The Weekend Review

Do you know this man?http://media.washtimes.com/media/image/2012/11/06/20121106-195938-pic-910164513_mugshot_four_by_three_s267x200.jpg?ec8f261d4936ae3433a61cef779c1dbc8a3728fb

No, it’s not a TV commercial. Richard Viguerie is a long-time conservative who has helped the campaigns of a number of conservatives. He is not among those who believe the GOP establishment should lead the GOP.

Viguerie has just released a book, titled, Takeover: The 100-Year War for the Soul of the GOP and How Conservatives Can Finally Win It, In it, he writes about the civil war that is taking place within the GOP. (Where have you heard that before, readers?)

The Daily Caller reviewed his book. According to the Daily Caller,  Viguerie said:

“Our true opponents are Mitch McConnell, John Boehner, Karl Rove, and George Bush. They’re the ones who have been engaged in a massive expansion of government and the American voters don’t like them,” “Whenever they are the face of the opposition to the Democrats, the Republicans almost always lose on the national level. It is the most important political battle in America and it’s not between Republicans and Democrats — it’s inside the Republican Party. And for the most part, conservatives have been losing.” — The Daily Caller.

You can read the column by following the link above. One statement Viguerie makes is that the ‘new’ conservatives, new to the political scene like Ted Cruz, Mike Lee, and Rand Paul, are loosely tethered to the GOP and more strongly to conservative principles. Viguerie views that as a positive trend within the GOP.

***

Have you heard about this? It wasn’t a recent report, although the lawsuit is. It’s another example of unrestrained police abuse. I have to wonder why the majority of these cases occur in the larger metropolitan areas dominated by liberals?

The short report is that some ABC agents in Virginia terrorized two colleges students for buying—a case of water and some cookie ingredients.

UVA student was victim of malicious, spiteful cops, $40 million lawsuit claims

Robby Soave, Reporter, 12:11 AM 03/31/2014

A University of Virginia student is suing the Commonwealth of Virginia for $40 million after her harrowing run-in with the state police, who–acting out of “anger and personal spite”–drew their guns and arrested her on obviously false charges, according to the lawsuit.

The incident happened last June, after 20-year-old Elizabeth Daly and two of her friends purchased a case of water bottles and cookie-baking supplies at a local Harris Teeter.

Officers with Virginia’s Alcohol Beverage Control agency were staking out the grocery store, on the hunt for lawbreakers. Mistaking Daly’s water bottles for beer, they thought they had found one.

Three officers followed the students to Daly’s car. After Daly and her friends had already climbed inside, the officers began banging on their windows. They were wearing their badges around their necks, but Daly couldn’t see them clearly and were unsure whether they were actual cops, according to the Richmond Times-Dispatch.

Daly was instructed to roll down her window, but she couldn’t do so without turning the car on, which angered the officers. One drew a gun and attempted to bash in the window.

Daly called 911 and tried to drive to a police station. The emergency operator then told her that the assailants were indeed police officers, so she pulled over. Police then arrested her for assaulting two different officers and failing to stop when ordered. She spent a night in jail. (RELATED: UPDATED: UVA student jailed for possession of bottled water, ice cream)

The charges were eventually dropped, after ABC determined that the officers’s heavy-handed tactics violated official policy.

The ordeal terrified Daly and left her in a nervous state. Her lawsuit alleges that the officers “acted with actual malice, out of embarrassment and disgrace for their own intentional and grossly negligent acts and charged (Daly) with three felonies and did so out of anger and personal spite.”

According to the lawsuit, Daly, “does not and never has consumed alcohol or abused drugs, and/or her parents, on her behalf, have incurred significant legal, medical and other costs, and will continue to do so in the future due to the malicious, intentional, and/or grossly negligent actions of the (d)efendants.”

The lawsuit asks for $40 million in damages.

While that may seem like a lot of money, The Washington Post’s Radley Balko wrote that it “may be just what Virginia policymakers need to start taking these issues seriously. The militarization of regulatory agencies such as the ABC is a disturbing trend,” he wrote.

It is interesting that even the uber-liberal Washington Post viewed the actions of the ABC agents as, “disturbing.”

***

In closing for today, here is another example of democrat deceit. Folks, never forget who are our real enemies.

Obamacare voter form pre-marked for Dems – Daily Caller: “A couple in La Mesa, California received a voter registration card from California’s Obamacare exchange already pre-marked for the Democratic Party… ‘I’m an old guy and I never would have noticed it, except I have an accountant that notices every dot and dash on a piece of paper as a wife,’ the man who received the card said… Covered California is in the midst of sending out voter registration cards to all of its sign-ups, due to pressure from left-wing groups threatening legal action if they don’t comply… Covered California denied responsibility for the violation.”

Where is the GOP going?

I’ve written a series of posts about the internal civil war within the GOP. More and more, the GOP DC elites, Boehner, Cantor, McConnell, Cornyn, act in concert with the democrats. The latest fiasco was the debt limit increase.

PHOTO ILLUSTRATION Scene from Game of Thrones and John Boehner.Rather than fight the increase and use it to cut spending, as Boehner and others promised last year during the ‘Continuing Resolution’ battles, Boehner, et. al, dropped all opposition and submitted a ‘clean’, that is no spending cuts, no restraints, as Reid demanded.

Conservatives rally against debt ceiling ‘surrender,’ call for Boehner’s head

11:18 PM 02/11/2014, Alexis Levinson, Political Reporter

The House voted Tuesday to raise the debt ceiling with no conditions attached, and conservative groups are calling for Speaker John Boehner’s head.

The vote was 221-201, with just 28 Republicans joining 193 Democrats to vote for it. Speaker Boehner cast a rare vote in favor of the bill.

But the attacks began before the vote even took place, as soon as it was known that Boehner would bring a no-strings-attached debt ceiling hike to the floor.

“A clean debt ceiling is a complete capitulation on the Speaker’s part and demonstrates that he has lost the ability to lead the House of Representatives, let alone his own party. Speaker Boehner has failed in his duty to represent the people and as a result, it is time for him to go… Fire the Speaker,” said Tea Party Patriots co-founder Jenny Beth Martin in a statement before the vote. The statement linked to a petition to “Fire the Speaker,” and the group’s Twitter account has been tweeting since the vote asking people to call Boehner and tell him to “resign.”

Senate Conservatives Fund had a similar idea.

“John Boehner must be replaced as Speaker of the House,” reads a post on their website from before the vote.

“Instead of fighting for conservative principles, Speaker Boehner has completely surrendered to the Democrats,” the post reads, and the group launched its own petition to “Replace the Speaker.”

Club for Growth lampooned the idea, flagging it as a “key vote” for their rankings of how pro-growth members are.

“When we heard that House leadership was scheduling a clean debt ceiling increase, we thought it was a joke,” wrote Club for Growth Vice President of Government Affairs Andy Roth in an email to House offices before the vote. “But it’s not. Something is very wrong with House leadership, or with the Republican Party. This is not a bill that advocates of limited government should schedule or support.”

For America, another conservative group, also went after the House Republican leadership.

“Republicans have caved again!” reads a post on the group’s Facebook page. “They promised to fight Obama, but they’ve just announced they will raise the debt limit without any conditions … Yet another failure from the GOP and more proof it’s time to dump the leadership!”

The post is illustrated with a photo of Boehner, Majority Leader Eric Cantor, and Majority Whip Kevin McCarthy.

Freedomworks’ Matt Kibbe dubbed the vote the “Boehner debt hike,” and marked it as a key vote in their score card for members as well.

“Governing with Democratic votes to raise the debt limit with no reforms attached is an all-time low for Speaker Boehner,” Kibbe said in a statement. “Based on reports, the Boehner debt hike spends money we don’t have to increase entitlement spending and grow the debt. In other words, with the money they spend today, they’ll come back and borrow to pay for tomorrow.”

Heritage Action also knocked the bill, urging members to vote against it.

Historically, Boehner does not have a warm and fuzzy relationship with any these groups. In December, Boehner accused outside groups like these — that were criticizing the bipartisan budget deal — of “misleading their followers” and said “they’ve lost all credibility” in the wake of the government shutdown in October.

The GOP is splitting. The latest polls in the Kentucky Senatorial race has McConnell trailing significantly behind his democrat opponent. McConnell will meet a primary opponent, Matt Bevins, a strong conservative with backing from the SCF, Heritage Foundation and numerous grassroots and Tea Party organizations. According to those same polls, Bevins would beat the democrat candidate by a number of points.

It makes sense, to retain the GOP senatorial seat, for McConnell to step down in favor of Matt Bevin. He has refused to do so and apparently would rather lose the seat to the democrats than keep it for the GOP.

***

We have similar examples at the state and local levels. The Senatorial Conservative rankings were released over the last weekend. I wrote about it in an earlier post. We have another example of a ‘Pub, Roy Blunt, voting in concert with democrats.

We have more examples within our state legislature. During the veto override session last September, a significant number of so-called ‘Pub Representatives failed to support the veto overrides for bills they had voted for during the earlier regular legislative session. Locally, Donna Pfautsch, Representative for Missouri’s 33rd district, reversed her vote. Her failure to support the MO tax cut bill contributed to the failure to override democrat Governor Nixon’s veto.

When we have ‘Pub legislators supporting the policies of democrats, can we truly call them republicans? All too often, ‘Pubs, instead of opposing democrat lawlessness as exhibited by Nixon and others within Missouri, we have ‘Pubs voting in lock-step supporting the democrats.

That must end.

A new front

A new front in the civil war within the GOP has appeared in the Heartland. Mitch McConnell and his NRSC fired the opening shot at Nebraska conservative candidate Ben Sasse. Sasse, a well known conservative and healthcare policy expert, has drawn McConnell’s attention. The NRSC is now channeling funds to Sasse’s opponent.

Ben Sasse, the conservative candidate in Nebraska on the most recent cover of National Review and who has the backing of the Senate Conservatives Fund, RedState, and others, suddenly finds Mitch McConnell and the NRSC holding fundraisers for his opponent. Sasse, it should be noted, is widely considered a brainiac opponent of Obamacare and healthcare policy expert. — Red State.

Another attack was initiated against Jamestown Associates who are consultants to conservative republican candidates.

…yesterday, the National Republican Congressional Committee blackballed Jamestown Associates from helping elect Republicans. The NRCC is joining the NRSC in attacking Jamestown. Why? Because Jamestown Associates has been working with conservative candidates the House and Senate GOP leadership opposes. — Red State.

How does McConnell and the establishment expect to win new ‘Pub seats in Congress when they are attacking their fellow republicans? Not surprisingly, the answer is: emulate the democrats—instead of repealing Obamacare, McConnell and his henchmen claim their aim is to ‘fix’ not repeal Obamacare.

Republicans Begin Laying Ground Work to Walk Away From Obamacare Opposition

 

Erick Erickson (Diary)  | 

Conservative and Republican affiliated groups have started the 2014 assault against Democrats who support Obamacare. At the very same time, it is increasingly clear Republicans are laying the groundwork to abandon their opposition to Obamacare.

The Business Roundtable, which has a great relationship with Republican Leaders, is now listing Obamacare as an entitlement worth preserving.

Douglas Holtz-Eakin, a former economic advisor to John McCain and who opposed passage of Obamacare, has started a think tank premised on keeping, but fixing, Obamacare. Holtz-Eakin has the ear of Republican leaders. In 2009, Mitch McConnell appointed him to the Financial Crisis Inquiry Commission.

The Chamber of Commerce is declaring it will work to fix, not repeal, Obamacare. In fact, just last week the head of the U.S. Chamber of Commerce said, “The administration is obviously committed to keeping the law in place, so the chamber has been working pragmatically to fix those parts of Obamacare that can be fixed.”

Concurrent to this, the Chamber of Commerce has begun funding candidates to beat conservatives in Republican primaries…

The establishment has gone so far to betrayal ‘Pub conservatives that they have aligned the NRSC, with the willing concurrence of the NRCC, with a democrat, and democrat funded, organization.

The Republican Main Street Partnership, headed by former Congressman LaTourette — who is a friend of Speaker John Boehner — is working with the Chamber and party leaders to target conservatives the party leadership finds troublesome. LaTourette has been parroting talking points from the National Republican Senatorial Committee about the Senate Conservatives Fund, Club for Growth, and others.

You see, the ‘Republican’ Main Street Partnership is funded by democrats: several unions, an Indian tribe, and a well-heeled democrat contributor. See my post from yesterday.

These act lead to my next segment of today’s post. In my mail, yesterday, was an envelope from the NRC wanting me to renew my ‘membership’ and contribute to the party.  I tore it up and trashed it.

I will not contribute to the NRC. I will contribute to specific candidates whom I think worthy of my money. I may contribute to the local ‘Pub organizations. I may attend their fund raisers, I may contribute directly to their election campaigns. Maybe.

I will impose litmus tests for every candidate. I am personal friends with some at the local and state level. I will help them remain in office because I know they will pass my litmus test.

For the rest of the ‘Pubs, they will have to work to get my support, my money, and my vote. It is very likely, like so many did in 2012, that my ballot in 2014 will have blank spaces next to some offices. By blank space I mean I skipped voting for that office.

Unless there is a winning conservative primary opponent next summer, the 4th Congressional District may be one of those offices that I will skip. Unless Ms Hartzler renounces her allegiance to the Washington establishment and proves, by her voting record, that it is a real renouncement, I will not be voting for her in 2014.

I supported and endorsed her in 2010 and 2012. No more. When there is no difference in the ‘Pub establishment and their willing helpers to the democrats, why bother voting for that office?

I’ve been a republican all my adult life. I’ve voted republican for 45 years. I still am a republican, a conservative…but my party is no longer.

News from the Front

At times I feel like channeling Edward R. Murrow. There aren’t too many people who still remember viewing and hearing him. I’m one of those.

Murrow had a news program, See it Now, on CBS in the 1950s. Mom and Dad didn’t have a television on The Farm at that time. Instead, we’d drive over to Grandma’s place and watch TV there. Dad liked to watch Murrow and Dragnet. Mom liked listening to Murrow on the radio but she was never a TV fan. She’d rather read.

Imagine…instead of hearing Murrow say, “This is London,” as he would report during World War II, imagine him saying, “This is…,” and then pick a US location. Somewhere in Texas, Missouri, anywhere except Washington. In our version of history, image reporting as it was during WW II. Think of the parallels. Britain is now the  United States. In the imagined parallel, Washington must be Berlin. With that world in mind, we have two items in the news today; news from the front.

Conservatives forces are making gains on the continent…er, in Washington. Reports from the field have conservatives strengthening their positions as they advance on establishment positions. After a successful counter-attack led by Senator Ted Cruz, we have this news release.

Conservative insurgents strike blow against GOP Establishment

By TIMOTHY P. CARNEY | JANUARY 14, 2014 AT 6:30 PM

Sen. Ted Cruz is shown. | AP PhotoCold cash, together with control of institutions, is what makes the Establishment the Establishment. But in the current Republican civil war, the insurgents have secured their own money pipelines, and they control their own institutions – which means the GOP leadership and its allies in the business lobby have a hard fight in front of them.

The firing and hiring of conservative staffer Paul Teller makes it clear that the anti-establishment has built its own establishment.

Teller was a House staffer for more than a decade, and was longtime executive director of the conservative Republican Study Committee. The RSC always exerted a rightward pull on party leadership, but it is nonetheless a subsidiary of the party.

After the 2012 election, the Republican Establishment captured the RSC, in effect, by getting Congressman Steve Scalise elected chairman. Scalise is a conservative, but he is also a close ally of the party leadership – much more so than his predecessors Jim Jordan and Tom Price. Scalise immediately swept out most of the RSC staff.

Last month, Teller was accused of working with outside groups such as Heritage Action to whip RSC members – and Scalise showed Teller the door.

In the old days, this might have been a disaster for Teller. He had lost his job and landed on the wrong side of the party leadership. Anyone who picked up Teller would be spitting in the eye of the Establishment. But this week, Sen. Ted Cruz announced he had hired Teller as deputy chief of staff.

The Establishment no longer has the power it once had to demand obedience.

How did the party leadership maintain such power in the past? Basically with money. Party leaders had a near monopoly on access to money, both in terms of raising funds for candidates and landing jobs for individuals.

Floor leaders and committee chairmen have always been the GOP’s main contact point with corporations’ political action committees and lobbyists. If a member stays on the good side of party leaders, the leaders make a phone call to a lobbyist who throws the member a fundraiser.

Similarly, if a staffer always played nice with the Establishment, that brought with it job security: Even if your boss retired, you could land on your feet, as the leadership would recommend you for a job in another office, or K Street would hire you.

You can see how this would make dissenting staffers and members watch their words and actions. Sure, members were allowed to vote against the leadership – as long as the leadership didn’t need your vote. But at the end of the day, you had to play ball, otherwise you got no money for re-election, and no jobs for you or your staff.

But Teller landed on his feet — and today any conservative staffer disposed to fight the party leadership can hold out the same hope. The GOP Establishment has lost its monopoly, and the insurgents now have many bases of power – and thus many sources of money.

Conservative activist groups have always existed inside the GOP, but because they couldn’t raise and distribute large amounts of money, they functioned mostly through moral suasion – which means they were largely powerless. Eventually, these Beltway conservative groups grew dependent on the GOP, and instead of holding the party accountable, they often ended up being the establishment’s liaison to the conservative base.

Today’s conservative groups are fully armed, though. Thanks to advances in Internet fundraising and changes in campaign finance laws, the Senate Conservatives Fund, FreedomWorks, and the Club for Growth can raise and spend enough money to compete in GOP primaries with the Chamber of Commerce and lobbying firms.

Beyond these new pipelines of campaign cash, the insurgents now control institutions – institutions they created, and ones they took over. Jim DeMint, who founded the Senate Conservatives Fund in 2008, left Congress in 2013 to head the Heritage Foundation.

Heritage used to be a faithful ally of the GOP – at least when it counted most. Under DeMint, Heritage is a scourge of the GOP leadership and an enforcer of a hard limited-government line.

And the Senate offices of Ted Cruz, Mike Lee, and Rand Paul are three insurgent beachheads on Capitol Hill. Being a senator doesn’t merely give one a vote — it gives these men the budget to staff a congressional office. As they gain seniority, the Tea Partiers will get control over budgets for committee staffs.

When a member’s re-election, or a staffer’s ability to pay the mortgage, doesn’t depend on the Establishment’s favor, the Establishment may need to find a new way to gain conservatives’ loyalty.

Another news report from the Front exposes an attempt by enemy agents to infiltrate conservative support organizations. The target of these infiltrators was to misdirect funds and reinforcements from conservatives. The infiltrators, funded and organized by liberal operatives, were exposed as reported below.

The “Republican Main Street Partnership” is Democrat Funded

Erick Erickson (Diary)  | 

Steve LaTourette, a former congressman and friend of John Boehner, runs the “Republican Main Street Partnership”. Note the word “Republican.”

As the left-wing Talking Points Memo reported a month ago, LaTourette and his Main Street Partnership have created an affiliated SuperPAC called “Defending Main Street PAC.” Along with the Chamber of Commerce and Republican Leaders, the Main Street Partnership wants to take out troublesome conservatives.

Defending Main Street PAC plans to raise $8 million in this election cycle; by contrast the Senate Conservatives Fund handled $12 million in 2012 and expects to raise even more this time around.

Note, first, that LaTourette spoke with a left-wing site to reveal his plans. Note second that Defending Main Street PAC has had to release its year end campaign finance numbers.

According to its fundraising report, Defending Main Street PAC received its money from a Democrat donor, a group of unions, and an Indian tribe.

More specifically,

  • Bonderman, David gave $30000.00 – the Los Angeles Times referred to him as “David Bonderman, a significant contributor to Democrats, “
  • Laborers’ Political League Education Fund gave $100000.00
  • The Chickasaw Nation gave $50000.00
  • International Union of Operating Engineers [EPEC] gave $250000.00
  • Laborers’ International Union Of North America (LIUNA) PAC gave $150000.00
  • MEBA PAF gave $15000.00 (Marine Engineers Beneficial Association)
  • Working for Working Americans-Federal gave $250000.00 (Building Trades / carpenters PAC)

In other words, the “Republican” Main Street Partnership’s affiliated PAC intends to use George Soros connections and Democrat back groups’ money to defeat conservatives.

More troubling, the Republican Main Street Partnership has a lot of ties to Republican leaders. Again, folks, it is us versus them. You pick.

It is no longer sufficient nor wise to assume anyone claiming to be republican is working for our benefit and is a conservative. All too many ‘Pubs, elected using the Tea Part and other grassroot organizations, have turned out to be turn-coats. Instead of listening to and following the demands of their constituents, those who elected them, these turn-coats parrot the establishment line. In many cases, the turn-coats talk and agree with their constituents at home, while voting, in lock-step, with the establishment in Washington.

It is worse. The local party officials quake in fear of these turn-coats. They point to their massive campaign funds, funds gathered with the help of those local dupes, and declare the turn-coats are unbeatable. That may be true, if the local and state party organizations don’t disavow and work to present primary opponents to remove these traitors in our ranks.

Failure of the county and state parties will likely result in a repeat of 2012 in 2014 and 2016. The conservatives, feeling unrepresented and seeing no real difference between the two national parties, stay home. The dems retain the Senate, and may take back the House. It will be Pelosi back as Speaker and a repeat of 2008 through 2010.

Will it take a repeat of of 2012 to make the ‘Pubs listen? Or, in disgust, will conservatives leave the party forever, creating a new party that speaks for them. Only the republican officials can say.

It’s 1856, ‘Pubbies. Think on that.

Another Pass

I am still not sick. I may have the symptoms of being sick, but I’m not sick.

Today’s post will be short. I saw something today, that I’ve not seen in a long, long time. An editorial in the New York Slimes that was pro-conservative. It was a guest editorial, of course.

John Boehner’s Betrayal

Op-Ed Contributor

 

WOODSTOCK, Ga. — THERE’S a political axiom that says if nobody is upset with what you’re doing, you’re not doing your job. We’ve seen this proved time and again in the liberal attacks on conservatives like Sarah Palin and Dr. Benjamin Carson, who provide principled examples to women and minorities and are savaged by the left for doing that job so well.

But cheap-shot politics isn’t relegated to Democrats. Last week the House speaker, John A. Boehner of Ohio, attacked conservative groups who criticized the budget deal, hashed out by Representative Paul D. Ryan, Republican of Wisconsin, and Senator Patty Murray, Democrat of Washington, for failing to reduce spending and for raising taxes.

“They’re using our members and they’re using the American people for their own goals,” he said, calling the opposition “ridiculous.”

In one way, Mr. Boehner is correct. The goals of groups like ours are those that congressional Republicans once espoused: smaller government, less spending and lower taxes. Alas, those who demand such things today from their elected officials face unfounded attacks.

Make no mistake: The deal is a betrayal of the conservatives who fueled the Republicans’ 2010 midterm shellacking of Democrats.

It raises discretionary spending above $1 trillion for 2014 and 2015. It reneges on $63 billion of sequester cuts. Its $28 billion in deficit reduction over the next decade is a pittance compared with the $680 billion deficit piled up in 2013 alone. And it raises taxes, particularly on airplane passengers through new travel fees.

Perhaps most troubling is that the deal locks in spending for President Obama’s Affordable Care Act, ensuring that the worst parts of Obamacare will continue unfolding to the shock of increasing numbers of Americans.

But the budget plan is about more than taxes and spending. It was a slick means by which Senate Republicans could appear to oppose the deal while in fact allowing it to sail through the chamber.

Take Senator Mitch McConnell, Republican of Kentucky, the minority leader, who opposed efforts to defund Obamacare earlier this year while claiming to do everything possible to stop it.

After attacking conservative groups for their efforts to prevent the funding of Obamacare, Mr. McConnell, who is facing a primary challenge in his 2014 re-election race, is now seeking to portray himself as a conservative darling, championing fiscal austerity by voicing opposition to the budget proposal. (My organization has not endorsed a candidate in that race.) Doing so gives him some nifty talking points that align with most conservative groups, but it is little more than parliamentary sleight of hand.

Consider how he handled the vote on the bill. To defeat a filibuster, its supporters needed 60 senators to win cloture and move to a final vote. Instead of rallying his troops against the vote, Mr. McConnell allowed a handful of Republicans in battleground states — who needed to be seen as supporting the bill — to vote for cloture, while he and the rest railed against it, casting themselves in the role of budget hawks.

The second half of the column can be read HERE.

In short, it was all Smoke and Mirrors, a ploy to give some RINOs in battleground states, the appearance of being fiscally conservative.

***

Continuing the theme of this week, here is the Celtic Woman with another Christmas video.

Another chip gone.

Chip? What chip? It is a chip off the stone of GOP solidarity. Boehner and McConnell, in order to preserve their political futures, have started a war they cannot win. In the short term, as the GOP continues to fragment, the only winners are the democrats. In the long term…who knows. The real question is whether, when all the chips have fallen, will there be anything to rebuild—of the nation and the Constitution?

The Ryan-Murray budget ‘deal’ is another chip off that rock of GOP solidarity. Ryan, Boehner and the rest of the Washington establishment are willing to risk everything to avoid confrontation before the 2014 elections. Instead, they have risked the entire country to gain a little time.

What Ryan, Boehner, Cantor, McConnell and the others have done is to increasingly solidify the opposition of conservatives against them. The article below from the Washington Times supports the reports of growing opposition to the budget deal.

All-out war breaks out in GOP over budget

By Jacqueline Klimas and Seth McLaughlin, The Washington Times, Wednesday, December 11, 2013

House Speaker John Boehner of Ohio,joined by House Budget Committee Chairman Rep. Paul Ryan, R-Wis., takes reporters' questions, on Capitol Hill in Washington, Wednesday, Dec. 11, 2013, as House Republicans signaled support for a budget deal worked out yesterday between Ryan and Senate Budget Committee Chair Rep. Patty Murray, D-Wash. The budget deal was one of a few major measures left on Congress' to-do list near the end of a bruising year that has produced a partial government shutdown, a flirtation with a first-ever federal default and gridlock on President Obama's agenda. (AP Photo/J. Scott Applewhite)Tea party groups and fiscal conservatives wasted no time Wednesday in savaging a bipartisan budget agreement negotiated between House Republicans and Senate Democrats, drawing an unusually angry response from House Speaker John A. Boehner, Ohio Republican.

All sides were rating the winners and losers in the deal struck a day earlier between House Budget Committee Chairman Paul Ryan, Wisconsin Republican, and Senate Budget Committee Chairwoman Patty Murray, Washington Democrat. The modest deficit-cutting deal had some sweeteners for defense contractors and oil drillers, while air travelers, federal workers and some corporate executives would take a hit.

But most of the passion focused on the politics of the deal, with Mr. Ryan, Mr. Boehner and the House GOP leadership defending their handiwork from attacks from conservative colleagues on Capitol Hill and from outside groups such as the Club for Growth, Heritage Action and Americans for Prosperity. Critics said the agreement effectively raised taxes in the form of higher fees, failed to restrain entitlement programs and permitted new spending in the short term in exchange for vague promises of long-term cuts.

Rep. Jim Jordan, Ohio Republican, said in an interview that Republicans sacrificed their biggest point of leverage — the tough “sequester” spending cuts that were already in force — in the rush to get a short-term deal that did not address the long-term costs of Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid.

“I am against [the deal] from just a basic point that we embarked on a position at the beginning of the year that said, ‘We will keep the sequester in place unless we get to make changes on mandatory spending that will save those program and put the budget on path to balance within the next 10 years,’” Mr. Jordan said.

Added Chris Chocola, president of the fiscally hawkish Club for Growth, “Apparently, there are some Republicans who don’t have the stomach for even relatively small spending reductions that are devoid of budgetary smoke and mirrors. If Republicans work with Democrats to pass this deal, it should surprise no one when Republican voters seek alternatives who actually believe in less spending when they go to the ballot box.”

— Continue reading here.

Unfortunately for fiscal conservatives, Boehner is pushing for a vote on the ‘deal’ as quickly as he can. The vote could take place as early as today and he, Boehner, wants a quick vote to prevent “interference” from conservatives. Heritage Action, Club for Growth and the American’s for Prosperity initiated call-in campaigns yesterday.

The lines are being drawn as more ‘Pubs shift to one side or another. Some will continue to try to sit on the fence, fearing offending one side or the other. Like so many in the months prior to December 1860, they will discover that fence-sitters will be despised by both sides and have support from neither.

Here is some links to addition columns in today’s digital newspapers.

KIBBE: Another Republican budget surrender

The short-term deal will assure long-term overspending — Washington Times

Budget Agreement Gets Attention from the Tea Party (Video)

John Boehner rips conservatives for prematurely bashing budget deal, but rushes bill to floor

By PHILIP KLEIN | DECEMBER 11, 2013 AT 5:48 PM(Washington Examiner)

Budget deal a step backward: Opposing view

December 11, 2013 at 4:06 pm (The Foundry)

Boehner’s Outburst Fuels GOP Civil War

The worst speaker of the House and Republican leader in the memory of living men. (PJ Media)

To say this deal is unliked is an understatement of biblical proportions.

The Return of the Friday Follies

This has been an interesting week—interesting as in the old Chinese curse, “May you live in interesting times.” Obamacare continues to disintegrate. The GOP Establishment howls, “See! See!”, as if it vindicates their ineptness and lack of leadership opposing it and the dems in general.

More dem pols are attempting to distance themselves from Obama and Obamacare, Mark Pryor of Arkansas is an example. The twenty and thirty-somethings, those whom the libs depended upon to fund Obamacare, are rebelling. That subject, rebellion, revolution, was spoken aloud this week by Michael Cannon of the Cato Institute before a congressional judiciary committee and was supported, obliquely, by law professor Jonathan Turley, an Obama supporter.

Frankly, I, like any sane citizen, would rather not live in interesting times. Unfortunately, we, collectively the citizens of this nation, have allowed the situation to occur. And, the longer the condition is allowed to continue, the worse it will be and the more difficult it will be to correct.

If it can. That was the underlying concern espoused by Michael Cannon and Jonathan Turley.

But, I’ve already written about those subjects. Today is Friday, December 6, 2013. Tomorrow is Pearl Harbor Day. I wonder if it will be remembered by the intelligentsia in Washington…or used as another campaign event by the democrats and Obama celebrating our slide into totalitarianism and a police state, of a one-party rule like that of the old Soviet Union.

***

The GOP Establishment as acquired an ally in their war against the Tea Party and their party’s core conservatives—the US Chamber of Commerce. That alliance created a reaction. The Club for Growth has joined the fray on the side of conservatives.

New battlefront emerges in war between Republicans, tea party

By Seth McLaughlin – The Washington Times, Thursday, December 5, 2013

The U.S. Chamber of Commerce’s new push to get involved in Republican primaries by defending incumbents against tea party challengers could actually make it easier to unseat them, according to the head of the influential Club for Growth.

Chris Chocola, the club’s president, said the battle between the chamber, which he said advocates big business, and the rank-and-file free-market conservatives whom his group represents is well underway as Republicans try to field their candidates for the 2014 congressional elections.

The latest fight is shaping up in Idaho, where the chamber announced this week that it will run ads defending incumbent Rep. Michael K. Simpson, a Republican, against a challenge by lawyer Bryan Smith. The club has endorsed Mr. Smith.

“The chamber is pro-business and we are pro-free market, and that is the difference,” Mr. Chocola told The Washington Times. “The opposing views are not new, but there seems to be some heightened interest from the establishment types to get involved in a race like Idaho. If that heightened interest continues there might be more chances that we end up on opposite sides.”

The column continues, here, at the website.

Not only has the anti-conservative campaign of the GOP establishment drawn out national organizations such as the Club for Growth, it has also started a wave of grassroots activism and reactivation of local Tea Party groups rallying to fight that establishment from both parties.

***

Speaking the truth. It is a dangerous occurance, regardless of the validity of the statement. Here in the U. S., it can get you fired. You’d think the consequences would be worse is socialist Europe and the UK. If you thought that, you’d be wrong.

PRUDEN: British press horrified as London’s new mayor dares to proclaim the truth

By Wesley Pruden – The Washington Times, Thursday, December 5, 2013

LONDON — Free speech is good, but sometimes dangerous in practice. Saying what you think can get you sacked in America even if it’s something that most people think. Practicing free speech here in the old country is risky, too, but saying the wrong thing appears to be a misdemeanor, not yet a felony.

Boris Johnson, the irrepressible mayor of London, said some provocative things the other day to a private think tank, the Centre for Policy Studies, and political London — mostly the scribblers, anyway — has been in a tizzy since.

The mayor playfully invoked Gordon Gecko, who exists only in a movie, and his economic philosophy that “greed is good” to make the point that intelligence, ambition, inspiration and above all perspiration is the irresistible driver of prosperity for everyone. He observed that some people are smarter than others, and that the 2 percent pulls the 98 percent into the good life. To the consternation of conservatives in the government and the left-wing columnists and commentators, the mayor is still upright and walking around.

The 98 percent should be grateful to the 2 percent and not spend a lot of time cultivating resentment. “Some measure of inequality is essential for the spirit of envy,” he said, “and keeping up with the Joneses is, like greed, a valuable spur to the economy.” This reflects an unremarkable understanding of what was once called human nature before the liberals — “progressives,” they call themselves now — decided that the state can install a better nature than God did.

Mr. Johnson then went even further. He said nice things about Margaret Thatcher, who has never been forgiven in certain of these precincts for pulling Britain out of the deep coma imposed by a welfare state that had reduced an empire to “a little England.”

The mayor sometimes talks less like a mayor than a newspaper columnist, which he is as well, for The Daily Telegraph. The squeals from the left and the harrumphs from the right after his Maggie Thatcher remarks may be less about the interpretations of his message than about the folly of electing a newspaper columnist to high office. Instead of bashing the rich, he wrote the other day, “we should be offering them humble and hearty thanks. It is through their restless, concupiscent energy and sheer wealth-creating dynamism that we pay for an ever-growing proportion of public services.”

You can read more here.

***

The topic, State Nullification, is a continuing subject in many conservative circles. It appeared in a Washington Times column this week in a discussion of the overbearance and possible Constitutional violations by the government and the NSA. Nullification, contrary to popular thought, is not supported in the Constitution. It was, however, discussed in the Federalist Papers and in those papers, advocated as a possible solution to the excess of the federal government.

The Constitution and state-level resistance to NSA spying

Wednesday, December 4, 2013 – A View from the Tenth by Michael Boldin

LOS ANGELES, December 4, 2013 –  In Federalist #46, James Madison advised state-level actions in response to unconstitutional or unpopular federal acts. He wrote that a successful strategy includes a “refusal to cooperate with officers of the Union.”

As reported by US News, and linked at the top of the Drudge Report yesterday, a coalition of organizations is working to put that advice into practice in response to mass NSA surveillance programs.

The activists would like to turn off the water to the NSA’s $1.5 billion Utah Data Center in Bluffdale, Utah, and at other facilities around the country.

 Dusting off the concept of “nullification,” which historically referred to state attempts to block federal law, the coalition plans to push state laws to prohibit local authorities from cooperating with the NSA.

Draft state-level legislation called the Fourth Amendment Protection Act would – in theory – forbid local governments from providing services to federal agencies that collect electronic data from Americans without a personalized warrant.

This morning, at the TIME Swampland blog, Nate Rawlings picked up on the story as well, but opined that the “effort is sure to be stymied by federal authorities.”

Such an opinion assumes that the federal government has the Constitutional authority to stop states from opting out of federal acts and programs, or has a history of doing so.

Both assumptions are incorrect.

The Supreme Court has repeatedly supported the ability of states to opt out of federal acts and programs. The legal principle is known as the “anti-commandeering doctrine,” and says that the federal government cannot force, or “commandeer,” states to enact, administer or enforce federal regulations.

The relevant court cases are:

* 1842 Prigg: The court held that states were not required to enforce federal slavery laws.

* 1992 New York: The court held that Congress could not require states to enact specified waste disposal regulations.

* 1997 Printz: The court held that “the federal government may not compel the states to enact or administer a federal regulatory program.”

* 2012 Sebelius: The court held that states could not be required to expand Medicaid even under the threat of losing federal funding.

There is nothing in the Constitution that requires a state to help the federal government do anything.

The 4th Amendment Protection Act is a state-level bill which seeks to put the anti-commandeering doctrine into practice. The Act would thwart NSA surveillance by banning a state from participating in any program that helps or utilizes NSA surveillance.  This would include providing natural resources, information sharing, and more.

The question, then, is this: Do enough states have the will to follow the advice of the “Father of the Constitution?”

Yes, that is an interesting question.

***

And for a parting shot, let this item from FOX News be a reminder what we, the conservatives, are opposing.

OBAMA SAYS ONE-PARTY CONTROL NEEDED
President Obama told MSNBC’s Chris Matthews that Republicans are to blame for the failings of ObamaCare and other national problems. Obama said making concessions on his signature entitlement program was “out of the question.” The way forward, the president said, was to end divided government. “In our history, usually when we’ve made big progress on issues, it actually has been when one party controlled the government for a period of time,” he said. “The big strides we made in the New Deal, the big strides we made with the Great Society – those were times when you had a big majority.” — Chris Stirewalt, Digital Politics Editor, Fox News.