My Other Blog & Comments

News and Information Feed

Thursday, September 16, 2010

Neocon elements in Establishment GOP attempt to sabotage more paleocon-oriented Tea Party candidates in favor of Democrats

Delaware Tea Party Candidate Victory Rattles GOP Establishment

(The New American) -- by Warren Mass --

Voice of America News summed up the September 14 primary results succinctly: “Conservative candidates favored by the Tea Party have gathered more ground in some of the last primary elections before November's Congressional elections.”

VOA quoted the victor in Delaware’s Republican senatorial primary, Christine O'Donnell, who defeated nine-term Rep. Mike Castle: "The America we are fighting for is worth restoring. I specifically want to thank the 9/12 Patriots for laying the foundation and stirring things up in Delaware, the Founders Values group, and all of the Delaware Tea Party groups."...

Many political gurus cited by the major media, as well as mouthpieces for the establishment Republican Party, expressed pessimism that O’Donnell could carry off a win in November. Democrats, in contrast, seemed elated that they are facing a perceived pushover in the battle for Delaware’s Senate seat, seen as critical to Republican efforts to regain control of the upper house...

"It's hard to see a path for us," one senior Republican official, who declined to be named while discussing party strategy, told The Upshot. "Never say never, but it has become much harder for us after tonight."...

In the last two Freedom Indexes rating members of Congress according to the Constitution compiled by The New American magazine, Cornyn scored 80 and 85 percent, while O’Donnell’s opponent, Mike Castle, who is consistently labelled as a “moderate” by the national media, registered anemic scores of 40 and 50 percent. One might say that in today’s political parlance, “moderate” is the new “liberal.”

AP reported that shortly after O’Donnell had been declared the winner, the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee had begun compiling “the nasty comments fellow Republicans have made about O'Donnell.” DSCC chairman Sen. Robert Menendez said in a statement: "Even the Delaware Republican Party chairman has said O'Donnell is 'not a viable candidate for any office in the state of Delaware,' and 'could not be elected dogcatcher.' "

Shortly before the race was decided, Rep. Castle said that it would be difficult for him to support O’Donnell if she won the primary: "One of the basic arguments here is that she is just not going to win the general election. I totally believe that ... I see no way she could win this general election, or maybe any general election."

However, O’Donnell remained undaunted by such negative comments. "Some people have already said we can't win the general election," she said in a speech to supporters, who responded first with chants of, "Yes, we can!" and then, "Yes, we will!"

"If those people who fought so hard against me work just as hard for me, then we can win," O'Donnell added in an obvious reference to Republicans who had opposed her.

The struggle between traditional conservatives (sometimes referred to as paleoconservatives, constitutional conservatives, or simply constitutionalists) and the more liberal Republicans usually associated with the Northeastern liberal wing of the GOP (once referred to as “Rockefeller Republicans,” after former New York Governor Nelson Rockefeller) has been waging within the party for many decades.

An article about “Rockefeller Republicans” in Wikipedia observes:

"Rockefeller Republican (often termed "liberal Republican") refers to a faction of the United States Republican Party who held moderate to liberal views similar to those of Nelson Rockefeller. The term largely fell out of use by the end of the twentieth century, and has been replaced by the terms "moderate Republican," "liberal Republican," and the derogatory term Rino [Republican in Name Only].” "

The near-final takeover of the GOP by the liberal wing occurred during the 1952 Republican National Convention, when the respected conservative statesman and likely nominee Sen. Robert Taft — “Mr. Republican,” who was the product of one of America’s most respected political families and the son of President and Chief Justice William Howard Taft — was bypassed in favor of General Dwight D. Eisenhower. A lifelong Democrat who had squelched a movement to nominate him as the Democratic Party’s presidential candidate in 1948, Eisenhower first publicly declared himself a Republican in January 1952. (For a well-reasoned analysis of the political differences between Taft and Eisenhower, read “The Republican Road Not Taken: The Foreign Policy Vision of Robert A. Taft," by Michael T. Hayes.)

The liberal wing of the Republican Party attempted to discredit Taft at first by branding him with the largely meaningless label “isolationist,” which had been used a decade earlier to discredit those Americans who opposed U.S. involvement in World War II. But the most damaging ammunition in the anti-Taft forces’ arsenal was the repeated use of the phrase “I like Taft but he can’t win.” With repeated repetition, helped along by Eisenhower backers in the media, support for Taft finally eroded to the point that he was denied the nomination.

Our purpose in resurrecting this history here is to illustrate the obvious similarities between what the liberal Republican wing was able to do to their best qualified presidential candidate in 1952 and what their successors have attempted to do to the traditional conservative candidates backed by the Tea Party and others in this campaign year. And Christine O’Donnell has been the target of such maneuvering more than most.

When the Delaware Republican Party chairman said that O'Donnell is “not a viable candidate for any office in the state of Delaware,” and “could not be elected dogcatcher," his statement was soon quoted by DSCC chairman Menendez. Should anyone be surprised, least of all the state party leaders?

Sometimes, conservative Republican candidates have had more to fear from RINOs in their own party than they have from Democrats. The late Senator Barry Goldwater undoubtedly would have agreed...MORE...LINK


apollonian said...

[I have a post I can contribute on the subject--originally posted somewhere else, but relevant to topic here, I trust. A.]

* * * * *

Topmost Jew Leadership In Turmoil As USA Sugar-Daddy Totters On "Last-Legs"
(Apollonian, 16 Sep 10)

What a bunch of twaddle fm the fat little Jew-sympathetizer, "hunter wallace." See What's happening w. Tea party is no different fm the Ron Paul and Alex Jones ( phenomenons: (a) topmost Jew PARASITE masterminds are having serious falling-out now they realize victim-host, good ol' USA, is about to be LIQUIDATED for reals.

For what now will parasites do for food when old victim is gone?--a serious question they now must face-up to. Don't forget, "there is no honor among thieves."

(b) The lower-level Jews (NOT members of the CFR-Bilderberg, who are still amazingly rich compared to goyim) are especially antsy as they know they'll be blamed and thrown to the proverbial "wolves" when/as top-level Jew masterminds flee the country as things un-ravel evermore rapidly.

Thus we see Alex Jones savagely attacking the "left-liberal" Jews in form of "globalists," as Jones calls them, the CFR-Bilderbergers behind communist United Nations (UN)--see and for expo/ref. on CFR, etc.

"Right-conservative" Jews then are led by "zionists" and "neo-cons" allied w. the single most powerful gentile faction, the "Judeo-Christian" (JC--see and for expo/ref.) hereticalists who say Christ was Jew (hence Talmudist--see and for best Talmudic expo) and support enemy terror-state of Israel which did 9-11--see for expo/ref.

[-------see below-copied for part two to above entry-------------A.]

apollonian said...

[--------here's part two to above entry-----------A.]

* * * * *

So now what's happening is the "left-liberals" are being royally shellacked and even routed by such as Alex Jones (even Glen Beck and Rush Limbaugh are scrambling to jump on Jones' bandwagon), and Israeli "zionists" and the "neo-cons" are laying low as lower-level Jews take drastic action, out-shining the stupid JCs who stand there flat-footed, relatively in-active for their favorite supporting terror-state of Israel which isn't going over so well as USA steadily goes down economic tubes.

So Tea-Party activity isn't difficult to understand--economic situation for USA is absolutely URGENT, US Dollar about to collapse, and Jew parasites are very concerned and alarmed. JC morons and scum are just dormant for the moment, for the most part simply swept along. But these JCs are still KEY to the over-all Jew hegemony of USA, still all-powerful as long as US Dollar holds out.

Real REVOLUTION--which is anti-semitism--must be most actively directed against these JCs by most forthright and real Christians (hence absolute anti-semites--anti-Talmud, as Gosp.s MARK 7:1-13 and MATT 15:3-9), BUT THIS IS NOT WHAT'S HAPPENING.

Rather, as noted above, we're seeing a serious REACTION against leftist Jews, these leftists presently fronted by Obama/Soetoro, who as u might notice lately, is rather desperately sucking-up to Israel and "neo-cons."

So then note who's BENEFITTING fm route of establishment leftists?--Israel, "zionists," and "neo-cons" on the right, JCs still dormant, many of their people rather partaking in Tea-party activity. And these rightist Jews are the ones most eager to co-opt the Tea-Party--that's why u see Sarah Palin, who's herself just a Jewwy JC, never forget, so prominent now within Tea-party.

CONCLUSION: So it looks like "rightist" Jews may really have potential for most "mileage" for the near-future if they play things right. JCs are still the weak-point for large, general Judeo-conspiracy which real Christians (anti-semites) and patriots MUST attack sooner or later--but which they still don't do as they lack intellectual-type leadership. Honest elections and death to the Fed. Apollonian