This is where I sometimes get a bit frustrated with Rush. I get why he doesn't like to do endorsements (or anti-endorsements), but I think we are at the point where we need to make a concerted effort to target the lameass leadership of this Party. It's not enough to talk around the issues and have everyone read between the lines. Boehner needs to be defeated. Cantor needs to be defeated. McConnell needs to be defeated. We can't even begin to take the fight to the Left because we keep getting shivved in the back by "our" party.
A caller to Levin this week used an example I have often thought of before too. In Braveheart you had William Wallace rising up to defend his nation, only to see the Scottish nobles stymie his efforts at every turn -- all while they tried to take advantage of his popularity by feigning solidarity with him. Wallace ended up knocking them off after they sold him down the river. We must do the electoral equivalent to Boehner et al.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1KdjUNIcP8k
This is where I sometimes get a bit frustrated with Rush. I get why he doesn't like to do endorsements (or anti-endorsements), but I think we are at the point where we need to make a concerted effort to target the lameass leadership of this Party. It's not enough to talk around the issues and have everyone read between the lines. Boehner needs to be defeated. Cantor needs to be defeated. McConnell needs to be defeated. We can't even begin to take the fight to the Left because we keep getting shivved in the back by "our" party.
A caller to Levin this week used an example I have often thought of before too. In Braveheart you had William Wallace rising up to defend his nation, only to see the Scottish nobles stymie his efforts at every turn -- all while they tried to take advantage of his popularity by feigning solidarity with him. Wallace ended up knocking them off after they sold him down the river. We must do the electoral equivalent to Boehner et al.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1KdjUNIcP8k
Yeah, Rush won't name names but states we know who they are. It's time to name names, Rush.
Huelskamp's sobering confirmation of conservatives' worst fears throws into perspective how much we need new, braver Republican leadership. Even under the most ideal circumstances, Republicans will enter 2013 with control of the House, a Senate majority with seats numbering in the low to mid-50s and the presidency. Democrats will still have the power and the will to filibuster every attempt at a major reduction in the size, scope, and spending of government. Unless the Republican leadership is willing to stand firm enough to force the Democrats to shut down the government, we are bound to repeat the failures of 2011 over and over again.
It will be very difficult to replace the current leadership. Representative Jason Chaffetz (R-UT), another solid conservative, while speaking at a recent town hall meeting with constituents, estimated that just 45 Republican House members would take a conservative stand even in the face of intense political pressure. We must assume that far fewer still are likely to oppose the reelection of the House leadership. Consistent constituent pressure is needed just to introduce the idea of leadership-change into the Republican caucus.
Though the potential difficulty in electing new leaders is great, it is still more difficult to envision the current leadership living up to the challenges of our time. Europe's near-daily bouts with collapse are ominous reminders of how short our time may be. We have none to waste.
...At this point I would be fully in favor of a military coup to seize control of government from these enemy agents.