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

Skip to comments.

Look who is purging their party now
Washington Examiner ^ | April 25, 2013 | David Freddoso

Posted on 04/27/2013 2:56:32 PM PDT by neverdem

It was almost exactly four years ago that MSNBC's blustery Chris Matthews declared that "the Republican Party continues to be unable to hang on to its moderates, especially in the Northeast, where it has begun to resemble the 19th century, pre-Civil War Whig Party."

It was 2009, and the late Sen. Arlen Specter, Pa., had just announced he was leaving the GOP, prompting Matthews to declare that the party was killing itself by purging its moderate members.

"They want to be the party of the religious right!" he boomed.

Matthews' guest, Chuck Todd, was more measured, merely asking, "Can the Republican Party be in the majority again without finding people who can win Senate seats and hold Senate seats in the Northeast?"

At the time Todd spoke, though, Republicans actually had found a person who could (and soon would) hold Specter's Pennsylvania seat -- Pat Toomey, the conservative who had just scared Specter out of the GOP and into a Democratic primary he was destined to lose.

As for the rest of "the Northeast," Republicans had no difficulty holding a seat in New Hampshire that same cycle.

The Tea Party revolution, which had begun months before Matthews' rant, has since undoubtedly cost the GOP a few Senate seats. But its energy probably let them seize the House and control of many state governments in 2010. And despite any Tea Party excesses, Republicans are within striking distance of a Senate majority in 2014.

Today, the same liberal worldview and wishful thinking that fueled the pundits' "GOP purge-and-die" narrative in 2009 is causing them to miss the more dangerous purge that threatens the Democrats now.

In 2006, Democrats built a congressional majority by embracing and convincing pro-gun, pro-life moderates to run in marginal states and districts. They have since lost many of these in the House, and liberals are now in the process of purging them from the Senate.

Until Monday, Senate Finance Chairman Max Baucus, D-Mont., had been acting like a man seeking re-election -- raising $1.5 million in the first quarter and attempting to distance himself from Obamacare.

But Baucus had just voted against the gun control measures that President Obama had been pushing. And in response, Organizing for Action -- the post-campaign version of Obama's campaign -- announced it would be mobilizing activists to shame and pressure Baucus and the three other Democrats who had voted against gun control.

Baucus, already polling badly and facing a tough re-election, needed that like he needed a hole in his head. Who could blame him for hanging it up early?

On the heels of Baucus' announcement came one from Mayors Against Illegal Guns -- the mostly Democratic group co-founded by liberal New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg. Lacking any soft Republican senators to target in 2014, the mayors have apparently settled on taking the scalp of Sen. Mark Pryor, D-Ark.

National Journal's Ron Fournier reported this week that the group will spend what it takes to "make an example" of Pryor. Rather than talk about guns and risk helping him unintentionally, the group plans "a months-long television, radio and direct-mail campaign" that would, among other things, inform black voters that Pryor was "opposing the president's agenda." For the few Democrats still capable of holding Senate seats in the South, such friendly fire is sure to kill.

If liberals succeed in purging the Democratic Party over gun control, it will make a lot of journalists happy. As Politico's Dylan Byers recently observed, the purported objectivity of the Washington press gave way quickly to strident advocacy when guns became involved.

Several surveys have shown that the people who bring us political news are to the left of the U.S. mainstream politically, and there are few issues on which they feel more strongly than this one.

It's a lot harder to mind or describe the perils of a purge when you're the one holding the torch.

Washington Examiner columnist David Freddoso is editor of the Conservative Intelligence Briefing. Follow him on Twitter at @freddoso.


TOPICS: Constitution/Conservatism; Crime/Corruption; Editorial; Politics/Elections
KEYWORDS: banglist; bloomberg; democrats; guncontrol; markpryor; moderates; purge; secondamendment
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-25 last
To: justiceseeker93

And they’ll implement those reforms right after the next election, held under the present procedures, which maximize fraud and cheating. Something wrong with this picture? But even so, senior Rats are retiring. Leaving a sinking ship?


21 posted on 04/28/2013 3:12:55 PM PDT by Eleutheria5 (End the occupation. Annex today.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: justiceseeker93

“”The (only) measurable difference between the Democrats and the Republicans today is that, in the main, the Democrat Party listens to its base. The Republican Party takes pitchforks to its base.”

Would agree pretty much with that statement, assuming you are talking about the Washington establishment parties. The possible equalizer, though, is that the potential GOP base is much wider than the ‘Rats, since conservatives are supposedly about 40% of the electorate, lefties of various stripes about 20%.”

It has to do with the demographics of Washington D.C. Politicians by nature as a group are of the personality type that likes to pay and please the crowd around them.

Politicians don’t just do as the Romans in Rome, they become Romans. The problem for us conservatives really is Washington D.C. itself, or rather the 90% democrat political culture thereto. You want to control your politicians keep them home as much as possible and vote remotely (from home) as much as possible.


22 posted on 04/29/2013 11:03:35 AM PDT by Monorprise
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: justiceseeker93

We need to find theses folks and bring them back to the fold. Let them lead our assimilation & immigration efforts. Create a Congressional & state caucus for them ect.. The Media must be made to recognize their existences.


23 posted on 04/29/2013 11:10:34 AM PDT by Monorprise
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: Carry_Okie

“Unfortunately, they are not exactly a political force here.”

Then we must make them so again. Find the League of Latin American Voters. Rebuild their membership and most importantly bring them to the forfrount of republican policy politics.

We need Spanish speakers to represent & sell the conservative cause in theses communities. Let nobody tell you they don’t exist they do exist and in Huge numbers just as they did before. We simply have to awaken them!


24 posted on 04/29/2013 11:14:59 AM PDT by Monorprise
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: Monorprise
Let nobody tell you they don’t exist they do exist and in Huge numbers just as they did before.

When California became a State in 1850, there were only 2,000-3000 Hispanics in the whole State.

25 posted on 04/29/2013 2:21:35 PM PDT by Carry_Okie (An economy is not a zero-sum game, but politics usually is.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-25 last

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