The Washington Establishment has already begun its assault on the truth. They are trying to push certain narratives that are simply not true. And if we do not correct the record that is what everyone will believe.
What is the latest story we are hearing from the Establishment and why must we point out the truth?
The latest narrative came in an op-ed in the Washington Times from Michael Taube.
Right now, they’re not. If anything, Tea Party supporters are unwilling to accept responsibility for the Nov. 6 presidential election debacle. As Judson Phillips of Tea Party Nation recently told Washington Times reporter Seth McLaughlin, “They went well out of their way to ignore us, marginalize us and pretend we did not exist, and they gave us the most liberal nominee in the history of the Republican Party.”
Let’s not go overboard. While Mitt Romney definitely is a political moderate, he’s hardly the GOP’s “most liberal nominee” as a presidential candidate. How quickly we forget Gerald R. Ford — or Thomas Dewey, for that matter. Meanwhile, most Republicans didn’t ignore, marginalize or pretend the Tea Party didn’t exist, though some of them definitely got angry, fed up and probably wished it weren’t around.
Tea Party activists have to accept their lumps for Mr. Romney’s defeat. It’s true many of them didn’t initially support his candidacy, but that’s irrelevant. The GOP uses a big-tent philosophy, meaning fiscal conservatives, social conservatives, moderates, libertarians, right-leaning independents and, yes, Tea Partyers have a role under the political big top. When there’s success, they deserve partial credit. When there’s failure, they must accept partial blame. That’s how politics work.
Let’s see. The Tea Party warned the Republican Party early on that Mitt Romney was a terrible candidate. We did not want him. We warned the GOP that Romney was unelectable and would lose the election.
Yet somehow we have to take our “lumps” for Romney’s loss?
Many Tea Party groups reached out to the Romney campaign. I know I did. I met one of the top people in his campaign and told this person I would like to talk to the campaign about Tea Party support in the campaign. I never heard back from them.
No other Tea Party group I am aware of heard from them either.
The Romney campaign made it a point of ignoring the Tea Party. The Tea Party was not even mentioned at the Republican Convention. People who supported the Tea Party such as Herman Cain, Ron Paul, Michele Bachmann and perhaps the most egregious omission, former 2008 Vice Presidential nominee, Sarah Palin were omitted from the convention stage.
Neither Mitt Romney nor Paul Ryan showed up at any Tea Party event that I know of.
For the Republican Party, this was no accident. The establishment wanted to make sure their man won without our support and in spite of our opposition.
They gave us the most liberal Republican ever nominated and he lost.
Taube subscribes to the big tent Republican theory. The only problem is that “big tent” they keep referring to does not include Ron Paul supporters, Sarah Palin supporters, social conservatives or anyone remotely associated with the Tea Party.
How is that working out for the GOP?
The big tent theory reminds me of one of the liberal protestant churches that advertises it does not matter what you believe, you can still join their church.
This is the huge problem the Republican Party has. It is no longer the Party of Reagan. It is the party of just showing up. It is the party of “we are the other guys.” It is the party of “We aren’t them.”
Unfortunately, the Republicans are no longer the Party of small government, low taxes, freedom and liberty.
Taube and the other establishment Republicans do not realize that the only way the Republican Party is ever going to be a majority party again is to stand for something. The Democrats stand for something. It isn’t good but they do stand for something.
If the GOP continues to stand for nothing, it will continue to slide to oblivion.
The Establishment is wrong almost as much as the left is.
The only lumps the Tea Party should be taking is for listening to the Establishment as much as we have.
I agree with a lot of what you say here. But despite everything, Mitt Romney is/was not all bad and was not unelectable. Had he defended himself and his perfectly upstanding record at Bain Capital against the totally outrageous and false (and mathematically impossible claims of sucking money out of companies as he bankrupted them) attacks to which he was subjected he would have helped himself greatly. The media bias against him was the worst in history. And even though he was way down on my list of potential Repub candidates (yes, too moderate would fit) he certainly is a decent, generous human being. But despite all this, all the exit polling data leads to the inescapable conclusion that without the incredibly unfortunate timing of Hurricane Sandy and the chance for Obama to go on TV and proclaim that "All red tape will be cut and no effort will be spared to bring relief to all those affected by this disaster," (which of course did not happen and can never and will never happen with a lumbering bureaucratic leviathan like FEMA under Bush or Obama or anyone else) Romney would have won the election!! Two weeks before the election he led 52-47 or so in both Gallup and Rasmussen polls nationally and by smaller amounts in the battleground states, but then came Sandy and the numbers went to 49-50 literally overnight, and we know what happened after that. Yes, a more consistently conservative candidate, could one have come through the brutal primary fight and the left wing personal destruction machine (look what they did to Herman Cain simply because he was black and friendly to a few white women along the way) who would have put forth an actual vision of something to stand for would probably have done better. He/she would also have had to avoid all of the many "gotcha" traps the media would surely have planted at every turn along the way. But despite the deficiencies of Romney's campaign and his past record on abortion and health care, etc., in 2012 he certainly seemed to be much nearer the conservative end of the spectrum in his speeches and in the debates. Shame on him for following his elitist handlers' advise that the TEA party people were just too toxic. (The biggest problem with those beltway Repubs is that they listen too much to the left wing media and believe they actually reflect what people think instead of the other way around.) Had Romney done some things better, maybe he could have Sandy proofed himself. But really, it was that close.
I have not heard the Beltway Republican term in a long, long time. But under paid consultants with personal integrity, genuine conviction more significant than their next campaign paycheck, Romney could have come across better. He did get lousy advice mostly from advisers and other politically hungry politicians whose interests had little to do with focusing on shaping Romney to come across more profound, more insightful, more relevant. Let's face it, he hired the same pricey "losers" who were paid handsomely for losing other major campaigns, including Romney's first presidential attempts. I know several of his "hired hands" from California. However, to say that Romney could have won if this or that were removed as obstacles is nonsense. Any of us could be dictators over an entire island if there was no other human daring to resist our ambitions. Anyone could be wealthy if no one else was more clever and more devious, nor more competitive. A true winner is one who simply knows how to engage in better combat in a jungle of other adversities. Winning without obstacles is called entitlement. Herman Cain has no one to blame but his own stupidity in getting caught. Most male chauvinists overestimate their macho allure and underestimate women's refusal to be door mats. If he had aspirations to be a political public figure, he should have been more cautious in his personal life. If we are going around preaching to others about individual responsibility and accountability, then the politically ambitious souls should plan in advance to sanitize their personal history. When high school students want to attend an ivy league university, they have to begin qualifying as early as sophomore or junior year. Any orchestra conductor will admit they prepared to be impressarios since childhood, same goes with ballet dancers, Irresponsible backgrounds have to be reconciled before launching into some role where expectations of sexual, financial and ethical integrity are expected. What we accuse Democrats is incumbent for Republicans and conservatives to also avoid.
Though Romney was a successful investment capitalist at Bain, remember, it was never his own generated monies at stake, always other people's funds including his inherited funds. He is no self-made millionaire, and neither is his friend, Donald Trump who was lent over $5 million by his father to buy a throw away building from New York, very cheaply. Oftentimes, multi-millionaire developers buy land cheaper per square foot than others pay for a single dwelling tract home in some suburb. Additionally, the mayors and other municipal and state officials give these guys extra tax breaks and additional subsidies for construction. I was acquainted with multi-milionaires in California who paid less property and other taxes in proportion to what I and other business owners paid out.
Like it or not, middle class are being gradually manuevered to become modern day version of peasants in every political sense. And, given additional leaks about Walmart family, also Republicans, cheap labor, no benefits is the aim of the political elite, the backroom trade off to entice companies to replenish domestic job numbers instead of increasing labor overseas. If average political science students can figure that out, why are we adults so naive?
You insunuate that Herman Cain was forcing himself upon these poor hapless women, and I take offense that you think that women are uncapable of handling themselves against aggressive male behavior.
As far as candidates planning their future, just how far back in one's life is it permissable to you for that person to have matured and made a turnaround to be righteous enough? Please tell me at what exact age, or exactly how long ago, the last transgression must be for one to qualify? Where do your judgements come from and what are the specific criteria? Are your standards more strict than those of Jesus Christ? He forgave people for their sins fairly soon after they repented, didn't He?
Does Romney deserve any credit for his managerial skills? And what about Trump inheriting something to begin with. Many children of rich people inherit money and blow it. Does he deserve any credit at all for not doing so?
The original intent of providing benefits through one's employment was actually a liberal/progressive idea in order to take control from the individual and put it in the hands of the business, which presumably would be more easily controlled. The business owner would obviously have less motive to watch out for the employee than the employee would him/herself. Anyone advocating true tea party principles should be encouraging individuals to take control of their healthcare by any means necessary to avoid the government/business model of it being selected for them. Health savings accounts are an example, but notice they have been "mysteriously" unavailable at a competitive rate due to, you guessed it, regulations.
Well as far as I am concerned Mitt would have got us back on track. Why would they come and talk to the TP when this Group bashed Mitt time after time. I just quit coming here because all it was was bashing him and when he became our nominee then you tried to say he was OK but barely.
I think the TP has done a great job in bringing people together and also dividing them. I know you won't like me saying that but that is true. Why do we have so many TP Groups? If we all came together then we would make a difference. But there are so many TP Factions fighting for being heard that no one pays any attention to us. We need to combine and work together and until we do nothing will change. Just my opinion
The people in the tea party simply want the smaller federal government that the founders created. They don't bash candidates that want the same thing, but they do bash candidates that continue to advocate big-government positions.
Mitt may have a stellar business record and be the most pristine, milk-drinking candidate to come along in quite awhile, but his record as a governor, and his public statements, have never fit the tea-party minimum standards of following the Constitution. He was always only going to be a less-toxic choice than the current potential antiChrist.
Why is it that Mitt Romney went after New Gingrich, Rick Perry and other GOP candidates with a vengence during the primaries and then goes limp when it came time to go after Obama? He was notably absent from appearing on talk radio shows, Tea Party rallies and consevative events as well! Also, Ryan was a weak VP choice. He, too, sat around and acted all nice and pliant while that babbling fool we call a Vice President talked over and under him during their debate! Until we have a candidate that can go after the Democrats with the same zeal they have opposing us, Republicans will continue to be the party on the sidelines.
This all needed to be said, and I'm glad you let the truth be known. Any one who has been at the Political Game for years knows that the Republicans cannot win an election without the Conservative base who they threw under the bus. I voted for R/R although they were far from my 1st choice, however, they will have to beg the Conservatives to vote for them if the Republican Party is still in business in 4 years. The Whigs when off into History and so might a Liberal/Moderate Republican Party.
Mr. Phillips renders accurate assessment about the philosophically, ideologically and morally flaky GOP tiers of leaderships. And it is correct that one glaring indication of how conservative groups are exploited when votes are desperately needed is when those we have known to be moderate to Liberal Republicans switch their rhetoric into conservative sound bites toward the final months of their campaigns. I witnessed the pandering by the likes of Meg Whitman, Carly Fiorina, Arnold Schwarzenegger and Mitt Romney in his first presidential tour in around California, then again this year. Multiply those phonies by a couple of hundred more within the Republican Party's major public office seekers and we should have predicted this debacle as far back as 2010. The signs were already visible. We just decided to turn a blind eye. We can no longer afford to live in "denial". The question is, now that the therapy and cathartic venting should be over, it is time to look to Mr. Phillips and other brave leaders to start the task of re-defining relevant objectives and process of implementation if reaching legislative policy status.
Where some of us cosmopolitan raised and socially clued-in conservatives may differ is in some of the conservative icons which many other Tea Party conservatives hold to heights of pedestal hero worship. Herman Cain, if poking into his actual personal life, hardly measures up to conservative role model. Michele Bachman can never be accused of not being a consistent conservative proponent, but her advocacy for cutbacks in government handouts services is contradicted by her family's dependence on charitable and state government subsidies and foster care payouts. What is good for the goose should be fairly good for the gander. Sarah Palin lied to her Alaskan constituents when she quit as governor after two years. The reasons she gave for quitting had absolutely nothing to do with her love for the people, but to "cash in" on her growing national celebrity, of which she has every right to exploit the public spotlight for her family's income welfare. However, I cannot visualize any serious college student aiming to graduate by requoting anything Sarah has ever expressed as intellectual substance, not one phrase. My own elderly 90 plus year old mother, no college degree but very savvy, could convey similar generalized opinions without relying on references to factual footnotes, not unlike Palin. Her grammatical delivery is hicksville with expensive designer fashion accessories. If she was not blessed with charismatic personality and good looks, she would not have lasted as long under the spotlight. Ann Coulter has an extremely lame or lack of hands-on political activist background, basically just a legal administrative pencil pusher whose income is generated by sounding like a bottle blond, tooth pick legged, socially boorish, caustic, culturally unrefined bigot. Coulter embodies every political sense of a female redneck - no class and never will have it. She is no lady. Congressman Ron Paul made the most common sense on the campaign trail. But Ron Paul is too affiliated with Libertarians, even if a registered Republican, which gave him negative scores with us Republican partisan purists. Not all us conservatives are willing to tolerate the vigilante, lawless, socially irresponsible, reckless, isolationist aims of Libertarians - I met too many who are under the impression there are enough islands where they can afford to buy to live away from the rest of humanity - weird.
Who constitutes true conservative icons has to rise above current hokey standards. A level of poise, intellectual sophistication, conveyance of public warmth, natural wit, extensive social parlance, less visibility of chauvinism, sexism and bigotry have to be achieved. The tide of diverse cultural populations cannot be stopped. Like any clever, adaptable, crafty, creative and innovative sales and marketing team, fresher tactics have to be developed and employed. Either freshen the wrappings around old messages, or adjust the messages to sound more relevant to the present and future. Or simply refuse the fact that time is moving ahead, not backwards and risk losing more elections.
What in the Sam Hill is the Tea Party California Council? You might consider some other words that can be abbreviated to TROLL.
To be clear, Herman Cain's personal life may have left some religious conservatives with an uneasy feeling, but his fiscal policy ideas certainly lived up in many ways to the standards of the entire tea party.
Michele Bachmann (and her family) is hardly "dependent" on government subsidies and payouts, but if the government is going to be throwing those payments to somebody, we should feel much more comfortable with the Bachmanns than say Nancy Pelosi or Barney Frank. Charitable contributions are of course the alternative that actually works in comparison to the governmental model of waste, and somebody has to actually administer the use of those funds if they must be thrown somewhere. Again, the Bachmanns are head and shoulders above just about any political or nonpolitical figures in the delivery of personal and private charity.
Sarah Palin did not "lie" to her constituents because that would require the knowledge that she was going to quit in advance. Although you might suspect that she "cashed in" on her national celebrity, as if that infers she didn't love her fellow Alaskans, your claim to know that is lacking in factual detail. And to criticize her grammar and her delivery may be your right, but it is certainly not a trait that is going to attract very many morally-conservative tea partiers.
Next you launch into an attack on Ann Coulter by calling her a redneck bigot with no class and skinny legs, but what is most funny is your claim that she is no lady. Please identify how your attacks on her demonstrate proper etiquette.
Once again, it is the same old attack against republicans as sexists, racists, and bigots. It does not matter that the democrat party continues to enslave minorities with handouts, and pay women less than men, but you spend your valuable time attacking anyone remotely uttering a Constitutionally-friendly sentence.
Drop the monicker -- it's not going to fool anyone.
Just because Pelosi, Franks and so many other wealthy Democrats are also at the government trough, does not expunge our own responsibility to hold whomever we view as our political leaders accountable to what they preach to the rest of us. If hypocrisy is now a conservative Christian virtue, then heaven is not big enough.
I also did not realize that be a proponent of a Tea Party movement means to be be a mental drone where the only intellectual nourishment and inspiration are stale sound bites. Coulter, just like R. Limbaugh are, by any intelligent process of defining them, classless rednecks. Just because we may be starved for real political icons nowadays, should not cause us to lower standards. It is too late for me to teach middle age folks with decades of limited social and cultural experiences about etiquette. Just go to some used book store and buy one, then read it.
If something quacks like a duck, waddles like a duck and flaps its feathers like a duck, it is safe to call it a duck. If there are visible evidence of abuse and disrespect toward women, that can be labeled sexist. If anyone of color is typecast as inferior, or dependent on handouts without any effort to check the facts, that is bigotry and racism. I did not know that ignorance is supposed to be a badge of honor to be a Tea Party conservative. I hope not or our next generation of prospective conservatives will suffer intellectual handicaps. there is a difference between thinking ahead and clinging to cobwebs.
The duck quack and waddle is exactly why the word 'troll" was used. But thanks for the confirmation by following that up with the old "bigotry and racism" line used so often by liberals to describe all conservatives that oppose their elitist progressive bigotry and racism against men, caucasians, and Christians.
If you feel you possess a superior intelligence to the rest of us, it is not unreasonable for us to ask you to provide the documentation and/or title of this alleged superiority. Hurry, for we are holding our breaths and clinging to our guns and Bibles.
It would be nice if the next generation of sneaky liberal/progressives weren't deceitful liars that advocate immoral positions and racist positions while pretending to be conservatives, but for some strange reason, I think they'll be even more vile and have less intestinal fortitude.
Apparently, the GOP establishment is taking lessons from Obama by putting the blame on others for why their chosen guy did win the ELection. Well, look no further than your own mirrors because while the TEA Party groups, 912 Groups, Tea Party Patriots, Americans for Prosperity, FreedomWorks etc. were out pounding pavement, making telephone calls and handing out literature and much more (even contributing monetarily). where were the GOP groups and all those pundits in the GOP? All those so called experts who called that the election would be a landslide for Romney didn't help matters either. Maybe that's why over 2 million people stayed home figuring Romney had it won. Instead Obama and his strategists outsmarted everyone and got out the vote by hook or by crook, but they did it with voter turnout and voter fraud, but how come the GOP isn't going after them harder? Because they made a pack with the Dems to not go after them for voter fraud. Talk about yes, but really go after them NO. Where were all the GOP elitest in this fight for our lives, sitting by their pools drinking martinis or what? If the GOP really wanted to win, they would have worked harder and smarter and gotten their hands a little dirty and wore off some shoe leather doing it. It's the GOP that needs some attitude adjustments for their lack of appreciation for what the TEA Party and others like us have done for them. Instead they go around with as much arrogance as Obama. You got what you wished for now. You, the GOP, allowed it to happen. We supported Mitt with our time, effort and campaigning along with our monetary contributions. So, get off you high horses and quit blaming others. If anyone is going to be yesterday's news, it will be the GOP because they don't know how to win elections any longer. We Conservatives will show them how, if they will cooperate with us and back our fiscally responsible candidates in the future. Quit fighting us, if you really want to save this Country. If the GOP doesn't, then they get what they deserve.