Akin targets Haley Barbour

The Politico ^ | September 14, 2012 | Charles Mahtesian

[Dr. Sivana]

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?

I lived in CT at the time. Yes. Real, formal, elected Republicans worked semi-openly on Weicker's behalf. A significant number of them voted for his wildly unpopular state income tax, allowing some Dems in swing districts to vote against.

CT had more Republicans in those days, but the Establishment Republicans in Fairfield County and Avon are quite different from the rank and file Republicans in Wallingford, North Haven, Hamden, Glastonbury and Stafford Springs.

Rowland, like George Ryan of IL, was rightly suspected by conservatives, which is why there was a fourth party challenge after Weicker knew he could not dream of re-election. The hardcore RINOs voted for his Lt. Gov. Eunice Groark (the name REEKS of RINO Establishmentism), totaling about 18% of the voting population. A plurality (non-hardcore RINO Republicans and win at all costs Republicans and easily fooled Republicans and Independents) voted Rowland. Dems voted Curry, conservatives voted Tom Scott (12% total). The Hartford Courant had an unusually insightful political cartoon where the four parties were represented. Elephant for Republicans, Donkey for Democrats, sitting duck for Groak (A CT Party) and a pulling at the leash barking Pit Bull for the Independence Party.

By the way, I had considered Akin a liability, and thought he should have bowed out,as there were at least two decent conservatives waiting in the wings. He didn't. At that stage, those who really want to win would wait to see how it plays out before disowning the candidate. What he said caused problems, and could have caused problems statewide. However, once you give him the David Duke treatment (which Duke of course, roundly deserved), you don't leave yourself a Plan B when he doesn't back out. If a win of the seat were the primary objective, some financial resources in the race to keep him in play would have been called for.

You will note that I did NOT say that the problem with the Establishment was that they had reservations about Akin. The problem is they LIED and said he would be dropping out. They almost seemed to enjoy piling on. I don't like that kind of dirty pool; the Establishment thrives on it.

Are people who want compromise on social issues really adamant about trade policy and tax brackets?

In my experience, yes.
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?

Why would we want to say such an unkind thing about Dick Cheney? (for the record, I started out at U of Chicago, not quite Yale or Harvard, but only one tier down. I transferred and the U of C time usually gets dropped from my resume when pared down by headhunters. So, yeah, in many circles, the actual degree is pertinent.

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.

Good point, except that I believe that the Reagan Democrats who are willing to vote Republican when given a decent candidate in presidential elections would more than take the place of the moderate wing tip types who are used to using folks for their own ends. The CBIA (CT Business and Industry Association) came out FOR the state income tax. It is really hard to want to stay united with those types on fiscal issues when you are in for principles and they are in for balance sheets, and honoring alliances means nothing.

CT still has regular guys making jet engines at Pratt & Whitney, working rail yards in New Haven, sticking warehouses in Bridgeport. They would vote for a Ronald Reagan, but not a Mitt Romney. Independents are not moderates, they are people who cannot identify with either party.

These people are in Pennsylvania and Ohio and Wisconsin and Michigan. Sarah Palin can appeal to some of them. There are more of them than portfolio managers and corporate VPs.

We would gain more bodies than we lose, but we wold lose big $$$. I think that is a big part of the problem for many attached to the Establishment GOP.

[SaraJohnson]

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.

[SaraJohnson]

...whatever that is...

---

Let’s see. Could it be the idiots who denounced the Tea Party? Yes it could.

[chae]

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.

[SharpRightTurn]

BTTT

[SharpRightTurn]

“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.

[SharpRightTurn]

“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.

[SharpRightTurn]

“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.

[Uncle Chip]

Fact: Sarah Palin and Alan West have said that Akin should get out of this race.

Have you asked them lately???

[BlackElk]

x:

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.

[SharpRightTurn]

“Akin made boneheaded comments he can’t recover from and the GOP can’t defend.”

Not one tithe as many boneheaded comments as ObamaClaire.

If Missourians want to let her numerous votes to destroy our country override Akin’s mishmash of a statement on abortion, all I can say is Romney shouldn’t have a chance either based on his many boneheaded comments and we should insist that Romney drop out as well.

[E. Pluribus Unum]

He's not going to leave, Bozo.

We can can win the seat with him, or idiots like you can campaign for Claire McCaskill and help her win.

There is no third door.

[Fiji Hill]

Many conservative Repubs have developed some fixation on the “Republican establishment” whatever that is.

They;'re the folks who brought you Landon, Willkie, Dewey, Eisenhower, Nixon, Ford, Dole, the Bushes and McCain and Romney.

[katiedidit1]

Newt, Santorum, Huckabee, Phyllis Slchaffly all say Akin should remain in as do many christian organizations. Sarah was wrong on this and I am surprised at her. As for Barbour?Haley Barbour is a disgrace to the republican party. Guess he didn't issue enough pardons in Miss. Hoof and Mouth Disease Haley? In 1982, Barbour’s reprimand of an aide who had made a racist remark only made the situation worse. Barbour said that if the aide “persisted in racist remarks, he would be reincarnated as a watermelon and placed at the mercy of blacks,” according to The Daily Beast. You can step on your d—k … You just can’t jump up and down on it,” Barbour said, on Texas Gov. Rick Perry’s “oops” moment at a Republican presidential primary debate, according to a RealClearPolitics e-book. “I’m a lobbyist and had a career lobbying. The guy who gets elected or the lady who gets elected president of the United States will immediately be lobbying,” Barbour said in 2011, defending his career in the lobbying sector. and last but not least..Barbour on Romney..“There are a lot of people in the Republican Party who are not that conservative, including our nominee for president,” Barbour told reporters in June, going somewhat off message. “He was the least conservative of the serious candidates.” And btw...why is the GOP establishment silent on their candidate running in PA? think his name is Bennett..he said that women on welfare who have children are the same as women who are rape victims and have children..huh?

[katiedidit1]

Akin was a Lt. in the Army. He served as a combat engineer. His son Perry Akin was a marine combat engineer that located bombs in Fallujah, Iraq. They have tough spines indeed. E. Plurbus Unum..forgive the length of this post but it will give you an idea of a huge battle in congress during the wee hours of the morning regarding Medicare D. Hastert, Blunt and Delay went after Emmerson and Akin. They even put President Bush on the phone with Akin to try and sway him to vote for medicare D. Reps. Todd Akin and Jo Ann Emerson were key targets of Hastert, Delay and Blunt. Akin received personal pleas from President Bush, but refused to support the bill; Akin called it a "a vote of conscience." Bush was on the phone aboard Air Force One on the way back, still scrambling for votes. But he wasn’t having much success. He failed to persuade at least five GOP members who had voted for an earlier version of the bill to back the measure headed to the floor. One of them was Rep. Todd Akin (R-Mo.), a staunch conservative who was elected along with the president in 2000.,/big> Akin explained his concerns to Bush about the bill’s cost, adding: “I’m sorry, Mr. President. It’s a vote of conscience.” A testy Bush shot back: “Are you saying I don’t have a conscience?” Bush and Akin would talk again 12 hours later... Hastert, DeLay and Thomas looked grim some 90 minutes into the vote. They were used to winning, and the possibility of an embarrassing loss was setting in. Democrats, meanwhile, tried to hide their glee, not wanting to provide fodder for a changed vote. As lawmakers and aides continued to lobby Smith, Hastert sought out Akin. Akin recounted that the Speaker, “with almost tears in his eyes, said, ‘Todd, I need your vote.’” “Denny is like a brother to me,” Akin said, “but I had to tell him no.”... A cell phone was soon passed around with the president on the other end. Bush talked to several members, including Chabot and Akin. Both stood their ground. Meanwhile, Jo Ann Emerson had voted against the bill, and Roy Blunt wanted to make a deal. More Cusack: Blunt had struck a deal with Rep. Jo Ann Emerson (R-Mo.) on a previous Medicare drug vote that summer and figured he could do so again — if only he could find her. A frustrated Blunt, unable to reach Emerson on her cell phone, awoke her husband at a quarter till five in the morning. Emerson, however, wasn’t at home. She was hiding on the Democratic side of the floor, crouching down to avoid eye contact with the Republican search team. This vote is important in our current context for a few reasons. First, it's important to remember what the days of Hastert/DeLay/Blunt rule were like in the U.S. House. They were ugly. Second, it's relevant to the 2009 discussion of deficit spending and fiscal responsibility in health care policy. Back to the Bruce Bartlett column: Just to be clear, the Medicare drug benefit [passed in 2003] was a pure giveaway with a gross cost greater than either the House or Senate health reform bills how being considered. Together the new bills would cost roughly $900 billion over the next 10 years, while Medicare Part D will cost $1 trillion. Moreover, there is a critical distinction--the drug benefit had no dedicated financing, no offsets and no revenue-raisers; 100% of the cost simply added to the federal budget deficit, whereas the health reform measures now being debated will be paid for with a combination of spending cuts and tax increases, adding nothing to the deficit over the next 10 years, according to the Congressional Budget Office... It astonishes me that a party enacting anything like the drug benefit would have the chutzpah to view itself as fiscally responsible in any sense of the term. As far as I am concerned, any Republican who voted for the Medicare drug benefit has no right to criticize anything the Democrats have done in terms of adding to the national debt. Space prohibits listing all their names, but the final Senate vote can be found here and the House vote here. It's hard to argue with Bartlett on this point. To his credit, Blunt is fairly honest about the fiscal irresponsibility of the prescription benefit. But incredibly, he cited his party's failure to fund the program as a key reason why we shouldn't pass any sort of health care reform this year. Speaking with KY3's Dave Catanese about the program in August: BLUNT: I'm certainly of the belief that the government should first do what it said it was gonna do before taking on a new obligation. CATANESE: You mean the prescription drug benefit? BLUNT: Well, you know, that was a very costly addition to Medicare. Now the way we did it it turned about to be 40% cheaper than anyboy estimated because we created a competitive marketplace. But that was, that's a big item. CATANSE: But it wasn't paid for. BLUNT: It was not. It was not. [chuckle] It was a $400 billion addition to Medicare. Watch the interview here. It was an ugly night in November 2003, but one that should not be forgotten. Especially when Republicans like Blunt -- and their supporters -- scream about the costs of health care bills that are actually financed, and actually reduce the deficit. Image credit: Seattle Times

View the discussion thread.

[E. Pluribus Unum]

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.

I learned everything I need to know about Barbour when he granted all those pardons on his way out of office, ala The Rapist.

[dixiechick2000]

Akin is doing what is necessary to stay in the race.

He was thrown under the bus for a stupid comment that meant next to zero.

If I were in MO, he would be my guy, and I would vote for him.

[Lancey Howard]

When Akin stood up against the Democrat newsrooms, and the GOP establishment they so easily cowered into submission, I gained a lot of respect for the man and decided he would make a great senator. The guy made a trite, politically incorrect verbal flub and so he’s relentlessly and mercilessly beaten like a mule, not only by the usual suspects but by his alleged friends, too?

Nah.. I won’t get onboard that bandwagon full of cowardly assclowns.
Go, Todd.

[Sola Veritas]

“Haley Barbout needs to stay out of Missouri politics. He is NOT on the ballot.”

As should the rest of the GOP....especially the GOP establishment. Since it isn’t providing him support. IF you are GOP and not supporting Akin....then stay away from Missouri politics. We living here don’t care what you think. Support Akin or keep your opinions to yourself, because you are only creating bad blood with socical conservatives in Missouri and helping McRascal get reelected. Akin IS the candidate...that is NOT going to change. It is time for those dissing Akin to shut up. Unless you are a Missouri voter....you have a stake in this. Because the GOP, except for a handful of REAL conservatives, have defunded Akin....they really have NO say it what transpires....unless they think that reelecting McRascal should occur....because that is ALL their critisism helps accomplish.

Akin’s beef with the GOPe is valid and right on the mark. It just proves that the GOP (especially the GOPe) does not really want Social Conservatives to represent the party. SOCONs are supposed to vote GOP, but be quiet about their values and beliefs. It has always been that way....it is just becoming more obvious.

[Jonah Vark]

Here’s what happens when you protest McCaskill.......

Police to the Rescue -Tea Party protest at MO Sen. Claire McCaskill’s office.

Local Tea Party patriots held an anti-Obama Care protest in 2009 at Missouri Senator Claire McCaskill’s district office and the police were called. The video was taken after the police told us to move to the other side of the street..

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1Jcrwnm4C3c&feature=plcp