The Republican Civil War Has Begun

If you live by the sword, you die by the sword.

If we turn the clock back to 2009 to the formation of the Tea Party with all the rage and venom that went with it, the GOP were faced with a stark choice. Sure, the Tea Party was a force of tremendous passion and energy, but was this the kind of passion and energy they really wanted? After all what they appeared to be driven by, almost exclusively, was rage. Naked, unfiltered rage. They painted Obama in the kind of extreme colors that were barely consistent with reality, what ever your political point of view, and vilified everything he stood for, indeed, the very concept of government itself. When this almost nihilistic force came knocking at the door of the GOP, they could have reacted in one of two ways. They could have stood up to it – as a few more level-headed conservatives like David Frum and Joe Scarborough recommended - or they could have, well, proceeded they did, which was to lunge forward into a full frontal embrace. Boehner led a procession of GOP lawmakers to speak at their gatherings, woo and court them and ultimately waltz down the aisle with them, all the way to victory in the 2010 mid-terms.

The problem with this, though, is that embracing fire rarely pays off in the long run. Sooner or later it will burn you too. The past year and a half have produced a couple of notable singes, but it is through the general election cycle that their destructive brethren really seem poised to run amok and burn their own house down before anyone else’s. The most concrete signs of this are in the growing coalition of overtly anti-Mitt Romney campaigners within conservative, and particularly Tea party, ranks. Their criticism of him is especially powerful because it rings true. It is an attack on his lack of consistency, rather than his lack of conservatism. As RedState’s Erick Erickson put it, “it’s not that conservatives do not like Mitt Romney. It’s that they do not trust him.” For the Obama campaign, who are making exactly the same point, this is manna from heaven.

This week a formal campaign, complete with website, was set up by a coalition within the GOP: notmittromney.com. The evidence they present in the case against Romney is damning...

• Mitt Romney pledged in 1994 to be stronger on gay rights than his opponent for U.S. Senate, Ted Kennedy. He now supports a Constitutional amendment protecting marriage as between one man and one woman.

• Mitt Romney was pro-abortion from 1957-2003. Running statewide twice in Massachusetts, opposing the pro life position had significant political benefits.

• Mitt Romney supported both the Assault Weapons Ban and the Brady Bill in 1994. In 2007, after claiming he enjoyed hunting and joining the National Rifle Association, he claimed he owned a gun, but did not. He is now a strong supporter of 2nd Amendment Rights.

• Mitt Romney in 2006 said illegal immigrants should have a path to citizenship, supported the McCain-Kennedy plan, which he denied was amnesty, and now attacks other candidates for their records on immigration.

• Mitt Romney refused to support the 2004 Bush tax cuts, but it 2007 he claimed that he had always supported them.

• Mitt Romney said on NBC’s Meet the Press that his Massachusetts health care plan was a model for the nation, but now says it is not right for the other states.

• Mitt Romney says he will issue an executive order on his first day issuing a waiver to all 50 states of ObamaCare. If he believes Obamacare must be repealed, why does he not believe Romneycare should?

• Mitt Romney resisted every attempt by opponent Sen. Ted Kennedy connecting him to Ronald Reagan in the 1994 campaign for U.S. Senate and has insisted that he was an independent during the Reagan years. In 2005, Romney said that Reagan was his political hero.

This civil war within Republican ranks has just begun. It is a show that will likely run all the way through the 2012 election. With the evident lack of active supporters speaking up for Obama in the media these days, it is good to see that he finally has a surrogate he can rely on.

:hi: Great post, too.

Thank you so much. Enjoying speaking my mind ;)

He said regaring abortion rights " you're not pro-choice, you're not anti-choice, you're multiple choice."

All of the candidates are on the side of the coo-coo-burros. It appears to me that our over-lords are willing to wait until the 2016 before they bring out the republicon party saviour, like Jeb Bush. Until then, our over-lords are willing to let the republicon party flounder with the wacko's.

Like you, I get the distinct feeling that the Repub grandees are waiting in the wings for 2016. They have realized that their party is too week, the primary electorate way too whacky and their opposition just too strong, to make a proper go of it this time. Hence the absence of more credible candidates like JB, Daniels, Barbour etc...

But more fool them if they end up facing Hillary on that one! ;)

America is not a monarchy. No one named bush will EVER be president again. Mark those words.

.

I am just curious to see where the 75% of Republicans who stubbornly refuse to vote for Romney will go... I mean, after all Erick Erikson said about Romney, I can't imagine him going on CNN and singing his praises in the general.

So yes, a 1972 moment is not an impossibility. We wait and watch...

.

when he was 10 years old?

LOLZ

but hadn't yet considered the abortion or birth control issue at that age!

I will also straight-facedly tell an antiabortionist that I think girls ought to get pregnant repeatedly at a young age and abort them all, just for the experience. Right before I start talking about blending DNA from other species, like how it would be cool to have a kid with a tail and pointy ears, but you might have to abort a whole bunch of false starts before getting a good one.

You didn't think THEY had the imagination to come up with that stuff, did you?

They have created an unbalanced electorate that is capable of just about anything. They are the radicals. I guess the real conservatives want to retain social security, medicare, a return to regulation and protection from the the predatory 1% Robber Barons. A perfect storm is brewing and the crazy 1/3 that is the Republican Party will hasten the fall.

Not all energy is good energy. They mistook anger for enthusiasm. Now they're paying the price...

Of course if people stay away from the polls they may get elected. I sure hope not.

:hi:

:toast:

And again, really nice to be here :)

What an exciting time this is!

The GOP needed a way to rile up the craziest parts of its base. And so FreedomWorks, Americans for Prosperity, and Faux News created the Tea Party.

The GOP leadership didn't think that the monster would turn on them and initially, they were right. The Tea Party helped elect run of the mill Republicans to the Governorship of MD and NJ. And they helped put Scott Brown in the Senate.

But as usual, a Frankenstein's monster is hard to control. And in a number of places, the monster began to turn on its creators.

Of course, the GOP leadership still thinks that they will be able to control the monster. You will notice that Faux News is no longer sponsoring and promoting Tea Party events. Glenn Beck has been dropped from Faux. And FreedomWorks and Americans for Prosperity are no longer busing angry senior citizens to Tea Party rallies.

The GOP is going to try and keep their monster chained up.

Personally, I hope it breaks lose and eats them alive.

For me, the signs are that it has already broken loose. When they are actively trashing their leading candidate on cable news, setting up websites to publicly campaign against him and backing obviously unelectable alternatives like the Bachmann-Perry Overdrive - not to mention the The Godfather, well the monster seems to be knocking at the door!

To all of my Conservative friends. Thanks.

I feel sorry for the saner among them... It must be like having an arsonist for a spouse.

they have a choice.

Hey, how's that going for you? I've never heard of anything like this.

Thanks for asking. I am a psychiatrist and, having observed Obama since '04, I have found him to be someone of extraordinarily high self awareness and emotional intelligence. So much so, in fact, that I am pretty sure he would make an excellent role model for anyone wishing to improve their own self awareness, emotional intelligence, confidence and, ultimately, success in life. I, therefore, started writing a self improvement book using him, and episodes from his life, as an example all the way through. The book is now finished - I've had a great time writing it! - and it's receiving final edits before publication. You can register on the website for notification of release if you're interested :)

A glance around the world stage - the leaders out there right now - Cameron, Sarkozy, Burlesconi (for the moment).When it comes to psychological make up, Obama really is in a different league.

God tells him straights couples are all 'Sanctified' and gay couples are inferior is a role model? Do you feel that bigotry is healthful, or is this just what you are saying to try to sell product?
How can a person of high self awareness hold not only prejudice against minority groups based on superstitious nonsense, but also hold their own kind to be superior?
As a psychiatrist, what do YOU say 'Sanctity' means in a civil context? How about Sanctified? Tell us. As a doctor and a person selling a book and a theory.

and, in his words "as a christian" is sacred.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N6K9dS9wl7U

So, he uses his religion to excuse his homophobia.

on edit- as to civil unions, separate is NOT equal.

But I'm not sure that I totally understand the concept.

, therefore, started writing a self improvement book using him

Can you give just one example? Thanks so much and I wish you and your book all the best!

The book is full of examples of his successes and failures that function as lessons in self-improvement. I'll try my best to give an example that'll fit in a brief post...

I guess I one is the time, early on in his administration when things were going wrong with tax returns of his nominees for office and Tom Daschle had to resign. Instead of becoming defensive or going on the attack, he went on T.V. and said what I have never heard a president say before, "I screwed up!" he wanted people to know he was fallible and was willing to improve and learn. The ability to check our ego and own up to our mistakes openly and honestly without too much self judgement or recrimination allows us to continually grow through life's challenges. The chapter is about flexibility and it includes other examples like Obama's repeated acknowledgement of is own mistakes during the primary campaign in '08 in a way that allowed his team to continually course correct all the way through.

This is an example of a key facet of emotional intelligence and the chapter goes on to elaborate how we can bring this about within ourselves more.


I hope that gives you some inkling of what I'm talking about. Thanks again for your best wishes.

Again, that sounds really interesting. But there was no need for you to make this point:

He Doesn't Need To Be Perfect For Us To Learn From Him

No one is perfect. And if there ever was a perfect person, how COULD we learn from them with all of the human frailties preventing our own perfection? I know why you made the point (probably in reference to the posts above mine) but it wasn't necessary. No one is perfect and I would dare say that includes the president's incessant detractors.

Again, all the best!

And you were right, I was trying to respond to a few people at once there. Sorry if it looked like I was trying to correct you. Thanks again.

govern, by nature, a socialist institution such as our democratic government. Has any country prospered when anti-socialists ran things?

any other country. They are going in opposite direction of the Mao years.

It's mindboggling what they've accomplished in 20 years...at our expense.

it's "pro-CHOICE"

From the notmitt.com founders. The whole list is in fact. I guess I should have put it in inverted commas.

They know Mittens is their best shot and they'll hold their nose to vote for him in the general and primaries. The real question is whether or not a right wing third party will form to challenge republicans from the right. Maybe the tea party will run their own candidate.

:hi:
excellent analysis!!

It's great fun being here! (& already a little addictive :) )

Horrors!

That's the military brass thanking G.H.W. Bush for his past services to their cause -- keeping fat and powerful, rich and, oh, yes, keeping Americans poor.

It will likely take that long to detoxify such a poisonous brand - just enough people will have forgotten...

:toast:

the rest of the current or former media-fueled circus clowns on the slate are on their 2011 book tours (or soon to start them)

• Rick "Parry" ("Fed Up! Our Fight to Save America")
  
• Hermit Cain ("This Is Herman Cain!: My Journey to the White House")
  
• Newt Getrich (“A Nation Like No Other" and just released "The Battle of the Crater")
  
• Michelle BachKKKman ("Core of Conviction")
  
• Ron Ayn Paul ("Liberty Defined")
  
• Timmy Palwenty ("Courage to Stand.")
  
• Donny Combover Trump ("Trump Tower" and "Midas Touch: Why Some Entrepreneurs Get Rich-And Why Most Don't")
  
• KKKris KKKristie ("Chris Christie: A Politician's Journey")
  
• Caribou Barbie (for her daughter "Not Afraid of Life")

The odd man out is Huntsman, who is there solely for the media to falsely point out that only 99.9999% vs 100% of their tabloid political coverage is focused on the 3-ring circus acrobats with one hand signing a book and the other hand begging for money. Of course the teabaggers would never support him since he formerly worked in the current administration..

:banghead:

Actually winning the nomination seems fairly low on the list of priorities for most of these guys.

Republicans will vote for anyone who is the strongest contender running against the colored guy. It's in their DNA. They're "tired of the white man paying for everything" is what they truly believe. This goes back to 64 when Goldwater supported States Rights.

I love reading a list of evidence against Mittens.

I would have even considered voting for him over Kennedy. Pro-choice, better on gay rights than Ted Kennedy, pro-affirmative action and anti-gender discrimination? What the hell happened to this guy? He's a fucking disgrace now.

As a stark illustration of the 360 degree turn around that Romney has made. How shockingly opportunist!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RgBdU7M3Y20

It's him in the 1994 Senate debate vs Ted Kennedy.

Compare him then to now.

The transformation is just astonishing.

And I have to say it is chilling. The sheer conviction of his answers makes a total sham of every 2011 debate performance to date.

The contours of a general election campaign against him are not going to be hard to predict.

Welcome! I love smart and informed people who are on the side of right!

Since Nixon, the money power of the Republican party has pandered to the lowest common denominator in politics. Nixon's Southern strategy was to play to White Southerners who were enraged by the Civil Rights acts of the 60s. Then, Reagan doubled down on that strategy by playing to the Christian fundamentalists.

Since Reagan, every successive Republican running for any office started targeting the lowest common denominator voting by playing on prejudices, fear, and greed. Even the media picked up on this strategy and found a way to make a huge profit through mediums such as AM political talk radio and Fox News.

Because of years and years of pandering, the lowest common denominator ("LCD") voter started to believe that they were the majority, and their beliefs were the majority opinion. In 1994, when the Republicans won control of the legislative branch, and Bush's victory in 2000 confirmed this belief.

After 8 disastrous years of Republican control, where we lurched from one epic failure to the next -- 9/11, Iraq, Afghanistan, Katrina, Wall Street collapse-- the LCD voter developed a cognitive dissonance about what actually happened. Decades of pandering taught them that their ideas were correct, and even when their ideas were actually put into play, their only explanation for the failure was that the government did not go far enough to enforce their ideology.

Along comes Barack Obama in 2008, a living embodiment of their prejudices and fears. His resounding victory, coupled with the loss of Republican legislative power, led the LCD voter to go out on their own. There was no Republican established leader that they had to fall in line behind. The LCD voter was free to become their own force, which they have in the form of the Tea Party.

So, now you're left with the LCD voter who now control a leaderless Republican party.

Yes, this pandering to the LCD is quite fascinating as a tactic. It produces victories sometimes but is so obviously self-destructive in the long term. What seems to have happened now - particularly with the advent of the Internet and social media - is that the LCD strand you refer to has a voice that totally drowns out the rest of the Republican coalition and now they are even sitting in positions of power in elected office. The whole face of the Republican Party is beginning to morph into the very rage driven sentiment it tapped into for opportunist reasons back in Nixon's day.

My prediction is that this will ultimately work in Obama's favor, but that is by no means a lock, especially with the economy as it is...