Posted on 11/08/2013 6:35:23 AM PST by GIdget2004
The tea party, he says, consists of "people who are angry and upset at government—and I agree with them." But "I think, honestly, many of them have been misled. . . . They've been told the reason we can't get to better outcomes than we've gotten is not because the Democrats control the Senate and the White House but because Republicans have been insufficiently feisty. Well, that's just not true, and I think that the folks that I have difficulty with are the leaders of some of these groups who basically mislead them for profit. . . . They raise money . . . take their cut and spend it" on political action that hurts Republicans.
He refers to the Senate Conservatives Fund. "That's the one I'm prepared to be specific about." The fund "has elected more Democrats than the Democratic Senatorial Committee over the last three cycles." The group is targeting Mr. McConnell with ads slamming his leadership during the shutdown. "Right now they're on the air in obvious coordination with Harry Reid's super PAC—Harry Reid's!—in the same markets, at roughly the same amount, at the same time."
But says he isn't worried about his own race: "I don't wanna be overly cocky, but I'm gonna be the Republican nominee next year."
(Excerpt) Read more at online.wsj.com ...
What a dummy!! Mitch, I have not been “misled” by TEA Party leaders. I’ve been a member of the TEA Party since before it was called the TEA Party and it had no leaders. We wanted less taxes, less government then, still want it now!
We want our senators and representatives to stand up for us and fight for our side. We don’t want them to be Democrat Lite.
When you give your enemy 100% of what they ask for, minus only funds for a program Zero himself this week apologizes for, the only entity responsible for a shut down is the Democratic party.
The freaking sad thing is that some idiots think it was the Republicans, simply because they can't get their heads out of their arses to see the truth. Crissy Matthews should not be your news source.
Thanks for the ping!
Hmmm...does “insufficiently feisty” exclude voting to confirm Supreme Court nominees who clearly intend to violate the oath of their job? Is it too “feisty” to simply exercise your vote, at no personal cost, to deny a lifetime appointment to someone intent on destroying the very foundation of a governmental system every American depends on to be secure in their person, property, and future freedom?
Considering that the R party has virtually no accomplishments in the last 50 years save some tax reforms in the early 80s, I would say they are “insufficiently feisty”. Their opponents have accomplished Medicare, vast welfare entitlements, spent the nation into unsustainable devt, destroyed 2-parent families, severely reduced the quality of public education, and have screwed up nearly every aspect of American life. Yep, that suggests the R party has been “insufficiently feisty”.
What he says is he wanted Lugar to vote for the amnesty, gun control and ENDA bill.
Lugar was probably worse than McCain. In the league of Murkowski. McCain is at least more public and is the idiot leader of the McCainiacs. Hated by his constituents loved by DC.
There were only 2 conservative Races lost: Akin and Mourdock. Taking Lugar out regardless was worth it. The control of the senate is just bragging rights against Obama’s agenda. You are not going to have a solid 51 or 61 votes with McCainiacs around. Losing the Virginia race was a bigger loss than those 2 Senate seats.
Rehberg and Berg should not have invited Christie to campaign for them. There was also the woman in New Mexico.
I hope he’s right!
Then I can vote for any body but him.
What we have are liberal democrats who ran as republicans in red states, because that was how they could win and gain control in congress.
http://www.gopusa.com/news/2013/11/08/nra-plans-to-play-big-for-mcconnell/?subscriber=1
If you are an NRA member, call them and tell them to stay out of the primary.
“They raise money . . . take their cut and spend it” on political action that hurts Republicans.”
Sorry Mitch, that is YOUR pimps on K-Street not the TEA Party.
“One of my pet peeves is that we attack our own camp harder than the enemy’s.”
Like McCain does, right?
So, the Kentucky kickback in Mitch's latest cave-in on the shutdown/debt ceiling isn't reason enough to bounce him from the Senate?
Assuming we follow your assinine suggestion, what good would examining Mitch's record do? Really, how hard is it for Mitch to establish a conservative voting record when he allows Harry Reid to set the agenda and language of every bill? Beyond that, where is McConnell when it comes to the PR side of the job on setting the tone of GOP opposition? On very rare occasions, he has choked out half-competent statements of conservative beliefs, but you could tell his heart really wasn't in it. The stench of capitulation simply exudes from every pore of his body.
Perhaps McConnell would be adequately conservative on his individual voting record to be a back bencher in the Senate, but he is woefully moderate as the GOP Senate Leader. I really don't care if Mitch remains in the Senate as a somewhat conservative back bencher, but I want him out as a leader. I don't even want him as a chairman or ranking member of a committee. And that's the problem. Congressional leaders NEVER step down from leadership unless they are forced out by scandal or individual electoral defeat in their home state.
In sports, they say you can't fire an entire team or a handful of players if the team performs poorly. Sometimes you have to fire the coach - even if the coach is a good guy or doing a good job or working hard. It's time to fire our coaches in both the House and Senate!
Chris Christie is a 500 pound pig that thinks he can fly.
Mitch McConnell is 200 pound pig that thinks he can fly.
Maybe they are both RINO's that think they can fly!
I think Republican politicians are just democrats who got left out of the party to scrounge around for republican votes
Well, gee. Let me think about that for a minute. Hmmm. I don't know. Perhaps his voting record would tell us where he stands on limited government, the 2nd Amendment, States' Rights, abortion, gay marriage, taxes, individual liberty and other conservative issues?
Really, how hard is it for Mitch to establish a conservative voting record when he allows Harry Reid to set the agenda and language of every bill?
You think McConnell allows Harry Reid to set the agenda? Clearly, you don't understand Senate Rules. McConnell does what he can to obstruct Reid's agenda, which is why the Democrats have labeled him "Senator Gridlock," but he doesn't have the ability to set the agenda in the Senate.
Mitch McConnell may not be the leader we want or need, but he is not an enemy. He is a solid conservative on many issues. I never claimed that he should remain the Senate Minority Leader, which by the way is an elected position. He doesn't have to step down. Senate conservatives can vote for someone else as Minority leader if that's what we want and need.
The poster to whom I was responding suggested that if McConnell gets on the ballot that conservatives should either not vote for him or vote for the Democrat. That, FRiend, is assinine.
Sorry, but McConnell did everything he could to sabotage the conservatives in the House. Taking the money for the dam was, under the circumstances, a slam in the face.
To what end? Is Mitch McConnell's voting record on those issues keeping the socialists from advancing their attack on those issues? Will his absence stop their advance? Hardly.
I also reject your assertion that a Mitch primary loss will automatically result in a GOP general election. It wouldn't and it won't.
McConnell does what he can to obstruct Reid's agenda, which is why the Democrats have labeled him "Senator Gridlock," but he doesn't have the ability to set the agenda in the Senate.
I would characterize that Democrat nickname as being of the "Oh no, Sen. McConnell -- don't throw us into that briar patch" variety. If McConnell were the rules genius you claim, Dingy Harry would not be able to get so much accomplished without any fillibusters. McConnell is tha rules master of avoiding tough votes that might make RINO's uncomfortable, but doesn't mind hanging conservatives out to dry. That might not define Mitch as an enemy of conservatives, but he sure as hell is NOT our friend, much less a leader.
The poster to whom I was responding suggested that if McConnell gets on the ballot that conservatives should either not vote for him or vote for the Democrat. That, FRiend, is assinine.
If that's your view, then you are not my friend/FRiend either. For the last 20 years conservatives have tried it your way - not primarying RINOs and/or holding our noses and voting for the odious GOP moderate. That is assinine - repeating folly and expecting a different outcome.
Why are you so afraid of letting the good people of Kentucky choose their GOP Senate nominee? And if they repeat their folly, why should conservatives in Kentucky be forced to validate that mistake? It's time to teach the GOPe who is the boss.
I guess Mitch doesn’t understand that we don’t care if a Democrat is elected in his place because it won’t be too different than what we already have.
Get rid of all RINOs and stealth liberals in the GOP, then rebuild. That’s the plan.
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.