Is the GOP trying to snatch defeat from of the jaws of victory?

The combination of certain factors have created a near "perfect storm" to create a GOP majority in the House of Representatives this November: Democratic overreach, the Tea Party movement, the failing economy and a strong populist anti-incumbent fever.

Now it seems that the GOP plans to "unveil their new 'Contract with America'" which is modeled to some degree after the quickly forgotten document which helped bring Republicans to majority status in 1994.

To be sure, some suggested elements of the "America Speaking Out" program to be released Thursday seem quite likely to inspire Tea Party activitists while winning a sizable chunk of the independent vote. The Hill reports:

GOP leaders have already hinted at some of the ideas that could be included. House Minority Leader John Boehner (R-Ohio), for instance, has called for a two-year freeze in tax rates and a reduction in spending to 2008 levels. President Obama and Democratic leaders want to extend most tax cuts, but would raise taxes on families with incomes above $250,000 annually and individuals who earn more than $200,000 a year. Republicans have also pressed for repeal of the healthcare reform law, and for replacing it with new reforms. Some GOP figures have also called for repealing Wall Street reform.

Politico adds to the mix:

If a member questioned whether the House had constitutional authority to pass a bill, that challenge would receive debate and a vote.

The second major initiative would encourage — though not require — members of Congress to read bills before they vote. According to a senior House GOP source, Republicans plan to push for a new rule that would require the House to publish the text of a bill online at least three days before the House votes on it, also giving the public an opportunity to review legislation.

Now here comes the part about how the GOP plans to blow it. "Social conservatives have said they're confident their views will be well-represented in the document," reads today's article from The Hill.

“There will be some in there, yes. I haven’t seen the language but have been told that there will be some in there, the social issues,” said Rep. Joseph Pitts (R-Pa.) in The Hill article linked immediately above. Here's more:

Leading anti-abortion group Susan B. Anthony List was among a collection of traditional family organizations lobbying GOP leaders to include social issues such as abortion, the Defense of Marriage Act and religious liberty in the final product.

Last week, that collection of organizations delivered 20,000 letters to GOP leaders from their activist community demanding that social issues make it into the new commitment to America.

“From the beginning our goal was to help remind the leadership that any document ought to include the full legs of the stool. The three issue sets that really form the base of the Republican Party. To not include a third of that would be very difficult for a party at a time with important goals,” Susan B. Anthony List President Marjorie Dannenfelser explained to The Hill.

GOP leaders told advocacy and interest group leaders last week that the yet-to-be-revealed governing agenda was not a party platform, “it’s an action item list,” according to a meeting participant.

“There is a difference between a platform and a governing document – abosolutely (sic). However, issues come up – a governing document for the Congress ought to reflect, to a large extent, what the platform is because right out of the box, there are going to be issues that present themselves,” Dannenfelser said.

The third-ranking House Republican, Rep. Mike Pence (Ind.), told an auditorium of Values Voter Summit participants Friday that they should demand no less than that GOP leaders include social issues in the dialogue moving forward.

“Men and women, we must demand, here and now, that the leaders of the Republican Party stand for life, traditional marriage and religious liberty without apology,” the House GOP Conference chairman told the hundreds of socially conservative voters in attendance. Pence went on to win the straw poll Saturday.

And his words gave Dannenfelser, at least, “certification that the whole base is included in the document.” 

What the social conservatives don't seem to realize (or even care about) is that this "whole base" also includes libertarians and fiscal conservatives not primarily focused on social issues. It's worth noting that ignoring fiscal conservatives led to serious GOP electoral setbacks and helped parent the Tea Party movement.

Even in 1994, the Contract With America barely touched upon social issues. With today's Tea Party movement driving the vote this year, why not stick with the message that's already working: "constitutionally limited government, free markets and fiscal responsibility."

Many Tea Party activists are libertarian. Others are socially conservative. However, social issues aren't motivating the movement , or voters, right now.  The Wall Street Journal reports the following:

Affinity only goes so far, however. A Wall Street Journal/NBC News poll conducted in June found that just 2% of those identified as tea partiers put social issues such as abortion and same-sex marriage at the top of their priority lists for federal action. By contrast, 29% chose job creation and economic growth at the top, and 25% picked the deficit and government spending.

Grover Norquist, president of Americans for Tax Reform, said what matters in politics is the "vote-moving" issue, and tea partiers vote for smaller government, not school prayer. He recalls the political climate during President Bill Clinton's White House intern sex scandal in the late-1990s. Back then, Mr. Norquist had a hard time getting himself on television to talk about tax-and-spending cuts.

Now there has been an about-face in the body politic. "I hear it from social-conservative leaders who say, 'Where are my issues?' " Mr. Norquist said. "I say, 'Your issues are in the backpack of the guys about to win [on] spending."' Tea partiers may also be anti-abortion and pro-gun rights, but if those were the issues that moved them, they would have gotten involved years ago, Mr. Norquist said.

Eight years of pandering to social conservatives left a very bitter taste in the mouths of fiscal conservatives, libertarians and independent voters - the very same base from which the Tea Party movement is comprised. Internet gambling bans, the unconstitutional internvention in the Terri Shiavo case, compassionate conservatism, No Child Left Behind and faith-based initiatives underscore the right's disdain for overreaching social policy. In short, social conservatives were successful in astroturfing the GOP and they seem to be at it again.

Emboldened by Christine O'Donnell's primary win over Mike Castle in Delaware, some social conservatives are suggesting that their values should be pushed to the forefront of the Republican agenda. O'Donnell pushed a fiscally conservative message against the Republican with the worst 2009 spending record in Congress, according to the Club for Growth. It's far more likely that voters were responding to these issues than the masturbation and witchraft stories dominating the media of late.

That O'Donnell won doesn't speak to her capabilities as much as serve as an indictment of Republican politics-as-usual mindset still present in the GOP establishment. That O'Donnell won serves as an indictment of her primary opponent.

The Washington Independent describes the mindset of those trying to push social conservatism in this year's elections:

“Don’t let them put you in the back of the bus,” former Pennsylvania Sen. Rick Santorum (R) said to a full ballroom at the Values Voters Summit — organized by the Family Research Council — in Washington Friday.

He expounded on that idea to the crowd of about 2,000 Christian conservatives, saying they shouldn’t let “people come out and tell us that we have to put the values issues in the back of the bus, we have to have a truce on the values issues because the economic issues are paramount.”

I'm not sure if they get it, but people like Santorum are a key reason why Obama and the Democrats are in power today. And they clearly aren't the leading voice of the Tea Party movement.  To allow them their issues at this point in time is clearly a recipe for disaster. Now they wish to push them so far as to allow them to be a component of the 2010 version of the Contract With America.

The Democrats have flubbed things up so badly that Republicans could probably win back the House pushing incredibly extreme portions of the socially conservative agenda like banning beer and burning (actually burying) books.  However, the actions they take this year will continue to decimate Republican branding for years to come.

If the social conservatives want to craft a socially conservative cohesive campaign theme, let them band together and create one which doesn't represent the entire GOP.

According to The Hill, former NRCC Chairman Tom Cole and Cheif Deputy Whip Rep. Kevin McCarthy are working on the inclusion of socially conservative values into the "America Speaking Out" program.

It's time for the socially conservative message to take the back seat on Santorum's bus. It's time for former Governor Mike Huckabee to cease his attack on libertarians and fiscal conservatives. It's time for Senator Lindsey Graham to quit trying to boot small-government types from the party. It's time for Gary Bauer to just shut the hell up.

If the GOP is serious about working with Tea Party members and adding libertarians and socially tolerant independents back onto their voter rolls the new GOP program will be devoid of social issues. If not, expect the drafters of this new document to become as unpopular with Republican voters as John Boehner and Mitch McConnell are today.

Your rating: None Average: 5 (1 vote)


 This is pretty much right

 This is pretty much right on, but here is the other mistake as you quoted:

Even in 1994, the Contract With America barely touched upon social issues. With today's Tea Party movement driving the vote this year, why not stick with the message that's already working: "constitutionally limited government, free markets and fiscal responsibility."

All of this rhetoric on "constitutionally limited government, free markets and fiscal responsibility" still presents a laissez-faire economics towards the middle class and our economy. The most important factor is jobs. And you cannot have jobs if we are shipping them overseas. So it is globalization and 2 billion cheap laborers that is the issue that undercuts our middle class. And until we fix the problem of globalization, you will not be able to fix one other thing, be it, fixing SS, Medicare, infrastructure, or government spending. 

What happens is that republicans always go to tax cuts and they think that this is all they have to do. And it just completely abandons the middle class. While it is up to individuals to do the best to take care of themselves, you cannot pull the rug out from under them. And this happens every time. The economy is never perfect, the free market leaves gaps and republicans ignore those gaps. And people fall through the gaps. 


For the past few decades, the

For the past few decades, the GOP has used coded language and promises they knew they could not keep to fire up the "base", without having to actually deliver much in the form of legislation. It worked for a long time, because the crazies were a minority within the GOP, and they had no other viable political option apart from GOP candidates. The right wing was, for a long time, carefully managed, fed a steady diet of propaganda, and kept under the control of party leaders. That is, until recently.

After the Bush years, and the disastrous McCain/Palin candidacy, large numbers of loosely-affiliated moderates and libertarians have left the GOP. But, the "base" didn't leave, they are still there. So, as the moderates left, the "base" became the new majority within the GOP. We call them the "Tea Party", but they are the same people who comprised the GOP base for decades. Now, the GOP has an interesting problem: their constituents actually believed all the deranged propaganda the GOP has been feeding them over the years, and now that the right wing has control of the party, they are electing their own via the primaries. They are demanding that the GOP enact the crazy promises they have made over the years.

This creates a number of interesting problems for the GOP party leadership. How do you tell your base that the things you have been telling them all these years are completely insane? How do you tell people that you have been manipulating them for decades, and that the things they believe, which you taught them, were never meant to be represented in actual legislative policy? You can't compromise when you really believe that the opposition isn't just your political opponent, but the enemy of your way of life. You don't make deals with that which you have been told all your life is abject, craven evil. You act to destroy it, because that's what you do with evil: destroy it.

After years of telling their constituents that government is the enemy, the GOP now finds itself unable to keep the lunatics away from the levers of power. It's no longer the top-down party of discipline that it used to be. The 11th commandment is being forgotten, as the old guard is increasingly viewed by the base as collaborating with the enemy. The GOP is becoming a real grassroots movement, with a twist: almost everything the base thinks they know is BS, fed to them for years in a carefully managed diet of propaganda.

And now, it’s all coming apart. The horrific result is that the GOP and by extension the rest of the country are collateral damage as the IEDs - Idiotic Election Devices - planted over all these years by the old guard explode in the public square.

Shorter answer, Stepen Gordon: the socon issues will not be kicked to the back of the bus because they're driving it. The old guard moderates know their days as moderates are numbered because sooner or later they have a choice to make: become a craven opportunist a la McCain or get primaried out by the lunatics.  Moderates and libertarians will be a vanishing species in the GOP going forward.

That was an astute and

That was an astute and well-rendered encapsulation of what faces the Republican party now. I would, however, add that the crazies who compromise much of that party at present aren't acting on their own--they're still being manipulated/controlled by the same powerful interests who have always managed them. It's just that far too many of those interests, having lost sight of the Big Picture, have increasingly opted for the pursuit of short-term gains with no eye to the future (and no sense of responsibility). The teabaggers, as you point out, aren't new. They aren't "grassroots" anything, either. Follow the money and it all leads back to the same places. It's just that the money that used to support the broader right is now being pumped, in much more concentrated a fashion, into the far right.

The reason so consummate an insider as Karl Rove was so upset about O'Donnell's win in Delaware is that the Delaware Republicans had a candidate who could have--and would have--won that seat, and they opted for a candidate who (as one Republican strategist accurately put it) couldn't be elected dog-catcher. In extremely red states like Alaska, one can get away with nominating some crypto-fascist crazy--the public, there, would vote Republican if you nominated a confessed child-molester, as long as he publicly hated the right people (the only thing that endears Republican candidates to their base). In marginal states, though, that's a recipe for disaster. Something like the O'Donnell campaign isn't an example of far right voters going off the reservation, though--O'Donnell was the creation of the same Big Money interests who made all of those other nut candidates. It's just that--as I said before--those doling out all that Big Money have become terminally shortsighted. Even Rove, who knows better, is spending millions supporting Sharron Angle in Nevada (though, to be fair, this seems to be because of a loudly-stated personal grudge against Harry Reid, rather than a consequence of any judgment of Angle's electability).

Tea Partiers are Grass roots, don't know about "baggers"

Unless its just anoter derogatory hate remark from the left side of Left Field ?

As for the Hypocritcal BS about O'Donnell and the latest assault upon her spending of Campaign funds, and being "Unelectable" even as a Dog Catcher ?....lets look at BOXER and she is supposedly "electable"...

Since 2000, Sen. Barbara Boxer, California Democrat, has taken 18 trips sponsored by outside organizations, at a value of $97,975.

Naturally, if you want to learn about the Islamic world, you go to . . . Paris, France. With your spouse. For a week. At a cost of $12,272, as Boxer did in 2008.

If you want to become more familiar with the impact of U.S. policy on Latin America, clearly, you go to . . . thePunta de Mita beach resort in Mexico. With your spouse. Three times, in 2006, 2005, and 2002, at a cost of roughly $6,000 per trip.

If you want to learn more about U.S.-Russia-European relations, you go to . . . Dublin, Ireland, for five days, at a cost of more than $6,000, as she did in 2005. Or perhaps you go to London, at a cost of $8,260, as she did in 2002.  


O'Donnell is unelectable ?   ROFLMAO, you guys are killing me, you are Jokers.......

What a surprise...

Typical of 4speed, he completely avoids the subject under discussion, and follows the good-defense-is-a-good-offense dictum of right-wing talk radio (which he slavishly parrots as a substitute for thought). Even when the "offensive" is completely irrelevant.

To address this wholly irrelevant matter, that sort of travel by Boxer is corrupt as hell. It's also something every other member of congress does. Another damnable practice: scheduling some minor "official business" during the course of a junket as an excuse to get taxpayers to pick up the tab for travel. These are corrupt practices, but entirely legal. O'Donnell, on the other hand, has allegedly been using her Big Money benefactors' largesse to pay personal bills, which is completely illegal--embezzlement carried out while she stiffed her staff and creditors.

Grassroots teabaggers? As of Aug. 25 (the last report), 85% of "grassroots" candidate Christine O'Donnell's individual contributions came from outside of Delaware (her Democratic opponent Chris Coons, as of the same reporting, got over 60% of his financing within the state). The people of Delaware, in fact, only offered $18,000 to her campaign, which raised less than $260,000 in individual contributions. So where does the money that propelled her to victory come from? Not from any "grassroots." It comes via Big Money fronts like the Tea Party Express (a public face of a Republican consulting firm in California).

I beg your pardon ?

Classic, let me quote you on the "Subject" of my Post, using YOUR words from your "Off the subject Post" ....hey, If I am, You am, so to speak....

"they opted for a candidate who (as one Republican strategist accurately put it) couldn't be elected dog-catcher. In extremely red states like Alaska, one can get away with nominating some crypto-fascist crazy"

Typical Classic, attack, no discussion of facts or policy, just slash, insult, and hate.   Desperation by Liberals, getting way beyond just the "Baggers" insults.  


Agree on all points.  I would also add that the Big Money behind the TeaPeople know the incessant screeching about anything and everything will psychologically wear down the rest of the country.  It amplifies the basic con of the TeaParty concept -- create a shiny, noisy distraction while BigMoney reaches deeper into our back pockets -- by instilling weariness in people.  Most people I know  just want to stop hearing about the childish antics of a handful of radicals, so it's not a big leap from there to thinking the prospect of two more years of wingnuts shrieking and howling about Nazis will make a good number of people say “whatever… give it to them … anything to shut them up.” 

But of course, just like with giving in to a two-year-old's tantrum in the store, coddling their loony whining will just ensure they are motivated to do more of it.  I also think some number of people (small, but there) are genuinely afraid of the veiled threats like "2nd amendment remedies" being carried out if the Temper-Tantrum Partiers aren't coddled, especially in areas where there are large numbers of them, which allows them to leverage classic bully tactics. 

Karl Rove?  He'll get over it.  He doesn't want them to take the Senate anyway, so they don't have to take responsibility for two years of (non)governance and while the loonies in the House will pursue impeachment, there's no possibiilty they can succeed with that in the Senate and pay the price in 2012.  All they need to do in the Senate is continue the tyranny of the minority and then screech in 2012 that Obama was a do-nothing president.  Of course, the media will be happy to carry their water with that message.

Lets give this Big Money and the Tea Party a reality check

What ARE you talking about ?   

O'Donnell received $ 1,000,000 towards her campaign within 24 hrs. after the Primary win.   I doubt that was BIG money at all, and why would I think that ?  

Number one, The National Republican Senatorial Committee announced it wouldn’t spend a dime to help her, within moments of her primary victory over Mike Castle, but changed its mind after a night of outrage from Republican voters.    No Corporate "Big Money" would go against the Republican RNC that quickly.

As for Obama's $745,000,000 presidential campaign, about 75% of those donations were $1,000 or more per donator.   Big Money ?  You guys are a joke.

Geez, you liberals are just throwing stuff against the wall to see if anything sticks.  No clue, and nothing to back up your accusations.   Sorta like the "Racist" Tea Party accusations, Baloney, Salami, Pastrami coming from the Left anyway you want to measure it.  

As for your comment (again) create a shiny, noisy distraction while BigMoney reaches deeper into our back pockets

How about some Word Association ?  Obama/Greek Columns/elaborate Stage/Colorado -  shiny noisy distraction.  


4speed, you can educate yourself or be a pawn

It's up to you.  I'm going to give you links to information about the funding behind the TeaParty and how they are used to advance corporate agendas.  You can read the linked artciles or not.  

"The Billionaires Bankrolling the Tea Party"  Frank Rich, New York Times:  Excerpt:

Last week the Kochs were shoved unwillingly into the spotlight by the most comprehensive journalistic portrait of them yet, written by Jane Mayer of The New Yorker. Her article caused a stir among those in Manhattan’s liberal elite who didn’t know that David Koch, widely celebrated for his cultural philanthropy, is not merely another rich conservative Republican but the founder of the Americans for Prosperity Foundation, which, as Mayer writes with some understatement, “has worked closely with the Tea Party since the movement’s inception.” To New Yorkers who associate the David H. Koch Theater at Lincoln Center with the New York City Ballet, it’s startling to learn that the Texas branch of that foundation’s political arm, known simply as Americans for Prosperity, gave its Blogger of the Year Award to an activist who had called President Obama “cokehead in chief.”

The other major sponsor of the Tea Party movement is Dick Armey’s FreedomWorks, which, like Americans for Prosperity, is promoting events in Washington this weekend. Under its original name, Citizens for a Sound Economy, FreedomWorks received $12 million of its own from Koch family foundations. Using tax records, Mayer found that Koch-controlled foundations gave out $196 million from 1998 to 2008, much of it to conservative causes and institutions. That figure doesn’t include $50 million in Koch Industries lobbying and $4.8 million in campaign contributions by its political action committee, putting it first among energy company peers like Exxon Mobil and Chevron. Since tax law permits anonymous personal donations to nonprofit political groups, these figures may understate the case. The Kochs surely match the in-kind donations the Tea Party receives in free promotion 24/7 from Murdoch’s Fox News, where both Beck and Palin are on the payroll.

Link to the source article by Jane Meyer for the New Yorker:

They're both lengthy articles, but taking the time to read them and realize their implicactions could save you a lifetime of heartache.  Or, you can be Exhibit #1 for the P.T. Barnum maxim that there's a sucker born every minute.

Sorry, I don't do Frank Rich or Pravda papers

You need to show me a Reputable source, not some Democrat Propagandist working for a Dinosaur Paper outlet on its last legs before Bankruptcy.   Frank Rich ?  The New Yorker ?  

As for ANY rich person contributing to the Tea whats the problem ?   Dick Army is a welcome contributor, after all, he was cleared of all Fake Democrat charges in a court of law....several years after the false lies and accusations from the lying left Democrats.  I think hes got a chip on his shoulder.

Koch, is just fine as a Republican Tea Party supporter.   No problem with him.  

PACS ?  Wow, a Democrat criticizing PACS ?  You're cracking me up......LOL.

And again, the $745,000,000 from 2008 Obama supporters, and YOU are complaining about the Tea Party contributions ???....WOW, $745,000, quote you "Exhibit #1 for the P.T. Barnum maxim that there's a sucker born every minute"

I don't think the Tea Party is in that kind of RARE AIR yet.  How unfair is that much money given by  those poor idiots who supported Obama the lying TOTUS ?   Didn't get what you paid for, did you ?   Bush's fault, isn't it ?   Heard about any White House Economic losers quitting the Whitehouse's sinking Economic ship lately ?   Heard about the consistent 10% plus unemployment figures lately for Americans ?  

You don't want to discuss policies and you sure as heck better stop throwing stones in that glass house. 


Doesn't surprise me that you

Doesn't surprise me that you chose ignorance.  You seem to wear it like a badge of honor.


* Link


Tea Partiers did not take note of David Frum and his "Donald Trump moment"  as he exited from some Conservative think tank, (per Plaeo's link) "Republicans for failing to work with Democrats on healthcare reform was the final straw (exit Frum)."   The Tea Party  is grass roots, ya know, we don't really notice these elite struggles.   So far, its been the other way, the elites have been noticing the Tea Party more.

Once the Pelosi Democrats closed their doors in Congress and started writing the Health Care bill, it was a little difficult to "work with the Democrats" at all.   The ruse was then used that "Republicans have no ideas", and that propaganda became the Pravda article talking point of choice for the Democrats.  Hows that working out "fer them there Dems now" ?

As we are seeing, "Finding out what's in the HC bill after it was Passed" has turned out to be a rather deadly miscalculation for the Democrats. 

Maybe Frum would have been invited behind the Closed doors of the "Secret Health Care Bill" composed by who the hell knows ?   Now that HC has been passed, we see news items saying "health care costs are rising higher and faster than Predicted".  

Its starting to look like Republicans having "No HC Ideas" has worked out pretty good for the Republicans.   David Frum needs to join the Democrat party, they need someone to work with them to FIX their HUGE health care mess.


Dick Army is a welcome

Dick Army is a welcome contributor

Koch, is just fine as a Republican Tea Party supporter.   No problem with him.

Etc. That's all fine and good, bright boy, but, to point out the painfully obvious, you can't take that position, then throw around "the tea party is a grassroots movement." It is, as a movement, created, nurtured, and maintained by some of the most powerful people in the world, and is entirely dependant upon them. The rest of the rubbish you've written is just a further string of attacks that miss this central point.

Sorry, I don't do Frank Rich

Sorry, I don't do Frank Rich or Pravda papers

Feel free to either refute one word of it, or, alternately, to stfu.

Educate yourself Classic, the Tea Party organization Secret

Excerpt from American Thinker........Grass Roots Beehive ? ?


American politics has never seen anything quite like the Tea Parties, though few appreciate the revolutionary organizational principle powering the movement. A major reason why the Tea Parties have been so successful, why the political establishment has found them so difficult to combat lies in their organization.  The Tea Parties comprise a distributed network -- . A distributed network can be compared to a beehive.   All the bees know their particular task and complete it autonomously, without directions from a central authority. If a threat appears, the bees overwhelm it not by direct confrontation, but by swarming, driving it away with sheer force of numbers.    Readers with a background in computer tech will recognize the distributed network as the preferred method of organizing computer networks, including the internet itself. Distributed networks are far less vulnerable to breakdowns and intrusions than hierarchical networks.  


This American Thinker excerpt

This American Thinker excerpt only addresses the effectiveness of the organizational structure of the Tea Parties.  I have no idea why it says American politics has never seen anything like the Tea Party structure, unless it's simply in reference to the fact that it is not labeled Democrat or Republican, because it is exactly the distributed structure used by the Obama campaign/Organizing for America.  Kudos to the Tea Party hustlers for recognizing its structural advantages -- why reinvent the wheel when a viable structure had been successfully demonstrated in real-time by the Obama campaign?  Big Money didn't get big by being moronic.

But that excerpt says absolutely nothing about the Tea Party organizers' goals, whether or not those goals if enacted would benefit most Americans, or somehow prove that Big Money isn't just pouring its money into the Tea Party instead of pouring it into old guard organizations.  Big Money recognized the GOP brand was so toxic by 2008 that it could be a generation before the stink wore off.  So a new entity to channel the same old BS was needed to stand in for it and thus the Tea Party concept was born.  Or rather, co-opted from the Paulbots.

It addresses the Grass roots, the uncontrolled bees

As a TP Participant, from day one, I can recognize a valid observation (so far) of what the TP represents.  "Baggers" I don't get, Bees I get.  

There are local TP leaders, pushing simple concepts at the local level.  Incumbants are out, American constitutional values are in.  City Councils are targets, County level political actions are in.  

Today, the Tea Party help "Shoot down" Jon Klein at CNN.   The NBC Chief self destructed, we can't claim that "sting".   But Tea Partiers yelling "Tell the Truth" at the CNN talking head at the 912 "meeting" in DC, plus the Hard Left new shows coming to CNN, guaranteed CNN ratings the opposite of Fox and talk radio (IMO).   The writing is on the wall, you just have to step back and read it .

I don't doubt that you

I don't doubt that you recognize the 'hive' analogy, 4speed.  The hive mind has been alive and well, and growing ever more virulent, in the GOP for decades.  I observed the same Borg-like mentality in my local GOP group before becoming an Indie.  It was clear that "you will be assimilated' was the dominant mentality; diversity of viewpoints was highly discouraged.  If my thesis that the TP is comprised of disaffected long-term GOP voters is accurate, it makes perfect sense that the same mentality transferred seamlessly into the TP structure.

And the fact that local TP leaders are targeting incumbents at every level?  Hardly a newsflash.  Democrats and Republicans have targeted incumbents at every level since, well, forever.  That's why political parties and movements exist, nothing revolutionary about the TPs there.

I'm not really sure what CNN and Jon Klein have to do with any discussion of the relative power of the GOP factions, which was the subject of the OP and generally how the comments have unfolded.  You do have a knack for constantly changing the subject in a comment thread so I'm not surprised you somehow ended up here, but I can assure you there is one reason and one reason only that high level corporate executives are forced out, and it has nothing to do with Tea Parties.  Corporations exist for the sole purpose of producing profits for their shareholders; their corporate boards are charged with overseeing executive performance for maximum profit; when executives are deemed to fail in that objective, they are removed in favor of executives who can produce more profit.  A few thousand Beckheads yelling at a CNN talking head is the least of CNN's problems.

There is a connection

The "Connect" to Zucker and Klein getting canned from NBC, CNN, is..... we now know more about O'Donnell in a few days, that the same Network coverage of "o' for over 2 years. 

The Smell of prejudiced CNN and Alphabet Networks has reeked for years.  

The tingle down the leg moment is gone for them, and Americans have been going "Click" on their TV's and remotes.    The most UN Trusted Source for News, CBS,CNN,ABC,NBC,PBS.   

Be sure and Tune in for the Next Palin attacks, the wall to wall O'Donnell assasination, and the assasination of anything "American", but go to FOX for "policy" discussions.  

The arrest of the politician, whose party ID is missing from the Text box......Oh, it must be a Democrat for sure.   The "Maccaca" moment of constant attacks on anything not Democrat or Politically correct, while anything Democrat walks around unscathed

Enter Talk Radio, MRC, NewsBusters, its all documented.   "We're mad as hell, and we're not going to take it anymore" from the Networks.   The Dinosaur Media is being voted out, one click at a time, one ratings season a quarter.

OK, 4speed, here is where

OK, 4speed, here is where I'll say nice things about Christine O'Donnell. 

She has good instincts for exploiting opportunities.  She has stayed true to her socon agenda and recognized the opportunity to get aboard the TP gravy train by suddenly finding fiscal conservatism as a vehicle to promote her socon agenda.  This despite the fact that her checkered personal fiscal history demonstrates anything but fiscal responsibility and she had never previously expressed an interest in fiscal issues. 

But, with the TP's help, she outhustled the establishment hustlers. This is surely a big part of why she got under Karl Rove's skin. As a young Palin, she can look forward to a long career as a socon leader on the wingnut welfare circuit, if not even a high-profile, high-paying FOX gig.  (Grandma Grizzly can't be everywhere all the time, ya know, and Ann Coulter isn't getting any younger either.)  She is easier on the eyes and ears than Palin, and more articulate.  The Senate actually pales in comparison to the camera-time and money she could have outside of it, so she wins either way.  She'll quickly learn the Senate isn't the place to achieve a radical socon agenda if she happens to win, so I doubt she'd serve out a full term knowing what fame and riches await outside of it.  It wouldn't surprise me if she pulled a Palin and Mike Castle is appointed to the Senate seat within a few years if she succeeds in beating the odds in November.  Which is why Karl Rove is now in her fan club; if she wins, the seat stays in GOP hands for the next six years and I think Karl can see the grifter parallels here ...

The nice thing about O'Donnell is Castle is gone for 6 yrs

You equate way too much conspiracy theory to O'Donnell and the Tea Party.   The TP is just ordinary people fed up with Government intervention in their lives, Regulations out of control, Cap and Tax trying to break out of DC, Trillions in Debt, Global warming Idiots, and most of all, the "You Lie" Congress and Administration.

America is a Representative government, not a "wanna be" Gulag with Jack boot EPA enforcers running around ignoring the people and protecting the Harvest mouse.  

Get used to the push back, and if you want to think its all evil neo con wacko far right religious nuts, then go ahead, chase some ghosts.   The Tea Party has grass roots nationwide with Constitutional conservative views, and the Socialist liars are outnumbered.  Constitutional States rights "Representatives" are headed to DC.

The TP is just ordinary

The TP is just ordinary people fed up with Government intervention in their lives, Regulations out of control, Cap and Tax trying to break out of DC, Trillions in Debt, Global warming Idiots, and most of all, the "You Lie" Congress and Administration.

4speed, I have always separated the ordinary people in the TP movement from the astroturfers.  I don't doubt that they are sincerely worried and I share their frustration with government of the billionaires, by the billionaires, for the billionaires.  It actually makes me very sad that their energy and time are being wasted doing the bidding of billionaires and carnival barkers like Beck.

I never claimed there isn't also Big Money behind the Democrats or Republicans.  My point is, there's Big Money behind all of them.  Which is why, in our frustration, we are ALL pretty much reduced to making our own personal choice about which Big Money agenda we're going to get behind. 

Why are you so wound up about global warming?  There isn't anything in the constitution about global warming and the Founding Fathers never discussed it, so it can't be a major TP concern because it's a constitutional issue.  Could it be you're all wound up about it because the Big Money astroturfing the TPers, e.g., the Koch brothers, are paying to have it woven into the TP narrative because it serves their big oil interests?  What does global warming, whether you believe in it or not, have to do with a constitutional movement?  Literally, nothing.  It's a scientific question, not a constitutional issue.  In your comment you referenced the Koch brothers' pet issue, Big Oil, FOUR times:  regulations, cap and tax, global warming, and EPA enforcement.  On the other hand, you only mentioned the debt once.  Why did you place so much more emphasis on big oil's agenda than on spending, debt, etc.? 

Christine O'Donnell isn't worth our time arguing over.  She's neither a sincere TPer or a leftist, more a theocrat.  I wasn't advancing a conspiracy theory.  All I said is that I wouldn't be surprised to see the Delaware GOP go with Mike Castle if she pulls a Palin.  On the other hand, I also wouldn't be surprised to see them go with a younger candidate since he'd be about 75 half-way through her term.  They may want to go with someone younger, with more potential to hold the seat long term.  Personally, I don't care either way since I don't live in Delaware.  I've got enough to concern myself with here in Phoenix, doing all I can to see that smug, arrogant frat boy Ben Quayle doesn't represent me in Congress since he isn't interested enough in our district to have even bothered to vote in Arizona, ever.  It's probably a lost cause, but it's interesting that I can't even find a TPer around here who likes him; they seem to be just as disappointed as the local Dems in the prospect of him representing them. Hey!  Maybe there's hope for us yet -- there are still things that Dems, Indies and TPers can agree on!

The Tea Party Koch guy can Whip your Soros billionaire

Washington Times Reality Link for Acinphx...........

The Jewish-American advocacy group J Street, which bills itself as the dovish alternative to the influential American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC) lobby, has secretly received funding from billionaire George Soros despite previous denials that it accepted funds from the Hungarian-born financier and liberal political activist.

Didn't read that very carefully, eh?

despite previous denials

And what is the Moonie Times story lacking? Any evidence that there have been "previous denials." Or even one denial. Ever. The only thing the article cites in this regard is an item from the groups' website that said

"George Soros very publicly stated his decision not to be engaged in J Street when it was launched--precisely out of fear that his involvement would be used against the organization."

As the fellow from J. Street explained in the article itself, Soros later changed his mind. The item has probably been on the website for ages--when the Moonies pointed it out, it was changed. Soros' support of the group is a matter of public record--that's how the Moonie Times learned of it in the first place--and both the organization and spokesmen for Soros openly speak about the contributions.

But the MT article had already killed its own credibility in the first few paragraphs with the patently false claim that Soros funds Media Matters For America. It has become a popular right-wing lie over the years, and thge folks at MMFA haven't just denied it--they've documented the fact that the claims are, in fact, lies, using the same public records the conservative smear-merchants falsely claim to use.

While the fact that a rich fellow funds liberal causes is definitely a man-bites-dog story, the raison d'etre of the Moonie article is "previous denials" that, in fact, don't exist.

Didnt read that very closely "Using Public recordes"

The point from the article was "has secretly received funding from billionaire Soros".......which would mean that the donations were NOT in the public record (I think thats what "secretly" means).

I'm sure the ACORN like organizations have got it down on the Public record "correctly", its the Politically incorrect part that is coming out. 

Interesting that I've posted the Obama campaign donation figure of 745,000,000 to these Silly "Big Money" accusations against O'Donnell, and lefties don't bother to even discuss it, mention it, or deny it, as its an accepted "Big Money" fact.   

O'Donnell whipped Castle on "Ideas", didn't have the BIG Money when she kicked Castle to the curb.  

I suppose it shouldn't surprise me...

...that I find myself having to explain this to you now.

The point from the article was "has secretly received funding from billionaire Soros".......which would mean that the donations were NOT in the public record (I think thats what "secretly" means).

It's true the Moonies falsely assert Soros' contributions were "secret"--like the bullsh!t about Soros funding MMFA, though, that's merely intended as red meat for idiots like you. The article's actual source--referenced in the article itself--is "tax forms obtained by the Washington Times." J Street is a tax-exempt org (as the article itself notes). Its tax forms are public record. Anyone can look at them at any time. You can huff and puff and rant about your hatred for all things decent, liberal, and American from sunrise until sunset, but there's NO way you can turn something openly disclosed in a public record into something done "secretly" (and neither can the Moonie Times).

The accusations came from the left, I was just saying....

This thread started with hatred and Liberal attacks / accusations on O'Donnell from the left.   A Sarah Palin instant replay.   Wardrobe attacks will problably be next.   The good news is she doesn't bow to anyone, and she knows we only have 50 states, not 57. 

I have hatred for lies and half truths and Democrats are full of both.   Americans can't even get an honest town hall meeting to discuss issues with Democrat incumbants, its just all "Attack your Opponent" stuff coming from the desperate left.    

Big money is just the attack on this site, and when I put a comparison out on the $745,000,000 BIG MONEY subject on Barrack.......crickets chirping...not even one mention that maybe accusing O'Donnell falsely of BIG MONEY might be HYPOCRITICAL.  

If O'Donnell is being attacked by the left because you're so concerned, why isn't the subject of VOTER FRAUD (link) being attacked by the Left ?   Democrat Voter Fraud.

And now we find Racism in the DOJ under Holder in the Whitehouse......coming to a Congressional investigation committee near you in DC, soon.

But pay no attention to the man behind the curtain pulling he levers on the voting machines, O'Donnel is the Droid you want to arrest.   LOL, you guys are jokes.

O'Donnell received $

O'Donnell received $ 1,000,000 towards her campaign within 24 hrs. after the Primary win.   I doubt that was BIG money at all, and why would I think that ?

That "grassroots" money comes in because of propaganda appearances that are de facto political advertising by the national right-wing media, which is why nearly all of her individual contributions (as I noted above) and the much more generous coordinated cash provided by Big Money groups are from out-of-state. Among a great many other things, O'Donnell appeared on Sean Hannity's show on Fox twice after winning. These appearances were, in effect, free advertising for her campaign. She was present for nearly half-an-hour between the two appearances. At current prime-time rates for Hannity, that amounts to a $1.2 million political contribution from Fox News, but the real benefit of Fox is the free advertising. You know about Christine O'Donnell in Delaware solely because some extremely powerful people want you to know about her. She serves their interests, not those of America. The same is true of all of the teabagger candidates. You can call that arrangement a great many things, but the one thing you can't call it is "grassroots."

Fox, Propaganda appearance ? Who is George Stephanopoulis ?

Stephanopolis is  "American television journalist and a former political adviser"....and YOU are groaning about a Political Candidate appearing ONCE on a Network  ?   Wow, you guys are joking again...hahhaaah...LOL.

Stephan has been making "propaganda appearances" on Network TV giving ONE SIDE of the Political policy for HOW LONG ?    At least Carl Rove doesn't have his OWN NETWORK SHOW to push his particular flavor of political views, and at least FOX announces who he is, and his previous job.   Stephan is put out there as a "Journalist" who is Fair and Balanced, and has had how many shows for how many years ? 

And the NETWORK hides Stephanopoulos from the public, they don't point him out as a ROVE equivalent.....

Prior to joining ABC News, Stephanopoulos was a senior political adviser to the 1992 U.S. presidential campaign of Bill Clinton and later became the White House Communications Director.

You are JOKE.......One appearance of a Candidate on Fox and you're WHINING.......

Don't want to mention/Talk about the 745,000,000 REAL BIG MONEY candidate, do YOU ?


I think that you might be on to something here. They are sitting in a great position right now and I hope they don't blow it. They are, however, standing by what they believe by not doing things just to get votes.

le meilleur casino en ligne pour jouer à la roulette