Mississippi Bloodbath: Open Warfare Breaks out in Tea Party vs. Barbour, Cochran

Breitbart ^ | 3/19/2014 | Matthew Boyle

[grimalkin]

Mississippi’s GOP senate primary is quickly becoming ground zero in 2014 for the fight between the establishment and the conservative grassroots for control of the Republican Party’s future. The state’s former governor Haley Barbour’s establishment political machine is in full swing running defense for incumbent Sen. Thad Cochran. Cochran is facing the fight of his political life from surging primary challenger two-term state Sen. Chris McDaniel.

“The battle lines are clearly drawn in this race,” FreedomWorks President Matt Kibbe said in an emailed statement to Breitbart News. “This is Cochran and his band of super lobbyists vs. Chris McDaniel and the people of Mississippi. The Barbours don't represent Mississippians, they represent their lobbying client lists.”

Tea Party Express chairwoman Amy Kremer told Breitbart News that Team Barbour is no match for the grassroots conservative movement already supporting McDaniel. “You can involve the entire Barbour family and all of their trusted ones on the payroll, but they will never have the strength of the grassroots,” Kremer said. “This mentality and the arrogance exhibited only emboldens the grassroots. We will not be intimidated, nor will we back down. This seat belongs to the people and not Senator Cochran or the Barbour family.”

[Yosemitest]

Chris McDaniel will get my vote.

I like Haley Barbour.
BUT "Establishment Republican" Thad Cochran has GOT TO GO, THIS SECOND !
Thad Cochran is one of the biggest back-stabbers we have.

[Enterprise]

The lack of understanding by the GOP as to what the Tea Party stands for is breathtaking. Clueless would be the understatement of the year.

[Yosemitest]

Key elements of the article:

" ... two-term state Sen. Chris ... McDaniel just secured the endorsement of former Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin,
and on Wednesday the Tea Party Patriots Citizens Fund announced its support for him.
He already has a consortium of national and state groups backing him up, ranging from
the powerful Club For Growth
to the grassroots-focused FreedomWorks
and Tea Party Express, among scores of others.

... Tea Party Express chairwoman Amy Kremer told Breitbart News that Team Barbour is no match for the grassroots conservative movement already supporting McDaniel.
“You can involve the entire Barbour family and all of their trusted ones on the payroll,
but they will never have the strength of the grassroots,” Kremer said.
“This mentality and the arrogance exhibited only emboldens the grassroots.
We will not be intimidated, nor will we back down.
This seat belongs to the people and not Senator Cochran or the Barbour family.”

... “A seventh term for Thad Cochran might mean higher fees for Haley Barbour’s lobbying practice, but it means more bailouts, debt-limit increases and tax hikes for Mississippi voters,” Club For Growth spokesman Barney Keller fired back at Barbour’s machine in an email to Breitbart News on Wednesday.

Kibbe echoed Keller’s assessment that the Barbours want Cochran in Washington to keep the federal dollars rolling into their lobbyists’ clients.
“The Barbour family wants Cochran in Washington to keep the spending rolling,
but the only thing that his 19 debt ceiling votes brought home for Mississippi families was over $10 trillion in debt,
all to be passed on to children and grandchildren,” Kibbe said.
“It’s time for a new generation of representation that cares about families and small businesses in Mississippi,
and Chris McDaniel is the principled leader who can get it done.”

... “He [Thad Cochran] built the nation’s No. 1 lobbying firm, representing businesses that employ millions of Americans and helping fund universities and hospitals in Mississippi,” Cochran said of Barbour in the ad.
“I’m proud of Haley, and you will be, too.”

Tea Party Patriots Citizens Fund chairwoman Jenny Beth Martin said that mentality is exactly why her group is endorsing McDaniel over Cochran.

“It is precisely this kind of thinking -
that having built the number 1 lobbying firm is a ‘good thing’
- that proves just how out of touch the insider, DC establishment crowd is with mainstream America,” Martin said in an email.
“This is just one more reason why we have chosen to endorse Chris McDaniel for US Senate.”

... “The Tea Party is about representing the interests of the American people,” she said,
noting that McDaniel “will be a true representative of the people, not just his pals on K Street.”

Kremer, the chairwoman of Tea Party Express, told Breitbart News that
this type of attitude from Barbour is why Americans should distrust career politicians.
“I am not sure what is worse,
Governor Haley Barbour saying that Cochran should be a Senator for life,
or Senator McConnell saying they are going to ‘crush’ the tea party movement and our candidates,”
Kremer said in an email.
“These comments make it clear that
the establishment mentality is to look out for themselves before
looking out for their constituents and the American people.
This is exactly what is wrong in Washington.”

Kremer, a self-described “southern belle,” also said that Barbour’s blatant inability to understand the grassroots means
he should consider leaving politics along with Cochran.

“I have met Governor Barbour several times and he is a very nice southern gentleman,
but he has no understanding of the strength of the tea party in Mississippi,” she said.
“Bless his heart, maybe it is time for him to retire too.”

[Black Agnes]

Not clueless. Deliberate obfuscation.

[workerbee]

Oh, they know what it stands for, alright. That’s exactly why they hate us.

[Yosemitest]

"One reason why the GOP’s gains this year will be far less than expected.
They’d much rather nuke each other to dust than take the fight to the dems."

The problem is ~ the "Establishment Republicans" don't "take to fight to the dems" .
That's WHY ~ "WE the PEOPLE" ~ can NOT trust them.

"Establishment Republicans" lose everytime they're listened to.
They wouldn't care if they DO lose.
If they can't be in power, they don't want US in power.
It's just that simple.
It's WAR!

"Establishment Republicans" Want to Redefine the Term "Conservative"

"DO CONSERVATIVES WANT TO WIN IN 2012 OR NOT?"

DO CONSERVATIVES "ESTABLISHMENT REPUBLICANS" WANT TO WIN IN 2014 OR NOT?

Jack Kerwick wrote an article on May 24, 2011 titled The Tea Partier versus The Republican and he expressed some important issues that I agree with.

Thus far, the field of GOP presidential contenders, actual and potential, isn’t looking too terribly promising.

This, though, isn’t meant to suggest that any of the candidates, all things being equal, lack what it takes to insure
that Barack Obama never sees the light of a second term; nor is it the case that I find none of the candidates appealing.
Rather, I simply mean that at this juncture, the party faithful is far from unanimously energized over any of them.

It is true that it was the rapidity and aggressiveness with which President Obama proceeded to impose his perilous designs upon the country
that proved to be the final spark to ignite the Tea Party movement.
But the chain of events that lead to its emergence began long before Obama was elected.
That is, it was actually the disenchantment with the Republican Party under our “compassionate conservative” president, George W. Bush,
which overcame legions of conservatives that was the initial inspiration that gave rise to the Tea Party.

It is this frustration with the GOP’s betrayal of the values that it affirms that accounts for why the overwhelming majority
of those who associate with or otherwise sympathize with the Tea Party movement
refuse to explicitly or formally identify with the Republican Party.
And it is this frustration that informs the Tea Partiers’ threat to create a third party
in the event that the GOP continues business as usual.

If and when those conservatives and libertarians who compose the bulk of the Tea Party, decided that the Republican establishment
has yet to learn the lessons of ’06 and ’08, choose to follow through with their promise,
they will invariably be met by Republicans with two distinct but interrelated objections.

First,
they will be told that they are utopian, “purists” foolishly holding out for an “ideal” candidate.

Second, because virtually all members of the Tea Party would have otherwise voted Republican if not for this new third party,
they will be castigated for essentially giving elections away to Democrats.



Both of these criticisms are, at best, misplaced; at worst, they are just disingenuous.
At any rate, they are easily answerable.

Let’s begin with the argument against “purism.” To this line, two replies are in the coming.


No one, as far as I have ever been able to determine, refuses to vote for anyone who isn’t an ideal candidate.
Ideal candidates, by definition, don’t exist.
This, after all, is what makes them ideal.
This counter-objection alone suffices to expose the argument of the Anti-Purist as so much counterfeit.
But there is another consideration that militates decisively against it.

A Tea Partier who refrains from voting for a Republican candidate who shares few if any of his beliefs
can no more be accused of holding out for an ideal candidate
than can someone who refuses to marry a person with whom he has little to anything in common
be accused of holding out for an ideal spouse.
In other words, the object of the argument against purism is the most glaring of straw men:
“I will not vote for a thoroughly flawed candidate” is one thing;
“I will only vote for a perfect candidate” is something else entirely.



As for the second objection against the Tea Partier’s rejection of those Republican candidates who eschew his values and convictions,
it can be dispensed with just as effortlessly as the first.

Every election season—and at no time more so than this past season—Republicans pledge to “reform Washington,” “trim down” the federal government, and so forth.
Once, however, they get elected and they conduct themselves with none of the confidence and enthusiasm with which they expressed themselves on the campaign trail,
those who placed them in office are treated to one lecture after the other on the need for “compromise” and “patience.”

Well, when the Tea Partier’s impatience with establishment Republican candidates intimates a Democratic victory,
he can use this same line of reasoning against his Republican critics.
My dislike for the Democratic Party is second to none, he can insist.
But in order to advance in the long run my conservative or Constitutionalist values, it may be necessary to compromise some in the short term.

For example,

as Glenn Beck once correctly noted in an interview with Katie Couric,
had John McCain been elected in 2008, it is not at all improbable that, in the final analysis,
the country would have been worse off than it is under a President Obama.
McCain would have furthered the country’s leftward drift,
but because this movement would have been slower,
and because McCain is a Republican, it is not likely that the apparent awakening that occurred under Obama would have occurred under McCain.


It may be worth it, the Tea Partier can tell Republicans, for the GOP to lose some elections if it means that conservatives—and the country—will ultimately win.

If he didn’t know it before, the Tea Partier now knows that accepting short-term loss in exchange for long-term gain is the essence of compromise, the essence of politics.

Ironically, he can thank the Republican for impressing this so indelibly upon him.

I'm fresh out of "patience", and I'm not in the mood for "compromise".
"COMPROMISE" to me is a dirty word.
Let the RINO's compromise their values, with the conservatives, for a change.
We will never unify under "Establishment Republicans" .
"Establishment Republicans" have more in common with the Democrats, than they do with Conservatives.
The weak candidates are "Establishment Republicans", weak on national security, amnesty for illegals, abortion, and government spending.
"Establishment Republicans" scream "COMPROMISE".
And people who study the Bible know that COMPROMISE almost always leads to destruction.
These "Establishment Republicans" are being weeded out, one by one, and slowly but surely, the TEA Party is taking over.

Someone once said [We're] 'Not victims of "the Establishment." '
I disagree.
I ask you again:

Who was it that dumped all those negative adds on Conservative Candidates in the primary?
Who was it that constantly battered each leading Conservative in the primary with an average of three to one negative ads against our real candidates?
Who's money was dumped against the conservative choices?

It WAS Mitt Romney, leader of the "Establishment Republicans"
and it WAS the "Establishment Republicans" who funded all those negative ads against Conservatives.

So conservatives, the BASE of the Republican Party, WERE ' victims of "the Establishment." '

Take a good long look at where "Establishment Republicans" ALWAYS take us.



The "Establishment Republicans" can GO TO HELL !

[Liz]

I think McDaniel’s equivocation on post-Katrina federal aid to the MS Gulf Coast will probably tilt the scales in Cochran’s favor.

This oughta help McDaniel beat that rap.

===================================================

BP Oil Accuses Texas Lawyer of ‘Brazen Fraud’ in Workers’ Claims Over Gulf Oil Spill (lawyer is Obama fundraiser)
New York Times ^ | December 17, 2013 | By John Schwartz / Posted by Brad from Tennessee

BP on Tuesday accused a Texas lawyer of fraudulently driving up its settlement costs in the 2010 Gulf Coast oil spill by claiming to represent tens of thousands of clients who turned out to be “phantoms.”

In a lawsuit filed in Federal District Court in New Orleans, the oil giant, which has been fighting the administration of a settlement with plaintiffs in the courtroom and in the news media, claimed that it relied on the client count supplied by the lawyer, Mikal C. Watts, in 2010 when it put $2.3 billion into a special compensation program for the seafood industry. The company, citing “brazen fraud,” is asking the court to allow it to stop payments and reclaim some of the unspent money.".....snip....

In July 2012, Mr. Watts hosted a $35,800-a-plate event for President Obama at his home. Judge Barbier named him to the committee of plaintiffs’ lawyers that helps run the litigation; he resigned from the Plaintiffs’ Steering Committee on March 13 this year, however, not long after Secret Service Agents executed search warrants at his San Antonio law office, a move that the Department of Justice officials suggested was related to the questions about his clients in the BP case. . .(Excerpt) Read more at nytimes.com ...

====================================================

Have at it Mc Daniel.

Mikal C Watts' birthday cake presented by Obama was trimmed in blue frosting that spelled out, "I better get my cut." (pic was taken down for obvious reasons.)

==============================================

REFERENCE CNN reported 2010: Behind closed doors and after four hours of negotiations, BP executives agreed to put $20bn into an independently managed compensation fund.

BEHIND CLOSED DOORS---Obama was joined in the negotiations by VP Joe Biden, and five cabinet secretaries, including DHS Janet Napolitano, interior secretary, Ken Salazar, energy secretary, Steven Chu, Labor Secy Hilda Solis, Valerie Jarrett, and COS Rham Emanuel. / PICTURE/BP Holdings.

DOING THE DEAL---Obama dreams about his cut and new diamonds for Michele. In foreground, then-COS Rahm Emanuel's hand holds the pencil jotting down his cut that will help make him Chicago Mayor.

At the top, in turquoise, then-Labor Secy Hilda Solis figures out her cut and how many BP executive jobs she needs for latinos. Left, in orange, Dragon Lady Valerie Jarrett hopes Biden will remember his scripted lines.

VP Joe Biden Told BP behind closed doors: "You’ll Put $20 Billion In Escrow Or We’ll Do It For You."

What happened to the $20 billion?

[Hawthorn]

>> This oughta help McDaniel beat that rap. <<

It certainly won’t hurt him!

(And I gotta say it looks to me as if dementia — or some other mental problem — is beginning to cloud the incumbent Senator’s judgment.)

[Theodore R.]

Barbour was borrowing from his friend and neighboring governor Huckabee on that. But can the MS and AR people understand?

[Theodore R.]

MS is a process conservative state; it follows the party rule book, whether it was Eastland or Cochran, makes little difference.

[Theodore R.]

These establishment “choices” somehow managed to get a lot of Republican primary votes.

[Yosemitest]

The democrats would rather have a RINO than a COMMUNIST.

[grandpa jones]

Cochran will lose the primary and go independepent in the general. Just fowwing The Murkowski rule.

[Yosemitest]

Cochran is pretty old, and what you suggest would expose his arrogance, and is very believable.
After all, he hates the T.E.A. Party more than he hates the DemocratsCOMMUNISTS,
so he'd want to prove that Chris McDaniel can't win without his "Establishment Republican" support (typical bitter loser).

Cochran, he's what WRONG with the RINO GOPe who "Go Along To Get Along" .