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."
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.