« BACK  |  PRINT

RS

MEMBER DIARY

The Opening Salvo

The 2010 primary season was, for the most part, a good one for limited government, freedom-loving conservatives. Most of the high profile challenges against the incumbent or establishment candidates, with Mike Lee, Ken Buck, Joe Miller, and Sharron Angle ended with the grassroots candidate winning. The American people clearly demonstrated that they are tired of long time incumbents, the ruling class, ignoring the will of the people and growing government spending and the role of government in people’s lives.

But we need to put things into perspective: the 2010 primary season must be seen as simply the opening salvo in the American people’s war against statism. It is the first battle in many to come in the war over whether the American people, or the ruling class, will control the American system of government.

Sure, there are reasons to celebrate, but let’s be honest: nothing has been won yet. The primary victories are just that: primary, not general election, victories. And while it’s humorous to see the befuddlement of the establishment as yet another one of its candidates goes down in defeat, think about this: of the 472 U.S. Representatives and Senators running this fall, it is almost guaranteed, in a supposed “anti-incumbent, anti-establishment” election that 80% or more of the incumbents will win this year.

Those statistics are just at the federal level, but they hold true even at the state level: roughly 80% of state house and state senate incumbents will win this fall. The good people over at Ballotpedia.org have even compiled a list of state legislators who will not even be challenged in the general election. The list is uncomfortably long, which is staggering given that this is a Congressional re-districting year due to the census.

All of this to say to the grassroots: there have been great victories, and progress in the right direction. But we must be honest: in 2010, with 80% of the incumbents winning, the ruling class will actually win the first battle in the war. What will be the true test is what the grassroots, and I would say the American people, will do in 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014; quite frankly for every election, every year, for the next 10-15 years.

What it comes to is this: If the American people are truly interested in winning the battle over who will run our form of government, if they truly believe that all power inheres in the people, not the ruling class, then they must break the power of the incumbents at all levels of government. If the American people can control the nomination process of a party, or parties, they will control the party, and quite frankly, the system of government.

What those of us who believe in free enterprise and limited government are confronting; an out-of-control bureaucracy, out-of-touch leaders, and fiscal irresponsibility, did not materialize overnight, and will not be changed overnight. It will take time to shift the massive ship of the American state and get it back on course.

I would say that until we see a losing percentage of 50% or more for incumbents at all levels of government we cannot truly say that there is an anti-incumbent wave and that the American people are winning the war against the ruling class. That percentage will not happen in the next election, or even the next after that, but I believe it should the conservative movement’s goal to increase by 5-10% every year the number of incumbents beaten. The starting point is to simply challenge incumbents in primaries (between 2000-2008, a GOP U.S. House member had a 98.3-99.5% chance of winning his or her primary).

I was asked by a reporter the other day if the “civil war” in the Republican Party was over. I told him I didn’t believe that there was a civil war: what’s taking place is people expecting Republican leaders to actually adhere to the principles of the party, and if they don’t, we can find leaders that do. He asked if I thought we’d see more of what took place in the 2010 primary season play out in the future. I told him we were just getting warmed up and to expect more of the same in 2012 and beyond. There are six Republican U.S. Senators that might need to be challenged in 2012. There are dozens of House members, and untold numbers of state legislators, county commissioners, city council and school board members who should also be primaried.

The process of breaking the incumbents’ hold over the American system of government will not be an easy one, but it will be well worth it. A farm team of conservative leaders at all levels of government needs to be identified and groomed, and American Majority is in the process of doing just that. But that is only part of the solution: the American people have to stay engaged and demand greater transparency and accountability from their leaders and government. Furthermore, we must have leaders sent to Washington, DC who believe that power should be devolved from DC and back to as local a level as possible-concentrated power was never what the Founders intended, and in fact, it is precisely what the Founders feared.

If the American people can beat the ruling class, and regain control of the government of “We the People,” they can renew the Founders’ vision for America. If we will renew the great principles of free enterprise and limited government, then we as a nation can rise to even greater heights of freedom and prosperity for all in the 21st century.

COMMENTS

  • fpete13527

    Great info. and great training session last week.

  • JadedByPolitics

    The GOP better wise up and quickly because 2010 was just the appetizer, dinner will be in 2012 and dessert will be in 2014! with wetnaps to clean up the messes in between!

    • dude

      Lets seal the deal and put Pelosi out of a job.
      Send what you can to John Dennis

      http://www.johndennis2010.com/

  • http://itsaboutfreedom.proboards.com IronDioPriest

    … but remains at a distinct disadvantage over the long term. Culturally and institutionally, it may well be that the battle is already lost, and our posterity the losers. But fight on, we must.

    We can defeat the Leftists at the polls. We can remind the GOP that the people are in charge of government. We can wrest the tiller of the government ship from the ruling class and restore it to the people.

    But ultimately, if we lose the hearts and minds of our children and grandchildren, and do not instill in them the will to fight, our little victories will be nothing more than the last throes of a dying nation.

    The hard-Left has massive infrastructural and financial support in academia, private and public sector labor, non-profits, community organizations, corporations, international bodies, entertainment, news media, the judiciary, not to mention the currently hapless but always demagogic Democrat party.

    Compound that with the chaos that will ensue should an entitlement system go bankrupt the moment our national credit goes bad.

    Our political victories only stave off the imminent planned destruction of the Republic by the hard-Left that currently controls the government. If we are fortunate enough to win those political battles even for several cycles in a row, the task ahead is massive, daunting.

    We all can agree that putting the breaks on Obama is crucial. But that does nothing to fix the country. As nedryun so eloquently lays out, that is a task that is likely to take at least a generation, with massive opposition, not the least of which is a rapidly crumbling economic infrastructure.

    • dmccracken

      More about principle than re-election. More about working for the good of the people of the country more than the good of the lobbyists that wine and dine them. More about instilling American values of Liberty and Freedom in our children, in the home, school and university than winning a few victories and sitting back on our laurels and enjoying a life of ease.

      This is a battle. The stakes are high because the rewards for success are high. For our side, a restoration of the liberty and freedom that the founders intended for this land. For the other side, financial wealth, security and power.

      Care must always be taken that our soldiers don’t succumb to the aphrodisiacs of Power and Wealth that corrupt so many.

  • eldstenorge

    I am tired of hearing just about Mike Lee, Ken Buck, Joe Miller and Sharron Angle. Yes, I hope and pray they win, however, we should all be doing all we can for Christine O’Donnell. She is the one who would really shake up DC. She is honest to a fault, she is well-spoken, she is one of us to the core, someone not perfect and presenting themselves as such, but one who is herself, period. Sharron Angle is much that way too as she has told the GOP in Nevada they need to clean up too. We should all be supporting Christine O’Donnell in everyway we can. If all of us could go to Delaware for a Week, I would bet things would really change there. Most of us cannot afford to do that, but can help with our money, prayers, emails, etc., all we can. And, that it what we should be doing. We should not be throwing her under the bus as Erick did.

    • Adjoran

      since the primary, what do you want?

      Look at her schedule! Delaware is a small state, fairly densely populated, retail campaigning pays off and can be done logistically. But she has few events planned, little publicity on them, no organizational momentum at all. A couple very generic commercials, which haven’t moved the polls at all.

      15%+ behind, you might think she would be burning up the personal appearances, hitting all the local media, shaking hands and kissing babies – but you would be mistaken.

      Apparently she is just planning on living off the campaign money until the next election cycle.

      • SirGladiator

        At first I wasnt sure about the ‘I’m you’ thing, but having seen her second commercial, I noticed its a theme, apparently they’re going to keep it up from now til the election, citing more and more ways in which she’s ‘you’. Naming just one or two things clearly wont do it, but as a theme with weeks worth of different ads, I’d say its got a great chance of getting through in a big way. Gotta like her campaign right now, it’s going strong!

        • IJB

          Rehabbing her own image isn’t nearly enough – she really needs to go after Coons as another radical vote for a radical, America/DE-destroying agenda. That’s her only chance to win this…

  • cwilson

    an “incumbent” and an “Incumbent”. Suppose all the Tea Party type election winners stay true to their small-govt promises during 2011 and 2012, and run for re-election in 2012.

    Do you want to see your “defeated incumbent” number go up at their expense? When Jim DeMint is up for reelection, do you want to see that “defeated incumbent Senator” count go up by 3%, by sending Jim home?

    A better approach is to tally the number of Incumbents — those members of the Ruling Class, of either party, who believe they OWN their seat. Count the percentage of THOSE b***** are sent home each cycle…and if some Tea Party type drifts, over the years, into the Incumbent party…throw them out then, not before.

    • Adjoran

      He is running against the ninja candidate, Alvin Greene, who won the Democratic nomination without spending a dime or making a public appearance. Greene’s economic program involves creating jobs manufacturing action figures of . . . Alvin Greene. As his mother said, “He not ‘tarded, he jus’ slow.”

  • Joshua Persons

    If you’re just using incumbency loss % as a metric of success, and you’re looking to increase this percentage going forward … Are you saying that you fully expect in two, four, six years to be fighting against the very candidates that you’ve successfully helped to reach office?!

    Our battle is not against incumbents, but against those who value their political power more than the health of the nation. The two sets are closely aligned at the moment; our very goal is to break the alignment, at which point your metric becomes useless.

  • Common_Cents

    Voters have short memories. Who would have thought such a rapid decline for Zero?

    Similarly if Reps gain a majority the clock will be ticking and there must be tremendous progress in a declining economy or the Dems could be set up to play the blame game and sit pretty well going into 2012.

    We can no longer wait until things get bad enough and react every several years. The new fight has to be continual, every day, stepping on the political necks of the left when we have the chance, instead of throwing them a “bipartisanship” bone like the wishy washy Rep establishment has done in the recent past.

    • zuckey6

      The object ofthe Tea Party peopleshould be to meet their commitment which shouls be stop Obama`s distruction our nation. Doing that should satisfy many people. that should mean that a conservative would be elected President in2012.

  • rdelbov

    elections before we move unto 2012 and beyond.

    I for one like Coburn and DeMint as fine senators to re-elect. Gov Perry too plus lots of house incumbents.

    For that matter if GOP members of the house and senate do the right thing in 2011 how about giving them their due and supporting them for re-election in 2012??

    There was a discussion about a vote Dan Coats cast in 1993 earlier this year–how about judging senators & congressman up in 2012 based on how they vote in 2011?

  • fbks

    elected to the senate, added to the existing conservative incumbents , that is a huge shift to the right, for a movement that began less than two years ago. Yes, it will take time and a lot of education for neighbors, family, ect, but need to consider how big a deal it is, when January 2009 was bleak.

    • Robert Allen Leeper

      1. Replaces less conservative Republican (5)

      Miller
      Rubio
      Paul
      Portman*
      Lee

      * Portman has been around awhile; the others above are all Tea Party type newcomers. I am pretty confident he is better than Voinovich, though.

      2. Replaces less conservative Democrat (6)

      Boozman
      Buck*
      Coats
      Hoeven
      Toomey*
      Johnson*

      * Ahead in polls, but not safe

      3. Replaces less conservative Democrat – but not ahead, or not much ahead (5)

      Fiorina
      Kirk
      Angle
      Rossi
      Raese

      So I count eleven likely (many very likely) plus probably at least three of the tossups and maybe 1 of the less likely ones – DE, CT, NY.

      That is indeed a huge shift to the right.

  • chamberD

    The reason America-as-founded teeters on the abyss is in large measure a function of her very success and prosperity; the allurements and enticements of materialsim that have cleaved her people from their pursuit of good character and civic responsibility have done us in. We’ve been asleep at the switch in our hedonistic pleasure domes and not much interested in the myriad hairline cracks in the foundation that the constant drubbing from Liberalism has wreaked on our Constitutional structure.

    We moan and groan at our corrupt and statist politicians, little noticing that it is we who have permtted them to go astray.

    Our politicians reflect who we are. The long road home to self-restraint and fiscal responsibility in our government, the ‘reformation’ if you will, depends on our willingness to reform our own individual character.

    “It is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle, than for a rich man to enter into the kingdom of God.” (Matthew 19:24)

    The fact is, most of us are rich, in historical terms, rich and complacent, and not terribly concerned about our souls, and easily led by those who mean us harm, and happy to brush shoulders (if not to succumb entirely) with the sexually hedonistic culture our complacency has enabled.

    We’ve lost our way and our churches have scrapped the gospel for a new and improved religion where social justice goals trump orthodoxy — “Instead, to suit their own desires, they will gather around them a great number of teachers to say what their itching ears want to hear.”

    Personal renewal precedes national renewal. Yet ultimately, only the first one really matters.

    • Aaron Gardner

      Personally, I am not rich by any standard – historical or otherwise.

      I don’t disagree with the idea that we have gone astray, but I wouldn’t go so far as to lay the blame on materialistic greed. Nor would I quote Matthew 19:24 if I was trying to challenge the idea of social justice.

      I think it is more that we lost focus on where our rights come from rather than materialism or greed. Those are but a symptom.

      • chamberD

        That means you have a computer (or iPhone, etc.) and pay an ISP.

        Food on the table? Roof over your head? Clothes on your back? Refrigerated food? An oven? A TV? Indoor plumbing? You get the picture, I’m sure. Rich by historical standards, without a doubt.

        But, it’s your last sentence that I want most to highlight. In response: materialism, greed, even envy, are indeed symptoms of our having lost sight of (or ignoring, or denying) where our rights come from — which only proves my point.

        God gives us good gifts to enjoy — in the ways he intended them to be enjoyed — yet we are never satisfied, we always want more, we always insist on doing things our way. So we bend the ‘rules’ to get what we want. Even my sister falls into this trap. A more fierce and vocal opponent of illegal immigration (she herself resides in SoCal), she still cannot see the contradiction in her claiming for herself the inevitability of ‘bending’ or ‘tweaking’ the ‘rules’ if it means she can gain some undo advantage for her family at the expense of others. The very thing she rails against in others, she herself is guilty of. Yet she cannot see it!

        She’s bothered beyond frustration that her tax dollars go to support schools, law enforcement, and healthcare for NON citizens for FREE. She understands that what you subsidize you get more of. Yet, at the same time, if she were in their shoes, figuratively, she’d take advantage of whatever she could if it meant she could ‘get’ more for her family.

        The notion of taking what doesn’t belong to you is now engrained in our degenerated culture. It’s no wonder we’re on the brink. One of the commandments: Thou shalt not steal. But since the Left has been so successful — because we let them be — these words have been removed from our classrooms.

        • Aaron Gardner

          Also, I think arguing that since I have a phone and internet that I am rich, even by historical standards, is a major reach.

          By your standards anyone who owns a flock of sheep in today’s world would still be considered rich by historical standards, yet they aren’t rich.

          Now, I am rich in the sense that I have two wonderful children and an equally wonderful and beautiful wife. Beyond that, not so much.

          • JSobieski

            If you are going to say that we are rich because we aren’t living in 2000BC, you might as well conclude that we are poor because we aren’t living in 4000AD.

            Anyone can be classified as rich or poor based on who is in the comparison pool.

            The broader point is well taken, but of course that depends on how one defines “greed”

            “greed” is different than “ambition” but even “ambition” requires a proper evaluation of priorities

        • Scope

          for our bathroom facility, to coal or wood burning stove to cook our food, and to whale oil to light out homes? The United States inventors, investors, and our technological advancements have made us “greedy.” Really? Has the United States not contributed to so much that has spread around the world that is good and advanced for any who choose to benefit from those advancements?

          You sound like you have either bought into the Progressive Counterfeit Catholics, or, you have adopted the Muslim mantra that the US is nothing more than Heidonistic (sp) slobs, that have brought so much misery to the world. Thou shalt not steal means that the Communists, or Muslims shalt not steal the wonderful advancements the US has put forward. It is not the US that is at fault for dictators stealing from their own citizens, while they take billions of dollars from the US, meant to help those that are suppressed from their own governments. Money, modern technology, and good faith has never turned those around that want nothing more than riches and power, and are vile to their own population.

          • Scope

            have their way, you will be rewarded with your wish. Everyone in the US will be “equally” poor and downtrodden.

          • chamberD

            . . . which in itself is rather disheartening.

            I’m not against ‘wealth.’ I don’t wish for us to be a poor nation. What I do want is for there to be fewer people who pursue things at the expense of goodness and character.

            Being relatively secure and relatively rich and unaccustomed to deprivation has a tendency to turn a people away from the pursuit of the good; it has a way of turning people into worshippers of created things rather than worship of the Creator. “Where your treasure is there will your heart be also.” It has a tendency to create in a people a willingness to accept the lies of the Left.

            The nation’s a mess because too many people seek what they can get from the government, from favoritism — contracts, earmarks, pork pork pork. Free this, free that. My point is, it should be beneath ones honor and dignity to feed off the government trough, whether you’re a lay-about OR a businessman.

            “Luxury, more deadly than war, avenges the conquered world.” Juvenal.

            The national character is in decline because the character of its people is in decline.

            National renewal, beyond the opening salvo, is a function of individual renewal, a return to the good and a rejection of the liberal lie: marxism, nihilism, agnosticism, et al.

          • chamberD

            When plunder becomes a way of life for a group of men living together in society, they create for themselves in the course of time a legal system that authorizes it and a moral code that glorifies it. — French Economist, statesman and author Frederic Bastiast (1801-1850)

          • mirac777

            You chastise your sister for expressing her beliefs against Illegal criminals.Thats right, they are criminals, entering a country illegally. Yet you talk about individual renewel. Would that renewel be possible without laws and people enforcing them? Of course not, you would be murdered by an illegal; or other type of criminal.
            It is common sense that a country has to have a base of good decent honest people, with strong leaders who are truly working for the good of the country. The good people have to stand up and make sure good people are elected to be leaders. In America, that means people who will stand up for Americans first.Its funny how people beg to come here for the American way of life, then when they get here, they want to inject their culture into our society.Their laws and rights. Thats B/S. Too many UnAmericans telling Americans how our country should be.The American dream is to work hard and prosper.Period. If you call having a toilet, instead of crapping in your drinking water river rich, so be it, yes we are all filthy rich After all we worked for it.We invented plumbing and things to make our lives better. If a person gets “Rich” while enhancing other peoples lives, what is so wrong with that?

            Doesn’t take 9 pages of self-important lectures to understand that. Common sense, not Lawyer talk, religion talk, not World Gov’t talk, just plain old common sense talk. American values at all levels. True values, not ones that have been skewed and manipulated by Liberal Flakes and Communists. When solving the problems of our country it always comes back to common sense. Working and prospering class, or welfare, non-productive sucking off others class? Simple.You want something like a house? Get off your ass and work for it. Never mind a gov’t putting you into one you cant afford.Think of how much common sense got denied in that situation!

          • chamberD

            Just in case I wasn’t clear, I am as adamantly opposed to the invasion from illegal immigrants coming from south of our borders as is my sister. Moreover, I believe that chief among the reasons our ‘traditional’ values are under assault is due to the 1965 Nationalization and Immigration Act that skewed all future immigration away from European and other countries of the West toward third world and non-Western nations, the purpose of which was to dillute our common heritage as was exemplified in our Founding. Ted Kennedy (main sponsor of the bill) promised in 1965 that America could easily absorb these people and assimilate them into the melting pot that is America without undermining our national, Western, character, without balkanization, without threatening our society, based as it was on English Common Law, Judeo-Christian principles and tempered by enlightenment attitudes. But he was wrong, and I think intentionally so.

            In short, I agree with my sister in her denunciation of our government’s failure to secure our borders. But, what I wanted her to see — and apparently you don’t see it either — is that when the open borders crowd characterizes illegal immigrants as people who are just doing what anyone would do (break the law) to find work to feed a family, that she cannot very well stand in opposition to that concept and rail against the invading horde when she herself claims she would bend rules too, if she had to, to feed her family. You can’t rail against others who break the law (simply because you have to pick up the tab for their criminality) when you insist that you should be able to break the law too if it ‘feeds’ your family, if it means you can get ahead in your job, etc, etc.

            Her reasoning? Everyone does it, just look at Washington D.C. and all the corruption there. But then she’s perplexed and fuming that America isn’t the place it once was.

            If Americans can’t tell right from wrong as it applies to them personally, then sir, they lack the common sense you so adamantly insist is going to save us.

    • zuckey6

      I Agree with you. Perhaps you might wich to read my reply to Common Sense

  • southernpatriots

    We must continue to remind conservatives that everything will not change even if we have 100 seats change to Republicans in the House, with maybe 60 being conservatives, and we have 8 – 13 seats change in the Senate with maybe 60% conservative again (I hope all are conservative but that is not possible with some of the nominees). Obamacare will not be overturned even with victory this November. It will take continuing victories two years from now, and then two years, etc. The left wing accomplished more in the past 18 months for their leftist and socialist agenda than Bush did for conservatism in 8 years and his father before him.. Do the conservatives have a candidate who can beat Obama and also be radical and motivated enough to make wholesale changes to the direction of the country. This conservative candidate cannot be a politician who is looking for the poles or getting re-elected. We can and must continue to pave the way to stop the socialist progressives and their agenda, that we must do.

  • juanfreeman

    We conservatives will succeed because we are motivated by love for God and country. We oppose people who fear – us, losing power, or any number of other things. The point is, love, though slower to yield results, produces a more sustained effect than fear. We can only be defeated if we are distracted. There will be those with the best of intentions going to Washington who are seduced and act like the current crop. Choose to not be discouraged, recognize who and what they are and replace them with the others – libs, progressives and rinos – willing to compromise for personal gain.

  • miroco

    Glad to see everybody fired up. We now have a slim chance to fix things — being predominately Repubs we probably will NOT. If I see the wicked witch of the NORTH–(Olympia) and her chum Sue in charge of anything but surrendering I will heave. When I see a loser scum like D”Amato declare My Sarah isn’t smar—that bald headed creep lost an entire state. Too many of the old guard cretins held on for the ride, Let’s take a page from the Commies and have a purge— here in Texas, we got our message to Kay Bailey…