Skip to comments.Akin targets Haley Barbour
Posted on 09/15/2012 10:03:20 AM PDT by Uncle Chip
Embattled Missouri GOP Senate nominee Todd Akin took aim at Haley Barbour Friday, accusing the former Mississippi Republican governor of trying to advance his own personal brand at Akins expense.
In a fundraising email, the Missouri congressman referred to Barbour, a former Republican National Committee chairman, as the Godfather of DC Party Bosses and a mega-lobbyist for the special interests after Barbour criticized Akin and called on him to drop out of the race earlier this week in a web video.
The sharp pushback against Barbour is part of Akins two-front Senate campaign, one against Democratic Sen. Claire McCaskill, and another against the party bosses he says are trying to keep him down.
Akin has also gone after Texas Sen. John Cornyn, the National Republican Senatorial Committee chairman, and RNC chair Reince Priebus, in an online fundraising pitch that features their photos and reads, Tell DC Party bosses to stop treating Missourians like pawns in their game.
(Excerpt) Read more at politico.com ...
Nothing the Grand Old Plantation hates more than an uppity candidate who represents the people first.
And here I thought Todd Akin was turning the race around all by himself, just giving the incumbent the drubbing she deserved.
And just now he is finding out he may be in trouble? Why, of course, that is the fault of the whole rest of the GOP, doncha know, couldn’t be HIM!
Just maybe the “base” in Missouri is not as solid, or even as big, as Todd Akin may have imagined it to be.
Pity. This should have been an easy win.
What’s happening on the 25th?
Old Karl Rove’s joke tells all one needs to know about the GOP-e- internals.
It is a liberal deception to claim one can be fiscally conservative and a social liberal.
You really cannot argue with that.
This state is almost evenly split among liberals, republicans/conservatives and those Frank Luntz ‘independents’. Old Claire is touting her voting record as making her #50 in a club of 100... She is attempting to deceive the Missouri voters that she is in the middle and ‘independent’. Haley Barbout needs to stay out of Missouri politics. He is NOT on the ballot.
I will say: my first reaction about any Republican who attacks the GOP establishment is that they are probably exactly what this country needs.
The deadline for resigning from the Senate race.
Is there a similar deadline for Mittens to pull out? I am looking forward to a limited g’ment type on the Republican ticket. For the last twenty plus years all I have seen are big G’ment - loose you individual freedom types from both parties.
I remember arguing with Freepers a while back, when they were looking for a replacement for Steele to head the RNC, that Haley Barbour is NOT a real conservative. At one time Freepers also imagined that Karl Rove was a conservative.
No, they are party hacks. And obvious they are out to get Akin because he is too conservative for them, and won’t bow down to the RINO leadership.
Former Guvnor ping
Todd Akin should be concentrating all his firepower on Claire McCaskill, and ignoring anything else. Whatever Haley Barbour, or anyone else in the GOP, might have to say about him should be irrelevant at this point. They are not the one on the ballot against him on Nov. 6th.
My wife’s Birthday!
Akin is courting those Frank Luntz 'independents' who cannot stand the GOP-e-. They have not yet forgotten why they voted against Talent/Bush in 2006. Claire's adds are alll about just how down the middle, centrist, and independent her voting record has been.
Barbour wants McCaskill to win.
Makes sense. Haley has a soft spot for convicted murderers too. Akin is just too....extreme for his sensibilities.
Akin is determined to stay in this race, no matter what.
He has no money and barring a MO miracle, he’s set to lose to that ugly demonic-rat Clair McCaskill.
Looks like Rove and Barbour really torqued him off and I don’t blame for that. Sarah Palin also wanted him to drop, but I haven’t heard her speak about this race recently.
OTOH, Newt Gingrich said the GOP-E needs to sthu, let Akin run his race and they ought to back Akin, who won the primary.
Many conservative Repubs have developed some fixation on the “Republican establishment” whatever that is.
“Is there a similar deadline for Mittens to pull out? I am looking forward to a limited gment type on the Republican ticket.”
There hasn’t been one at the top of the ticket since 1984.
Akin is an idiot and we are going to lose this seat because of him. That means 6 more years of an Obama supporting liberal Democrat in a state we should be winning.
There are plenty of pro-life conservatives who could step in and win this seat against McCaskill. Instead Akin puts his ego above the very pro-life movement he claims to champion.
Akin made boneheaded comments he can’t recover from and the GOP can’t defend. He needs to go. If he won’t, Claire retains the seat. Simple as that.
Party boss and Washington insider John Cornyn this week had two words for Todd Akin, and Missouri: Were done.
Rather than swallowing their pride and admitting they were wrong to not help Todd Akin, Party Bosses are doubling down.
Mike Huckabee, on the other hand, had this to say about the Washington Party Bosses:
They will turn their backs on Akin out of their arrogant pride because just as they were wrong about Rand Paul and Marco Rubio, they are being shown they are wrong on Akin? We need to rally every pro-life, pro-family, faith-based voter in America and tell them that the party obviously doesn't need them, but Akin does. If the party doesn't want us, then it's good to get that cleared up. I'll direct my time, money, and efforts toward candidates who will take a stand, and when they get elected, they won't be obligated to party bosses, but to God and their conscience.
Today is the final day of our most ambitious fundraising goal yet: $70,000 raised by tonight at midnight to defeat the $7 Trillion Dollar Senator Claire McCaskill.
Time to get that LaserEye fixed. Conservatives are NOT Republicans. In a two party system, the Republican party often offers up the least objectionable option. Often there is no difference between a Republican or a Democrat. - I offer you the option of Bush vs. Clinton. Both of these two gentlemen stand for very large G’ment and no freedom for you and me.
For details refer to the TSA at you nearby airport
Karl Rove’s PAC was giving Akin millions before he blew it. Akin is 100% a product of the GOP establishment and Huckabee, the hero of the left.
Actually it is the 'Republican establishment' that has the fixation to destroy 'conservatives'... President Bush made that activity loud and clear when he ran for office in 2000 branding a new voice called 'compassionate' conservatism. His intended 'compassion' was to legalized millions of invaders. And what did he call US that were opposed to his advances? President Bush's claim to fame was how well and often he compromised with liberals in Texas, and that is exactly what he did as president. He turned over domestic policy to the tax and spend liberals, while holding on to a tax policy that kept us afloat and beginning to thrive until the sodomites outed the GOP-e- little boy chaser Foley.
“Akin made boneheaded comments he cant recover from and the GOP cant defend. He needs to go. If he wont, Claire retains the seat. Simple as that.”
That is the whole ball of wax. But I don’t see any indication Akin is seeing the handwriting on the wall. So 6 more years of McCaskill.
How much money did Rove actually give to the Akin campaign? I want literal evidence of that claimed amount. Actually, Akin was a thorn in the side of the Bush administration during a spending action that Akin could not be bought or bribed. I think it was the prescription druggie thing.
Oh, let me be clear here, I will vote for Akin IF he is still on the ballot, but he did bring this upon himself. He invited this 'trouble' but so long as he is the candidate then I have no choice but to support him. BUT these high-minded GOP-e- are as responsible for the state of this nation's affairs as the liberals they bed down with after the lights go out.
“Today is the final day of our most ambitious fundraising goal yet: $70,000 raised by tonight at midnight to defeat the $7 Trillion Dollar Senator Claire McCaskill.”
$70,000, and McCaskill has 12 million. That is all you need to know about this race.
What??? I don't recall him leaving his borough and seeing his shadow. That's not til September 25th.
Hey people, remember Reagan’s eleventh commandment!
We have to stop this republican circular firing squad!
Thinking Akin a liability isn't the same as helping Planned Parenthood or voting for Charlie Crist. Not wanting to give Lugar the "heave-ho" isn't the same as voting for Weicker's independent candidacy.
(Did any real Republicans do that? Or was it independents and people without real party ties who elected him? If they did were they vindicated when Rowland was elected, then indicted?)
Are people who want compromise on social issues really adamant about trade policy and tax brackets? And really, can we finally accept that while Cheney may have a degree from Wyoming, but he was, like Bush, a Yale man through and through? No common man he.
The folks who would rather be a permanent but privileged minority than yield power and position to real conservatives. In many states (e.g. Illinois, NY, CA), they are happy to be junior partners in De Covilla's "ruling class".
That cuts both ways, though. Push all those people out and the GOP or conservatives will be a permanent minority as well, with its leaders in a privileged minority status.
Welcome to Free Republic
Missouri should have let you and Tokyo Rove decide who our candidate should be!
Missouri should have let you and Tokyo Rove decide who our candidate should be!
Is money the qualification for supporting candidates???
If so, then will you want the GOP to nominate Hillary next time? She can certainly outraise most conservative candidates. Maybe the GOP should nominate uberleftist Senator Richard Blumenthal (third wealthiest in all of Congress) of Connecticut in 2016 for POTUS. After all, he is unquestionably rich and that would make him best qualified unless John (did you know he served in Vietnam?) Windsurfer Kerry would like to bring that Heinz Ketchup fortune back into play.
The ability to satisfy the corrupt demands of plutocrats eager to line Muffy's trust fund with taxpayer money and to allow (because it is allegedly none of the government's business) space aliens to copulate with household pets in public or twelvesomes or mandatory funding of abortion through "insurance premiums" which are actually NEW TAXES as SCOTUS recently ruled or a cornucopia of other abominations----- is not a measure of desirability as a candidate.
I had little interest in Todd Akin BEFORE he was nominated in a three way primary with two other conservatives. My order of preference would have been Sarah Steelman, John (?) Brunner and then Akin. He won that primary fair and square. He IS the GOP nominee. It ill behooves those who, like Karl Rove and Haley Barbour and John Cornyn, have never displayed a principle in their elitist careers and tell conservatives that Romney is this fall's nominee whether WE like it or not, to be publicly undermining Akin and chewing on his ankles, and impeding him as best they can, and cutting off party funding.
The trash who are undermining Akin won't be satisfied until the GOP Senate caucus is wall-to-wall unprincipled trash like themselves or the soon to be departed Olympia Snowe, or Susan Collins, Bob Corker, LAMAR!!! Alexander, Saxby Chambliss, Johnny Isakson, and the unlamented John Warner, Lowell Weicker, and impudent elitists in other offices like Christy Todd (It's My Party, Too!) Whitman. Making the GOP Senate Caucus safe for baby-killing, rump-ranging posing as "marriage," gun grabbing and padding Muffy's trust fund is certainly NOT the objective of an overwhelming majority of GOP voters. Substituting megabucks from corrupt interests for conservatism is essentially a social crime within the GOP. We need ground war more than air war and you cannot buy ground war.
Note that the GOP Establishment express little or no interest in naming Sarah Steelman (Sarah Palin's candidate) or John Brunner (Missouri Right to Life's candidate and a successful businessman) but rather, they have suggested recycling GOP-Establishment figures like former Senator John Danforth (R-Purina Dog Chow) who has become a vociferous critic of conservative GOP voters and their candidates or Kit Bond who had a modestly conservative record but was always most at home in the GOP-E. Why not Jim Talent whose poor performance led to McCaskill's election in the first place? How about someone with a name like Percival Worthington 32nd??? The slogan could be: "The world should be run by those who own it!"
Fortunately, Todd Akin has stood against the tide of the spoiled and witless and corrupt who have substituted their judgment for that of Missouri GOP primary voters. If that stand does not succeed in toppling McCaskill, then blame the fastidious, intellectually sterile GOP-E and their exaggerated upper class sensibilities and manners and their horror over Todd Akin for the loss.
Did I read here that Akin voted AGAINST raising Obozo's allowance by voting AGAINST an increase in the debt limit? Is that the lurking issue that caused the federal money dependent GOP-E to pounce on Akin at the first opportunity???
There is NO single Senate election result that could better signal an impending revolt against the power of corrupt money in the GOP than Todd Akin DEFEATING Claire McCaskill (and implicitly Haley Barbour, John Cornyn, Reince Priebus and their ilk who are shamelessly rooting for her since Akin doesn't play polo). Todd Akin has a set of enemies in the GOP that can make an excellent reputation for the man among the rank and file.
He’s triangulating the Rinos which is the same as attacking the Liberal Democrats.
Rinos should think a minute before they go for the jugular. Things are not the same.
...whatever that is...
Fact: Sarah Palin and Alan West have said that Akin should get out of this race.
Fact: Claire McCaskill has repeatedly said he should stay in.
Yeah, you really can’t argue with that.
“I was really pissed at Akin at first, but he has a spine of steel and all the right enemies. You really cannot argue with that.”
Exactly. Priebus, Rove, and Barbour are not a trio a conservative should look to for approval.
“I will say: my first reaction about any Republican who attacks the GOP establishment is that they are probably exactly what this country needs.”
That’s my thought also. Look at the record of the party under the first few years of G.W. Bush when the Republicans had the presidency and both houses of congress. Did we see them reduce the size and scope of government? No, just the opposite. And Akin voted against some of the more egregious Republican initiatives. No wonder he’s hated by the establishment stalwarts.
“Todd Akin should be concentrating all his firepower on Claire McCaskill, and ignoring anything else. Whatever Haley Barbour, or anyone else in the GOP, might have to say about him should be irrelevant at this point. They are not the one on the ballot against him on Nov. 6th.”
In a general way, I agree with you SuziQ. However, the Akin campaign has had two fronts to fight: ObamaClaire and the Republican establishment. And a lot of Republicans know that there’s a struggle going on within the party—establishment versus conservatives/Tea Partiers—and are fed up with the establishment telling us we have to close ranks to back their candidates but don’t want to reciprocate.
Still, your point is well taken.
Have you asked them lately???
1. Which of Dr. Sivana's grievances do you regard as legitimate and why? Please elaborate.
2. Is defeating Akin in favor of Claire McCaskill essentially the same as helping Planned Barrenhood? If so, why? If not, why not?
3. Voting for Charlie Crist in a GOP primary against Marco Rubio? OR Voting for Charlie Crist as an "Independent" against Marco Rubio in the general election? If only the latter. is this some sort of partisan litmus test? Justification?
4. Is Lugar old enough now to be rejected for that reason alone absent compelling circumstances? Should he have been dumped long ago for supporting the Panama Canal Treaty? For being an internationalist, treaty-addicted, globaloney menace to the sovereignty of this republic? For being a lifelong spineless moderate squishball? Did he need to be dumped now because he supports the sovereignty-sapping Law of the Sea Treaty and probably other UN abominations as well???
5. When Lowell Weicker was defeated in 1988 in his third re-election bid by Joe Lieberman, he got a hefty percentage of the Democrat vote just because he was leftist Lowell Weicker. A high percentage of fed up Republicans (including me) voted for Lieberman. Bill Buckley started a PAC called Buckleys for Lieberman. Conservative GOP State Senator Tom Scott organized a ground war among Republicans and did a fundraiser for Buckleys for Lieberman.
6. Two years later, LoLo's Senate seat toy having been repossessed by GOP conservatives and given to Lieberman, Weicker was determined to get revenge. He ran as an independent, took some leftist social revolutionary upperclass social snob named Eunice Groark (descended from founders of the Connecticut colony, don'tcha know?) as a running mate, promised not to pass a state income tax, successfully ran against a Demonrat leftist Congressman and against newly unprincipled Congressman John Rowland for governor.
7. Almost immediately after his election, LoLo did a 180 on the income tax and in true GOP-E fashion, bought and bribed and bullied legislators into enacting it. Connecticut had never had a tax on wages and salaries. Weicker dared not run for re-election after his gross dishonesty and abuse of the Connecticut electorate. Feel free to express specific disagreement including any contrary factual claims.
8. Weicker in 1990 was beaten in largely blue collar New Haven County (other than Yale) and in still then steadfastly Republican Fairfield County (the Gold Coast) but he racked up support in the wealthy enclaves of Litchfield County (NW CT) and the government laden affluent Greater Hartford Metro area.
9. In 1994, Eunice Groark actually ran for governor on the now thoroughly discredited "A Connecticut Party" of Weicker and, with nothing but money going for her, lost badly. The Democrats nominated a practicing social revolutionary (a polite term for such a scandalous person) William Curry who was badly defeated losing substantial numbers of unionized private sector Democrats to anti-income tax conservative Tom Scott (Weicker's worst enemy) running without funds as a social conservative as well. Rowland was elected. By the time he was elected, Rowland had become a two-faced disgrace with conservatives.
10. Those of us who refused to vote for Rowland in each election (in my case 1990, 1994 and 1998 and then I left the state) as Republicans were in fact vindicated when the slimeball was indicted, convicted and imprisoned for selling his office for some "free" repairs by contractors to his vacation cottage on a lake. Regrettably, all good things come to an end and Rowland was eventually released from the federal hoosegow.
11. "Compromise on social issues???" Christy Todd Whitman, Lowell Palmer Weicker, Jr., the late (AIDS ridden) Stewart McKinney, former Congresswoman Nancy Johnson (CT), current "GOP" Congressional candidate Andrew Roraback (CT-5), Maine's Olympia Snowe, Susan Collins, and a whole lot more of the GOP-E are as enthusiastic for baby-killing as Margaret Sanger and as enthusiastic for "gay" everything as Liberace and as eager for "free" trade as would be J.P. Morgan if he were still with us today and as firm in limiting upper class tax bracket protection as Grover Norquist on steroids.
12. Dick Cheney got kicked out of Yale but his Yalieness was sufficient to make him Chief of Staff for Feckless Ford (Yale Law Class of ???) long before he became more palatable to conservatives as he aged. OTOH, he was not a graduate of Phillips Exeter or Phillips Andover or the Groton School or other elite prep schools as were both Bushes. He did not count ancestors (on the Walker side) who were members of Skull and Bones in the era of Andrew Jackson's presidency, and he apparently attended a local public school in Wyoming before his ill-fated matriculation at Yale.
Dr. Sivana correctly cited the Angelo Codevilla work on our "ruling class" elites. This does NOT cut both ways. The Reagan approach was to actively recruit "Reagan Democrats" who were socially conservative, militarily militant, and less concerned about internationalist trade schemes. The GOP-E approach is to suck up to university faculty elites, business elites, government employees and the permanent ruling elites. This is a social status thing. Ruling Class Elitists in the GOP are just socially appalled by the issue priorities of social conservatives and are just sooooo embarrassed to share the GOP with them. So long as the GOP-E gets enough crumbs off the Demonrat table (as in Illinois, NY, California, New Jersey, Massachusetts, Vermont, Connecticut, Rhode Island, etc.) they are quite SATISFIED to run candidates without passion or principle and to leave the Demonrats in power. They don't care what the GOP-E candidates are willing to stand for as social issue revolutionaries so long as they say it in sufficiently oval tones and are, above all, polite to a fault as they spend mountains of money causing nominations that guarantee the GOP to lose elections to the Obozos and to the Slick Willies and (if they can pull it off) to the Hillarys. Their WORST fear is a GOP which is populist, passionate, and appealing successfully to people who work with their hands for a living, to people who lack polo club manners, to people not desperately concerned about Muffie's trust fund.