Posted on 06/11/2014 7:52:24 AM PDT by DestroyLiberalism
Fellow Conservatives:
We have very exciting news to share with you.
Not only did the grassroots in Virginia score a major victory for freedom last night by defeating House Majority Leader Eric Cantor in the Republican primary, but one of Virginia's strongest grassroots conservatives is joining our team.
Starting today, Ken Cuccinelli, the former Attorney General of Virginia, will serve as the president of the Senate Conservatives Fund!
If you don’t know Ken, he’s a principled fighter who is respected by the grassroots and is passionate about electing the next generation of conservative leaders. Throughout his time in public service, whether in Virginia’s State Senate or as Attorney General, Ken led the fight to defend constitutional rights, protect life, stop tax increases, and keep Virginia a low-regulation state.
As Attorney General, Ken fought the federal government to reduce burdensome regulations from the EPA, FCC, National Labor Relations Board, and -- most famously -- was the first to sue to stop Obamacare.
Ken Cuccinelli is the perfect person to continue and expand on what former Senator Jim DeMint started with SCF.
We’re confident that Ken will help the grassroots do even more to help elect principled conservatives to the U.S. Senate.
And Ken could not be joining our team at a better time. Not only did Dave Brat win in Virginia last night, but thanks to your support, Ben Sasse won in Nebraska and Joni Ernst won in Iowa.
And now we're on the verge of nominating Chris McDaniel in Mississippi and T.W. Shannon in Oklahoma on June 24th.
Conservatives are on the move and it's more important than ever for the grassroots to work together to support principled candidates.
Please watch Ken Cuccinelli's video message to all SCF members and then send him a quick note welcoming him to the team.
Ken explains why he's excited to join SCF and why it's important for Americans to stand up to the Washington establishment.
Thank you for your dedication to our nation's founding principles and thank you for supporting SCF. You're changing Washington one election at a time.
Best regards,
Matt Hoskins
Executive Director
Senate Conservatives Fund
So how is it not a victory? It only stops being one if we go all Debbie-downer on the setbacks. I'd also like to add that there is total clarity that Brat has 100% support from Numbers USA and Cantor intended to backstab constitutional conservatives concerning the invasion of the US.
I do not care who that is. If it is a no name, so be it.
I'm very much in tune with that - I voted Constitution Party rather than throw my vote away on lib-lites like Romney or McCain. But since the SCF's endorsement was not exactly brimming with enthusiasm and didn't claim McConnell was a conservative, and since McConnell's re-election would quite conceivably make the Senate less unconservative than would his general election defeat, I think it's hasty to call them hypocrites. (Whether you want to donate to them is a very different question.)
I gotta call it what it is. They screamed the evils of Mitch, then ‘quickly’ endorsed him. What ELSE can it be called?
<< And thus they are the problem, not the solution. Astroturf filled with GOP pretending to be TEA party.
When one is quick to back the man that was out to destroy you, by his own words, odds are you were never the opposition to begin with. >>
************************************************************
Let me begin by saying I'm not a Mitch McConnell fan whatsoever... I think he's an inept party leader who has behaved pretty despicably toward his conservative base. As a result, I harbor quite a bit of animosity toward him.
Yet, like it or not, we are down to a choice of two candidates, bad as they are, between McConnell and radical leftist Allison Grimes. I know some may disagree (and I can certainly respect and understand those who do), but to me it actually makes far more sense to pull the lever for McConnell in November.
Look, even though McConnell is a squishy, wimpy, linguini-spined GOP establishment hack, our #1 mission right now is we MUST take back the Senate. Once we accomplish that, I really do believe McConnell, as Senate Majority Leader, can and will be pressured into taking up votes to pass conservative legislation if he has a solid, increasingly conservative Senate majority behind him that include names such as Cruz, Lee, Paul, Scott, Johnson, Sasse, McDaniel, Earnst, T.W. Shannon, Milton Wolf, and Rubio (his awful immigration stance notwithstanding). A Grimes win in Kentucky not only potentially puts us in jeopardy of falling short of capturing the Senate and keeping that filthy little tyrant Harry Reid in charge, but could also pave the way to begin entrenching a leftist in the Kentucky Senate seat. This is simply not a viable option, in my humble opinion.
Mitch got in Bed with Obama. Fact. There are conservatives in his state. Fact. There were options. Fact. Murkowski won on a write in. Fact.
Mitch is not one of two options.
Fact.
Demint’s team did pretty good last election cycle TEA
party candidate wise.. Here’s to more wins!! GiDDyUP!!
I have seen plenty of posts saying, and hoping, that the R candidate loses to a dem.
This new thread for example is about wanting Graham to lose to the dem.
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/3166312/posts
Ask Norm.
Norm, who would you rather see lose:
McConnell or his dem opponent?
Graham or his dem opponent?
I would rather see a rino lost to a conservative first and foremost. If a conservative does not win, I see no difference in a RINO or a Dem winning.
At that point, I would rather the GOP was burnt to the ground , the earth salted, and all the RINOs lined up and mocked eternally.
Is that clear enough for you?
Because an enemy in ones own camp id a greater danger than an enemy in ones face. And if you think you are wiser than Alexander Hamilton, the Founders and 3000 years of military history on that subject, please, by all means, show your arrogance.
But since none of the 50/57 states is without a conservative in it to write in, we should never have to resort to helping an open enemy defeat a backstabber to begin with.
I have seen plenty of posts saying, and hoping, that the R candidate loses to a dem.
That's neither an endorsement nor a Dem vote.
You’re funny.
I’m not Norm, but I’d rather have the D. Better the D than an R who votes with the other side.
With the R, the D’s get both the vote AND the ability to call their scuttling of the Constitution bipartisan.
No sale. Give me the D if it is to be.
“I would rather see a rino lost to a conservative first and foremost.”
So would I, and most around here.
Thanks for being honest saying you favor the dems winning.
Thanks for the straightforwardness.
I said nothing of the sort. I clearly said I favor the conservative winning. After that I do not care if it is GOP or Dem because they are the same thing.
Thank you for outing yourself as another GOP shill/plant.
You don’t even stand by your own word.
At that point, I would rather the GOP was burnt to the ground , the earth salted, and all the RINOs lined up and mocked eternally.
Is there something about being a GOP shill that causes one to be a liar? Because anyone can read what I wrote.
Try harder.
I;ll let you in on a little secret.
I love tender moments like this with shills/plants like you because all the lurkers get to watch your kind tie themselves into liberal knots trying to justify their RINO.liberal love.
You started off with a personal attack backing up nothing you have said/accused, then lied. I really cannot believe you have no clue how you look. But like so many before you, you provide entertainment and help me spread the conservative message.
So than;s for being a witless accomplice to your party’s own demise.
I can't speak for Norm, but BECAUSE I want to see the Republican party turn right and move this country right, I would rather see McConnell and Graham lose. There is only ONE WAY to make the Republican party turn right, and that is to vote such that leftist/collectivist/"liberal" people in the Republican party are prevented from achieving positions of power. They must be stopped.
Ifinnegan and any other reader, you are in mathematical and functional ERROR if you think the above translates into "vote for the Democrat." Devoid of emotional intent, my purpose is to deprive the Republican party of leftists. It is why I am more inclined than ever to advocate THIRD PARTY, because that vote does TWO things:
1. Announces loud and clear that here is a potential Republican vote that dumped the candidate and went for one announcing LESS GOVERNMENT as the driving common denominator.
2. Works toward reducing the mandate percentage of whichever liberal/leftist/collectivist (that is, subscribes to more and bigger government) wins. Winning on a plurality, or less than half of the votes cast, makes the liberal victor that much weaker. ONLY a third-party vote contributes to a plurality.
Americans truly need a Second Party, and we need to be seriously SEEING THAT COMING FOR 2016 right now. If the choice is another Democrat vs Democrat Lite for the 2016 Presidential -- which is about 98 percent certain it will -- then you had better be prepared for even more rejection of "Republican" than before.
I guess the shill didn’t get his way and left the building...bummer.
<< Mitch got in Bed with Obama. Fact. There are conservatives in his state. Fact. There were options. Fact. Murkowski won on a write in. Fact. Mitch is not one of two options. Fact. >>
************************************************************
I'm not disagreeing with what you're saying, Norm, but unfortunately it's all water under the dam now. Voters in Kentucky had a golden opportunity to make a huge statement and oust McConnell in the primary. They could've and should've elected Matt Bevin as the conservative alternative. Instead, they chose to re-nominate McConnell in a landslide. It sucks royally but ultimately he's the one Kentucky Republicans have chosen to represent them. So now with McConnell and Grimes running neck-and-neck in the polls, a conservative third party challenger can only succeed in siphoning votes away from McConnell and handing the race to Grimes.
I mean, if you can think of a better option where a bonafide conservative can realistically defeat both McConnell and Grimes at this point and win the Kentucky Senate seat this November, believe me I'd love to hear it. But I just don't see any feasible way a write-in candidate is going to magically swoop in and defeat the highest-ranking GOP Senator and his massive war chest. That needed to happen in the primary race.
Incidentally, Murkowski won her write-in (a VERY rare feat, by the way) as a well-funded, establishment-backed incumbent by defeating a lesser-known, much lesser-funded challenger in Joe Miller (who I'm hoping can still be the 2014 nominee for the Alaska Senate seat held by Mark Begich).
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.