Posted on 06/26/2014 8:09:54 PM PDT by 2ndDivisionVet
When news broke that Eric Cantor had lost his primary, Ed Gillespie, the Republican nominee for the Virginia Senate seat, immediately tweeted congratulations to David Brat. The rest of the Republican party establishment, the non-sentimental lot that it is, fell into line and pledged to support the winner.
Cantor had been defeated. There was no talk of starting a third party or sitting the election out. Sure, there was some anger and disappointment, but rank and file Republicans moved on.
Contrast with the news of what happened last night. Long before it became clear that Thad Cochran, a long-time Republican incumbent and overall highly respected senior Statesman, had been reelected, Tea Partiers had a existential meltdown. Sarah Palin went on Sean Hannity’s Show and threatened to start a third party. Prominent bloggers cried that if they didn’t get their way, they would drop out of politics entirely. Laura Ingraham, who led the charge against Cantor, threatened to join Palin.
The biggest epithet the Tea Party crowd likes to throw at prominent establishment types (like me) is that we are RINO’s. A RINO is a Republican In Name Only. But who is really the RINO? The one who fights for the nominee no matter who he (or she) is or the one who threatens to bolt the party every time a primary election doesn’t go their way?
This ideological fight has been going on a long time.
It started when Teddy Roosevelt – who is most famous these days for occasionally winning the President’s race at Nationals stadium – started the Bull Moose Party because he thought his successor wasn’t doing a sufficient job in continuing his legacy.
Roosevelt accused William Howard Taft of not really being a Republican, and vice versa.
The fight continued in the 1920’s, when Joe Cannon of Illinois battled with Bob LaFollette of Illinois. In the 1950’s, Robert Taft accused the Eisenhower Republicans of being insufficiently opposed to the New Deal, in the 1960’s, Goldwater Republicans drummed the Rockefeller Republicans out of the party, in the 1960’s, Ford battled Reagan, and in the 1980’s, the Bushs fought the Reaganites.
In the late 1990’s and into the 2000’s, a great ideological sorting took place among the parties. There was no longer a moderate wing to the GOP. The Republican party was the pro-life, pro-defense, pro-growth (and pro-business) party, while the Democrats were pro-choice, pro-labor and the largely pacifist.
The failures in the Iraq War and the financial crisis of 2007-2008 shook the three-legged stool, and in 2010, a new force, the Tea Party, came to the table. The Tea Party is far more libertarian, far more isolationist, far less in favor of big business, far more anti-immigrant and far more reactionary than the typical Republican regular.
They are far more likely to want to bolt the party if things don’t go their way.
This is a familiar, but not dominant, strain in the Republican Party. They are the Lindbergh isolationists in the 1930’s, the John Birchers in the 1950’s, the Yaffers in the 1960, the Libertarians in the 1970’s. They supported Ross Perot and Pat Buchanan in the 1990’s.
And now they are very, very angry that the Republican Party beat them in Mississippi. Some of them will leave the party, some will sit out the next election, and some will continue to agitate within the party structure and within the Tea party movement.
And ironically, they will be the ones to call out the rest of us RINOs. But we know who they are and who we are.
John Feehery is currently the President of Quinn Gillespie Communications and Director of QGA Government Affairs. Before joining QGA, Feehery was President of the Feehery Group, a strategic advocacy firm dedicated to helping its clients achieve their legislative and communications objectives in Washington D.C., and the chief blogger for The Feehery Theory (www.thefeeherytheory.com). He is a frequent commentator on the political landscape, widely quoted around the country and often seen on CNN, MSNBC and Fox News Channel. He is also a regular contributor to CNN.com, Politico and to The Hill’s “Pundits Blog.”
Feehery has worked for almost two decades in a variety of influential positions both as a staffer for three prominent members of the United States House of Representatives Republican leadership and a communications strategist in the private sector. Most recently, Feehery served as Executive Vice President for Global Government Relations and Global Public Relations for the Motion Picture Association of America.
Feehery managed the communications operation for Speaker of the House J. Dennis Hastert. Feehery was the longest-serving top spokesman to a Speaker of the House in the history of the House of Representatives. Feehery came directly to the Speaker’s office after a stint as a government relations advocate for the Barbour, Griffith and Rogers. He also served concurrently as Vice President for Communications for Policy Impact Communications. Before that stint, Feehery served from 1995 until 1998 as the Communications Director for Majority Whip Tom DeLay. Before becoming DeLay’s communications director, he served as the Whip office’s Chief Floor Assistant, during the historically notable “Contract with America.”
Feehery started his career as a speechwriter to former U.S. House Republican Leader Bob Michel.
GOP = Whigs
You do like poking sticks in ant beds, don’t you?
GOPe has shown their sheets.They were Klan Night Riders this past tuesday
Dave Brat won by 10 points.
He’s right. We’re conservatives, he’s a stinking Republican.
Me, or John Feehery?
This guy doesn’t know much about his party.
I wish people would see that we the people have the real power. Our so called elected leaders and other such as the media are the real slaves. They have to answer totally to their masters; not us.
And now they are very, very angry that the Republican Party beat them in Mississippi. Some of them will leave the party, some will sit out the next election, and some will continue to agitate within the party structure and within the Tea party movement.
What the author is neglecting is very simple... The R party takes for granted the conservative vote - and therefore has deliberately violated that constituency. The Tea Party represents the desires of that conservative vote.
So he's blaming the conservatives for noticing that the R party just BROKE THE FRICKING LAW to beat them.
He can kiss my ass
I just realized the close relationship of many people in this county with Haley Barbour. Lanny Griffith is one of his cohorts. Small town and all politics is local.
Telling. Feehery comes by his WQ (Wuss Quotient) honestly.
http://www.newsmax.com/Politics/John-Feehery-Pete-King-Cruz/2014/06/24/id/578935/
“Ted Cruz is an elitist who somehow has been able to portray himself as a champion of the masses, while the son of a New York cop who worked full time loading and unloading freight cars and was a member of blue-collar union is seen as a defender of the Republican establishment.”
George Soros is just an errand boy. The IRA are backed by establishment globalists. They support globalism and open borders.
>> But who is really the RINO? The one who fights for the nominee no matter who he (or she) is or the one who threatens to bolt the party every time a primary election doesn’t go their way?
Really? How shallow can they get? Try this on for size: the RINO is the one who abandons principle in return for power.
The logic of this piece breaks apart right here. The indication is that Thad Cochran was not reelected fairly, that he was reelected as a result of deceit and fraud. His reelection seems to have been engineered by the Democrats. Frankly, the Republican that Democrats want in office is not the one who should be there.
The Tea Party is correct to react against this. The method of his reelection is as egregious as the Democrat practice of overturning an election by counting the votes over and over until enough votes have been found or misplaced (as appropriate) to pull out a Democrat win.
The Tea Party is far more libertarian, far more isolationist, far less in favor of big business, far more anti-immigrant and far more reactionary than the typical Republican regular.
Anti-immigrant? In this context this “responsible Rebulican” must be referring to the “reactionaries” reaction to the “open borders” policy of the Obama administration, which is intended to fulfill Obama’s dream of fundamentally changing the USA into something far different. And the RINO’s have sunk so low as to oppose our opposition to this national catastrophe!
We love immigrants. We don’t like lawbreakers or those who can’t tell the difference.
We love immigrants. We don’t like lawbreakers or those who can’t tell the difference.
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.