Posted on 02/24/2014 5:30:12 AM PST by xzins
The leaders of the Big Government Republican establishment are beginning to get desperate. They are finally starting to grasp that the limited government constitutional conservatives of the Tea Party movement and other liberty-minded voters now understand that the first, and most important, fights in the battle to restore America are the Republican primary elections.
In a desperate effort to hold on to power they have begun to deploy one of their oldest tactics in the 100-year civil war in the Republican Party – calls for Party unity to back Big Government Republican incumbents who have betrayed conservative principles and are rightly facing primary challenges.
Conservative author and commentator Ann Coulter whose incisive critiques of liberal policy follies and witty jibes at liberals and Democrats in general, make conservatism interesting and entertaining is only the latest in a long line of “conservatives” to get suckered into the idea that keeping establishment Republicans in power somehow advances the goal of governing America according to conservative principles.
It doesn’t and it never has.
"Of course, I love the Tea Party," Coulter said to Sean Hannity, but she limited the Tea Party movement to people in the "heart of America" who want to see change. She said Tea Party groups such as the Senate Conservatives Fund are just trying to bilk donors.
In other words, now that the Tea Party movement has grown politically sophisticated enough to adopt the tools that the establishment uses to stay in power, such as PACs, and the Senate Conservatives Fund PAC is being effective against incumbent Big Government establishment Republicans, Coulter wants to disarm the opposition.
But here’s where Ann Coulter is really full of it.
“If it weren’t for shysters running against establishment Republicans we would have 51 Republicans senators right now,” Coulter told Sean Hannity referring to the 2012 blow-ups of the Todd Akin and Richard Mourdock Senate campaigns.
Coulter’s comment shows just what a deep draught of the establishment Kool-Aid she has taken and is indicative of how the Big Government Republican establishment is desperately trying to rewrite history to advance the idea that only establishment candidates can win and that conservatives should “unite” behind Republican candidates who have records of betraying conservative principles.
Akin and Mourdock weren’t first time rookie candidates; they were experienced Republican politicians with many campaigns under their belts.
What’s more the comments that blew up their campaigns had nothing to do with the Tea Party’s limited government constitutional conservative agenda. They got suckered by the Democrats’ “war on women” strategy, put their foot in their mouth, were quickly abandoned by the GOP establishment despite conservative calls for Party unity, and consequently got beat.
As our friend Chris Chocola of the Club for Growth put it so well, “the question isn’t why Todd Akin and Richard Mourdock lost — we know why they lost,” said Chocola. “The question is really why did Heather Wilson in New Mexico, Rick Berg in North Dakota, Denny Rehberg in Montana, Tommy Thompson in Wisconsin, George Allen in Virginia and Linda Lingle in Hawaii — why did they lose?”
We could add Mitt Romney nationally and Connie Mack in Florida to Chocola’s list, but you get the point.
The fact of the matter is that of the three Republican Senate victories in 2012; Nebraska’s Deb Fischer, Arizona’s Jeff Flake and Texas’ Ted Cruz all ran as Tea Party-oriented or anti-establishment candidates.
There’s no evidence that running as a principled limited government constitutional conservative automatically made a candidate “unelectable” in 2012 and a whole lot of evidence that running as a Bush-type establishment Republican did make one “unelectable,” because despite the millions Karl Rove and his establishment Republican funders spent on them they all lost.
Tit-for-tat is a poor reason to do anything, so we will forego the opportunity to explore where exactly were the establishment calls for Republican Party unity in campaigns where the conservative won the primary, such as the Goldwater, Reagan and Cuccinelli campaigns, when the Republican establishment did everything they could to undermine the conservative candidate after the primary.
Calls for Republican “unity” and a free pass in the primary for incumbent establishment Republicans like Mitch McConnell, Lamar Alexander, Pat Roberts and Thad Cochran will only accomplish one thing; keeping ineffective and unprincipled establishment Republicans in power. And anyone, including our friend Ann Coulter, who thinks that advances the cause of conservative governance is full of it.
I haven’t followed him. Which state?
Mr Rogers has a good point. The GOP-E has continued attacking and refusing help to conservative candidates. Akin — whether you like him or not - is an example.
He messed up trying to explain a pro-life concept.
That’s not nearly as bad as some mistakes make by both democrat and republican candidates in the past. Our party threw akin to the dogs as part of their campaign to refuse to defend life.
Instead of saying, “those babies are so precious. Let’s not lose them. Let’s love them.”
He didn't have to run very far to get there. That's the real truth about Romney.
McFlake is from Arizona. He is from the Lindsey Graham school of politics...ie, whatever McCain wants, he wants too. IIRC, he voted for going to war in Syria and for cutting military retiree pay.
Just checked:
“The Senate Foreign Relations Committee voted to pass a resolution that would authorize a military strike against Syria.
Both of Arizona’s Senators, John McCain and Jeff Flake, are on that committee, and they both voted in favor of the resolution.”
http://blogs.phoenixnewtimes.com/valleyfever/2013/09/john_mccain_and_jeff_flake_vot.php
“Not everyone agreed. Sen. Jeff Flake, R-Ariz., a lawmaker known for fiscal conservatism and one of the three who voted “no,” expressed disappointment that his colleagues would even consider repealing the COLA caps.
“How do we convey the seriousness of the budget crisis when, at the first sign of political pressure, we undo a portion of the bill that we passed less than two months ago?” Flake said.”
The latter vote was 95:3, and McFlake was one of the three opposed.
You get what you vote for. If no one voted for RINOs, they'd all soon disappear. People who think your way, are empowering the very thing they claim to resist.
Lotta good that does in the long term (see Bush 41, Dole, McCain, Romney...).
The Founding Generation would recognize that statement for what it is -- a call to abandon the whole point and purpose of your fight.
Others may do what they like, but I'm never voting RINO again. I'd rather fight the enemy in the streets than compromise my personal integrity any further.
What have you gained if your RINO majority advances the cause of liberalism (like they always do)?
It’s an interesting reminder how devious is the GOP-E.
This kind of thread also generates hits and during a Freep-a-Thon it’s good to remind folks why they like Free Republic.
Might inspire someone to donate to THE ONLY PLACE on the web where they actually get to voice their opinion, discuss it, and get feedback....FREE REPUBLIC
Ann Coulter Is Full Of It
++++++
Sure can’t be food.
I don't understand how it can be seen that way. The idea that you can win with 2% is totally insane. The idea that all of the founders agreed with each other is absolutely incorrect.
Like Reaqan did, Cruz will have to bring the RINOs to vote for him, and will use them to win. I have no problem with that, and neither should you.
Allowing the totalitarian left to win all the time is simple suicide. Reagan knew that, and Cruz (or Palin) is smart enough to know that.
Your point is first order good-feel reactive. But then there is reality.
Here’s the reality:
McConnell and others will never give up their hold on power and will do all they can to defeat any Tea Party upstarts. They are not conservative, they are plants. Plants put there by corporate interests and front organizations to do the bidding of those controlling the cashflow.
First thing to understand is that McConnell and others in his ring are not conservatives and the second thing to understand is they are republicans for convenience. IF Kentucky was leaning blue, the money bags behind McConnell would retire him and choose a democrat to do their bidding.
So in conclusion even if the GOP takes the Senate there will still be a fight for the leadership meaning a fight for control of the money. Party leaders in Congress are fronts for the financial controllers; money is the mother’s milk of politics.
In order for your view to have a smidgen of a chance of effectiveness, the real conservatives must be in control of the leadership meaning the money and then the ‘moderates’ can be counted on to fall in line. That’s the reality.
And the reality now is this battle for the leadership of the GOP is now happening.
This is a two-stage war. FIRST the corrupt leadership of the GOP aka the GOPe must be driven from power IN THE PRIMARIES. SECOND the new leadership of the GOP must drive the corrupt democrats from power.
So I recommend you tune your thinking and adopt the view that the GOPe must be soundly defeated. After that, they can attend the game as players but the coach will call the shots and the coach will be a Tea Party conservative.
Of that list, Jeff Flake out-and-out lied. He's been nothing but a McCain clone since the day he won the election.
How much of that 50% is due to sneaky tactical voting like the one he just pulled, voting for cloture on the debt ceiling debate so he could pretend to vote against it on the final vote? Only Cruz called his bluff and forced him to show his hand?
bump
I have no doubt that both the left and the GOPe have, from the beginning, made a decision to infiltrate the TEA Party just as they do other conservative bastions and institutions.
Anybody who pulls that "Voted before it before I voted against it" trick has no right to call himself a "TEA Party" candidate. Jeff Flake did that.
Yup. Flake really surprised me because, other than lying about observing a Term Limit, he had a good voting record in the House.
And his healthcare law is left! So with Romney, we had a losing candidate right off the bat.
Veterans know who to hold accountable:
http://clerk.house.gov/evs/2013/roll640.xml
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.