Late last week, I read an essay penned by Tagg Romney. In it Tagg thought he would spill the beans on why his dad lost the most important election of the modern era. It seems as though Mitt had no desire for the Presidency after all. Mitt ran so that no actual conservatives would end up winning the Republican nomination, and by extension, America would not once again be saddled with a Reaganite in the White House, freeing Americans once again to live their lives unfettered by onerous federal intervention. That 28 year super boom that somehow got credited to the slippery Bill Clinton, at least in terms of the moronic under 30 crowd. Somehow, our public educators have gotten away with pretending that both Jimmy Carter and Ronald Reagan never existed. Taggs essay angered me for another reason as well. You see, I was on Tagg Romney’s email distribution list. I received no fewer than 200 communications from Tagg this year, all of them asking me to part with hard earned money so that his dad may find success in his attempt to win the election against a man whom he had no actual intention of defeating.
Special note to Ann Coulter, and if anyone who reads this actually knows this woman, please pass it along. Do you still believe that Mitt Romney is the true conservative in the field, even after the admission from his family that he only ran in order to prevent conservatives from finding electoral success? Why should we ever listen to you again?
I read a poll last week, because I’m not sufficiently tortured I guess, that told me what I already knew. The crux of the finding was this. Conservatives, of our many stripes make up 68% of the GOP voting bloc, while Moderate or Liberal Republicans only tally 32% of the party’s voters. The problem is that the smaller 32% make up the power base of the party, and they ain’t looking to change their positions to accommodate us pesky small government types. As a matter of fact, far from attempting to reach out to us, I have heard nothing but derision coming from them since Mitt Romney managed to so spectacularly snatch defeat from the jaws of victory 7 short weeks ago. They view us as losers, fringe elements of a knuckle dragging freak show, who’s votes are assumed, and voices disliked. From their perspective, we have no where else to go.
There is some truth in that, for the very short term future anyhow. We are just supposed to take their crap, and like it, and pray that some day the ghost of Reagan will once again lead us to victory. John Boehner is so intent of believing that we will fall in line, simply because we always have, that even as I was defending him last week, he removed all conservatives from important committee positions prior to a key vote, rather than using the threat of taking those assignments away as a tool to keep his coalition in line. (Shockingly, he lost that vote.) Poor President Obama, he had to give up another record setting round of golf for American Presidents in order to have coffee and discuss our pressing fiscal crisis, created entirely by himself by the way.
My Epiphany is this, how long do these geniuses believe that they will be able to just assume our votes into reality. We conservatives outnumber the liberals who run the party by a 2 to 1 margin. In case nobody has noticed, Republicans have done very well at the state and local levels recently. It is only on the national level where we seem so thoroughly capable of losing, no matter how inept the opposition. The simple and by the way true explanation for this is that at those smaller levels, conservatism wins. it does not win nationally, because since Reagan, nobody has bothered to articulate that message.
The national Republican Brand right now is a mess. John Boehner and the party apparatchiks are trying their level best to cajole the rest of us, actual GOP voters, into falling in line and just going along with their message of Democrat Lite. They are telling us via every microphone in existence in this hemisphere, that we can not afford a Republican civil war at the moment, that the Obama agenda will move forward unopposed should we insist on a party that actually shares our values to represent us.
I say, what’s the difference? If the Obama agenda moves forward as is anyhow, even with chosen leadership in tact, how on Earth is that any better? We need this civil war, between the Conservatives and the Moderates, and we should have it out as soon as possible. If the GOP does not survive, then so be it. They have long ago forsaken us all anyhow. Mitt Romney and his team of professional Republican Advisers left a bevy of winning issues on the table. Fast and Furious, onerous regulation, Obamacare, Dodd Frank, the EPA, Solyndra, Benghazi, Pigford, Lifting of the Domestic Drilling Ban in the Gulf, the Continental Shelf, the Endangered Species Act, Quantitative Easing, and hundreds of others, were all left on the table in order to not sound like we were being mean or so Romney could seem Presidential. At least that’s the story. The truth is, neither he, nor his team actually believed any of it anyhow. That is to say, Conservatism is a second language to the 32% of the Republican Party that actually runs the show. They aren’t the Rinos, we are.
The only way to correct the course for this country is to do one of two things. Either we win this civil war that is going to happen sooner or later, and then run candidates for national office as true conservatives, or we need to divorce our Democrat Lite spouses and establish our own residence, and then run candidates for national office as true conservatives. This much is certain, it will never improve with the current GOP leadership taking our voices for granted and then continually selling us out.
Cross Posted from Musings of a Mad Conservative.
Tags: Republican Civil War
Ann Coulter, a whore and a good argument against the 19th Amendment
How much did Mitt Romney pay you? An open email to Ann Coulter
@ 1389AD:
Ann Coulter is a Transvestite. She has an Adam’s apple. Has anyone seen her/his birth certificate?
That 68% is very divided.
Rodan wrote:
I’ve seen the Adam’s apple, but not the birth certificate. You might be right.
Having a Y chromosome never stopped anybody from being a whore -- in any sense of the word.
The plan (Plan C) is fiscal cliff for all non-Obama supporters
Jolly Old Ron Karenga (a Kwanzaa Carol) now up at PJM.
Comments, as always, solicited.
buzzsawmonkey wrote:
But his words are so noble! We can’t care about a few cracked eggs or bumps in the road can we?
Rodan wrote:
I am a conservative and I am not a Bachmann or Santorum fan.
It is time for the GOP to say no and refuse to follow Barack Obama and Harry Reid…
@ Speranza:
Santorum is no Conservative he’s a Theocratic Socialist. Bachmann is a Conservative, but she’s nuts.
@ bluliner10:
Hey Merry Christmas!
Rodan wrote:
uh oh, you said theocrat…these and others are the very people that really turn me off to the GOP and I’m not alone
@ heysoos:
I distinguish someone who is Socially Conservative from a Theocratic Socialist. People like Santorum, Huckabee and Akins are really Socialists who hide behind Social Conservatism. They are pulling a con job and too many Conservatives fall for it.
O/T but worth a look: MOTUS: Guns and Posers
@ 1389AD:
Aerosmith’s Dude looks like a lady fits Coulter perfectly.
Rodan wrote:
I’m a socon myself. I’ve lived long enough and observed enough to know that a society cannot be founded on debauchery. It just doesn’t work.
@ Rodan:
Merry Christmas brother! Hope all have had a wonderful holiday and in turn, I hope for a wonderful 2013! If not, I bought Zombie Max .223 rounds…
heysoos wrote:
Note a theocracy of the G-d of Abraham would levy combined taxes no greater than or equal to 10%. Would not send your sons out in front in battle nor make your daughters into whores.
Just sayin’
Rodan wrote:
Saying she looks like a lady would be a bit of a stretch. Nothing ladylike about her.
Interesting that she’s never been married.
@ bluliner10:
Maybe will face the Zombie apocalypse!
waldensianspirit wrote:
Nor would children be sacrificed to the Moloch of abortion.
@ waldensianspirit:
How will you create this Utopia without expanding government power?
@ 1389AD:
I believe in Individual Liberty and Freedom. If someone aint bothering me, I don’t care.
@ Rodan:
We already lost to the Zombie Electorate, the Apocolypse cannot be far behind.
Rodan wrote:
??? I wouldn’t expend. The government would have no more power than doing for the general good from 10% such as roads and pipelines etc.
Samuel bemoaned kings yet he never saw the destructive power of 100 Senators
Only Prince Harry goes into battle
waldensianspirit wrote:
Whose daughters are being made into whores?
Speranza wrote:
Fluke’s parents for one
Rodan wrote:
Many government policies, including the gay agenda in public school sex education, government funding for abortion, and the welfare state, not to mention the current state of family law in the US, endorse and incentivize debauchery.
Speranza wrote:
What else do you call the welfare state?
Many of you state Obama is a secularist. Well accepting the premise there you see the result of secularism. It’s your fault
@ waldensianspirit:
So how will you create this Utopia which never existed without government?
Last time I read the Bible, Jesus said his Kingdom is not of this Earth.
1389AD wrote:
You sound like a Paulian.
Rodan wrote:
Simple. Lower taxes to less than 10% and lead in battle
@ 1389AD:
I against funding any of that. But humans have always been debauched. there has never been a perfect society or Utopia.
waldensianspirit wrote:
Do you want to make a law that sexual intercourse should be limited to married straight couples?
I know its just my nature, I do not mind going off another cliff,
this one, for sure not so bad if I know Harry Reid is at the bottom of the cliff first and I get to land on him feet first at terminal velosity.
And not print any extra dollars; the size of government would be dictated by efficient spending of the <10%
@ waldensianspirit:
That still will not result in Utopia. Humans are flawed beings and are not perfect. There will always be evil until the end days. I don’t believe in Utopia.
Speranza wrote:
I want to make a law that says I do not have to pay for their sexual intercourse
@ waldensianspirit:
What laws make you pay for people having sex?
Rodan wrote:
I never said Utopia(that’s your word). I’m talking about smaller government(sized according to G-d) with the blessings of G-d for not mistreating the represented people
Rodan wrote:
Obamacare etc.
Money going to Planned Parenthood to clean up their biological wastes
@ waldensianspirit:
How does Obamacare make you pay for having sex? Please specify?
@ waldensianspirit:
Most religious based states have been Authoritarian Big Government Regimes. How will you force people to live according to your moral code without big government.
Rodan wrote:
??? You haven’t followed any of that? The requiring people to pay for Fluke’s contraceptions and when that fails her abortions? Paying for abortions oversaeas in other lands?
What is seen just above on the back and fort is why we lost to Obama.
A house divided can not stand.
Millions did not vote due to being on one side or the other of this, and Obama walked in while our side kicked each other in the parking lots of the vote places.
@ waldensianspirit:
OK you specify.
What do you think of Bobby Jindal’s proposal about allowing Birth Control pills to be sold over the counter? That takes away the whole Insurance should cover it argument.
Speranza wrote:
No, but the grabbermint should neither endorse (as with “sex education”) nor in any manner pay for people to have sex outside of marriage.
Rodan wrote:
Me either.
OTOH, no governmental body should endorse or encourage or pay for people to commit sins.
Very much on topic:
The modern liberal world view makes monkeys out of us all
Rodan wrote:
They did not follow Biblical principles.
Notice it isn’t a law against or a punishment matched. Not even check on you. It is information given to help in faring well on this earth.
Rodan wrote:
I agree with that one.
OTOH, “Plan B” is an abortifacient and that’s a whole ‘nother matter.
Rodan wrote:
Not that I agree with everything he says, but you’re being intentionally obtuse just to argue.
Funding for planned parenthood and government requiring all employers to pay for birth control are two very specific examples.
Speranza wrote:
Neither CzechRebel, the author of that article, nor I, voted for Ron Paul.
We both supported Newt.
@ taxfreekiller:
Yep. The Democrats are united in purpose, and thet purpose is the destruction of the United States. As we’ve seen with Mitt Romney, though, the Establishment Republicans are OK with that so long as they get invited to all the right parties as things go down. What do they care? They aren’t the ones who’ll face the consequences of Obama’s disasterous presidency. They’ve got the money to go elsewhere when it all comes crashing down.
Rodan wrote:
I think it’s a great idea and takes it completely out of the government hands.
Of course the FDA has no intention of allowing that to happen, especially under this admin.
@ waldensianspirit:
Nowhere does it call for a government to enforce the Holy Spirit’s will. It is up to the Individual is they want to be right with God. It’s only between a person and God if they lived as best they can to God’s principals.
Politicians are not men of God, it’s Priests, Pastors or Rabbis who are.
waldensianspirit wrote:
The Roman Empire embraced polymorphous perversity. It didn’t work. One of the reasons the Christian faith gained popular appeal is because people recognized that polymorphous perversity was unhealthy for both individuals and society as a whole.
Rodan wrote:
If there is money left over after the <10% is put toward roads, police to enforce against crimes that infringe on the next citizen, etc. then maybe put money into describing the unhealthiness of these meds. If people disregard then what they buy and consume is their call
Government was never meant to be a theocracy, at least not under Christianity. And everytime a theocracy evolves it winds up becoming a big government Socialist Theocracy. Every time it has been tried in this country especially it has wound up becoming communes and socialism.
Even the Hutterites are socialist and oppressive. I’m not as sure about the Amish as I have none near me.
Rodan wrote:
Right! The only things even talked about (and for Christians only) beyond the Ten Commandments does not get into enforcement what so ever. That was my point.
Flyover:
Late last week, I read an essay penned by Tagg Romney. In it Tagg thought he would spill the beans on why his dad lost the most important election of the modern era. It seems as though Mitt had no desire for the Presidency after all. Mitt ran so that no actual conservatives would end up winning the Republican nomination,
I can find a lot of citations of Tagg saying his father wanted to be president less than anyone he ever met but I can’t find anything about blocking conservatives and I can’t find any essay. Got a link?
eaglesoars wrote:
I doubt that Tagg would have come out and acknowledged that.
But it’s superabundantly clear that Romney’s BACKERS had that in mind.
Every. Last. One. Of. Them.
@ eaglesoars:
I’m looking. Romney is quoted in saying he didn’t have any other candidate he wanted President or he’d have gladly turned running over to them
1389AD wrote:
Well when the MSM had picked him 2 yrs ahead of time to be the candidate you had to know the fix was in.
@ waldensianspirit:
He couldn’t just get out of the way and let the voters decide if he didn’t want it, could he? I don’t want to hear any more about what a good man Romney is. That’sd bullshit. If he didn’t want the job, he should have stepped aside. Nobody held a gun to his head and made him run for office.
@ eaglesoars:
I think Tagg spelled it out for his father.
1389AD wrote:
That is NOT what Flyover wrote.
Mars wrote:
Yup, you nailed it. What Government should not do is attack Religion. It is up to Churches and other faiths to convince people to be live according to God’s will. It needs to be embraced by the individual.
@ eaglesoars:
The only thing I see is Romney not thinking anyone else was viable. But that doesn’t say he wanted to block Conservatives.
Iron Fist wrote:
I agree with you. I have lost respect for Mitt Romney. It explains his ” lackadaisical attitude towards the election. He didn’t care if he won or lost.
Rodan wrote:
Except Obama the Most Viable
@ waldensianspirit:
He spent 3 months as a punching bag
taxfreekiller wrote:
Obama won by buying votes with future tax payer dollars from the moment he took office
Rodan wrote:
To my regret I quit punching him for his style of making money etc.
Rodan wrote:
I don’t know about everyone elses view on Christianity, but I was brought up to believe we are here to have free choice. Instituting religion as government immediately deprives people of that choice. You have no choice but to follow the tenants of whatever faith.
You are supposed to be allowed to fall or rise due to your own choices. The information is in place for people to make the right choice. Not doing so is your own decision.
Mars wrote:
I actually am pretty close on this to your statement. What I was contrasting is how well secularism is doing in running the affairs of humans. And the graft! Enslaving graft!
@ Mars:
You are supposed to be allowed to fall or rise due to your own choices. The information is in place for people to make the right choice. Not doing so is your own decision.
That’s how I was raised and viewed it.
Mars wrote:
my interpretation presumes that if you are pre-determined to make the right choice you WILL make the right choice, but yes religion should not be instituted by gubermint.
(CNSNews.com) – Documentary-maker and liberal activist Michael Moore said the reason for mass shootings in the United
@ RIX:
What a jerk.
RIX wrote:
said the fat hypocrite with armed bodyguards…
Matt Damon (the secularist) is jaded with politics!
ht drudge
some well deserved payback….maybe someone can do a hit on MM
http://newsbusters.org/blogs/tom-blumer/2012/12/26/blogger-creates-interactive-map-employees-paper-which-published-names-an#ixzz2GDHAY5FA
@ heysoos:
you saw wz and others have responded?
waldensianspirit wrote:
I guess you might call that asymmetrical warfare…fine with me
https://twitter.com/glennthrush/status/284065618465001473
Read down to Iowahawk’s
the paper publishing these names was criminal, and how did they obtain this info?….a larger story here
Section 1. Subdivision 5 of section 400.00 of the penal law
A. 9388 2
1 (II) A REQUEST FOR THE ENTIRE LIST OF LICENSEES, OR FOR ALL LICENSEES IN A GEOGRAPHIC AREA, SHALL BE DENIED, EXCEPT TO ANY LAW ENFORCEMENT AGENCY OR ANY ENTITY ACTING ON BEHALF OF OR PROVIDING SERVICES TO ANY LAW ENFORCEMENT AGENCY.
@ heysoos:
WOW! Maybe they consulted with David Gregory
90 waldensianspirit wrote:
Who is this Glenn Thrush moron?
heysoos wrote:
they probably got around it by asking for an almost entire list, and paying a bribe.
@ eaglesoars:
Here’s the moron
@ RIX:
What color is the sky in Moore The hut’s world?
@ citizen_q:
the color of an extra cheese pizza?
Conservatives can win if they have a clear national issue like jobs or defense or trade that conservative principles will strengthen. That means pulling in independent voters who might be socially liberal. Conservatives are digging themselves a big fail hole which they might never get out of if they can’t compromise.
The fiscal cliff fiasco is going to be laid on the shoulders of the GoP by the media and Obama. When that first paycheck minus $50 appears, the conservative base is going to shrink. There is no conservative win via gay marriage, abortion, drugs, or less money in the paycheck.
@ citizen_q:
Money. He’s just trying to scare up mor efools to pay for his schlock. He’s gotten filthy rich selling Socialism.
heysoos wrote:
excellent idea… time for a slice. bbiab
waldensianspirit wrote:
Politico. Figures.
During a chat with Barbara Wa Wa Comrade Zero joked:
President Barack Obama revealed the ‘real reason’ he wanted a second term as president is because his daughter Malia, age 14, is about to start dating boys.
‘One of the main incentives of running was continued Secret Service protection so we can have men with guns around at all times,’ the father of two joked.
In jokes there is often a kernel of truth. An interesting concept when considering one who avoids it so often.
Iron Fist wrote:
For where Moore came from and the Goracle came from, he’s done alright by himself
@ Iron Fist:
And filming where there are the best tax breaks.
@ citizen_q:
It was in extremely poor taste. It’s getting to be a tedious old saw, but had Bush made a similar joke, the big story this week would be just how tasteless it was.
@ heysoos:
Laws don’t apply to the MSM, silly.
@ MacDuff:
Agreed.
I find the anti-white racist angle to be a particularly vile twist the anti-Second Amendment talking points.
Made by whites to appear particularly hip is just pathetic.
citizen_q wrote:
Particularly in light of the fact that the majority of those murdered using guns--as well as the majority of those doing the killing--are black.
@ lobo91:
An “inconvenient truth,” as a prominent Democrat once said…
@ lobo91:
As well as the fact that most anti-gun laws were used against minorities.
MikeA wrote:
I don’t even bother trying to bring up history. Most of them are so ignorant that they believe Lincoln was a Democrat.
lobo91 wrote:
and MLK too…
@ MikeA:
One of the most offensive things that Moochelle has ever said was when she talked about how dangerous it was for her husband to be “a black man in America,” and how he might be “shot while buying gas,” clearly implying that some random white person was going to kill him.
If anyone were to shoot him while he was buying gas in Chicago, it would be a black person.
lobo91 wrote:
Of course noticing is raaaacist!
Unless you add in some truly unhinged tin-foil hat conspiracy theory that the NRA and the grabbermint are purposely arming blacks so the inevitable result of being armed occurs. Therefore it’s all the NRA’s fault.
Actually heard some idiot call in on Michael Medved’s show to express that opinion yesterday.
@ citizen_q:
A whole lot of lefties believe that the CIA introduced crack into the “black community” deliberately, too.
@ lobo91:
AIDS also.
@ citizen_q:
I get really tired of people referring to the NRA as some sort of lobbying group for the gun industry.
The NRA primarily represents gun owners, not manufacturers. They have their own group.
citizen_q wrote:
They’re getting into scifi territory with that one.
The National Shooting Sports Foundation is the industry lobbying group.
citizen_q wrote:
Took settin’ up late into the night to accomplish THAT one but they managed to do it!
New Thread
@ lobo91:
So true. But then if they really looked at the facts, they wouldn’t believe what they do.
brookly red wrote:
I don’t think MLK was a Republican although his father was.
lobo91 wrote:
No argument from me. I remember the statement just because of its absurdity.
@ waldensianspirit:
I wonder if its the fruits white kids in college to attending diversity type classes where they were taught they were racist simply for being white.
lobo91 wrote:
The NRA is a Civil Rights organization. It deserves the same respect that Liberals reserve for the ACLU.
lobo91 wrote:
Anything rather than to accept responsibility for the consequences of their own debauched lifestyle and their refusal to supervise their kids.