« BACK  |  PRINT

RS

EDITOR OF REDSTATE

The So Called Adults Within the GOP Are Stupid

By: Erick Erickson (Diary)  |  March 11th, 2013 at 03:30 AM  | 

RESIZE: AAA

I realize there are those within the Republican Party who do not like Rush Limbaugh. Some of them even think the GOP is worse because of him.

Likewise, there are those within the GOP who say they like Rush and see “a use” for him, but they themselves do not like listening to him. He’s just not their cup of tea or something.

These people should really spend a week listening to Rush three hours a day and perhaps they would not be so stupid.

Most of the people who fall into these camps have been mouthing off on two topics about which their commentary has been decidedly stupid. Perhaps if they were students of the Institute for Advanced Conservative Studies they’d wise up.

The first, of course, is CPAC, put on by the American Conservative Union.

The ACU gave Mitch McConnell a 100% rating and gave Renee Elmers of North Carolina, one of the most worthless members of Congress to ever be elected as a tea party candidate, some award to prove her bona fides. That basically means the award is her conservative bona fides because she doesn’t have a record to show for it.

Basically, ACU is good at giving people cover.

And now they’ve given Chris Christie cover. They haven’t invited him to CPAC.

Boo-freaking-hoo.

If you listen to the libertarian leaning serial whining twitterati of twenty-somethings, this is an outrageously outrageous insult. They’ve invited Donald Trump to speak and his positions and Chris Christie’s are a lot alike, but for Trump actually taking the fight to Obama.

If you listened to the average Republican — not conservative — pundit on the right, it has been just ridiculous that Chris Christie was not invited. These people are more outraged over that than the ACU giving Mitch McConnell a 100% conservative rating. The adults in the GOP just cannot get over it.

The fact is, and to repeat myself, the ACU is good at giving people cover. They have given Chris Christie cover. Do you really think it is hurtful to Christie, headed into a campaign year in New Jersey, to be dissed by the conservative political action conference?

Come on people, smarten up.

But there is an even bigger issue.

The number of notable Republicans critical of Rand Paul’s filibuster is really amazing. Rand Paul put serious points on the board against the Obama Administration and John McCain, Lindsey Graham, Bill Kristol, National Review, and others are out dismissing him.

If they had paid attention to the crux of his argument on Wednesday, he worked hard to find common ground on the right. His filibuster was premised on the Obama Administration claiming it could use drones to kill Americans in the United States without due process of law after defining “imminent harm” in a way that was not imminent.

I support killing bad guys with drones overseas. Hell, I’m okay with killing bad guys in the United States with drones if they are about to cause imminent harm. But the administration’s standard was far too nebulous. It is opposed by a majority of Americans. Ted Cruz, Mike Lee, Marco Rubio, and others who are okay with drone attacks on bad guys supported Rand Paul because Paul found the sliver of ground on which they could all be opposed to an Obama Administration policy.

The act drew headlines. It united conservatives, independents, and even some progressives.

But then the so called adults within the Republican Party had to weigh in. They had to rain on the parade. They had to criticize Rand Paul.

The fact is Rand Paul put more points on the board than Bill Kristol, National Review, John McCain, Lindsey Graham, or pretty much any other Republican over these past few months. He did so on ground the GOP rarely fights on in a way that those who do not share much of his view on drones could find common ground with him.

But he took the spotlight away from the adults in the room. That was his sin. He had to be rebuked.

The adults in the GOP’s big tent have been complicit in getting us to $16 trillion in national debt and have never met a victory from which they could not snatch defeat.

Perhaps if they spent more time listening and learning from Rush Limbaugh and less time trying to show the world they’re better than him or the base he gives voice to they’d be more effective. Right now, they’re just stupid.

Like in Middle Earth, the so called leaders and wise men really should just let the filthy Hobbits take care of things.

Tags:

COMMENTS

POSTING RULES  |  LOGIN TO COMMENT  |  REGISTER TODAY
  • PowerToThePeople

    You have got to get more sleep Erick if you ever hope to get to my age. 3:30 in the morning is only for us old guys and for the chickens.

  • daniel22

    Loved the post Erick! You hit it dead on that the so called adults in the GOP are upset that Rand got the attention. About time.

  • davesinsanantonio

    Erick, you are right that the self-proclaimed leaders of the party are upset that Rand Paul took their media time, and got some attention they think they deserve. But, I think it goes even deeper. They were upset that his filibuster got a lot of people, even some on the Left, talking about a Rand Paul presidential race in 2016. This, of course, upsets the GOP leadership, because it isn’t “his turn”. I am not sure at this point who the leadership thinks is next in line for the futile race, but it is NOT Paul, because he hasn’t put in decades of “reaching across the aisle” yet. That seems to be the primary criterion for the GOP so-called leadership to back a candidate. I love it when a conservative can get the so-called leadership to get their panties in a knot without even saying a thing about them, but says things that resonate with the American people. The only thing that resonates with the so-called leadership is their own empty heads when they can get on TV and use a lot of words to say nothing.

  • http://boldcolor.blogspot.com/ Paula Bolyard

    The “adults” in the GOP are part of the low-information voter bloc. I’d suggest a lengthy stay at the Mark Levin Re-Education Camp as well as time at the Institute for Advanced Conservative Studies.

    Well said, Erick.

  • danandsis

    Loved your article Erick

    Rand Paul’s filibuster was the ‘shot heard round the Republican Party’ symbolizing that it’s control by the Old Guard is over. As to Rush’s political acumen he could tie all of his brain behind his back and still put McCain and his fellow troglodytes to shame.

  • sudomakeme

    I’d like to see Ted Cruz, Rand Paul, Mike Lee and a handful of others I can’t think of their names (quarter to 5 in the am here) band together. With united supporters and a united front, they could stand a chance to get this party into shape.

    People are not happy with “reaching across the aisle” any more. Look where that has gotten us. We want the new blood to stand up and be the opposition party and reign these “progressives” in. Everyone I know was energized by this, not only because of Rand but because we could put names to those who were willing to stand up and support him and defy the “so called adults”.

  • jpmhofct

    The sad fact that Republican voters must recognize, and act to change, is that far too many of the incumbent ” REPUBLICANS IN CONGRESS ARE NOT RIGHT OR EVEN CENTER POLITICALLLY.

    RINO REPUBL;ICANS MUST BE REMOVED FROM LEADERSHIP AND INCUMBANCY BEFORE WE CAN GET ANY SIGNIFICANT ALTERNATIVES TO THE “PROGRESSIVE RADICAL POSITIONS PUSHED FROM WASHINGTON WITH THE COMPLICT PARTICIPATION OF THOSE INCUMBENTS.

    RAND PAUL MAY NOT BE EVERY REPUBLICANS CUP OF TEA BUT AT LEAST IT CAN BE EXPECTED HE WILL NOT BE COMPLICIT WITH ACTIONS OF THE LEFTIST RADICALS.
    Rubio and Cruz and a few others elected more recently can rise to lead if we remove the long term Rino cadre.

  • raginpatriot

    The GOP leadership a/k/a “adults are not our leadership; they are the Petains of D.C.:

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Philippe_Pétain

    With the imminent fall of France in June 1940, Pétain was appointed Premier of France by President Lebrun at Bordeaux, and the Cabinet resolved to make peace with Germany. The entire government subsequently moved briefly to Clermont-Ferrand, then to the spa town of Vichy in central France. His government voted to transform the discredited French Third Republic into the French State, an authoritarian regime. As the war progressed, the government at Vichy collaborated with the Germans, who in 1942 finally occupied the whole of metropolitan Francebecause of the threat from North Africa. Pétain’s actions during World War II resulted in his conviction and death sentence for treason, which was commuted to life imprisonment by his former protégé Charles de Gaulle. In modern France he is remembered as an ambiguous figure, while pétainisme is a derogatory term for certain reactionary policies.

  • romeg

    The ‘Adults’ are queuing up to support yet another Bush for the 2016 run for the White House. The views of the Tea Party and its chosen few have no place in their calculus for what it takes to win and that is exactly the problem. They are stuck on stupid, continuing to believe things that have been disproven in the last 5 major losses and two victories by Republican candidates for President. Going all the way back to Gerald Ford, an undeniably ‘Nice Guy’, the Party has put up the guy ‘whose turn it was’ rather than choosing a conservative candidate with the focus and philosophy and the courage to stand up and articulate it to begin to turn back the rising tide of progressiv/social/liberal/whatever-in-hell-they-are-calling-them-selves-this-week/ism that amount to the fulfillment of Alexis de Tocqueville’s prophecies in his master work of social/political science: ‘Democracy in America’.

    So, we can absolutely count on what you are saying in this excellent piece: Rand Paul will be dealt with in the same fashion as every other truly conservative candidate or potential candidate that has come along recently and they will promote the ‘electable’ guy, come hell or high water. Why not save your money and instead of printing up ‘Bush 2016′ bumper stickers, just clip any references to the year and first name from the ones left over from the 2000 and 2004 campaigns because that, along with yet another defeat is where this party is headed in 2016.

  • jaydickb

    Erick is correct. This is about power. There is a power struggle going on in the GOP. Young people like Paul are taking over, and old people like McCain don’t like it. Erick is also correct that the oldsters like McCain haven’t done well with the power they had and it is time they relinquish it. Of course they won’t do so willingly; they will have to be pushed out.

  • hdpolitics

    A few issues:

    1) Christie absence from CPAC doesn’t hurt him in NJ. It hurts him nationally. If he’s just going to be the Governor and then Senator from NJ, swell. If he has any national aspirations he’s going to need to do a much better job of drawing conservative support in the Republican primaries. CPAC’s a sham, mostly, but if Christie lets his brand get moved too far off of conservatism he’ll never win a series of Republican primaries against a field with Rubio or Paul or Ryan. If he’s doing the “Full Scarborough” and slowly transmogrifying into a Democrat so he can have a huge come to Jesus celebration and popularity spike at his party switch, that might work.

    2) The current stupidity of the GOP ‘elite’ is our fault because we listened to people who told us to focus on the ‘electable’ candidate. Even today there are all kinds of people (many of them Romney supporters for instance) that tell us and told us we need to just get the (R) in the seat and then work on them from there.

    Wrong.

    What we should be doing is getting the candidate who best represents our values up, even if that means we lose a few more seats than we otherwise would have. Why? Because what’s the point of ‘victory’ if it means McCains, Grahams, McConnells, and Murkowksis are the power-brokers afterwards?

    I mean, we played that ‘electability’ game back in 1996 and 2000. How’d that go, exactly? We had the Congress and the Oval but had a bunch of ‘moderates’ in power to the huge detriment of both the country and the GOP brand.

    I’d rather have a 58-42 Senate minority where 30 of the 42 are actual conservatives than a 52-48 senate majority with the current cadre of big-government ‘Republicans’. At least there’s a future for the party in the first case.

  • mhorner

    Some in the GOP are very upset that Rand Paul actually demonstrated some LEADERSHIP which has become a very rare commodity in Washington. Erick, I am with you on supporting most of the Drone strikes, even on bad guys in the United States if they are actively engaged in a terrorist activity. I think that what Rand and the rest of us suspected is that Obama and Holder wanted the authority to lay down Drone strikes on individuals they alone considered a threat such as the “Clingers to their guns and their bibles!”

  • ardvarkmaster

    I’m developing a new voting strategy. I call it the McCain Contrarian Vote. What he’s for I’m against, what he’s against I’m for. That way I have more free time without having to do more research on the issues. And if that makes me a Hobbit, then I’ll just have to use my Sting.

  • Marcus_Traianus

    While Rush, et al are certainly provocative thinkers and some might say, conservative stalwarts, they have a specific role in our party structure. Mistakenly, some conflate that with a leadership position- it is nothing of the sort.

    Sound, wise leadership comes from people who are not only principled, but participative in the political process. They are people who are elected, must answer to voters and therefore must negotiate the best possible deal achievable. While I realize the latter part of that statement has become an anathema to the party, perhaps given our experiences, it is an unfortunate reality.

    Stop and think for a minute why Congress is so unpopular with most people. Let’s forget about Democrat or Republican- it’s all of Congress. Add to that perspective that one of the most fiscally destructive President’s and Senate’s just won reelection or maintained their majority. Fluke or the product of “takers”? Perhaps, but it is a cold, hard reality.

    The fact is that Democrats have continued to win through a strategy of gradualism over the years and unarguably its been a winning strategy. Republicans counter-strategy? Big, bold and to many voters, unsettling changes. Leaving aside for a moment which will produce better results- what do you believe has the best chance to succeed?

    It’s about time we separated the conversation about returning to principled leadership that a broad set of Republicans can agree on from the political execution strategy. We’ve conflated those issues to our detriment and as a result remain divided and less effective. party members need to realize what’s achievable in the current Congress and with an electorate who is in severe need of an education of what’s to come in our country’s future.

    You can still win without total achievement of your objectives. Just look across the aisle and you will realize it’s possible.

  • gyakuzuki

    Hard to imagine Jeb Bush winning the nomination … put simply, a THIRD Bush in the WH in 30 years? It starts to make our democracy look like oligarchy, especially with another Clinton running in 2016, and even low information voters will have to laugh.

  • gyakuzuki

    Paul also stepped on McCain’s role/ego as self-appointed czar of all things war and foreign policy. McCain is deeply embedded with journalists (he is a huge leaker and also has his face on TV, more than any other senator, I believe) and the rest of the DC defense and intel establishment. He is a creature of DC and this not only an old guard/new guard fight, this is about attacking a leader of the old guard on his home turf, i.e foreign/defense policy.

    But McCain reflects a 1990′s worldview that does not help us win elections (or him in 2008, obviously) which is America as the world’s policeman. He just recently wanted us to intervene in Syria and no doubt has 5-10 other “hotspots” where a more activist/interventionist foreign policy is, in his mind, urgently needed.

    But he’s creating enemies (mostly) where they don’t exist in the view of most Americans and in particular the ones we need to vote for us. The old guard has no coherence in its foreign policy worldview and it ends up giving the D’s easy opportunities to paint Republicans as warmongers/white guys who bomb brown people.

    Paul’s speech last week juxtaposes a different Republican worldview against that of the old guard’s foreign/defense policy worldviews. So Rand’s speech was not only a great win for us rhetorically to seize important real estate around civil liberties, but it’s also a great rhetorical win for re-framing our party’s philosophy on foreign policy.

    And if John McCain is the whipping boy to help us illustrate the difference, so be it. McCain tried this plenty of times using GWBush for the same purpose. Chickens coming home …

  • Jim_Riggs

    I’ll grant you they did a job on Romney but Cain and Perry did it to themselves IMO.

  • Jim_Riggs

    That’s kind of hard to do when we label about half of all voting Republicans as RINOs themselves.

  • http://www.mattmodleski.com mattmodleski

    That’s what people thought about our current President.

  • silentnomore

    McCain in Congress for 31 years
    Graham in Congress for 19 years
    McConnell in Senate for 29 years
    Sheila Jackson-Lee in Congress for 18 years
    …Entrenchment is a hard thing to overcome.

  • romeg

    That never seems to deter the supporters of anyone named ‘Kennedy’ or a candidate who is, even by the most remote possible connection, somehow related to JFK.

  • mt32

    Cistern? Maybe you meant cess pool?

  • dmart81

    If you don’t like Rush, then you don’t get it.
    Signed, 31 year old, who first heard Rush in 5th grade, went lib in college, and came back to Earth when I was 24.

  • cheesycon

    Can someone plot length of time in Congress versus conservative voting record? I bet that power corrupts and the plot is probably an exponent curve.

  • whitetop

    I was in Sheila’s gulag for 8 of those years and it was truly taxation without representation. The worst part of it is she has a protected district that was designed and is maintained by the state republican party. Politics in Texas is not a spectator sport.

  • carolb

    You can compromise WITHIN a principle, but you DO NOT compromise the principle. Many within the GOP are not principled individuals, they are political opportunist who are too darn lazy or arrogant to figure out how you get through to the voters on what they want and why. Maybe they don’t even know because they aren’t principled! Going along with the theme of todays society, the mediocre have risen to the top in the age of sound bites and lies and care nothing more then to further their own personal careers and fortunes. A place at the table. At least Rand Paul is acting like a real leader and it’s through individuals like him we might have a glimmer of hope of saving something of this once great nation.

  • rabun1016

    Criticism from Lindsey Graham or John McCain should be worn as a badge of honor.

  • http://aeroelectric.com Robert Nuckolls III

    Who said they were adults? I suggest that “despotic children” is a more accurate description . . .

    Despotic progressivism (an escalating series of dishonorable acts without empathy for the ‘victim’) is in our DNA. We are born DesPros. If we could not command the time, attention and resources of others to quiet our discomforts as infants, we would not survive.

    Our DNA is similarly wired for love of liberty and a sense of property. There is not a creature on the planet that does not feel a sense of accomplishment and ownership of their work product . . . whether to obtain food, shelter or other goods germane to existence of the species.

    When raised by honorable, independently self-sufficient citizens enjoying individual liberty who are thriving in a state of communal liberty (free market trade of value) then prospects for following in our parents and teacher’s footsteps are good. Clearly, the present leadership in Washington demonstrates that the practice of despotic progressivism doesn’t require much talent, capital, or will toward independent self-sufficiency. Indeed, most of what is pawned off as ‘constitutional’ government in the United States is a manifestation of despotic progressivism in its highest form . . . chronological adults who take their cues from teenaged flashmobs.

    These individuals (who rose to power on the vote of an ignorant electorate willing to trade security for liberty) are rapidly becoming our masters. They are criminals in the sense that they live on plunder; traitors in the sense that they’re sucking the vitality out of a nation. I think it is clear that these individuals are simply manifesting traits that served them well as infants and children and for a combination of reasons they simply failed to grow up. They demonstrate this daily by their actions, demeanor and inability to string a series of words together in an intelligent, honorable thought. Unfortunately, in a nation ignorant of the values given us by the Founding Fathers, ANYONE can grow up to be senator, judge on a high court and yes, even president.

    We are endowed with the capability of being either honorable or despotic. The Founding Fathers gave us a mission statement (the Declaration) and a policy and procedures manual (the Constitution). Both are simple documents, easy to read, easy to teach, and easy to follow. They are a vaccination against despotism. But unless the vaccine is given generously and often throughout a citizen’s upbringing, there is great risk that the DesPro virus will reach pandemic proportion. Under the worst conditions it will bring down nations . . . and perhaps entire planets.

    Sadly, this cabal of intellectual children in black robes and powerful office are about as far removed from honorable behavior (guardianship of liberty) as one can get.

  • sta46

    I don’t believe they are low-information. I believe they are completely complicit and only interested in feathering their own nests. They are pond scum just like the D’s.

  • bobbie227

    All I can say to your wonderful article is AMEN! I have been listening to Rush for years. I have learned MORE from him than anything I read. He truly is “Mr. Conservative” and has converted many liberals after they listen to him. I have heard them call in and tell him just how he changed their thinking. And, yes, the “old network” in the GOP IS stupid IF they do not listen to Rush and follow the principles he teaches.

    I even get the impression today that just because BHO is “wooing” Republicans now, it should be a huge “WARNING SIGN” to the GOP idiots that are still “hoping”. BHO has NEVER proven that he can be trusted. After watching him for over 4 years, even my “some college” background tells me that this man is very very dangerous to the U.S. Anyone who does not see that is exactly the “uninformed voter” that Rush talks about.

    It appears to me that most Republicans in Congress want to keep on giving BHO chances that he does NOT deserve in view of his current “record”. Until he steps up and announces to the whole Country that he has had a change of heart, he does not need to be trusted for ANYTHING! Personally, I don’t think he has any intention of doing anything like that.

  • jpkoch

    It wasn’t too long ago that retired Senator and now Defence Secretary, Chuck Hagel, was considered one of the few adults inside the GOP. His confirmation circus shed light on how ridiculous he really is. The man was only able to limp into his new office inside the Pentagon, his reputation was so damaged.

    The Beltway Media Borg is something to behold. National Review and The Weekly Standard are now part of it.

  • Kevin Barbour

    Agreed Erik…John McCain, Lindsey Grahama and the rest of them can kiss my @$$. Bring on the young bulls and let them lead

  • jaydickb

    Term limits anyone?

  • http://www.erickerickson.org Erick Erickson

    I go back to sleep.

  • 2warabnvet

    These “go-along-get-along” Establishment Republicans like McCain and “Ghramnesty” have more in common with their liberal Democrat allies than with Conservatives. These PWOPs (Politicians Without Principles) have put personal power ahead of their constituent’s interests for decades. And are not capable of/don’t want to undo the damage the current administration has inflicted on our country. It’s time for a Conservative Revolution to get rid of this deadwood.

  • iitywybad

    This headline caught my attention, and is the most alarming thing I have heard. I have been an advocate of replacing John Boehner as majority leader and this makes me even more adamant that he needs to go. The entire leadership needs to be replaced, and quite frankly if Paul Ryan goes along with this, he should be replaced as well.

    http://freedomoutpost.com/2013/03/house-gop-leaders-well-pass-gun-control-immigration-without-republican-support/

    I love Paul Ryan and consider him to be a brilliant mathematician and a principled leader, but if he doesn’t stand up against this move from Kevin McCarthy, I’ll be very disappointed.

  • reddog76

    Unfortunately, Rush and Coulter come off as too mean and nasty for me. I can’t get beyond that, so i don’t hear any message of use from them at all. McCain needs to simply retire at last. (What happened to term limits ?? Lobbyist limits ??!!! Also Flat tax ?? Everyone pays the same rate, simple as that, no 10,ooo page tax code. Oops, I digress).

    I did appreciate the Honorable Mr. Rand Paul putting the hot spotlight on way too loose, vague and nebulous of legal language in how drones may be used in this country. I have faith with our 10′s of thousands, hundreds of thousands of dedicated police, sheriffs, National Guard and Military, drones aren’t necessary at all within borders of US for strikes. Why is it becoming an option ?? As in parenting, not everyone who CAN be parents SHOULD be parents, and as in science, “Not everything that CAN be done, SHOULD be done”. Now to sort that out is the key.

  • jaydickb

    YES! And, Paul and the other young bucks are good at it. That’s a skill the GOP old guard seems to have forgotten, if they ever knew.

  • jaydickb

    It appears that Christie is totally focused on reelection; he doesn’t seem to care about anything else. That may eliminate his chances for national office as a Republican. And in view of other alternatives now on the horizon, I think that’s fine.

    I would much prefer any Republican over any Democrat. I would also prefer a conservative Republican over a moderate/liberal one. As for your Senate numbers, what would be wrong with a 52-48 Republican majority where 31 Republicans are real conservatives? Or, how about a 60-40 Republican majority where 35 Republicans are real conservatives?

    I don’t think electability can be ignored in choosing candidates, but it’s often very tough to judge in advance. The old saw about choosing the most conservative candidate who can win still has a lot of merit, I think.

  • jaydickb

    They probably are pursuing their own interests/agendas, but I also don’t think they know very much about national government and probably understand almost nothing about it.

  • jaydickb

    Nah, it’s not just the publicity. It’s the POWER. Of course, publicity comes with power, but so do many other things.

    Actually, I can’t see anyone whose turn it is next. If there is actually no one, that would be a very good thing.

  • jaydickb

    It depends on his pitch. If he can explain his policy proposals in a way that is attractive to the voters, he could easily win more than 50%, maybe even much more.

  • hdpolitics

    There’s nothing wrong with your numbers. The problem is that there’s no way to get there if step one is electing ‘moderates’ to get near 50. What those guys do in the short term will always blow up any kind of momentum towards consistent control of the chamber.

    IMO the way to really ‘fix’ the GOP in the Senate is to start getting the Paul’s, Rubio’s and Cruz’s there even if it means we lose elections because we whiff on O’Donnell’s and lose a race a Vitter would have won instead. Then, over time, those established, real conservatives will elevate through the ranks and it will get easier to add more conservatives, not harder.

    I mean, when the GOP had a 55 seats for 4 years and a majority for 6… they did nothing positive with it. Because all those ‘electable’ candidates didn’t have the belief system to even want to try. Then nothing happens, the GOP brand gets torched, and it gets way harder to regain control of that chamber as a result.

  • jaydickb

    Yes, but the point is still valid. The GOP and its candidates need to get much meaner. It’s the only way to survive and win. But, the GOP must be much more careful than the Dems because of the media. GOP candidates must make sure their information is accurate before using it.

  • cheesycon

    but as per Erick, are ACU scores actually conservative now, or just for cover?

    we need something better than ACU. I’d love to see a RedState score!

  • http://aeroelectric.com Robert Nuckolls III

    Mean and nasty . . . or assertive? Watch a dozen episodes of The Dog Whisperer and consider the constellation of aberrant and/or antisocial behaviors of our four-legged friends and then consider the common solution . .. consistent honorable leadership.

    As Dr. Larry Arnn explains in many of his lectures, humans occupy a unique station between angels and the lesser creatures. We share needful limitations with all other creatures for shelter, sustenance, rest and the purposeful drive for procreation and survival. Unlike the lesser creatures, we have the ability to think and to ponder the value of collegiality in a state of individual and collective liberty. This means that as honorable citizens, we don’t go around DOING THINGS to others. Under our constitution the honorable citizen has a right to be left alone. Unlike dogs, every honorable citizen feels a personal duty to protect the liberty of himself and others.

    Rush, Mark, Sean, Ann, et. als. do not preach the gospel of doing things to others. They expose despotic behaviors, particularly behaviors of those who wear robes and suits and call each other senator, judge, or Mr. President. Yes, they can be vociferous and enthusiastic about their mission. But would anyone be inclined to quietly and politely suggest that somebody not abuse a child, kick a dog, or set fire to somebody’s house? Some despotic behaviors demand immediate and energetic responses from those with the intelligence to perceive and the courage to expose and the duty to protect.

    When Chief Justice Roberts joined with a majority of justices in declaring that bullying attendees of a funeral is legitimate public debate protected by the First Amendment, he exposed himself as unqualified for his job as chief protector of liberty.

    http://tinyurl.com/3nyjo4g

    If it were not for those who responded with great alarm, how many more of our citizens would go unaware of this dishonorable deed? Congressman Matheson responded to this travesty of justice with a polite introduction of new legislation “to protect military funerals”.

    http://tinyurl.com/aqxhqtr

    What whimpy, sanctimonious hogwash! How about the protection of liberty for all citizens implicit in the Constitution! Congressman Matheson’s tepid response was NOT commensurate with the severity of the crimes perpetrated by both the protestors AND the supreme court. The crimes we’re considering here are on a plane much higher than the abuse of a child, kicking a dog or setting somebody’s house on fire. These individuals are abusing a nation. Given the demonstrated inability or unwillingness of our government to do it’s job then it’s up to the like of Rush and friends to blow the whistle . . . the louder the better.

  • jaydickb

    I agree, especially with your last paragraph. And, your long term strategy is excellent. But I think the current situation is very bad, and getting the Dems out is way too urgent to take the time your approach would require. In fact, it may already too late to turn things around.

  • jaydickb

    I don’t think Jeb would be a strong candidate in today’s environment considering the alternatives. Paul, Rubio, Ryan, Walker, Jindal, all seem stronger to me. Moreover, I think he will see this and decide not to run.

  • sarah417

    Obama’s make nice to the Republicans is a ruse. The NWO Globalist don’t want the American people hating the Democrats Obama has done so poorly that everyone is disliking his policies. He is only following orders from the NWO. Now they’re going to have to make a turn around so everyone will love the Dems. All this so that in 2016 when they give us a real choice, A REAL CHOICE, you have the ability on your own volition to chose between , Ta, Da, JEB BUSH OR HILLARY CLINTON. Both of these people belong to the NWO mindset. The only thing keeping from the takeover is our guns. Lock and load.

  • barfaulkner

    Go to True The Vote

    Possible Voter Fraud Lights Up Rep. Sheila Jackson Lee’s District

    I cannot fathom why everyone in the US would not want term limits. It is time for us to demand term limits.

  • hobokenred

    You might want to read up on Jersey politics before making assumptions. Gov. Christie is sailing to re-election. His opposition is a lightweight whose own party tossed her from the Majority leadership spot not long ago. It’s getting so bad the Dems are worried that Gov Christie could have coattails and hurt them in down ticket races.

    Having to spar with a Dem lightweight allows Gov Christie to set up his Presidential campaign WHILE campaigning for Gov. Hence his trip to California with Zuckerberg.

    The last President before Obama to be elected from Congress was JFK. It’s very likely our next President will come from a current Governor.

  • barfaulkner

    Who are these media people? lol I don’t go there and I don’t buy the products that are advertised there! Wow.. not buying products advertising on medias who are against the American way of being unbias . what a novel idea!!! I don’t buy newspapers, magazines (except wood working), anything that shows bias. They can all cave into oblivion as far as I am concern. What they think is of no concern to me. If a news article has any adjectives and adverbs, that is editorialism. I won’t buy it!

  • mkeprof

    Jeb Bush will NOT win the nomination. His strength is supposed to be with Latinos – and they make less than 5% of the primary voters – he will be killed by a conservative candidate. Unless there are too many conservatives dividing the vote like last time.

  • edniceville

    It is, perhaps, time for the “elder adult R’s” to head for the bunkhouse and let the young studs with “fire in there eyes and truth in their hearts” to run the ranch. As both Matt and Dave pointed out, those people have neither the desire or the know-how to win an election, and they are not as conservative as the base is. We don’t want someone who can “go along to get along”. We need solid conservative fighters that are willing to LEAD!

  • mkeprof

    Or learn to filter what Rush says. I listen to Rush for about an hour almost daily (that’s as much as my drive allows) – and while I agree that at times Rush is unnecessarily dramatic/coarse/megalomaniac – if you filter through that and hone in on to the essential message – that almost always resonates very well.

  • edniceville

    Maybe it is time to look to a Paul/Carson ticket for 2016… They seem to have what America needs, and quite obviously, they are not afraid to take on the left.

  • Northpaw

    Erick, right on, right on, right on, (as el Rushbo would put it) To paraphrase the Reverend Wright, I am sick and tired of Negroes Conservatives who just don’t get it! Rush Limbaugh is the conscience of the Conservative movement. I have long suspected that those on the right who dislike him are either not true conservatives or simply do not listen to him!

  • poillini

    Bravo.
    The only way to stop this crap is to follow ColdWarrior’s example!

  • casparcarrot

    I love it when conservatives fight with each other …

  • WmCraig

    The adults, and I use that term loosely in the Democrat party have an agenda, and agreed upon tactics to win. When one of their “noisy hobbits” causes a ruckus they manage to leverage it to bash Republicans. Even when a majority of Democrats do not stand to gain anything from the specific demands coming out of the bull horn.

    It seems to me that the adults in the Republican party have principles for which the fight, not against the unprincipled left, but against each other for the “one perfect truth”. With the most common tactic being a kind of political cannibalism following any media attention generated by one of our “noisy hobbits”.

    I am still trying to analyze what results the Republican tactical response to Rand’s use of the bullhorn achieved. But if really is time to retire some of what Erick refers to as “the adults”.

  • Bill S

    Too bad for you… you won’t be talking about it here

  • Bill S

    It must be true. You saw it on the Internet.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rmx4twCK3_I

  • WmCraig

    He is a libertarian. It will haunt him and not benefit us in my opinion. His greatness is in his ability to pick up the bull horn and create a Ruckus. His views cut across party lines, his commentary resonates with the anti-war left, Properly leveraged we can use the reality of Democrat outcomes, war, death lists, antiseptic death from the sky, lack of transparency, lack of freedoms, lack of hope for the urban poor, etc, to pound the drums against the Democrats. Not everyone needs to be President. Some have a higher purpose.

  • paco12348

    I want the GOP Leadership OUT of our Primaries and I want term limits for the old, stuck in the mud Congresspeople of both Parties. They hold grudges for years upon years. They also hold onto their seat with both hands, feet and teeth. 2 terms is all they need.
    How can America move forward when our Congress is not turned over to keep up what is important? If they don’t live within the States, owing a house is not living, they know nothing. The last two great elections we had Carl Rove and other big headed Republicans messed with everything trying to steer it the way they wanted. l have refused to support the RNC anymore. My money goes to the candidate. Right now, Rand Paul and Ted Cruz look awfully good. I’m also keeping my eye on Trey Gowdy.

  • capeconservative

    Everyone in the US wants term limits except those who would have to vote for them! I’m pretty sure if the issue was put on the ballot, it would pass with a strong majority. Especially if we could include a ‘rules passed by Congress must be applied to ALL, including members of Congress’ section!

  • red_oakster

    Um, no. Erick’s point is that Paul identified the small sliver of ground where hawks and libertarians can co-exist on the drone issue, and a bunch of folks who should know better about these issues (mCCain and Graham) opposed him on what basis I still do not know. That said, hawks like Cruz and Rubio did support Paul on this one, suggesting they are also using their heads. But Paul’s ability to win the GOP presidential nomination while espousing an isolationist foreign policy? That seems south of 20%.

  • capeconservative

    Tie the drones in with the DHS bullets and tank purchases and I see no reason for ANY American to doubt Senator Paul’s take on the situation.

    McCain and Graham are has-beens…all mouth and no action! Our country would be much better off if they would resgn immediately! It has been PROVEN that the old ways of the Republicans does NOT work…too bad there isn’t a drop of concern for our country amongst them…just me me me my re-election blah blah blah

  • capeconservative

    The leadership MUST go!

  • gmat

    “But he took the spotlight away from the adults in the room. That was his sin. He had to be rebuked.”

    It wasn’t just that. Paul has some ideas on foreign policy that McCain, Graham, Kristol, et al, have worked hard (and successfully) to keep out of the mainstream FP conversation.

    He has them scared. They have to discredit him.

  • gapch12

    Dave in San Antonio, you nailed it. Very well said. Thank you for writing the words that I feel.

  • stanman

    you make a great point regarding Rand Paul’s potential 2016 presidential run and the fact that the old bulls in the republican party have concluded that it’s not “his turn.” As much as I have liked Bob Dole and even John McCain….. it was the pecking order of republican candidates whose time to run “had come” as a major reason why the republicans not only lost the election, but lost touch with important voting blocks. When I was growing up, I lived and worked on farms. You can imagine what happened when bulls got a little bit past their prime!

  • mrfixit10

    took the words right out of my mouth.

  • mrfixit10

    Rand drove a nail in the heart of the RINO’s and they will not take it lightly. That is a big part of the problem with the R PARTY. Do not challenge your elders or you will pay the price. You must first learn how to be a prostitute to join the CLUB.

  • Northpaw

    Generally speaking every constituent wants his or her
    congressperson for life to remain in orifice, it is only the other guys professional legislative thief who should be term limited if not terminated.

  • Northpaw

    The rub is some conservatives suspect that Rand Paul is his father Wrong Paul’s cat’s-paw, and in that regard there should be some constipation
    consternation. I come down on the side of Rand Paul’s intrepid stance in the
    teeth of the old guard’s disapproval.

  • checkmate2012

    Agree GC especially when you get a D and I to support the cause (wasn’t it B. Sanders that tried to delete his supportive Tweets?). I’ve heard that Christie has been invited numerous times but never showed up. Is it possible CPAC is providing him cover for his upcoming election? Curious minds want to know :)

  • Dave_A

    The bigger concern is this… The sheep’s clothing is coming off (As I predicted) and Rand is just a slightly more PR-aware clone of Daddy Paul…

    Of all the things to do a standing filibuster on, he skipped right past the REAL issues & locked in on a doomsday-prepper fantasy-land one: A US administration using lethal military force on citizens in conditions less than outright civil-war…

    This proves beyond a shadow of a doubt that JrPaul is just as nutty as his dad – in that he sees this issue as a realistic enough concern to do a ‘Mr Smith goes to Washington’…

    Had he done it on spending/the budget, the debt limit, or some other REAL, SERIOUS ISSUE then it would have lent credence to ‘the apple fell far from the tree’…

    Instead, he proved all of his opponents (on the right, anyhow) right…

  • Dave_A

    BTW: If you want to stop having problems with the Establishment, than show the Establishment that conservative candidates can win & keep winning, nationwide…

    This means no more ‘Bad News Bears’ – no more idiots like the ones from MO, CO, IN & DE….

    The Establishment only cares about winning. Show them we can win (for more than a ‘
    ‘wave’ election) & they will care about us…

  • Dave_A

    They *are* the Left in different colors.

  • drfredc

    The GOP LOSERship aren’t part of the low-info voter group.

    The GOP LOSERship are the epitome of the NO-information voter group. The longer they talk, the less and less you know what they and the GOP stand for, other than themselves being very important people who deserve your attention… The only thing they lack is the big L tatoo on their forehead.

  • runner12

    As someone stated below, criticism from McCain and Graham should be worn as a badge of honor. The establishment cannot stand the fact that Conservatives have been right all along. If you take on the Obama administration in a bold and intelligent way, you actually win. Playing not to lose never works. Neither does running away from principles. Sen. Rand Paul just showed up the entire GOP establishment and I could not be happier.

  • midwestconservative

    Nixon was a Senator from California, make sure you have facts before you spout off

  • midwestconservative

    yeah because Karl Rove did real well in 2012, Jim Bunning never won more than 51% of the vote when he was a Senator, Rand Paul won 55% principled conservatives do better than squish republicans, and Todd Akin was chosen by Democrats who entered a GOP primary to pick the weakest candidate while two other candidates split the Tea Party vote, Karl Rove labeling those he doesn’t like as “Todd Akins” is not helping the GOP, you are espousing Karl Rove talking points which is almost as bad as Dem taking points which are against this website’s posting policy

  • midwestconservative

    here here, it took over a decade after Goldwater before the GOP supported Reagan, they tried all the mushy candy bars before they tried the one with they thought had “nuts”, turns out people really like snickers

  • midwestconservative

    the problem is that all of the best conservative alternatives are up for reelection in their respective offices ( Pence, Thune, Paul, Rubio) even decent moderates like Portman will probably play it safe and run for reelection; so that leaves us Jeb Bush, Santorum, and Chris Christie
    looks like Jeb Bush 2016, woe to conservatism

  • Viet71

    My take on Rush: He’s foremost an entertainer, as he admits; and he’s great for his audience. Substantively, he’s almost always right from what I’ve heard of him on the car radio, IMO.

  • Northpaw

    JFK was the last member of the legislative branch to be elected president before Øbama, Nixon was Vice President when he lost to JFK, not a senator.

  • midwestconservative

    did he not become a Senator after losing in 60′ or was he in the Private sector all that time, I know he lost to Pat Brown for Governor in 62′

  • Northpaw

    He was in private practice as a lawyer in NYC after losing to the father of the current California’s governor, Pat Brown. Nixon was a senator from California when Ike tapped him for the VP spot in 1952.

  • Northpaw

    RINO Joe Scarborough urged Republicans to look beyond those
    two outlets [Fox & Talk Radio].

    “Just for conservatives that think they have to stay in their own little media world, since Rush Limbaugh went on the air and became a national figure, Republicans have lost five out of the last six presidential elections in the popular vote,” he said. “Since Fox News went on the air in 1996, Republicans have lost four out of the five
    last elections”

    Here are the facts:

    Mitt Romney became the eleventh losing GOP moderate nominee
    since the Progressive Republican Herbert Hoover ran for re-election in 1932:

    1.
    Romney 2012

    2.
    McCain 2008

    3.
    Dole 1996

    4.
    George H. W. Bush 1992

    5.
    Ford 1976

    6.
    Nixon 1960

    7.
    Dewey 1948

    8.
    Dewey 1944

    9.
    Wilkie 1940

    10. Landon 1936

    11. Hoover 1932

  • Dave_A

    The point is, Rand Paul is not a ‘Principled Conservative’. He is an anarchist-libertarian in a slightly more opaque package… A clone of his dad…. Yes, he won in Kentucky… It just proves that a nut with an (R) after his name can win a primary in a state where that’s as good as winning the election…

    As for Akin, it’s not just Akin. It’s Akin, and Mourdoch, and O’Donnel, and Angle, and…

    The fact is, running crappy candidates not only costs seats, but it discredits the ‘principled conservative’ message, and makes the establishment more likely to stand in the way.

    Remember: You can’t get anything done without a majority of votes… So unless you want to take the Paul-family ‘appeal to the most liberal of Democrats’ approach you have to make peace with & work with the establishment.

    Fortunately, pragmatic, unprincipled ‘anything to win’ types are easy to work with – you just have to give them what they want: a way to always end up on the winning side….

  • Dave_A

    I would hardly call Hoover a moderate…

  • Northpaw

    You are right, Hoover was worse than a moderate, he was a progressive.

  • midwestconservative

    I bet you think Jim Demint was unelectable until he got elected, this site is not here to pick “anything to win” types, furthermore Kentucky is a “pink” state, there State Democrat Party is actually quite strong due to the Unions, they currently have a Democrat Governor and Secretary of State, and I suppose you think its okay for the Feds to usurp power just because “It could never happen in America” we are not talking about this administration but an Administration 50 to a 100 years in the future,
    “the anything to win” republicans are in part the reason this nation is in the its sad state of affairs, and Dick Lugar should have retired with atleast some Dignity, if that had happened you wouldn’t have seen Mourdock as the candidate, Dick Mourdock was just the only Republican willing to ruffle some feathers among the “big club”
    I’d rather go down swinging with Barry than to follow after Nelson like a lamb being led to slaughter

  • midwestconservative

    then you don’t understand history, Coolidge was a conservative, Hoover was a big government progressive who ran on Coolidge’s coat tails just like Bush I did

  • midwestconservative

    I will admit I am one of those people who don’t listen to Rush and have a negative opinion because of that, but he isn’t beating just about every media outlet in the ratings for nothing

  • midwestconservative

    Robert Taft was a noninterventionist, the guy who gave us the Taft-Hartly act and convinced people to override a Presidential veto in order to do so, and thus give a legal basis for all of the Right to Work laws you probably personally benefit from, would be labeled the “Left” by you, perhaps you need to examine what you consider to be “conservative”
    You’ve proven to be so irritating as to make me defend “legalize all drugs” Ron Paul good job

  • midwestconservative

    and since when is advocating tax reform a plat form of the Left?

  • billbaker

    So soon we forget Rush’s lying ways when it came to having his maid feed his drug habit. But most, I remember, as a young single father, my wife having left without even caring for visitation with my daughter, that one of Rush’s programs he said ‘single fathers raising girls are child molesters.’ Rush is too radical. The dems will win if the republicans keep pushing people away who would love to agree with them on 99% of subjects if only they would lighten up on one or another.

  • Northpaw

    You have to be joking! If not and you are serious, than you
    are an irredeemable leftist trolling conservative sites to spread lies and sick
    propaganda among the brethren. I know Rush, you could not be more
    wrong!!

  • Dave_A

    It’s the combination of peace-at-any-price/the-military-is-here-to-oppress-us nonsense, and the ‘legalize all vice’ (not just all drugs) thing…

    Both Pauls & their ilk have more in common with Dennis Kucinich (voting record wise, etc) than they do with anything close to ‘Conservative’….

    A token vote for tax-reform isn’t enough to outweigh the things they line up with the Dems on…

  • Dave_A

    Actually, I don’t really have a beef with DeMint… I kind of liked him… DeMint is not a doomsday-prepper-nut, nor did he cozy up with people who think I should face trial for murder for participating in ‘Bush’s Wars’, nor does he tend to side with the ACLU in their ‘all criminals are just misunderstood victims of the state’ rubbish… Not being a peacenik-hippie is one of my ‘must-haves’ to consider someone conservative.

    As for the unprincipled anything-to-win types, they are the ONLY place we as conservatives (regardless of views on libertarianisim) can turn to get votes to move our issues forward – mainly because everyone else ideologically opposes conservative views, whereas the Establishment just thinks they aren’t winning issues.

    It’s very hard for some ‘super principled’ people to understand, but the fact is that ‘The Establishment’ doesn’t oppose us on principles – they don’t do it because they *believe* we are wrong – They oppose us because they believe we hurt their chances of *winning*.

    So find conservative candidates LIKE DEMINT who can win, repeatedly… Not lunatic benchwarmers that create media nightmares a 1st-year poly-sci student could see coming… And if you get enough of them, the establishment will jump on board…

  • midwestconservative

    in case you didn’t notice most people, though not agreeing with everything Rand Paul said, view his filibuster as a pr success for the GOP, let me guess you think Ted Cruz is unelectable right? and I’m not against establisment candidates, Reagan was eventually embraced by the Establishment however reluctantly, Mike Pence is a good establisment conservative; at the same time the do anything to win types supported by Karl Rove have done more damage to the conservative movement than anything Obama has done; and Rand Paul is not Ron Paul, he does not support the legalization of drugs, or the dismantling of the Military or anything like that, the sins of the father should not apply to the son, I guess you think Grahamnesty should be our Candidate in 2016

  • midwestconservative

    And How can you label ben carson “the Left” he doesn’t even have a voting record

  • midwestconservative

    I have to see Rand Paul advocate a Trial for Bush, can you give me a specific instance, I have yet to see Rand Paul say the military is here to oppress us, do you have any documentation for this or is that just your perception of him?

  • Dave_A

    I think that Rand really is Ron with better messaging.

    And I think his recent stunt pretty well proves it. Picking an issue so nutty no one else but Daddy Paul would go after it, and doing a standing fillibuster, when there are REAL concerns to be addressed that would benefit from that same tactic (most of them fiscal)…

    So I do assign the sins of the father – the letters, the association with Code Pink/Cindy Sheehan (referenced above, trial comment), and such to him as well.

    P.S.

    I didn’t have a significant problem with Cruz because, quite frankly, I knew that regardless of who won that Primary the GOP would keep the seat (absent Mourdoch/Akin/ODonnel style idiocy).

    Now, if he joins the Pauls in their anti-Federal-Reserve rubbish, or becomes a ‘we need to arrest & try terrorists located on foreign soil, not kill them’ type.. Then I’ll have a problem with him…

  • Dave_A

    The guy who’s ‘turn it is’ is Rick Perry.

    The ‘guy who’s turn it will be next time’ is going to be either Christie or Walker.

    The insurgent spoiler/pain-in-the-ass for this year’s primaries, will be (surprise-suprise) Rand Paul (just like Daddy)….

  • Dave_A

    Paul’s peace-at-any-price foreign policy is unrealistic and indistinguishable from the Democrats most extreme members (Dem *moderates* tend to be the interventionists)…

    The US does not need to be involved in *every* foreign spat, but McCain is right about Syria. Our non-involvement to-date is essentially rolling back the gains made against Al Queda in 10+ years of OIF/OEF.

  • checkmate2012

    I care more about O’s leading from behind policies that enabled the Arab-Spring into radical Islamic regimes.The Pauls don’t govern policy like the pres. And those that buy into O making the world a kinder safer place are delusional….see about 15 Arab countries burning American flags and O lookalikes around 9/11/12. They still hate us and what we stand for and now we’re weak to think otherwise.

  • Sisyphus

    For McCain’s part, he did not want an isolationist, anti-Israel, small government libertarian to become the face of the GOP. McCain did not even bother to ferret out that scrap of consensus Paul chose to make his stand, assuming and assigning all of the worst Paul baggage to the filibuster and looking out of touch and confrontational doing it. That it all came within the same news cycle where McCain sipped from the cup of one who has painted fiscal responsibility racist and, well, he figured the press would cover for him and crown him in glory.

    Whom the gods would destroy, they first make mad.

  • Dave_A

    Anyone who would be Ron or Rand Paul’s running mate…

  • zollistar

    Here’s an article worth reading on this very matter: http://www.fgfbooks.com/Manion/2013/Manion130316.html

  • agooglyminotaur

    A position you likely share with most liberals, as well as conservatives. Everyone is sick of the damned congress.

  • Northpaw

    “Whom the gods would destroy, they first make mad”.

    Or seriously pissed off

  • ardvarkmaster

    Not if he following the left side of the drainage ditch. In Arizona.

  • ardvarkmaster

    If ANOTHER Bush somehow manages to become the GOP nominee, I will stay home on election day. I’m sick of the Kennedys, I’m sick of the Bushes, I’m sick of the Clintons and I’m sick of any other family that thinks just because their relatives were in office, they should be too. A pox on all their houses.