"Establishment Republicans may prefer Romney to Perry, but their assumption is that either man can be counted on to steer the party back toward the broad center next fall, effectively disarming the Tea Party mutiny.
If that’s the case, then it now seems like only a matter of time before the Republican empire, overwhelmed by insurrection for much of the last two years, strikes back at last."
10/16/2011, "Does Anyone Have a Grip on the G.O.P.?" NY Times Magazine, Matt Bai. Rick Perry has long been Establishment.
9/1/14, "DEACE: Rick Perry could get rick-rolled again," Washington Times, Steve Deace
"According to numerous reports, two of Perry 2016’s initial hires are Henry Barbour and Steven Schmidt....
Mr. Barbour is one of the ring leaders of the infamous race-baiting U.S. Senate primary in Mississippi....
Then there’s Mr. Schmidt who is the ruling class' favorite kind of Republican. Which is to say he’s really not much of a Republican at all.
Schmidt was the mastermind of John “don’t use Obama’s middle name or you’re a racist” McCain’s failed 2008 presidential campaign, which is one of the main reasons the country has been suffering under Mr. Obama’s Marxist leadership ever since. In typical ruling class fashion, Mr. Schmidt attempted to rewrite the history of that disaster — including his decision to suspend the campaign to go all-in for the still-hated TARP bailout— by blaming the whole thing on conservatives afterwards (namely Sarah Palin).
Last year, Mr. Schmidt was given a $10 million war-chest by the ACLU in an effort to recruit Republicans to join in the effort to “strike down” state marriage laws passed in a majority of the U.S....
Mr. Schmidt on fellow Texas Sen. Ted Cruz: “A lot of Republicans wish Ted Cruz would go back to Canada. We’re following (Cruz) down a policy path that will ultimately lead to the destruction of the Republican's ability to compete as a national party.” Because obviously a guy that ran a presidential campaign that got beat by almost 200 electoral college votes knows all about what it takes to “compete as a national party.”
How about when Schmidt said that Rush Limbaugh and Donald Trump needed to be “shut down” for actually wanting the alleged party of conservatives to be — gasp! — conservative? Then there’s Schmidt urging the GOP to “dump” Tea Party “kooks.” Last, but certainly not least, remember when Schmidt said the GOP needs to “take conservatism’s good name back” from the Cruz/Tea Party “freak show.” Because if there’s anyone in America attuned to what it means to be a conservative, it’s the guy that ran McCain’s campaign into the ground....
He’s (Rick Perry) not even the most popular GOP presidential candidate from his own state. Only 23 percent of Texas Republicans believe Mr. Perry should run for president, and only 10 percent make him their top choice."... via Lucianne
6/26/13, "ACLU Hires Steve Schmidt to Bring Republicans Into Same-Sex Marriage Push," aclu.org
Added: Longtime Bush crowd guy Steve Schmidt is finishing the job for his pals. He slanders the few remaining Republican voters (they "want to discriminate" against "women, gays, and immigrants".). His hate speech makes him a media regular:
3/4/13, "Former McCain Aide Steve Schmidt Tells Bill Maher GOP Can't Attract Cutting Edge Workers Because They're Anti-Gay," towleroad.com
"Former McCain aide Steve Schmidt told a a panel on Bill Maher which included California Lt. Governor Gavin Newsom that the GOP lags in its tech and internet capability because it can't attract young, cutting edge workers. Why? They don't want to work for a bigoted party.
"If you look at your first guest on talking about brilliant young people in computers who understand all this stuff [and] be at the cutting edge, it's difficult to make the case to work for a political party that wants to discriminate against their friend who happens to be gay. So we have an enormous problem because of some of our issues in the Republican party that are so out of step whether its with regard to
the anti-immigrant rhetoric, and
it makes it difficult to attract the best and the brightest in this space."
7/1/14, "Typical: 'Hardball' Features GOP Strategist Warning Party It Risks Losing Women Voters Post-Hobby Lobby Case," NewsBusters, Ken Shepherd
"For his part, Schmidt both failed to push back against any of Onero's misleading talking points -- he protested there wasn't any time for that -- and, predictably added his own lament that the GOP was at risk of being too socially conservative to appeal to female voters in the next presidential election year."...
Steve Deace and his friends are the conservative battered wives Peggy Noonan wrote about in 2007 if after Mississippi they still think the GOP will allow conservatives to have a candidate.
6/2/2007, "Too Bad," Peggy Noonan, Wall St. Journal
"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....
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 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....
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.