate once again that I have posted multiple times the platforms that Myth Romney supports are near the same as those supported by Hillary Clinton [the aforementioned issues] (and 0bama). So the questions I have posed:

If Hillary became an (R) and was running against 0 would you vote for her?

If so/not why/why not?

Not one of the lesser of two evils supporters stuck around to answer.

And the reason is because it destroys every premise they have for throwing their ballot in support of Myth and the other posers in the Stupid Party (R).

Instead it seems many want to poke fun at having any type of principles or moral absolutes and clamor for a 'bigger tent'. The platform needs to change, the base/voters needs to change, we need to reach out to this group or that group and compromise to support xxxxx liberal agenda. How about the party changes (to the platform it is chartered to stand for), or we do away with it?

Conservatives are so ready to boycott JCP, Starbucks, and Target because they support the homo agenda - yet will try to rally support for Myth; why?

Every day the list grows of businesses and media conservatives claim they refuse to support - yet the vote for, and give money to, candidates that support the very things conservatives are claiming to boycott.

Hell, the Wounded Warrior Project was trying to keep a non-political focus and strictly focus on providing assistance to wounded vets yet FReepers were lining up to deride them for not wanting to go on a pro-gun radio show and be viewed as supporting one political cause over another (even though WWP sponsors shooting and hunting events)......and yet

When he ran for the Senate and for governor, he supported a ban on assault rifles and the Brady Bill's five-day waiting period for gun purchases. He proudly said those positions wouldn't make him "the hero of the NRA." As governor, he made Massachusetts the first state to permanently ban assault weapons. He has even flip-flopped about whether he owns any guns. In New Hampshire, he was asked his view on the Second Amendment. He responded that he had been a hunter "pretty much all my life." Later, red-faced aides of Romney had to admit that Romney had never had a hunting license, and under further questioning, Romney acknowledged that his "lifetime of hunting" was having shot at some birds during a Republican governors meeting during a fund-raising event and maybe shooting at "small varmints" when he was seventeen with his cousin.....

Is the guy you voted for.

Selling the rope to hang ourselves with indeed.

I think a Romney win would have been a sign of God’s grace, which I fear has been withdrawn from a sinful nation.

Ah. Excuse me, no need to reply to my earlier post, I see where you're coming from.

As far as I'm concerned, it is a blessing good sign of God's grace that Romney lost. There is nothing "hateful" about remembering Romney's solid depravity in caving to the homosexual agenda, to say nothing of remembering that he was indeed the author and Godfather of ObamaCare. You choose to characterize those of us willing to SPEAK THE TRUTH as being "hateful." And you are willing to tell God that by golly, you want a guy whose hand signed such Governor-type things as a proclamation endouraging Gay Youth Pride involvement in local middle schools, or law that ultimately forced adoption agencies to accommodate gay "parents." What on earth is hateful about speaking that truth here, and where do YOU get off thinking God would be proud of a nation of His followers willing to put such an abandoned amoral character in charge?

Listen, Mammy, God is smiling that enough of us believed in Him to reject an agent of some morally very bad stuff.

Amen, Brother FReeper.

We need the confidence to brush off the MSM dominant illusion that has people erroniously concluding that most Americans are childish idiots. Anyone who preaches that gospel is a loser by definition.

The MSM represents a sliver of American reality, but it appears to define it. The left has more talking heads, but on our side there are more Americans who reject the left than not. There must be -- otherwise Democrats wouldn't have to cheat to win. And certainly reading MSM consumer comments on MSM news sites indicates that the majority resent the liberal bias in the media.

But the insidious nature of the MSM taking the role of defining what "America" is thinking, has the majority perceiving itself as a minority. When elections are won by fraudulent votes, America is primed to regard them as legit.

Take heart, we do have the means to restore this nation. Confidence in our compatriots and the courage to defy a very convincing illusion are necessary.

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.