Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 14
  1. #1 Gloves Off: GOP Establishment Goes After Tea Party 
    Moderator txradioguy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Bavaria
    Posts
    7,649
    The National Republican Senate Committee, the GOP campaign arm responsible for Senate elections, has decided to use its political power to block consulting firm Jamestown Associates from receiving political work from GOP candidates or incumbents.

    Jamestown's "sin" is working with the Senate Conservative Fund, an organization that supports conservative candidates for the US Senate.

    NRSC communications staffer Brad Dayspring, a former spokesman for House Majority Leader Rep. Eric Cantor (R-VA), told The New York Times on Friday, “We’re not going to do business with people who profit off of attacking Republicans. Purity for profit is a disease that threatens the Republican Party.”

    Jamestown Associates has done work with the Senate Conservatives Fund (SCF), a conservative group largely responsible for the elections of Sens. Ted Cruz (R-TX), Mike Lee (R-UT), Jeff Flake (R-AZ), Marco Rubio (R-FL), Rand Paul (R-KY), Deb Fischer (R-NE), Pat Toomey (R-PA), and Ron Johnson (R-WI), among others. Former Sen. Jim DeMint (R-SC), who left the U.S. Senate last year to become the president of the Heritage Foundation, founded SCF.

    "In a warning shot to outside conservative groups, the National Republican Senatorial Committee this week informed a prominent Republican advertising firm that it would not receive any contracts with the campaign committee because of its work with a group that targets incumbent Senate Republicans," the Times wrote.

    "Even more striking," the Times continued, "a senior official at the committee called individual Republican Senate campaigns and other party organizations this week and urged them not to hire the firm, Jamestown Associates, in an effort to punish them for working for the Senate Conservatives Fund, a group founded by Jim DeMint, then a South Carolina senator, that is trying to unseat Senator Mitch McConnell of Kentucky, the Republican leader, and some other incumbents up for re-election next year whom it finds insufficiently conservative."

    The Times notes that a large part of the reason why SCF has drawn the ire of the GOP establishment is its endorsement of McConnell’s primary challenger, businessman Matt Bevin. McConnell’s chief of staff Josh Holmes, who is now working for the NRSC through the election, told the Times that McConnell plans to beat up SCF for being conservative like he would if it were a bar fight. “S.C.F. has been wandering around the country destroying the Republican Party like a drunk who tears up every bar they walk into,” Holmes said. “The difference this cycle is that they strolled into Mitch McConnell’s bar and he doesn’t throw you out, he locks the door.”

    Brian Walsh, former NRSC communications director and currently lobbyist for the bipartisan firm Singer-Bonjean, has aggressively tweeted his support for this new campaign against conservatives’ work prospects.

    “Important stand by the @NRSC - Republicans who profit off of attacking other Republicans will not get their business,” Walsh tweeted as the Times published its piece. Walsh, who works for former top Sen. Chuck Schumer (D-NY) aide Phil Singer at Singer-Bonjean, attempted to frame the NRSC’s attack on Jamestown Associates as an effort to clean up the GOP from conservatives that he says are “professional operatives profiting off of attacking Republicans.”

    Some conservatives are pushing back at the NRSC. Rep. Mark Sanford (R-SC), a conservative who won his comeback election with no establishment support, has offered up his public support of Jamestown Associates.

    “When some in DC stepped away from our race Jamestown Assoc. stood with us and fought,” Sanford tweeted in response to the Times article. “What a few in DC think won't change that.”

    John Drogin, the state director for Sen. Ted Cruz (R-TX)—a conservative who also employs Jamestown Associates—similarly tweeted out support for the firm. “Jamestown is good firm, doing good work for conservatives, including @tedcruz,” Drogin tweeted.

    A Republican strategist told Breitbart News he believed the NRSC action was designed to send a warning shot across the bow of other GOP consulting firms. "The NRSC action against Jamestown is designed to send a message to the other political firms. If they work with conservative challengers, [the NRSC] will block you from working with other candidates or incumbents."


    http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Governm...t-at-Tea-Party
    In Memory Of My Friend 1st Sgt. Tim Millsap A Co, 70th Eng. Bn. 3rd Bde 1st AD...K.I.A. 25 April 2005

    Liberalism Is The Philosophy Of The Stupid

    To Achieve Ordered Liberty You Must Have Moral Order As Well

    The libs/dems of today are the Quislings of former years. The cowards who would vote a fraud into office in exchange for handouts from the devil.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  2. #2  
    Senior Member Arroyo_Doble's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    Ft Worth
    Posts
    3,788
    The gloves were already off. It's just now, the so-called Establishment Republicans have decided to fight back.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  3. #3  
    Moderator txradioguy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Bavaria
    Posts
    7,649
    Quote Originally Posted by Arroyo_Doble View Post
    The gloves were already off. It's just now, the so-called Establishment Republicans have decided to fight back.
    What do you mean decided?

    They've been sabotaging Conservatives...or at least trying to since before you and I were born. All the way back to Goldwater and Reagans first attempt to get the nomination.

    They're just more brazen about it now.

    We're seeing the Conservatives in the party stand up to the bullying and this is how the establishment reacts.
    In Memory Of My Friend 1st Sgt. Tim Millsap A Co, 70th Eng. Bn. 3rd Bde 1st AD...K.I.A. 25 April 2005

    Liberalism Is The Philosophy Of The Stupid

    To Achieve Ordered Liberty You Must Have Moral Order As Well

    The libs/dems of today are the Quislings of former years. The cowards who would vote a fraud into office in exchange for handouts from the devil.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  4. #4  
    Power CUer noonwitch's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Warren, MI
    Posts
    12,472
    Quote Originally Posted by txradioguy View Post
    What do you mean decided?

    They've been sabotaging Conservatives...or at least trying to since before you and I were born. All the way back to Goldwater and Reagans first attempt to get the nomination.

    They're just more brazen about it now.

    We're seeing the Conservatives in the party stand up to the bullying and this is how the establishment reacts.
    By Tea Party standards, Goldwater was a liberal. At least he was a liberal on most social issues.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  5. #5  
    Moderator txradioguy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Bavaria
    Posts
    7,649
    Quote Originally Posted by noonwitch View Post
    By Tea Party standards, Goldwater was a liberal. At least he was a liberal on most social issues.
    Much MUCH later in life he turned that way. But when he was in his prime he was the Gold Standard of Conservatism.

    It's only you revisionist history Libtard types that like to paint his enire career with what you said above.
    In Memory Of My Friend 1st Sgt. Tim Millsap A Co, 70th Eng. Bn. 3rd Bde 1st AD...K.I.A. 25 April 2005

    Liberalism Is The Philosophy Of The Stupid

    To Achieve Ordered Liberty You Must Have Moral Order As Well

    The libs/dems of today are the Quislings of former years. The cowards who would vote a fraud into office in exchange for handouts from the devil.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  6. #6  
    Fabulous Poster
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Posts
    10,161
    Quote Originally Posted by txradioguy View Post
    Much MUCH later in life he turned that way. But when he was in his prime he was the Gold Standard of Conservatism.

    It's only you revisionist history Libtard types that like to paint his enire career with what you said above.
    Could you take the time to give us five bullet points, a litmus test if you will, which define a conservative candidate?





    Reply With Quote  
     

  7. #7  
    Power CUer noonwitch's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Warren, MI
    Posts
    12,472
    Quote Originally Posted by txradioguy View Post
    Much MUCH later in life he turned that way. But when he was in his prime he was the Gold Standard of Conservatism.

    It's only you revisionist history Libtard types that like to paint his enire career with what you said above.

    He supported Roe v Wade. I thought that automatically made him a liberal.



    I have a lot of respect for Goldwater. I'm not one of those liberals who thinks he was a racist because he opposed the Civil Rights Act of 1964. He truly believed that Americans could end racism without legislation-he probably gave his fellow Americans more credit than they deserved in that regard.


    My very liberal high school government teacher said this to us: "Always watch what Senator Goldwater does or says, because he's the only man in Congress who thinks for himself". That's very high praise.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  8. #8  
    Moderator txradioguy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Bavaria
    Posts
    7,649
    Quote Originally Posted by noonwitch View Post
    He supported Roe v Wade. I thought that automatically made him a liberal.
    Thats what happens when you think noonie.



    I have a lot of respect for Goldwater. I'm not one of those liberals who thinks he was a racist because he opposed the Civil Rights Act of 1964. He truly believed that Americans could end racism without legislation-he probably gave his fellow Americans more credit than they deserved in that regard.


    My very liberal high school government teacher said this to us: "Always watch what Senator Goldwater does or says, because he's the only man in Congress who thinks for himself". That's very high praise.
    He only became the Liberals favorite conservative because of some of the things he said much later in life closer to his death.

    He was despised by people like you and your high school government teacher when he was running for President and helping to shape the political beliefs of one of our greatest Presidents ever.
    In Memory Of My Friend 1st Sgt. Tim Millsap A Co, 70th Eng. Bn. 3rd Bde 1st AD...K.I.A. 25 April 2005

    Liberalism Is The Philosophy Of The Stupid

    To Achieve Ordered Liberty You Must Have Moral Order As Well

    The libs/dems of today are the Quislings of former years. The cowards who would vote a fraud into office in exchange for handouts from the devil.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  9. #9  
    Moderator txradioguy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Bavaria
    Posts
    7,649
    Quote Originally Posted by Novaheart View Post
    Could you take the time to give us five bullet points, a litmus test if you will, which define a conservative candidate?





    You first.

    Do you really think I'm dumb enough to fall for this Nova? No way in hell I give you a future gotcha moment or a chance to falsely label me some kind of hypocrite.

    If you haven't paid attention enough over time to my postings here to know what I believe would make an excellent Conservative presidential candidate that would beat the hell out of any Libtard up against him or her...then it's your fail for not paying attention.
    In Memory Of My Friend 1st Sgt. Tim Millsap A Co, 70th Eng. Bn. 3rd Bde 1st AD...K.I.A. 25 April 2005

    Liberalism Is The Philosophy Of The Stupid

    To Achieve Ordered Liberty You Must Have Moral Order As Well

    The libs/dems of today are the Quislings of former years. The cowards who would vote a fraud into office in exchange for handouts from the devil.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  10. #10  
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Posts
    9,056
    There's an interesting article by David Horowitz on uniting the right:

    http://www.nationalreview.com/articl...david-horowitz

    Uniting the Right
    Freedom is the idea that can bring our fractious movement together.

    By David Horowitz

    ...It is the power of a unifying idea. A unifying idea is not a consensus over policy or an agreement on tactics; unanimity in these matters is difficult to achieve and impossible to sustain. Instead, their unity is inspired — forged actually — by a missionary idea. On the eve of his election in 2008, Barack Obama said to his followers: “We are five days away from fundamentally transforming the United States of America.” That idea of transformation is what unites the Left. Unity in embracing a future goal — the fundamental transformation of society — is what motivates them to march together. It is what makes them “progressives” in the first place. It is their identity in the same way “Christian” and “Jew” are identities of people with a religious faith...

    ...The coalition of the Right is extremely diverse and at present lacks a unifying idea. Conservatives do not speak from the same page generally, or march in lockstep; their divisions are open for all to see, and for their opponents to exploit. The conservative media is frequently at odds with the Republican party, and the Republican party is often at odds with itself. The Tea Party has emerged and flourished because of dissatisfaction with the way Republicans conduct themselves in conflicts with their progressive opponents. To be sure, on the other side, there is also a progressive grassroots faction that has significant disagreements with the Democratic party. But when it comes to election time, when it comes to who gets the power, the progressive grassroots fall into line. They do it for the good of the larger cause. To be on the right side of history.

    In contrast, conservatives are not averse to sitting on their hands at election time, or even voting for the other camp. Why do conservatives do this? Because they think elections are about particular policies, and they don’t see the larger cause. Republicans do not frame their broader political cause as a moral crusade, and do not project a unifying idea. Consequently, their focus is on policies and tactical issues. This inevitably promotes divisions in the ranks of Republican officeholders and frequently puts them at odds with their political base. As previously noted, the schism over whether to defund Obamacare or keep the government solvent was purely tactical, since all Republicans and conservatives oppose Obamacare. Yet by most accounts the fallout from the division was serious enough to pose a threat to the GOP’s electoral chances in 2014, when a defeat would make Obamacare a permanent feature of the nation’s life.

    If policy and tactics were Democrats’ main concerns too, they would be as divided as Republicans. The fact that Democrats are united behind the ill-conceived, unpopular, and unworkable Obamacare legislation is a prime example of what happens when a policy is regarded as a pillar of the transformative cause. The troops bury their doubts and give it unanimous support because they understand that it is essential to the progressive dream.

    Here is the bottom line: If conservatives continue to ignore the fact that their opponents approach politics as a religious war, if they fail to organize their own resistance as a moral cause, they will eventually lose the war and everything that depends on it.....
    Reply With Quote  
     

Bookmarks
Bookmarks
Posting Permissions
  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •