Friday, January 31, 2014

Everyone's on to Boehner's game. He does his deal behind closed doors, has stooges plant breathless fake news about it, gathers a crowd round to ridicule reaction of the unwashed who like starving animals live and die on Boehner's every twitch. That won't happen again-Erickson

1/31/14, "The Speaker Reaps What the Speaker Sows," Erick Erickson, RedState

"Less than twelve hours into the Republican retreat and the leaks and attacks came fast and furious. John Boehner, Eric Cantor, Kevin McCarthy, and Paul Ryan intend to push immigration through the United States House of Representatives.

The bulk of the House Republicans thus far seem opposed, but Boehner and his lieutenants intend to find a path forward. They will start bid and grandiose and whittle their way down into something, anything, to show they intend to move the ball forward.

Conservatives inside and outside the retreat began preemptively crying foul. The bill is going to suck. We all know it will suck. But we only have a few digestible nuggets.

John Boehner is reaping what he sowed. During the last great fight — the Ryan-Murray plan — Boehner attacked conservatives who, relying on press leaks from his office to reporters, opposed the deal. “They had not yet seen the deal,” Boehner claimed and, consequently, were opposing something they had not seen with no basis for opposition.

Once he made the case and had people rally to his cause, he rushed through the Ryan-Murray bill in less than seventy-two hours. Boehner expected that many of those who joined him in ridiculing conservatives for their opposition to Ryan-Murray (again: based on leaks from Boehner’s own crew, but before the entirety of the package was released) would stand with him.
Instead, it looks like they know the game that is about to be played. John Boehner and his friends will craft a package behind closed doors. They will leak it to the press. They will attack conservatives for daring to oppose that which they have not seen. Then he will rush through a package as quickly as possible, relying on Democrat votes to get it done.

The Chamber of Commerce will be happy, the base will not be, and Boehner can retire to a cushy K-Street job with Chambliss, Latham, and his other BFF’s who are retiring this year.

Unfortunately for the Speaker, the alliance he built for Ryan-Murray was an alliance for that legislation only. Many of those with him then are not only opposed now, but see how he played that game. So they’re rallying as early as they can."


In June 2013 Mitch McConnell signaled the IRS scandal was over and he was moving on. In Jan. 2014 as night follows day, McConnell's facing an election so he puts on an act like he all of a sudden cares and his media pals sell it

"Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell fired a major shot Thursday, taking to the chamber floor to say the rules amount to a declaration of war on free speech and vowing the GOP will try to block them."...1/30/14, "IRS rules change seen as limiting free speech for nonprofit organizations," Wash. Examiner, Seth McLaughlin

6/21/13, "Mitch McConnell Realizes IRS Scandal Is Over," NY Magazine, Jonathan Chait

"Mitch McConnell delivered a speech today at the American Enterprise Institute to officially signal that the IRS scandal has entered its post-fact phase. When the IRS first revealed that its Cincinnati office had attempted to enforce its nonprofit laws using a search function that disproportionately impacted conservatives, Republicans were certain it must have come from the White House. They were going to follow the facts. But all of the facts point in the same direction, which is that the Obama administration had nothing to do with it at all. That was the conclusion of the agency’s inspector-general report, as well as the House Oversight Committee’s own interviews, which the Republican majority tried to suppress and which (when the Democrats released them) showed the operation was an independent, well-intentioned effort to enforce the law led by an IRS official who happens to be a conservative Republican....

The belligerent and borderline-paranoid tone of McConnell’s speech today is a kind of covered retreat, signaling the IRS scandal’s turn into a vague trope that conservatives use with other members of the tribe, the way liberals liked to say “Halliburton” during the Bush years, to signal some dark beliefs they don’t need to back up."


Excerpt from McConnell's speech in which he signaled it was time to move on from this one event and focus on the big picture. He has to say something to pretend he's not a democrat for the benefit of the media:

6/21/13, "McConnell: Obama ‘Refuses to Accept the Fact that the Public isn’t Going to Applaud Everything He Does’," Robert Costa, National Review
"“There are a lot of important questions that remain to be answered about the IRS scandal,” McConnell concluded. "But let’s not lose sight of the larger scandal that’s been right in front of us for five years: a sitting president who simply refuses to accept the fact that the public isn’t going to applaud everything he does. So my plea to you today is that you call out these attacks on the First Amendment whenever you see them, regardless of the target. Because the right to free speech doesn’t exist to protect what’s popular. It exists to protect what’s unpopular. And the moment we forget that is the moment we’re all at risk.""...


Comment: Mitch McConnell can only hope IRS interference v the Tea Party goes on forever. Obama saved the GOP's life by allowing the IRS to be used against the TP. At minimum precious time was wasted of hundreds of talented volunteers who were this country's last hope. 


commenter from Free Republic to above:

"To: Buckeye McFrog

The IRS hasn’t changed their arrogant aloofness , at least not since the last “Easter Egg Roll “  Nor have I heard of a change in policy , or guidance ...

What I have heard is that Mitch Mc Connell ( RHINO elite ) says that it is time to move on to other things.

Mc Connell is content with the results of the Investigator General ~ which is pablum

So as far as the RHINO elite are concerned , the situation has been exposed ;

there has been no prosecution or investigation even above the level of an audit once the results pointed towards Washington!!

As long as the IRS scandle continues to suppress the Tea Party Conservatives , he’s happier than a pig in sh*t / mud !!

And the RHINO elite can continue to assist in the sacking of the country !
29 posted on Friday, June 21, 2013 4:56:08 PM by Tilted Irish Kilt (“Freedom is never more than one generation away from extinction.” - Ronald Reagan)"

Tata Nano among 5 cheap cars made in India failing crash tests, cars were meant to upgrade India working class masses 'from two-to four-wheelers'-AFP

"The NCAP said the five vehicles it tested accounted for about 20 percent of all new cars sold in India annually."..."Tata has said it would like to export the Nano but has previously raised safety problems as an impediment."...

1/31/14, "Tata Nano and other Indian small cars fail crash tests," AFP via Yahoo Finance UK

"The Tata Nano, billed as the world's cheapest car, and a host of other top-selling small models from India have failed their first independent crash tests, a global safety group said Friday.

The five entry-level vehicles -- including the country's best-selling small car the Suzuki-Maruti Alto 800, as well as the Ford Figo, the Hyundai (KSE: 011760.KS - news) i10 and the Volkswagen Polo -- scored no stars out of five for protection.

The tests, carried out by the New Car Assessment Programme (NCAP), saw the basic models, all without airbags, driven at 64 kilometres an hour (40 miles) into a block simulating a head-on collision.

All would leave the driver facing life-threatening injuries.

"It's worrying to see levels of safety that are 20 years behind the five-star standards now common in Europe and North America," said the head of NCAP Global, Max Mosley, the former chief of international motorsport.

NCAP also tested the cars in a crash simulation according to United Nations standards -- a frontal collision at the slightly slower speed of 56 kilometres an hour -- and none of them passed. 

Small vehicles are the biggest segment of the price-sensitive Indian car market, which is coveted by global brands and domestic manufacturers as working-class consumers upgrade from two- to four-wheelers.

The NCAP said the five vehicles it tested accounted for about 20 percent of all new cars sold in India annually.

The Tata Nano was the brainchild of the former boss of the Tata conglomerate Ratan Tata who wanted a cheap car for the masses. But it has flopped since its launch in 2009, partly due to poor marketing.

The NCAP tested only the basic models of the cars in question and it said the Figo and Polo would provide much better protection if fitted with airbags, which were an optional extra.

But the Nano, the i10 and the Alto (Other OTC: ALTO - news) had "inadequate" structures that meant that even air bags would "not be effective in reducing the risk of serious injury".

As a result of the tests, Volkswagen (Other OTC: VLKAF - news) has withdrawn its Polo model without airbags, NCAP said.

The models tested were bought locally and any exports from Hyundai, Ford and Volkswagen, which have factories in India, would be subject to safety regulations in their final market.

Tata has said it would like to export the Nano but has previously raised safety problems as an impediment. 

Footage of the crash tests can be viewed at:"


1/31/14, "Popular Indian cars fail crash tests," BBC


Obama Denmark Prime Minister selfie pal on thin ice after making deal giving Goldman Sachs 18% of Denmark state energy utility-NY Times Dealbook

"Prime Minister Thorning-Schmidt, who is best known internationally for her recent “selfie” with President Obama at the funeral of Nelson Mandela, said she would form a new government....The party’s withdrawal from the coalition left the government of Helle Thorning-Schmidt, the prime minister, with a tenuous grip on power."...
1/30/14, "Goldman Deal Threatens Danish Government," NY Times Dealbook, Danny Hakim

Dec. 10, 2013

"When Denmark gave the global financial giant Goldman Sachs the go-ahead on Thursday to buy a stake in its state utility, the move was not exactly followed by a celebratory signing ceremony....

Under the terms of the deal, Goldman would invest about $1.45 billion for an 18 percent stake in Dong Energy, the state utility, which has become a green energy exemplar in its push for electricity from wind turbines. Though the deal buys far from a controlling share, the minority stake would come with special privileges.

Goldman would get a seat on the utility’s board. And the bank, along with two Danish pension funds, would have veto power over changes in the utility’s strategy or its executive suite — specifically the utility’s chief executive or chief financial officer. The Danish pension funds are investing about $550 million.

Among the questions about the deal is whether it is being structured to avoid taxes. Goldman’s investment will be made through a company based in Luxembourg. Danish Broadcasting has reported that shares in the Luxembourg company are partly owned by entities based in the Cayman Islands and Delaware....

So divided was the Socialist People’s Party that it withdrew its ministers from the country’s governing coalition. Some party members said the deal ceded too much power to Goldman. Annette Vilhelmsen, the party’s leader, who supported the deal, stepped down from her leadership role since she could not reach agreement within her party.

The party’s withdrawal from the coalition left the government of Helle Thorning-Schmidt, the prime minister, with a tenuous grip on power.

That so many Danes have been aghast at the idea of giving Goldman Sachs a prominent role in the country’s energy future reflects how far the damage to the investment bank’s reputation has spread since the financial crisis.

However much the financial world might envy Goldman’s trading prowess, many Danes see Goldman as an emblem of an industry that helped cause the crisis and then profited handsomely even as much of the Continent still struggles to recover.

Thousands of people have taken to the streets in recent weeks to protest the deal; a prominent banner featured the vampire squid that critics have come to embrace as a symbol of Goldman Sachs. Nearly 200,000 Danes signed an online petition against the deal, a record.

The deal was approved on Thursday by a parliamentary committee. The departure of the Socialists left the two remaining parties in a precarious position....

Dong Energy has a number of businesses, but it is perhaps best known of late for its leading role in building offshore wind farms. Dong also drills for oil and gas in the North Sea, has about one million gas and electric customers and operates coal and biomass power plants....

On Wednesday, an estimated 4,000 people gathered in front of Parliament to protest the deal. A few supporters also turned up, including Rasmus Jarlov, a member of the Copenhagen City Council and the Conservative Party.

During an interview, he was hit by a snowball, and later, he and three other conservatives were attacked by protesters....

But Prime Minister Thorning-Schmidt, who is best known internationally for her recent “selfie” with President Obama at the funeral of Nelson Mandela, said she would form a new government. The two remaining parties in the coalition government, her Social Democrats and the Social Liberal party, hold about a third of the seats in the Parliament. The Socialists said they would still support the coalition in parliamentary votes. The governing coalition is also backed by a far left party.

“It is quite an odd day in the Danish Parliament, considering one of the three parties that was in the government has left,” Benny Engelbrecht, a Social Democratic lawmaker, said in an interview. He said the departure of the Socialist People’s Party “was over a number of things, but inspired by this.”"...Image above, 12/10/13, "US President Barack Obama (R) and British Prime Minister David Cameron pose for a picture with Denmark’s Prime Minister Helle Thorning Schmidt (C) next to US First Lady Michelle Obama (R) during the memorial service of South African former president Nelson Mandela at the FNB Stadium (Soccer City) in Johannesburg on December 10, 2013....AFP PHOTO / ROBERTO SCHMIDT (Photo credit should read ROBERTO SCHMIDT/AFP/Getty Images)," via Wash. Times


US home flipping increased 16% in 2013, $400,000+ properties showed biggest increase-Realty Trac

1/28/14, "U.S. Home Flipping Increases 16 Percent in 2013 and Average Gross Profit on Flips Rises to More Than $62,000 in Q4," Realty Trac staff

"IRVINE, Calif., Jan. 30, 2014, RealtyTrac® (, the nation’s leading source for comprehensive housing data, today released its Year-End and Q4 2013 Home Flipping Report, which shows 156,862 single family home flips — where a home is purchased and subsequently sold again within six months — in 2013, up 16 percent from 2012 and up 114 percent from 2011....

The report also shows the biggest increases in flipping nationwide occurred on homes with a flipped price of $400,000 or more. Although flipping increased across all price ranges, flips on homes with a flipped sale price above $400,000 increased 36 percent from 2012, while flips on homes with a flipped sale price at or below $400,000 increased 17 percent from 2012.

The average time to complete a flip nationwide was 84 days in 2013, down from 86 days in 2012 and down from 100 days in 2011....

Major metro areas with big increases in home flipping in 2013 compared to 2012 included Virginia Beach (up 141 percent), Jacksonville, Fla., (up 92 percent), Baltimore, Md. (up 88 percent), Atlanta (up 79 percent), Richmond, Va., (up 57 percent), Washington, D.C. (up 52 percent) and Detroit (up 51 percent).

Major markets with big decreases in home flipping in 2013 compared to 2012 included Philadelphia (down 43 percent), Phoenix (down 32 percent), Tampa (down 17 percent), Houston (down 17 percent), Denver (down 15 percent), Minneapolis (down 9 percent), and Sacramento (down 5 percent).

Broker perspectives

“Investors have not lost interest in purchasing and flipping homes. In fact, now that we are seeing home price appreciation they are more interested than ever,” said Sheldon Detrick, CEO of Prudential Detrick/Alliance Realty, covering the Oklahoma City and Tulsa, Okla., markets.  “The challenge for many would-be flippers in our markets is a shortage of available inventory to flip, as evidenced by the decrease in the number of homes flipped in both Tulsa and Oklahoma City in 2013 compared to 2012.” "...via Zero Hedge


Pending home sales collapse in Dec. 2013, 'surprises' economists, lowest since Oct. 2011, all 4 regions drop, Nov. 2013 revised down

1/30/14, "No, The Plunge In Home Sales Was "Not" Due To Cold Weather," Zero Hedge

"This morning's utter collapse in pending home sales - a 6-sigma miss by 'economists' unaware that it was cold in December - has been ushered away on the back of "weather" reasoning. However, a glance at the chart below confirms this is total bullshit. As Goldman Sachs admits "broad-based declines by region suggest that colder-than-average weather was likely not the primary driver."
Via Goldman Sachs,
Pending home sales dropped 8.7% in December (vs. consensus -0.3%), the largest decline since the expiration of the first-time homebuyer tax credit in 2010. Sales declined in the Northeast (-10.3%), West (-9.8%), South (-8.8%), and Midwest (-6.8%).
The broad-based declines by region suggest that colder-than-average weather was likely not the primary driver, given slightly warmer-than-average temperatures on the Pacific coast in December.
Although a noisy series, the December weakness in pending home sales is an unfavorable indicator for near-term existing home sales, and follows disappointing new home sales already released for the month.
So, if it wasn't the weather... could it be that fast-money has left the bubble and what is left of the real-money mortgage-paying homebuyers are all that remains?" map from NOAA Climate Prediction Center via Not Jim Cramer twitter. (Zero Hedge didn't provide a link for the Goldman Sachs quote and I couldn't find it anywhere myself. Susan)


1/30/14, "Pending homes plunge, surprising economists," CNBC, Katie Little

"Signed contracts to buy existing homes dropped 8.7 percent in December as abnormally cold weather hit much of the U.S., according to a new report from the National Association of Realtors.

The plunge caught economists by surprise. Economists polled by Reuters had forecast pending home sales would tick up 0.3 percent. 
This pending home sales index fell to 92.4 from a downwardly revised 101.2 in November. These signed contracts are an indicator of sales in January and February, and are at the lowest level since October 2011....

All four major regions in the U.S. saw declines.

Of these, the northeast saw the steepest fall while the Midwest's drop was smallest in December from the month before. Still, the NAR forecast that total existing-home sales should be close to 5.1 million this year, about the same as 2013, although inventory is limited in much of the U.S."


'Casting pall on economy,' Dec. 2013 durable goods orders drop 4.3 %, expected 1.8% rise, Nov. 2013 revised down, economists humiliated again

1/28/14, "US durable goods swoon in December, casting pall on economy," Reuters via CNBC

"Orders for long-lasting U.S. manufactured goods unexpectedly fell in December as did a gauge of planned business spending on capital goods, which could cast a shadow on an otherwise bright economic outlook.

The Commerce Department said on Tuesday durable goods orders dropped 4.3 percent, pulled down by weak demand for transportation equipment, primary metals, computers and electronic products and capital goods.

Last month's decline in orders for durable goods, which range from toasters to aircraft, was the largest since July and reversed November's revised 2.6 percent rise

Economists polled by Reuters had expected orders to rise 1.8 percent in December after November's previously reported 3.4 percent advance.

Durable goods orders fell despite a strong rise in aircraft orders at Boeing. The aircraft company reported on its website that it received orders for 319 planes last month compared with 110 in November. 

Orders may have dropped because the model used by the government to iron out seasonal fluctuations was likely anticipating an increase in aircraft orders in December anyway. Excluding transportation, orders fell 1.6 percent, the biggest decline since March, after edging up 0.1 percent in November. 

While durable goods data is volatile from month to month, details of the report could support views that factory activity will cool off early this year after output grew at its fastest pace in nearly two years in the fourth quarter.
Non-defense capital goods orders excluding aircraft, a closely watched proxy for business spending plans, fell 1.3 percent after rising by a revised 2.6 percent in November. 

Economists had expected orders for these so-called core capital goods to increase 0.5 percent in December after a previously reported 4.1 percent surge in November. 

Shipments of core capital goods, which are used to calculate equipment spending in the government's measure of gross domestic product, slipped 0.2 percent last month." chart above, Commerce Dept. via Reuters


Jobless claims jump 'unexpectedly' for week ending 1/25/14, claims from two weeks ago revised up by 3000

1/30/14, "Jobless claims jump unexpectedly,", Steve Benen

"After several weeks of relative stability in initial unemployment claims, the latest figures from the Labor Department were unexpectedly discouraging.

"The number of people who applied for U.S. unemployment benefits rose by 19,000 to 348,000 in the seven days ended Jan. 25, marking the highest level in six weeks. Economists surveyed by MarketWatch had expected claims to climb to 330,000 on a seasonally adjusted basis.""... 


1/30/14, "U.S. jobless claims jump 19,000 to 348,000," MarketWatch, Bartash

"Applications for unemployment benefits highest in six weeks."

"Initial claims from two weeks ago were revised up to 329,000 from an original read of 326,000, based on more complete data." (last sentence in article)


1/30/14, "Initial Jobless Claims Miss; Back To Levels First Seen 6 Months Ago," Zero Hedge

"The trend that was so many momentum-chasing bulls friend for so long has ended. The steady downward drift in jobless claims- all noise, debt-ceiling, winter storm, and software glitches aside - has ended. Initial claims rose 19k this week, missed expectations by the most in 6 weeks, and jumped to the same levels seen 6 months ago. The Labor Department says "nothing unusual" about this week's data but noted one state 'estimated' claims last week. Total benefit rolls dropped by 16k this week (back under 3 million) as emergency claimants remains "0". 

For those of the "seasonals are to blame" persuasion... this is the worst start to the year since the financial crisis..." (charts at link)


Not so fast, failed hack Pete Wehner, key insider in Bush admin. that destroyed the GOP and handed the US to the radical left. Pete should explain 'Again and Again and Again' what he did wrong and what reparations he'll pay for millions of lives he helped destroy

1/30/14, "Not So Fast, Pete Wehner," Jeffrey Lord, American Spectator

 "As Ronald Reagan said to Jimmy Carter: “Well, there you go again.”

There goes Pete Wehner again (and again and again and again.)

This time the target is Texas Senator Ted Cruz. Over at Commentary Wehner leads with a Cruz quote thusly:
“I understand that there are a lot of folks in the media that love to talk about the shutdown from four months ago.”
“What we ought to be talking about is the fact that we have the lowest labor force participating in 30 years since 1978, that Obamacare has taken away more than 5 million people’s health insurance plans, that people are hurting, that income inequality has increased under the Obama agenda and that there is an abuse of power and lawlessness. So that’s what we ought to be talking about. Efforts that distract from that conversation, I think, are deliberate efforts of smoke and mirrors distracting from the questions coming from the American people.”
This Cruz remark sends Wehner into yet another case of the moderate dithers.
Scolds Pete: 
Of course it’s clear to every sentient human being that the Cruz & Co. gambit badly backfired. It achieved nothing useful. It deflected attention away from the awful rollout of the ObamaCare website. And it damaged the reputation of the GOP. The public, in overwhelming numbers, didn’t like the government shutdown—and by overwhelming numbers voters blamed Republicans for it.
Clear to every sentient conservative is that Ted Cruz drew a Reaganesque line in the sand that made clear to Americans Obamacare was a looming disaster and everything possible should be done to stop it in its tracks.  The tactic succeeded.  While Establishment Republicans in the Senate sabotaged Cruz and Company, now that millions of Americans have lost their health insurance there is no doubt whatsoever that Cruz was doing the right thing to crisply identify the GOP as the party that tried to keep those millions from losing their health care.

But there is that interesting part of Wehner’s sentiments that actually should be applied to Wehner himself.

What part? This part.

So here’s my recommendation: Unless and until Senator Cruz admits the errors of his ways—unless he is willing to concede how flawed his judgment was and explains to us what he’s learned since then—the press should keep asking the junior senator from Texas about the shutdown. Again and again and again.
If Ted Cruz thinks it was such a terrific idea, let him claim ownership of it at every conceivable opportunity.

Let’s rewrite these Wehner comments this way:

So here’s my recommendation: Unless and until Pete Wehner admits the errors of his moderate ways—unless he is willing to concede how flawed his judgment and that of the Bush administration was and explains to us what he’s learned since then—the press should keep asking the ex-Bush staffer about that administration’s record in expanding government. Again and again and again.

If Pete Wehner thinks it was such a terrific idea, let him claim ownership of it at every conceivable opportunity. 

Specifically, we await Pete claiming ownership “at every conceivable opportunity” of these facts as cited by the always perceptive Dan Mitchell over at a post on International Liberty. 

Dan’s headline:
Compared to the Reagan Era, the Bush-Obama Years Have Been a Fiscal Nightmare
He goes on to write….and has the inevitable charts to back him up:

As you can see in this chart, Reagan managed to limit average domestic spending increases to less than one percent per year. These figures, which are adjusted for inflation, show that spending has grown more than five times as rapidly during the Bush-Obama years.
The comparison is even more dramatic if we examine the average annual increase in inflation-adjusted domestic spending. In other words, we’re looking at how much spending increased each year, not the percentage change. During the Reagan years, overall domestic spending grew less than $10 billion per year, while spending has soared more than $100 billion per year during the Bush-Obama era. Remember that we’re using inflation-adjusted dollars, so this is an apples-to-apples comparison.
….Last but not least, don’t forget that FY2009 began October 1, 2008, nearly four months before Obama took office, and the bad numbers for that fiscal year generally should be attributed to Bush. Yes, Obama added to FY2009 spending with an omnibus appropriations bill and the faux stimulus, but I’ve estimated that 96 percent of that year’s spending was the result of Bush Administration decisions.
Moving from Dan’s point, there’s this list over here detailing some of the Bush government expansion: 
  • No Child Left Behind Act of 2002
  • Medicare Prescription Drug, Improvement, and Modernization Act of 2003
  • American Dream Down Payment Act of 2003
  • Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act of 2002
  • Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002
  • Homeland Security Act of 2002
  • Safe, Accountable, Flexible, and Efficient Transportation Equity Act of 2005
  • Department of Homeland Security Appropriations Act, 2007
  • Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007
  • Food, Conservation, and Energy Act of 2008
  • Economic Stimulus Act of 2008
  • Supplemental Appropriations Act of 2008
  • Housing and Economic Recovery Act of 2008
  • Consumer Product Safety Improvement Act of 2008
  • Emergency Economic Stabilization Act of 2008
To be clear.

In a discussion like this it is necessary to say that in this corner we are not Bush-haters. To the contrary, President Bush 43 did a magnificent job in responding to 9/11. And Bush 41, in whose administration I served over there in Reaganville, the Kemp crew at HUD, is a genuine war hero and wonderful classy man. 

These are political differences that have to do with the proof-of-the-pudding failure of moderate Republicans. An idea that both Bushes subscribed to and were in fact not alone — far from alone — in so doing.

In Steven Hayward’s first volume of The Age of Reagan: The Fall of the Old Liberal Order 1964-1980, there is a small but telling story.

Back in the Nixon days, President Nixon, advised by his domestic policy guru, the liberal Harvard professor and future New York Senator Daniel Patrick Moynihan, stunningly signed on to the idea of a guaranteed annual income. 

Who stepped forward to oppose what became known as the Family Assistance Plan? That would be California Governor Reagan, who sent out a letter to Republicans in Congress (who in the day were in the minority in both House and Senate) saying the program would cost $15 billion and open the door to endless increases in a new entitlement.

Most Republicans in Washington sent Reagan a perfunctory acknowledgment of his letter. One GOP Congressman, however, took Reagan on. That would be Texas Congressman George H.W. Bush, using classic moderate logic that is at this moment being employed on immigration, logic that was employed in both the Bush 41 and Bush administrations.  Congressman Bush argued that Reagan’s figures were wrong — the actual cost number was not $15 billion but $4 billion. FAP, argued Bush, was actually cheap and in fact could serve conservative ends by providing a work requirement, remove incentives for family break up and so on. Reagan fired back, informed by a prominent Senate Democrat on the Senate Finance Committee  (Harry Byrd of Virginia) that in fact Reagan’s estimate was low and that indeed costs would soar on a brand new entitlement.

In short, the man who would become Bush 41 was making the same argument in an earlier form that moderate Republicans make today. Expand the government, just do it cheaper, and it helps the GOP politically. This was exactly the Bush 43 logic on No Child Left Behind as explained by Karl Rove in Rove’s memoirs. Tellingly, in 1970, when Congressman Bush ran against Lloyd Bentsen for a Texas seat in the US Senate, Bentsen pummeled Bush for supporting “big welfare” and Bush lost the Senate race. Just as years later, on his own in the White House after campaigning as Reagan’s heir, Bush 41’s moderate instincts got him in trouble over raising taxes, losing him re-election with a mere 37% of the vote.

So to conclude.

Not so fast, Pete Wehner. To repeat:

So here’s my recommendation: Unless and until Pete Wehner admits the errors of his moderate ways–unless he is willing to concede how flawed his judgment and that of the Bush administration/GOP Establishment  was and explains to us what he’s learned since then–conservatives should keep asking the ex-Bush staffer about that administration’s record in expanding government. Again and again and again.

If Pete Wehner thinks it was such a terrific idea, let him claim ownership of it at every conceivable opportunity.

In truth?

One suspects he will.

Which illustrates the GOP’s problem exactly." via Mark Levin


Thursday, January 30, 2014

Parasite Bushie Peter Wehner needs to apologize to us 'Again and again and again' for his part in Bush crowd destruction of millions of lives and handing this country to the radical left. A normal person with Wehner's record would've retired from public life in shame

1/30/14, "Bushies Like Peter Wehner and Rove Fight Against American Greatness," Jen Kuznicki

"Peter Wehner, former Bush staffer who called Karl Rove a “phenomenon of nature,” has the gall to attack well-loved Senator Ted Cruz from the great State of Texas..

Here is some of his impotent lashing via Mark Levin’s facebook:
Unless and until Senator Cruz admits the errors of his ways–unless he is willing to concede how flawed his judgment was and explains to us what he’s learned since then–the press should keep asking the junior senator from Texas about the shutdown. Again and again and again.
Well, who the hell died and made Wehner King?

This is the divisive nature of the Bush acolytes on display.  A sitting Senator, who is absolutely loved by the GOP grassroots, who attempted to actually listen to his constituents and do something about Obamacare, was sabotaged by 25 of his own caucus in favor of Obamacare, and is now continuously hen-pecked by the establishment Bush cronies, hoping to knock him down.

It won’t work, because Wehner’s big government movement within the GOP is limping along, and will die out in short order. The people of the United States, to quote Ronald Reagan, “weren’t put on this Earth to become managers of decline.”

These Bushies will bitch, piss and moan about actual constitutional conservatives doing what needs to be done for the good of the country, because they don’t want the government defunded or limited in any manner.  They want to be the managers of decline, they want the expedience of lucrative government relationships and the power that comes with having at their fingertips, a government large enough to take everything from the people, their livelihood, their personal privacy, and their freedoms, so long as it’s for the “good of the whole.”

These Bushies are at the heart of what is wrong with the GOP, their heavy-handedness is that liberal in them, screaming to come to the fore, to control your life, to be the King George we forced out in order to create this “more perfect” system that they have helped destroy.

They use and abuse Reagan’s words, they use and abuse Madison’s words, they use and abuse Burke, in order to provide the false historical context that would give them the credentials needed to fool enough people into believing they are conservative.
They hate conservatism.  They hated all of Reagan’s talk about limiting government and the subversion of God in our country, they hated when he talked about abolishing the Department of Education, created by their big-government heroes, they call the increase of government, “good government” when it only strangles you and me. They want that power, they want it bad. And they will back a Democrat before backing a Reaganite.

They are identified by their impotent attacks on Ted Cruz and Rand Paul and Mike Lee.  They are the punks who have, as Jeff Lord has pointed out, “mortgages, not principles.” Since Reagan accepted G.H.W. Bush as his vice-presidential nominee, the Bushies have bled that capitol dry, and they persist, with more cronies and more useless punk staffers like Brad Dayspring.

Peter Wehner is a Rove lapdog, he is not a conservative, he is not principled. He is the dancing fool of the surrender caucus. He believes that the shutdown is why people hate the GOP?  It’s the opposite. People hate the GOP for not standing up to this President and not standing on principle. People hate the GOP because people like Wehner have it in their grasp for the time being. The best thing that could happen to the GOP is forcing people like Wehner into the back seat by an overwhelming slap down by Reagan Democrats and the GOP conservative base.

But if Wehner wants to talk about the shutdown, fine, we can talk about it.

Ted Cruz pleaded with GOP Senators to stand with the American people.  25 of those Senators stood with the Democrats instead.  Defunding big government is not their forte. They called Cruz’s work a “shutdown strategy” before it was even off the ground, they would not help him stand with the American people. So they can feel the power of government who forced those WWII Vets out of their memorial, because big government, with them, is here to stay.  They can fantasize about how great it would be to disrupt the lives of people who defended this nation, while at the same time, laying out the red carpet for illegals demanding amnesty. You can’t have it both ways. The Bushies stand with those who would tear down this nation’s founding in order to be at the helm someday, lording over us peasants. There is no honor in sabotaging a winnable fight as the 25 Republicans in the Senate did. Collaborating with the enemy as Quisling did still brought the Third Reich to Norway.

Enough. America is not going to stand by and let those Bush sycophants grab the controls of government as they have before, barely, and continue to send us more unelectables like McCain and Romney. Big government robs the American people of freedom and the dignity and respect they deserve, and the Bushies share the view of leftist Democrats that the people are not to be trusted with more freedom.

America needs a Reaganite, and we will be in direct opposition to the Bushies, and the fight is on. 

The Greatness of America is her people, allowed maximum freedom by limited government. We need people like Reagan, who wanted to limit government, not the Bushes, who just don’t get it. Amongst the rot of DC, we’ll hold those who fought for America with high honor and respect, and those who selfishly want political expedience, taking cheap shots at honorable people, can thank us for bringing back American greatness, by listening to her people, and striking against her enemies within."

Related Articles:

Wehner Hearts Rove
Wehner: Compromise and Moderation
Magnificent Imbeciles: The Enemy Within
Wehner Incorrectly Cites Madison for Compromise
Peter Wehner Attacks Phyllis Schlafly
Quotes To Help Peter Wehner Address His Defeatism
Peter Wehner’s Closed Mind
Peter Wehner and the Barry/Carter and Reagan Debate


Comment: Rupert Murdoch deserves more credit for keeping the Bushies front and center. Murdoch hires failed Bush hacks across Fox News to guarantee the radical left remains in power.

P.S. ObamaCare could easily have been defunded anytime after Jan. 2011. The House has sole power in financial matters, can't be vetoed by the Senate or President. Boehner has never allowed a standalone, up or down vote to defund (not repeal) ObamaCare to come to the floor. He also has never allowed a vote to approve ObamaCare as a tax. It's legal as a tax but all taxes must be approved by the House. Boehner won't hold the necessary vote. We gave him a landslide in Nov. 2010 for the single purpose of defunding ObamaCare. Boehner and the GOP ignored that and chose to further punish America.


In 2007 Peggy Noonan said both George Bushes had kicked conservatives out of the GOP but conservatives didn't seem to realize it, were hanging around like "battered wives:"  

6/2/2007, "Too bad," Wall St. Journal column by Peggy Noonan:

"What political conservatives and on-the-ground Republicans must understand at this point is that they are not breaking with the White House on immigration. They are not resisting, fighting and thereby setting down a historical marker -- "At this point the break became final." That's not what's happening. What conservatives and Republicans must recognize is that the White House has broken with them. What President Bush is doing, and has been doing for some time, is sundering a great political coalition. This is sad, and it holds implications not only for one political party but for the American future.

The White House doesn't need its traditional supporters anymore, because its problems are way beyond being solved by the base. And the people in the administration don't even much like the base. Desperate straits have left them liberated, and they are acting out their disdain. Leading Democrats often think their base is slightly mad but at least their heart is in the right place. This White House thinks its base is stupid and that its heart is in the wrong place.

For almost three years, arguably longer, conservative Bush supporters have felt like sufferers of battered wife syndrome. You don't like endless gushing spending, the kind that assumes a high and unstoppable affluence will always exist, and the tax receipts will always flow in? Too bad! You don't like expanding governmental authority and power? Too bad. You think the war was wrong or is wrong? Too bad.

But on immigration it has changed from "Too bad" to "You're bad."

The president has taken to suggesting that opponents of his immigration bill are unpatriotic -- they "don't want to do what's right for America." His ally Sen. Lindsey Graham has said, "We're gonna tell the bigots to shut up." On Fox last weekend he vowed to "push back."

Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff suggested opponents would prefer illegal immigrants be killed; Commerce Secretary Carlos Gutierrez said those who oppose the bill want "mass deportation." Former Bush speechwriter Michael Gerson said those who oppose the bill are "anti-immigrant" and suggested they suffer from "rage" and "national chauvinism."

Why would they speak so insultingly, with such hostility, of opponents who are concerned citizens? And often, though not exclusively, concerned conservatives? It is odd, but it is of a piece with, or a variation on, the "Too bad" governing style. And it is one that has, day by day for at least the past three years, been tearing apart the conservative movement.

I suspect the White House and its allies have turned to name calling because they're defensive, and they're defensive because they know they have produced a big and indecipherable mess of a bill -- one that is literally bigger than the Bible, though as someone noted last week, at least we actually had a few years to read the Bible. The White House and its supporters seem to be marshalling not facts but only sentiments, and self-aggrandizing ones at that. They make a call to emotions -- this is, always and on every issue, the administration's default position -- but not, I think, to seriously influence the debate....

If they'd really wanted to help, as opposed to braying about their own wonderfulness, they would have created not one big bill but a series of smaller bills, each of which would do one big clear thing, the first being to close the border. Once that was done -- actually and believably done -- the country could relax in the knowledge that the situation was finally not day by day getting worse. They could feel some confidence. And in that confidence real progress could begin.

The beginning of my own sense of separation from the Bush administration came in January 2005, when the president declared that it is now the policy of the United States to eradicate tyranny in the world, and that the survival of American liberty is dependent on the liberty of every other nation. This was at once so utopian and so aggressive that it shocked me. For others the beginning of distance might have been Katrina and the incompetence it revealed, or the depth of the mishandling and misjudgments of Iraq.

What I came in time to believe is that the great shortcoming of this White House, the great thing it is missing, is simple wisdom. Just wisdom -- a sense that they did not invent history, that this moment is not all there is, that man has lived a long time and there are things that are true of him, that maturity is not the same thing as cowardice, that personal loyalty is not a good enough reason to put anyone in charge of anything, that the way it works in politics is a friend becomes a loyalist becomes a hack, and actually at this point in history we don't need hacks.

One of the things I have come to think the past few years is that the Bushes, father and son, though different in many ways, are great wasters of political inheritance. 

They throw it away as if they'd earned it and could do with it what they liked. Bush senior inherited a vibrant country and a party at peace with itself. He won the leadership of a party that had finally, at great cost, by 1980, fought itself through to unity and come together on shared principles. Mr. Bush won in 1988 by saying he would govern as Reagan had. Yet he did not understand he'd been elected to Reagan's third term. He thought he'd been elected because they liked him. And so he raised taxes, sundered a hard-won coalition, and found himself shocked to lose the presidency, and for eight long and consequential years. He had many virtues, but he wasted his inheritance.

Bush the younger came forward, presented himself as a conservative, garnered all the frustrated hopes of his party, turned them into victory, and not nine months later was handed a historical trauma that left his country rallied around him, lifting him, and his party bonded to him. He was disciplined and often daring, but in time he sundered the party that rallied to him, and broke his coalition into pieces. He threw away his inheritance. I do not understand such squandering.

Now conservatives and Republicans are going to have to win back their party. They are going to have to break from those who have already broken from them. This will require courage, serious thinking and an ability to do what psychologists used to call letting go. This will be painful, but it's time. It's more than time." via bizzyblog


2/20/13, As Country Club Republicans Link Up With The Democratic Ruling Class, Millions Of Voters Are Orphaned,” Angelo Codevilla, Forbes
“Increasingly the top people in government, corporations, and the media collude and demand submission as did the royal courts of old.”…



Comment: It's fine if Republicans find their ideology compatible with Democrats'. They simply need to immediately file paperwork making their Democrat status official.  


Obama broadcasts his adoration for John Boehner, cites 'son of a barkeeper' in SOTU in both 2014 and 2011. Boehner gives 'thumbs up' to Obama and applauds radical left priorities which are now identical to GOP priorities

1/29/14, "Boehner Gives Obama Thumbs-Up At SOTU," TPM, C. Thompson

Boehner Thumbs up on Barkeep
"House Speaker John Boehner (R-OH) gave President Barack Obama a thumbs-up Tuesday night when the President shouted him out as an example of American upward mobility....
"It’s how the daughter of a factory worker is CEO of America’s largest automaker; how the son of a barkeeper is Speaker of the House; how the son of a single mom can be President of the greatest nation on Earth," he continued.

The audience gave Boehner a standing ovation when he was mentioned." (video at link). image above from TPM, MSNBC


1/29/14, "Friends at last? Obama and John Boehner share warm moment at State of the Union," Eric Pfeiffer,

May 2011

"The highlight came after Obama singled out Boehner for rising from his humble roots to lead Congress:
“They believe, and I believe, that here in America, our success should depend not on accident of birth, but the strength of our work ethic and the scope of our dreams,” Obama said. “That’s what drew our forebears here. It’s how the daughter of a factory worker is CEO of America’s largest automaker; how the son of a barkeeper is speaker of the House; how the son of a single mom can be president of the greatest nation on Earth.”
After Obama’s comment, Boehner stood to applaud. Clearly touched by the gesture, he smiled warmly in the president’s direction before offering a salute to the audience.

The comment immediately went viral across social media, with “#sonofabarkeep” becoming the top trending U.S. topic on Twitter. “#speakerofthehouse” followed closely behind."
Interestingly, it was not the first time that President Obama has singled out Boehner for his relationship with his father during a State of the Union address. In 2011, Obama said, "That dream is why someone who began by sweeping the floors of his father’s Cincinnati bar can preside as speaker of the House in the greatest nation on earth."
So what is the state of affairs between the two men, exactly?

Via Twitter, NBC’s “Meet the Press” host David Gregory said the relationship may have strengthened in recent times:
There were also some noteworthy moments of generosity on Boehner’s end, in which he applauded comments from Obama, even on issues in which the two men do not agree.

By our count, Boehner applauded at least 18 times throughout the speech. Some of those were obvious, bipartisan moments, such as when Obama saluted the armed forces and when he introduced first lady Michelle Obama.

But Boehner also applauded politely in a few more contentious moments, including when Obama endorsed using federal funds to hire more construction workers, on passing immigration reform and on ensuring the right to vote."...

ClimateWire 'reporters' Lehmann and Lippman cheer Jan. 2014 Obama climate statements as 'fact' and 'sugar rush' yet two major Obama 2013 climate statements alleged as 'facts' have yet to be confirmed by the EPA, UN IPCC, or any scientist

1/29/14, "Obama tells sidelined lawmakers that climate change is 'a fact'," Evan Lehmann and Daniel Lippman, E&E reporters ClimateWire

President Obama declared that the uncertainty around climate change is at an end, telling Congress "the debate is over" about its impacts on the Earth. His assertion in the State of the Union address served as a sugar rush for Democrats...."Climate change is a fact," Obama said in the first half of his speech."...Lehmann image via LinkedIn. Daniel Lippman, LinkedIn

The Republican Party 'is hell-bent on rubber stamping Obama's agenda.' Daniel Horowitz, RedState

1/28/14, "The State of the Republican Party," Daniel Horowitz, RedState

"The big story for conservatives is not the President’s State of the Union Address.  It is the broken state of the Republican Party – the party that is supposed to serve as a bulwark against the poisonous ideas propagated in that speech.

It certainly is egregious that we have a president who is brazenly implementing wage controls without congressional approval.  It is reprehensible that he speaks of inequality while promulgating regulations that throw people off their healthcare and destroy jobs in Appalachia.

But it is even more reprehensible that we have an opposition party that is hell-bent on rubber stamping Obama’s agenda, while engaging in a civil war with the party base that desires a bold contrast.

Obama is requesting endless debt ceiling increases.  Mitch McConnell and John Boehner have made it clear they agree with his fallacious premise about default and plan to raise it, yet somehow extract concessions.

Obama has doubled down on Obamacare.  Yet GOP leaders are owned by lobbyists who have made it clear they will never repeal the law.

Obama has shredded the Constitution and used illegal administrative power to advance legislation that never passed Congress.  The GOP leadership has made it clear they will never use the power of the purse vested in the House to clamp down on those illegal maneuvers.

Obama talks about the endless need to intervene in the private economy, yet Republicans are prepared to pass a $956 billion Farm Bill, which locks in the President’s baseline for food stamp spending and entrenches the federal government into every aspect of Agriculture.

Obama speaks of the need to make “investments” in the nation, yet Republicans respond by passing a $1.1 trillion omnibus bill.

Obama panders to radical socially liberal interests in order to remake our society, and Republicans are silent on “social issues.”

And finally, Obama speaks passionately about our obligation to open our citizenship and welfare state to illegal immigrants and the rest of the world without limits, yet Republicans respond… offering the same!  Their alacrity to open our doors and pocketbooks to illegals has already empowered the drug cartels to smuggle in more potential beneficiaries and future Democrat voters.

On Politico’s front page you will find an article titled “Boehner Unchained,” which details the Speaker’s new mission to join with Obama and fight conservatives.  You will also find an article titled “GOP Ready to Surrender on Debt Ceiling.”  Now couple that with tomorrow’s vote on the Farm Bill, and we have a full-blown crisis within the party.

Luckily, some members are starting to get the message that the establishment doesn’t share our values. When the House passed its version of the farm bill last year divorced from food stamp spending, we warned that they would reinsert it back into the bill in conference.  Not only did they remarry agriculture with food stamps, the conference committee gave Democrats almost everything they wanted among the disputed items with House Republicans.  There are even some environmental conservation regulations that liberals never thought they’d win in the deal.  Members are finally starting to understand that we will always get rolled during private negotiations.

And the reason is quite simple.  GOP leaders don’t share our values.  To the extent they humor us with some shiny objects it is designed to get the bills to conference so they can inject their real priorities into the final agreement.  Now some House conservatives are getting a taste of what a potential immigration conference committee would look like.

We all know that this president is dangerous.  We need to defeat him and his party.  But if we focus exclusively on Obama and the priorities he laid out tonight and ignore the fire within the Republican Party, we are destined to play into his hands.

But the good news is that reinforcements are on the way.  Senator Mike Lee showed us last night that there is still hope within the Republican Party and it rests with competitive primaries.  After a vanilla pudding response to the State of the Union offered by GOP Conference Chair Cathy McMorris Rodgers – one which was full of platitudes and devoid of policy substance – Mike Lee laid out the superlative response from the Tea Party.

Mike Lee laid out our first principles in plain language but also weaved them together into specific policy solutions.  He explained exactly how free markets and limited government help the very people for whom Obama claims to protect.  He argued our views from a position of strength and went on offense against Obama’s class warfare instead of the banal GOP response of “don’t hate us; we’re sweet people too.”  Lee unambiguously called for an end to corporate welfare.  Not surprisingly, he noted that “to be fair, President Obama and his party did not create all of these problems. The Republican Establishment in Washington can be just as out-of-touch as the Democratic Establishment.”

Lee went on to take Obama’s inequality meme and throw it back at him like a cruise missile.  He noted that inequality in rural communities exists from government controlling most of the land out west.  He hit Obama directly on administrative fiat and NSA spying.  He went on to tie in government-sponsored inequality to government messing with life and marriage (not running away from so-called social issues.)  Finally, he offered numerous policy solutions on infrastructure, education, energy, and healthcare.

There are more Mike Lees where he came from, but we will only find them in competitive primaries.  It’s time to get to work and rebuild the Republican Party, and by extension, this great Republic."


among comments at Redstate:


a day ago

I'm not sure whether the country is more demoralized by Obama's agenda or by the Republican Party's unwillingness or inability to fight back."


" 11 hours ago

Here's the problem... here in WA, the Republican Party is mainly controlled by McKeating-aligned "Mainstream Republicans of Washington", who are basically a front-group for the Dems to give the ILLUSION of choice."


2/20/13, "As Country Club Republicans Link Up With The Democratic Ruling Class, Millions Of Voters Are Orphaned," Angelo Codevilla, Forbes
"Increasingly the top people in government, corporations, and the media collude and demand submission as did the royal courts of old."....(subhead 'Public Safety')

"So long as the Uniparty exists, mere voters will have no way of affecting what the government does."

12/15/13, "Breaking The UniParty," Angelo Codevilla,

"Yet again, for the nth time, Republican Congressional leaders and their Democrat counterparts produced a Trillion dollar, multi-thousand-page spending bill that was voted immediately after being unveiled, without having been read. Republican 2012 vice presidential candidate Paul Ryan authored the latest edition along with Democratic Senator Patti Murray. Republican leader John Boehner preempted Democrats by preemptively accusing Republicans who opposed the bill of wanting to shut down the government. He topped off this feat of leadership by declaring political war on the conservatives who had given Republicans the majority that had made him Speaker of the House – a war that Republican leaders cannot sustain. 

The Republican Party’s leaders have functioned as junior members of America’s single ruling party, the UniParty. Acting as the proverbial cockboat in the wake of the Democrats’ man-of-war, they have made Democratic priorities their own when the White House and the Congress were in the hands of Republicans as well as in those of Democrats, and when control has been mixed. The UniParty, the party of government, the party of Ins, continues to consist of the same people. The Outs are always the same people too: American conservatives. They don’t have a party.

Whatever differences exist within the Uniparty, between Republican John Boehner and Democrat Nancy Pelosi, between Republican Mitch McConnell and Democrat Harry Reid, get worked out behind closed doors. Those differences are narrow. The latest negotiations were over some $80 billion out of three trillion dollars in spending. The bipartisan negotiators did not let into the room any of the major issues that concern Americans. Not Obamacare, not racial preferences, not religious liberty, not endless no-win wars. The UniParty is unanimous: more of the same!

Hence, so long as the Uniparty exists, mere voters will have no way of affecting what the government does.

Breaking up the Uniparty, means breaking the Democrats’ hold on non-Democrat congressmen and senators. The only way to do that is to break the Republican leadership’s hold on other Republicans and on the Republican label. That in turn requires using the primaries to screen out UniParty people. Doing this is more possible than ever, providing conservatives learn to hang together before they are hanged separately.

No longer do American political parties consist of organizations that pick and run candidates. More and more, candidates present themselves in primaries, organize their own supporters, and raise their own funds, including via direct mail and the internet. Hence, nowadays, party labels are important chiefly to identify candidates as belonging to one side or the other of the great questions of the day.

The Democratic Party has built solid identification between its brand and its substance. Majorities of Democratic voters tell pollsters that they feel well represented by those who bear the label “Democrat.” Hence that label is enough to inspire a gamut of voters on a certain side of American politics to support the candidates who bear it.

Not so the Republicans. Only about a fourth of those who vote Republican feel well represented by Republican officials. Because Republicans roar like lions but lie down like lambs, the label “Republican” does not inspire people on the non-Democrat side of American life to vote for the candidates who bear it.

To vote for a candidate, non-Democrat, i.e. conservative, voters need assurances that the “Republican” label cannot supply. Over the last several decades’ electoral cycles, such voters have increasingly turned to organizations that promote particular issues (the National Taxpayers’ Union, the National Rifle Association, Americans United For Life, etc. and arguably above all, to the Tea Parties) for assurance about substance. As the party’s credibility has gone down, the issue organizations’ importance has risen.

In short, these organizations, not the Republican Party, are the source of legitimacy on the non-Democrat side of American life.

These organizations are the lever by which voters can pry the UniParty apart. Problem is, each organization endorses and supports the candidates most closely aligned with its own particular issue.

They and their candidates compete against one another for funds and for the voters’ attention.

This disunity is as unreasonable as it is dysfunctional. Diverse as are Americans’ reasons for not wishing to be governed by Democrats, nevertheless there is as much commonality on the right side of America’s political spectrum as on the left. Few dispute that the several issue organizations, their different foci notwithstanding, are all “conservative” in some way. The UniParty will endure only so long as the several parts of the conservative movement continue to pull in disparate directionsonly so long as the conservatives fail to draw bright, sharp lines between themselves and the UniParty.

Karl Rove, who set up a fund to elect Establishment Republicans, provided clarity by identifying his kind. That all but invited conservatives to identify themselves as the UniParty’s opponents, to explain that the UniParty has brought America to its current sad state, and to show how differently they want to do things. That identification can be made only by the several conservative organizations endorsing and supporting candidates in primaries and beyond.

Candidate Smith, whether for President of the United States or dog catcher, must be able to say: “I am the only candidate who represents those Americans who want smaller government, who want to safeguard human life, who defend the free exercise of religion, the right to keep and bear arms, and who oppose the government’s intrusion into our lives, and I am so certified by the following organizations….My opponent is supported by the Republican Establishment. What do you think that represents? It represents the UniParty!

It is high time for the leaders of the main conservative organizations, together with the most obstreperous Republican elected officials (present and past chairmen of the House Republican Study Committee, Senators Cruz, Paul, Lee, Rubio, etc.) to consider how and on whom to affix the precious joint certification: “conservative.”" 


RedState commenter, 1/14/14: 18 hours ago
Ok, folks when are YOU going to accept that there is no difference between the Republican Establishment and the Democrats? I mean really, how effing dumb does a person have to be not to see that the Democrats have actually infiltrated what used to the Republican Party? Has Mitch McConnell done ANYTHING to thwart the power or will or agenda of Harry Reid? Has John Boehner done anything but acquiesce to the Reid/Pelosi/Obama agenda that hasn't been Kabuki theater? 

Obama has been ceded dictatorial powers, the Justice Department is operating in full blown lawlessness, the NSA is doing nothing to fight terrorism and in fact is far more scary than Muslim suicide bombers (I mean really, what are your chances of being blown up or on a hijacked plane compared to the absolute fact that all your email and phone calls are being monitored along with where you walk and where you drive?) and yet the so called Republicans are doing what? ABSOLUTELY NOTHING!"