Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

The Establishment’s Last Stand: Keep Obama
canadafreepress.com ^ | Friday, February 24, 2012 | Daren Jonescu

Posted on 02/24/2012 9:06:41 AM PST by Resettozero

Mitt Romney cannot win the Republican presidential nomination. He is a man who seemingly entered the race because, after a long and successful working life, he could think of nothing more impressive to top it all off than being President of the United States. From last spring to this very moment, much of the Republican Establishment has been solidly, viciously, in his corner. And yet he cannot win. Most people, when their candidate looks hopeless, turn to another available candidate who might be satisfactory. The Republican Establishment, which is not like most people, is beginning to murmur about a brokered convention. They are determined to get what they want, by hook or by crook, by Drudge or by Fox.

What is it that they want, exactly? To get a hint of an answer, one must look at the man they have supported thus far.

(Excerpt) Read more at canadafreepress.com ...


TOPICS: Constitution/Conservatism; Culture/Society; Government; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: gope; rinos; romney; rulingclass
Another take.
1 posted on 02/24/2012 9:06:47 AM PST by Resettozero
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Resettozero

I believe his quest for the White House has everything to do with his father’s abortive campaign in 1968 (”Brainwashed” out of the running) and hasn’t the slightest idea what he would do if he actually won the job.


2 posted on 02/24/2012 9:20:25 AM PST by katana (Just my opinions)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Resettozero

They probably want Obama to be re-elected because then 2016 will be an open election and they can go all orgasmic over Chris Christie (or some other worthless moderate) as the nominee.

They want to kill the Tea Party and keep the gravy train flowing. They either want one of their own (Romney) or to have Obama reelected. They won’t stand for any other eventuality, although we may force them to.


3 posted on 02/24/2012 9:23:11 AM PST by cotton1706
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Resettozero

Many on FR have recognized Boehner & Company will cleave only to their own power, satisfied with one of two, RINO Romney or Obama, either with whom they expect to oversee the fall of America, manage the chaos, remaining quite secure, ensconced and undisturbed in power.


4 posted on 02/24/2012 9:27:31 AM PST by RitaOK (LET 'ER RIP, NEWT. Newt knows where all the bodies are buried, because he buried them.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Resettozero

“He is a man who seemingly entered the race because, after a long and successful working life, he could think of nothing more impressive to top it all off than being President of the United States.”

That’s it! THAT’s what my visceral reaction to the guy has been. No, no, and hell no.


5 posted on 02/24/2012 9:28:15 AM PST by jagusafr ("Write in Palin and prepare for war...")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Resettozero

Many on FR have recognized Boehner & Company will cleave only to their own power, satisfied with one of two, RINO Romney or Obama, either with whom they expect to oversee the fall of America, manage the chaos, remaining quite secure, ensconced and undisturbed in power.


6 posted on 02/24/2012 9:28:34 AM PST by RitaOK (LET 'ER RIP, NEWT. Newt knows where all the bodies are buried, because he buried them.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Resettozero

Best analysis of the turmoil on the Right I’ve seen. The Establishment’s failure to call out the fraud zer0 on his obvious ineligibility will be the straw that breaks the camel’s back.


7 posted on 02/24/2012 9:30:05 AM PST by kreitzer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Resettozero

Another reason I believe that a true Conservative third-party is inevitable. The sooner we set about making the GOP irrelevant the better.


8 posted on 02/24/2012 9:31:53 AM PST by Buckeye McFrog
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Buckeye McFrog

I would much rather the conservatives take over the GOP and kick the current “establishment” to the curb.


9 posted on 02/24/2012 9:34:52 AM PST by MrB (The difference between a Humanist and a Satanist - the latter knows whom he's working for)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: Resettozero

I learned a new word from reading this: desuetude.


10 posted on 02/24/2012 9:39:05 AM PST by GSWarrior
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: cotton1706
"They probably want Obama to be re-elected because then 2016 will be an open election and they can go all orgasmic over Chris Christie (or some other worthless moderate) as the nominee."

What they don't see or don't care about is that, for most of us, after four more years of Obama there won't be a country left worth being elected to lead.

11 posted on 02/24/2012 9:43:52 AM PST by Truth29
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Resettozero
Good article. A few choice excerpts follow...

The aim is to keep moral questions out of the equation, thus preserving the long-standing Washington charade of optics politics, in which two factions argue about whether the noose around America’s neck ought to hang twenty feet high, or ten feet, while the public, oblivious in its cell, enjoys its last meal while staring at “American Idolatry” and “Dancing with the Dimwits.”
...
The Establishment, body and soul, has a vested interest in maintaining the status quo. And this means they need to corner the market on “conservative” principle and policy.
...
Today’s constitutional conservatives threaten to end the parlor game. They have committed the faux pas of noticing that their national story is about to end, and of objecting—forcefully—to the quality of leadership that has brought things to this bleak prospect.
...
If the Establishment does not get what it wants through the Party’s own process, it has a fall-back option: Undermine the Republican candidate, and accept a short-term loss in the form of four more years of President Obama. They did it to John McCain; if you think they would not do it again—and even more aggressively—to a constitutional conservative, think again.
...

12 posted on 02/24/2012 9:45:41 AM PST by SpaceBar
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Resettozero

Col. Powell ... the establishment


13 posted on 02/24/2012 9:46:08 AM PST by dila813
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: GSWarrior

Me too. Word power is now increased.

desuetude
(DESS-wah-tood)
noun
The condition of not being used or practiced any more; disuse: laws fallen into desuetude


14 posted on 02/24/2012 9:49:38 AM PST by Resettozero
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: Truth29

Right. Exactly. This is a political game to them. Sometimes we win, sometimes they win. The liberty of a people is at stake!


15 posted on 02/24/2012 10:34:47 AM PST by cotton1706
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: onyx

Here’s an excellent article, worthy of a mega-ping.


16 posted on 02/24/2012 11:22:37 AM PST by meadsjn (Sarah 2012, or sooner)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: MrB

I would as well but the liberals hold all the positions of power in the GOP and will not be relinquishing them come hell or high water.

We have been trying to take over the party for 30 yrs. or more its not working, the fix is in.


17 posted on 02/24/2012 11:23:30 AM PST by sarge83
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: meadsjn

Which list?


18 posted on 02/24/2012 11:31:15 AM PST by onyx (SUPPORT FREE REPUBLIC, DONATE MONTHLY. If you want on Sarah Palin's Ping List, let me know.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: All

BTTT


19 posted on 02/24/2012 11:39:11 AM PST by Tijeras_Slim
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: onyx
The Palin list, or the Newt list, or all of the above.

The article is discussing the GOP establishment's willingness to throw the election to Obama, rather than let any conservative win.

20 posted on 02/24/2012 11:51:33 AM PST by meadsjn (Sarah 2012, or sooner)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: meadsjn

Thanks for confirming my initial impression. A second reading is even more edifying! The author isn’t as good-looking as you or I but he sure has our smarts. Plus a few.


21 posted on 02/24/2012 1:32:23 PM PST by Resettozero
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: Resettozero

I’ve read this article a second time and, even though it’s Friday evening here, I think others FReeper would benefit from reading this. This kind of well-thought-out and complete article doesn’t come out every day, or every week.


22 posted on 02/24/2012 1:43:39 PM PST by Resettozero
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Resettozero

But Michael Medved says there is no “establisment” republicans. He says its a myth. Hey, he said it, not me.


23 posted on 02/24/2012 2:14:45 PM PST by subterfuge (BUILD MORE NUCLEAR POWER PLANTS NOW!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: subterfuge
But Michael Medved says there is no “establisment” republicans. He says its a myth. Hey, he said it, not me.

Smart guy, actually.

The current candidates rail endlessly against a mythical “out-of-touch GOP establishment.” But the only establishment that really means anything is the establishment of currently empowered officeholders, led by congressmen and senators and governors who are actually far more in touch with the opinions of the constituents who regularly re-elect them than are presidential candidates who have been years away from meaningful electoral accountability. While the White House contenders focus exclusively on appealing to the small minority of Republicans who actually bother voting in party primaries (where turnout has declined decisively and disastrously), governors and members of Congress need to worry about the additional opinions of independents and even wavering Democrats who will help to fire or re-hire them in an impending election. Those same independents and dubious Dems will make the final decision on either renewing or terminating Barack Obama’s contract in November.

He's also right about this: GOP Presidential Contenders Are All Out of Office and as a Result Out of Touch.

24 posted on 02/24/2012 2:34:41 PM PST by x
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: Resettozero
Romney can and will do nothing to awaken people from the profound moral desuetude that is bringing the abyss closer every day

Romney can and will do nothing to awaken people from the profound moral desuetude that is bringing the abyss closer every day. And, strange as it may seem, that’s just why the Republican Establishment chose him. It must not be forgotten that, at the very beginning of the primary process, back at the 2011 CPAC Conference, the Establishment-manufactured man of the moment was Mitch Daniels. “Mitch Who?” asked those genuine conservatives who smelled a rat. It was understood, and made explicit by prominent Establishment voices, that he was the man precisely because he spoke like a reasonable fiscal manager—while simultaneously speaking out strongly against allowing the so-called “social conservative” agenda to play a role in the 2012 election.

Awake! Awake! Awake from your profound moral desuetude that is bringing the abyss closer every day!

No presidential candidate is going to be able to do that. At least none of the candidates running now (and probably nobody who uses the word "desuetude").

For all this talk about McCain and Dole and the establishment, this year looks like Dole all over again, with Gingrich, say, constantly lecturing voters about their morality. Gingrich or Santorum may take it further than Dole, who had his own skeletons in the closet, but it won't work this time any better than it did in 1996.

We may be headed towards the abyss, but voters don't pick candidates who keep telling us that. And do you really think any of the current candidates really could effect the kind of changes in the public mind that Jonescu assumes a President can?

The cheap shot at Daniels is undeserved. He may not have been an ideal candidate, but he knew that himself. To look for a candidate who's actually in office, who's actually had to balance budgets and meet payrolls is only common sense.

Run down everybody who actually has administrative experience in favor of speechmakers who don't know how to do anything in the real world and you get -- well, you get what we've got now. Ronald Reagan, who had to balance budgets and meet payrolls wouldn't have gone in for cheap shots like this.

25 posted on 02/24/2012 2:45:37 PM PST by x
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: x

Perhaps he is. But I stopped reading his movie reviews a long time ago because I disagreed with his assessments.

Well, if there isn’t a GOPe establishment, who are those guys that are acting like they’re the GOPe establishment?


26 posted on 02/24/2012 2:47:22 PM PST by Resettozero
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: x

Medved’s wrong.
By destroying President Bush the media destroyed the ‘Republican Establishment’ for now.
Without a leader the ‘Republican Establishment’ consists of it’s campaign funders, not the ‘currently empowered officeholders’.


27 posted on 02/24/2012 2:53:53 PM PST by mrsmith (So... how's the Tea Party nominee for your House seat doing?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: x

As for your followup post, don’t agree with much of it either.

I didn’t write the article but you act as if I did. Please consider the possibility you are wrong on your sweeping judgements. Thanks. Recognizing the familiar tone of your posts, I don’t want to argue further with you.


28 posted on 02/24/2012 3:01:42 PM PST by Resettozero
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: Resettozero
after a long and successful working life, he could think of nothing more impressive to top it all off than being President of the United States.

I don't think his goal is the presidency. He "deserves" the nomination. I don't think he has any illusions about beating the kenyan as someone who can implement communist policies more efficiently than the incumbent. He is like Dole and McCain. Neither actually wanted to be president. They both felt they deserved the honor of being Nominated but didn't really want to hold the office.

29 posted on 02/24/2012 3:41:37 PM PST by arthurus (Read Hazlitt's "Economics In One Lesson.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: MrB

“Taking over” the GOP is probably not possible.The GOP should be replaced and probably will be after the 2012 Debacle. Think Whigs.


30 posted on 02/24/2012 3:44:20 PM PST by arthurus (Read Hazlitt's "Economics In One Lesson.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: SpaceBar
They did it to John McCain

John McCain did it to himself. He was part of the effort to undermine the opposition to the NWO or whatever the scheme for total control is called. Every time I heard Candidate McCain speak he left me wondering just who he wanted to win the election.

31 posted on 02/24/2012 3:48:04 PM PST by arthurus (Read Hazlitt's "Economics In One Lesson.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: GSWarrior

DOWN with the antidisestablishmentarians!


32 posted on 02/24/2012 4:00:18 PM PST by JediJones (Watch "Gingrich to Michigan: Change or Die" on YouTube. Best Speech Ever!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: Tijeras_Slim

Repo Men (Wall St. bankers and D.C. ruling class, “more than a few of them belong in prison.”)

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2826109/posts

Excellent NRO article substantiating this article and thread.


33 posted on 02/24/2012 4:18:49 PM PST by txhurl
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: arthurus

There’s bound to be more to it than just that. I would really like to know why the Republican nominees seem to evade doing what it takes to win the Presidency. Cannot seem to find a good-enough answer.


34 posted on 02/24/2012 4:23:21 PM PST by Resettozero
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: txhurl

From that article:

“So there you have it: hedge-fund titans, i-bankers, congressional nabobs, committee chairmen, senators, swindlers, run-of-the-mill politicos, and a few outright thieves (these categories are not necessarily exclusive) all feeding at the same trough, and most of them betting that Mitt Romney won’t do anything more to stop it than Barack Obama did. If anything, the fact that Romney is having the least luck with the firm that knows him best speaks better of him than does the enthusiasm he apparently inspires in Goldman Sachs et al.”


35 posted on 02/24/2012 4:25:27 PM PST by txhurl
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: JediJones

No. Down with antidisestablishmentarism. Love the antidisestablishmentarians. (That doesn’t look right.)


36 posted on 02/24/2012 4:27:25 PM PST by Resettozero
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: txhurl

Thanks for re-posting. Missed it the first time around.


37 posted on 02/24/2012 4:31:12 PM PST by Resettozero
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: Resettozero

It’s a disturbing must-read.


38 posted on 02/24/2012 4:35:33 PM PST by txhurl
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies]

To: Resettozero
Well, if there isn’t a GOPe establishment, who are those guys that are acting like they’re the GOPe establishment?

Elected officials who want to keep their jobs, plus conservative movement types in Washington who spend most of their time talking to each other. What they're doing may be the wrong thing, but it's not like the old Rockefeller Republican establishment is still around.

I didn’t write the article but you act as if I did.

Some people do post articles they wrote themselves here. But in any case, if you want people to respond to your posts, a lot of the comments are going to relate directly to what's written. If you don't want such comments, why post the article?

Please consider the possibility you are wrong on your sweeping judgements.

Of course I could be wrong, and often am. It's just my opinions. Are they really any more sweeping than anyone else's?

Thanks. Recognizing the familiar tone of your posts, I don’t want to argue further with you.

And a good day to you, too.

39 posted on 02/25/2012 8:42:06 AM PST by x
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: Resettozero

bump, reset


40 posted on 02/25/2012 11:12:37 AM PST by txhurl
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies]

To: x

You have got to be kidding me. NO establishment type republicans in the party. McCain, lindsey Graham, Snowe aren’t “establishment” republicans? What planet are you from? Planet X?


41 posted on 02/27/2012 8:07:17 AM PST by subterfuge (BUILD MORE NUCLEAR POWER PLANTS NOW!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: subterfuge
You have got to be kidding me. NO establishment type republicans in the party. McCain, lindsey Graham, Snowe aren’t “establishment” republicans? What planet are you from? Planet X?

This talk about the Republican establishment goes back 50 years to the days when the Northeast ran the country and the party, when Republicans easily carried Vermont and Oregon, had trouble in Arizona and Oklahoma, and had no hope of winning Mississippi or South Carolina. In those days, Rockefeller and Javits and Lindsay were big Republican names. Wall Street and companies like GMC, US Steel, International Harvester were solidly Republican. Time Magazine and the New York Herald-Tribune were forces in the party, and even the New York Times endorsed Republicans for president.

That Establishment is gone. So when you say that Snowe (or Collins) who's barely still in the Republican Party are the party Establishment, it's kind of like saying the liberal tail wags the conservative dog (when that tail's only barely still attached to the dog). And to say that nowadays Establishment Republicans come out of South Carolina or Arizona or Kansas or Utah is to say that the old Northeastern Republican Establishment is deader than dead.

Are Graham and McCain some kind of Washington Establishment? Okay, but when it comes to elected officials the walls between insiders and outsiders, Establishment and insurgents aren't as high as they once were. When Ann Coulter's part of the Establishment and Newt Gingrich isn't, it may be time to rethink the whole "Establishment" idea.

I don't entirely agree with Medved, though. First, a lot of what people call the Republican Establishment nowadays is conservative pundits like himself, not just elected officials. It's more about George Will and other columnists and National Review than about Senators and Congressmen.

Second, a lot of the reason people are calling Romney the establishment candidate has to do with all the big contributors he got on his side, rather than just endorsements by elected officials. Those big contributors aren't as monolithic as the old GOP power structure. A lot of them aren't even solid Republicans. But the candidate who has the most millionaires and CEOs on his side is bound to be seen as the Establishment's guy.

42 posted on 02/27/2012 1:37:39 PM PST by x
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 41 | View Replies]

To: x

I appreciate your reply. But what do you make of the old guard republicans in FL gerrymandering congressional districts that strongly favor Alan West’s congressional opponent?

And why does the RNC repeatedly support guys like Charlie Crist and Mel Martinez over conservatives?

Thanks.


43 posted on 02/29/2012 12:35:43 PM PST by subterfuge (BUILD MORE NUCLEAR POWER PLANTS NOW!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 42 | View Replies]

To: subterfuge
West is the new guy in Congress. He doesn't have the seniority that enables those who've been in Congress longer to get stuff for the state. He also didn't come up by the usual route, though city, county, and state offices, so he doesn't have as many friends and allies in the legislature and the state party committee. And his district is a swing district that the Republicans would be more likely to lose than other, more secure districts.

So when redistricting comes around, representatives with more seniority, more clout in Washington, more allies in the legislature, and more securely Republican districts are ahead of Allen West in line. Maybe things might have been different if he supported the same presidential candidate as the local bigwigs did, but they wouldn't be that much different.

I'm not saying that there isn't something you could call the party establishment, but I think Medved is on the right track. If you're an elected official with some seniority, you're in the club, and the national committee isn't going to give you trouble.

There might be some kind of "game theory" explanation for this. If the RNC could refuse to support an incumbent who's not Republican enough or conservative enough, there's a potential that they'd go after other Republican incumbents for other reasons, and in the end no incumbent is safe, so they just support whoever is already in office or already has the nomination.

In any case, it looks like new reps have to face their own version of the "terrible twos" when redistricting comes around. Somebody who's just been elected but doesn't have the seniority and hasn't demonstrated an ability to get reelected isn't wholly a part of the club already and doesn't have the full protection of the establishment in the way that more senior members do.

44 posted on 02/29/2012 1:59:43 PM PST by x
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 43 | View Replies]

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson