Posted on 09/17/2010 10:12:54 AM PDT by K-oneTexas
Is the Republican establishment losing it?
Is the party leadership capable of uniting a governing coalition as Richard Nixon did before Watergate and Ronald Reagan resurrected in the 1980s?
Observing the hysteria and nastiness of Karl Rove and the GOP establishment at the stunning triumph of Tea Party Princess Christine O'Donnell, the answer is no.
This party is not ready to rule.
Consider. In its grand strategy to recapture a Senate that George W. Bush and Rove lost in 2006, the GOP Senate leadership endorsed all its own caucus members for re-election, if they chose to run, then picked out all its favorite candidates for the open and Democratic seats.
Conservatives and tea party activists, however, had other ideas. They began to pick their own candidates. And, again and again, the Senate's chosen were rejected in favor of tea party challengers who had the endorsement of Sarah Palin or South Carolina's Jim DeMint.
Arlen Specter was rejected by the Pennsylvania GOP and left the party. Rand Paul routed Sen. Mitch McConnell's man in Kentucky. Charlie Crist was challenged by Marco Rubio in Florida. Crist, too, departed. Sen. Bob Bennett was denied renomination in Utah. Sen. Lisa Murkowski lost her primary in Alaska to a little-known fellow named Joe Miller.
But Delaware was the stunner. Rep. Mike Castle, a former two-term governor who had been winning elections for 40 years, was a certain victor in November.
Challenger O'Donnell, however, ended all that.
Yet, though her conservative credentials are far superior to those of Castle, O'Donnell was made the object of a wilding attack by National Review and The Weekly Standard, Charles Krauthammer, who lashed out at Palin and DeMint for "irresponsbility," and Rove, who on Sean Hannity's show went postal as soon as the returns came in.
Now, on paper, O'Donnell is a far tougher sell in Delaware than is Castle. But her defeat is not certain. Not in this volatile year.
And what is the justification for the savagery of the attacks on her, from her own?
What has this woman done? Did she vote for Sonia Sotomayor or Elena Kagan for the Supreme Court like Lindsey Graham? Did she support the Obama stimulus like Olympia Snow and Susan Collins? What did she do to deserve the trashing?
The answer is not distant.
To the Republican establishment, tea party people are field hands. Their labors are to be recognized and rewarded, but they are to stay off the porch and not presume to sit at the master's table.
And what O'Donnell did, with her amazing victory, is to imperil that establishment's return to power. That is why these Republicans went ballistic.
O'Donnell's conservative convictions and Castle's social liberalism mean nothing to them.
They are about power and all that goes with it.
And that raises a question too long put off.
What is the Republican establishment going to do, what are the neoconservatives going to do, if returned to power?
Are not these the same people who assisted George W. Bush in stampeding the nation into an unnecessary war that got 4,400 Americans killed to strip Saddam Hussein of weapons he did not have?
Are these not the same people who misled or deceived us about Iraq's role in 9/11?
Are these Republican scribes and senators not the same folks who went all-out for NAFTA and GATT and the WTO and MFN and PNTR for China, those brilliant trade deals that gave us $5 trillion in trade deficits, wiped out 6 million manufacturing jobs and 50,000 factories in one decade, and put us into permanent debt to China?
Are these not some of the same folks who backed the Bush-McCain amnesty and did nothing for 20 years, as millions of illegals invaded America? Now that all America is on fire, they too want to "build the dang fence."
Are not the National Review and Weekly Standard scribblers and their neocon comrades of the mainstream media not now drumming up another war for Americans to fight, against Iran?
Are these not the same folks who went along with No Child Left Behind and the biggest run-up in social spending since Great Society days?
Beltway Republicans say they have learned their lesson. But the tea party folks and conservatives who vaulted O'Donnell to victory are saying: You had your chance. Now, move aside for new leaders.
Why is the tea party wrong -- and the establishment right?
The first tea party rebellion was the Barry Goldwater movement. When it triumphed at the Cow Palace, Nelson Rockefeller denounced the movement as riddled with radicals, baited the Goldwater people at the convention and refused to endorse the nominee.
A decade later, Vice President Rockefeller got his payback, when conservatives demanded that President Ford drop him off the ticket as the price of renomination. Ford agreed.
In its contemptuous response to O'Donnell's victory, the GOP establishment of today looked like nothing so much as the Rockefeller Republican establishment of yesteryear. Its time is coming, too.
The first tea party rebellion was the Barry Goldwater movement. When it triumphed at the Cow Palace, Nelson Rockefeller denounced the movement as riddled with radicals, baited the Goldwater people at the convention and refused to endorse the nominee.
A decade later, Vice President Rockefeller got his payback, when conservatives demanded that President Ford drop him off the ticket as the price of renomination. Ford agreed. ..."
The question may be framed in the context stated in another thread today--"lesser of two evils," or it may be framed on the basis of a contest about the nature of liberty versus the nature of tyranny by coercive government power. One may also examine the Castle/O'Donnell matter as one grounded in questions about constitutional principle versus compromise on political issues.
If we just fill a Senate or Congressional seat with a candidate who bears the letter "R," unaccompanied by a strong determination to adhere to the Founders' ideas of liberty, then we risk damaging, rather than helping, the Republic. On questions essential to liberty, that candidate may compromise away the liberty of our posterity and help to snuff out the light of liberty in the world.
If we keep doing the same things we've been doing (electing RINO's), then we can expect the same results we've been getting--compromises that throw away the liberty of future generations.
On the other hand, if we nominate candidates who can articulate and explain the Founders' ideas throughout a single election cycle, even if that candidate loses the election, he/she will have planted the seeds of liberty in the hearts and minds of potential voters. Those seeds will bear fruit for the future, because once the ideas of liberty are understood, individuals may no longer voluntarily submit themselves to slavery to government. The RINO candidate is not likely to plant those seeds, because if they understood them, they would sacrifice their "lives, liberty and sacred honor" rather than compromise on issues of limiting government, spending, taxation, etc.
Short-term gain, numbers wise, may lead to long-time loss.
I repeat here a statement from Senator Zacharias Montgomery which I posted on a thread earlier, and will follow it with Thomas Jefferson's First Inaugural remarks on "essential principles" and what should be done if we depart from them.
Montgomery: "If I have learned anything from the reading of history, it is that the man who, in violation of great principles, toils for temporary fame, purchases for himself either total oblivion or eternal infamy, while he who temporarily goes down battling for right principles always deserves, and generally secures, the gratitude of succeeding ages, and will carry with him the sustaining solace of a clean conscience, more precious than all the offices and honors in the gift of man."
Thomas Jefferson:
"These principles form the bright constellation which has gone before us and guided our steps through an age of revolution and reformation. The wisdom of our sages and the blood of our heroes have been devoted to their attainment. They should be the creed of our political faith, the text of civic instruction, the touchstone by which to try the services of those we trust; and should we wander from them in moments of error or of alarm, let us hasten to retrace our steps and to regain the road which alone leads to peace, liberty, and safety."
I greatly respect and undergird the desire of many simply to focus on changing the balance of the House and Senate immediately. For too long, however, our public discourse has been based on "issues" and short-term political goals, with not enough emphasis placed on how this or that question relates to a principle essential our very liberty as a nation. We must return to the "road" described by Jefferson as he took office if liberty is to survive the assaults by Progressives in both major Parties over the past 100 years.
Wow. The old fella can still deliver a wicked thrashing! Nice work, Pat!
George Romney stormed off the convention floor in 1964, to protest conservatives, he took his 17 year old son Mitt with him.
They hate us, while their all "My good friend" "My friends across the aisle", "My special lover" (Barney Frank) to all Democrats.
Yes, I agree ... the GOP and their leadership are out-of-touch with the American people. we have known for a long time the democrats were and that the GOP keep swinging in the wind trying to ‘capture’ member by how the wind blew on the issues.
The GOP leadership needs to realize that in order to offer an alternative they truly have to have one. at this point in time, with all the RINO’s running about shouting as loud as the Dem/Libs, the few true leaders we have can not be heard.
That is one reason the Tea Party is a necessity these days.
The Eastern Elite/Establishment vs the Western New Ideas which went back to the roots.
Lets see how it goes this time around.
ML/NJ
Ah, the elephant in the living room that no one at Free Republic wants to talk about. It’s simply math people. It’s not a matter of the country club being wrong and the Tea Party being right. It’s a matter of the right needing to unite in order to win in November. If the GOP stays divided the Democrats will at the very least minimize their losses.
The question is: Will either the Tea Party folks or the establishment Republicans be willing to admit that each needs the other? Personally, I’m thinking not. To be blunt, both sides are way to arrogant and stubborn, and interparty division will hurt us badly in November.
The first tea party rebellion was the Barry Goldwater movement. When it triumphed at the Cow Palace, Nelson Rockefeller denounced the movement as riddled with radicals, baited the Goldwater people at the convention and refused to endorse the nominee.It would be best to remember this as events take place over the next two years.
This site has been part of the problem in past election years where the short term goal of winning the House or Senate was all that mattered. Filling seats with (R)'s. We were admonished and called disgusting names if we didn't want to hold our noses and vote (R)for RINO; there is such a thing as vision. It takes time and patience. Thank God for the tea party and conservatives!
"If we just fill a Senate or Congressional seat with a candidate who bears the letter "R," unaccompanied by a strong determination to adhere to the Founders' ideas of liberty, then we risk damaging, rather than helping, the Republic." Well stated!!
On election night we were invited to watch the results in the Grand Ballroom of the Sheraton and it was great time.
A VERY good article by Buchanan. Don’t necessarily agree with ‘some’ of his finer points about the war, but he’s dead on about everything else!
The ‘establishment people’ always tell us to ‘suck it up’, ‘hold our noses’ and vote for the lesser of two evils during the general elections. They always lecture us on how primaries are the time to support candidates you REALLY want to see win.
Well.... This year, that’s what people dammed well did! The ‘establishment’ types. Are now throwing a tantrum, because the rank and file have had enough of the ‘ruling class’. What will now be the test since the shoe will be on the other foot is to see if those same people that lecture us to “hold our noses and vote” will be willing to take their own advice, and hold THEIR noses and support the CONSERVATIVE republican in the general elections.
Thanks for seeing that. That was my main reason for posting it.
I am not a huge Pat Buchanan fan and I didn’t agree with the entire article ... however sometimes Pat makes a good and rememberable statement. Like that one that gives us all pause for thought.
I am sorry some don’t look at articles posted closely cause they dislike the author.
Even an idiot can say something smart once in awhile.
Thanks again for catching this point.
IMHO, we need to stop tearing each other apart cause that is a sure sign of a Dem/Lib win!!!!!!
we need to find enough common ground to STOP them in their tracks.
Win? Win what?
If the Republicans behave like Democrats, why do we need two parties?
Seems the ‘establishment’ didn’t get the message in 2006.
‘cause that is a sure sign of a Dem/Lib win’
As opposed to a Rep/Lib win? What’s the difference?
Good read.
Keep tearing the voters apart.
Let the Dems get amnesty through cause you know that the new Dem phrase is that illegal aliens = undocumented Democrats.
IMHO, we don’t have to wait for the democrats to divide us ... we Conservatives do that well enough on our own.
We must be ‘PURE’ or not at all! Echos from the past!!!
With a Dem/Lib win, the knife that stabs you in the back is labeled “D”; otherwise it’s labeled “R”.
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.