PIECES OF THE PUZZLE: More Indications We Have One Party Pretending To Be Two

This post is short because the point is easy to make.  Here is the story:

Romney: Instead of ObamaCare, I Would Require States Get Everyone Insured

Now, when I read this story, what I hear is a Republican admitting he has no problem with the goals of the Progressive agenda; he just differs as to how to get there.   Either way, Romney is saying he is fine with telling people — no — forcing people to do what he thinks is best…just like the Democrat Progressives.

Now, ask yourself this question: “If we all want to get to the same destination, then how different are we – really?  The same applies to Party politics.  If both Parties are working toward the same goal, then how different are they?

Now, since no one wants to discuss getting rid of Parties, are you ready to talk about forming a second Party yet?

55 thoughts on “PIECES OF THE PUZZLE: More Indications We Have One Party Pretending To Be Two

  1. “are you ready to talk about forming a second Party”

    You’d probably know better than I do, Joe, but wasn’t that largely the idea of the Tea Party folks? Maybe if the Koch brothers and/or some other big-money folks put enough dough into another party it could work. But a lot of structural and financial hurdles have been thrown up by the existing power structure.

    • James,

      Contrary to popular opinion, it would cost very little to form a new Party. Here, let me show you.

      Step 1 — those who still believe in individual rights and liberty leave the Democrat and Republican Party

      Step 2 — They call themselves whatever they want, but they pledge vote according to the principles of individual rights and liberty

      Step 3 — people who actually believe this step forward to run and use social media to make their names known

      Step 4 — the people who are no longer in the One-Party-as-Two crowed start using social media to discuss things and then settle on a candidate and write in the name(s)

      DONE! And no money, no centralized leadership, just real liberty and citizen government. Now, will the organized Parties be more powerful? At first, yes. But you start local and grow. With every victory, the new elected reps start to actually tear this leviathan apart. Eventually, things will get easier — so long as people stay focused on what they are trying to do: preserve liberty.

      • Well said, Joe. I don’t see why starting a party would be outstandingly expensive. If it was a true collaborative grassroots effort (and I hate the word “grassroots” in light of Fauxccupy Wall Street). It seems to me like a party would only need large overhead if they were planning on financing influence in Washington. It seems like it would be counter intuitive for a liberty based party to do something like that, and it’s justification, circular reasoning at best. If you ask me, using bait and switch tactics to attack founding principles by casing barbs at the GOP, coughcoughSBJcough, seems kind of fruitless to me; but hey, What do I know.

  2. There’s no denying that Romney is a progressive, and I may be wrong, but I believe we had all come to a consensus about this back during the last GOP primaries. James; I am registered with the Tea Party, and I have yet to see anyone step forward with a serious plan for forming an actual party. Like most that I speak with, I do not think there is a workable plan for a successful launch of a new political party … though I honestly wish there where. The brothers Koch could throw all the money at it they have at their disposal, but I do not believe you could avulse enough voters from other the Democrats, Republicans, or Independents.

  3. Joe, augger, et al: Starting a third party is a fast way to lock-in the Liberal/Progressive rule for a generation. While I don’t like to acknowledge it, third parties don’t work in America like they clearly do elsewhere. That’s our history, and everything in our electoral law is set up to support two parties and make it virtually impossible for third parties to succeed on a national level. The GOP needs to be secured by a coalition of American Conservatives and libertarians since it has the national infrastructure to beat the Dems. My sympathies are with the Tea Party, although I am not yet directly involved as a member. That’s something I’m considering, although my activities in this area have been elsewhere thusfar.

    Joe, I’d like to see the Romney quote if you have it, since I do believe healthcare funding reform is needed, but that it should be carried out at the state level. That is where it appropriately and legally belongs. There have been several Supreme Court decisions confirming that insurance regulation is not a Federal issue. So the entire Affordable Care Act has been in violation of existing law and the Constitution. I don’t understand why the opposition to Obamacare has been so inept, since both the Constitution and existing law have rendered the whole exercise completely illegal. CDE

    • CDE,

      Why the opposition to Obamacare has been ‘inept’ is directly connected to why we MUST start a new Party. Let’s go to history.

      Progressives came to power by infiltrating the existing organizations, then seizing the reins of control over them. This makes them immune to anyone doing the same to them to take over what they have already seized. This is how Cartels insure their continued existence. They get big, partner with govt. then pass laws that they can afford to pay the cost for but which prevent competition from ever threatening their position. This is why we will not succeed in taking over the Republican Party.

      Next piece of history: Progressives invented this idea of starting a third Party movement to make sure their side wins. This is what Teddy Roosevelt’s Bull Moose Party was all about — making sure making sure Wilson won. So, do to them what they have been doing to us — and stop thinking you only have Republican voters to work with.

      Look at the demographics of the TEA Party movement. Before the Progressives in BOTH Parties (the one Party) and their lackeys in the media started trying to destroy the Movement, polls showed some 37% of the movement were Democrats and Independents. GO AFTER THEM! If you can pul the 60-80% of the Republicans who are NOT Progressive, gather up the bulk of the moderates and steal 20-30% of Democrats, you have a dominant movement that will end Progressivism for generations.


      • Joe: I am primarily a business man, which means I have to be both realistic and pragmatic or I don’t eat particularly well. I like to eat well. We have no differences on ends…the rump Republican Party of the remaining country club set cannot and will not confront or defeat the increasingly aggressive and completely amoral strategists of Mr. Obama’s Neo-Progressive Party. Their funding and support of a Faux Libertarian candidate in Virginia and use of the IRS to suppress the Tea Party’s activities in 2012 are evidence that they will do anything, legal or illegal, to retain and gather power over the lives of the American people. I understand that mindset, since in my professional world one expects one’s competitors to be smart, tough and determined to win.

        While I would prefer to see a political environment in which the movement with better ideas, like the Tea Party or my libertarians (and American Conservatives, generally) would be able to mount a philosophically pure uprising and defeat the intellectually bankrupt status quo, what I see when I analyze our current political marketplace are laws and practices which greatly advantage the two entrenched parties. I also see a requirement for national infrastructure, including information systems, communication channels, ballot positions and grassroots organization that will be very hard to put in place in time to win in 2016, which I regard as crucial. If this were my business, I would be preparing a take-over strategy that would place the GOP under the effective control of those whose ideas and energy will be required to compete with and defeat the Neo Progressives over the next generation. We would need leaders, which we have, big time financial support, which we also have, and superior strategy and tactics. This last requirement can be met by the vastly more impressive policy research being churned out by the Heritage Foundation, the Cato Institute, the Manhattan Institute, the American Action Forum and a host of other think tanks and policy shops. In short, if this were my business venture, I would begin implementing this friendly take-over strategy immediately.

        On the third party gambit, you are quite correct about the Progressives’ Bull Moose Party strategy carried out by Roosevelt and Wilson to secure Wilson’s election in 1912. Both TR and Wilson were committed Progressives, but the American citizens of that time were not accepting of Progressive ideas and policies, as the majority are not today. So TR, formerly a popular GOP President, weakened the GOP candidate Taft and allowed the election to go to his soulmate Wilson, who then ran one of the most destructive regimes in American history. Obama’s Progressives are now attempting to do the same thing by supporting faux Libertarian candidates and the Libertarian Party, which is a joke, and splitting the Conservative/libertarian vote. The Progressives in DC are in major trouble with American citizens right now and we need to sustain and build the pressure while gaining effective control of the GOP and securing the Senate and the House in 2014 and 2016, and the Presidency in 2016. This will take focus and endurance, but it is manageable. I don’t think the creation of a third party will be, but I am open to being proved wrong. Cheers, CDE

        • CDE,

          I am going to make this comment to you because you have given me sufficient evidence to suggest you might understand the point. So, please, do not think it is meant to be condescending, but rather, to give pause to some serious consideration of the matter at hand from a very different vantage point.

          If our founders had thought and argued as you are now, would this nation exist as it does, or would Hamilton have won out, in which case, might we have a king?

          Think that over for a while and then re-visit my comment about the Bull Moose Party. Maybe this time you will see I was suggesting we use their tactics against them, only with a slightly different aim. Not to take over a Party, but to destroy it, leaving the new Party in place to inherit the spoils.


          • Joe: You are too kind. I always enjoy your comments and this one is no exception. I am a rational optimist, but my business experience has taught me to work hard to avoid letting my emotions make an opportunity look easier than it actually is to pursue. I’ve never been afraid to pursue a difficult goal, but I’m careful to always understand the reality of each situation. I agree that American Conservatives and libertarians need a plan for dislodging Mr. Obama and his Progressive allies and for beginning to heal the damage they have already done to our nation. I regard a friendly takeover of the GOP, something that is already in train, as a more realistic and achievable approach for several reasons. First, the energy and money that would be required to create and build a third party (the Tea Party or the American Conservative Party or something else) would divert attention from attacking and defeating our real foe, the Progressives. Second, the logistics of establishing a truly national party would likely push us past 2014 and possibly 2016. It is now much more difficult than in Lincoln’s time, or even Jackson’s. I would rather spend my time and money to win elections than to build a new party. Third, I see what is needed as similar to when the Republicans absorbed the mantle of the Whigs, which resulted in Lincoln’s election in 1860. The GOP Establishment leaders are old and tired and the new leaders (Cruz, Lee, Rand, Scott, Rubio in the Senate and Gowdy, Goehmert and others in the House) are our guys. We hold the rising GOP leaders, the most important financial supporters and all of the ideas…why should we not assume the mantle of Lincoln, Reagan and Coolidge?

            I hope that is the way things will proceed, but I’m not a political fellow and my concern is for our nation and for the America my six kids and four granddaughters (grandsons still to come) will inherit. My ancestors fought with Washington, even though they were Quakers who deplored violence in any form. My commitment to America is as strong as theirs was, and my intention is to pass that loyalty on to our next generations. CDE

            • CDE,

              Thanks for the thought out answer. I prefer this as opposed to what people tend to post on blog pages. I consider it bread as opposed to milk.

              OK, here is my primary objection. Suppose you get everything you want. Where did you solve the problem? You haven’t. All you have done is assumed that replacing the current leadership with the new one — the one you support — will solve the problem. Now, not to insult, but…how ‘Progressive’ of you. 🙂

              As for me: I’ve had enough of doing the same thing over and over. I have been looking to history for possible solutions, and — once again — I find the founders pointing the way. We need to do something about the structure. The Constitution was designed to help FORCE us to act in a way that preserved rights and liberty. Party structure works against them. So, being an AMERICAN, I am refusing to accept the claim that the “only way” is to keep doing it the same way…only with “our people.” I know human nature well enough to know that this will ALWAYS lead us right back here.

              TO use your business example. Though I am sure I am nowhere near as successful as you have been, I own a small business, myself. When I first started, I set my prices according to what I felt like I would be willing to pay. I paid no attention to cost of production and the results were predictable. Now that I have “lived and learned,” there is a formula in lace that does take cost of production into account. And while it is not a hard rule in setting that price, it is a structure that I use to guide me that, if I follow it, will help to prevent repeating past mistakes. That is why I disagree with trying to reform/save the GOP: that path will only repeat past mistakes.

              There is one last reason I am not as optimistic on this matter as you. I honestly do believe the two Parties are one, which means you are trying to take over BOTH Parties. Good luck with that, guys. Let me know how it turns out. After all: you have been trying to do exactly what you are advocating for years and have made NO progress. What appears as progress with the TEA Party is already lost to you. The TEA Party was succeeding when it was a true grass roots movement. The GOP co-opted it. This isolates that 30%+ of Independents and Democrats who would otherwise be allies to the movement. It also opens the GOP purse, which further subordinates the movement. You see, the movement you are looking to is already being taken over using the structure the Progressives have put in place to protect themselves. Forgive me, but I think we have to attack in a way that structure is not designed to defend.

              Anyway, this is where I am. I see we are at an impasse on the issue, but I thank all who have participated.

              • Joe: I don’t see there being a possibility of impasse in this type of discussion. Hopefully the process is a spiral rather than linear or circular, and we can both benefit from the exchange. At one point, fairly recently, I would have agreed with you that there was little if any difference between the GOP and the Democrats. But that was before the emergence of Barack Hussein Obama and the Neo-Progressives on the Democrat-side and the Tea Party and the resurgent American Conservatives and libertarians on the GOP-side. The Neo-Progressives are Marxists in American-drag. The Tea Party, American Conservatives and libertarians are essentially the modern followers of Classical Anglo-American Liberalism, sharing beliefs in individual freedom, free markets and limited government, all Constitutionally protected ideas. Establishment Democrats are no more, having been completely overwhelmed by the Progressive/Collectivist/Marxist Obama supporters. Establishment Republicans are fading fast…all GOP Establishment leaders are at the ends of their careers, which have generally accomplished little, and the emerging leadership, including some very impressive governors and Senators, are all Conservatives or libertarians, most with the support of the Tea Party.

                So I see the two parties, both of which have established local organizations in all 50-states, as rapidly diverging in terms of their governing policies and their visions for America. Will the McCains’ of the GOP go easily…no, but they can be overwhelmed within the GOP, just as the Neo-Progressives have taken over the Democrat Party. By taking over the GOP, the new Tea Party/American Conservative/libertarian alliance will immediately be on the ballots in all 50-states and local jurisdictions, have a fundraising apparatus in place, along with positive cash balances and will inherit 25% of the national vote which will vote Republican regardless of who is running the Party. My father fell into this last category, as have most of his extended family. To launch a 3rd Party effort would require enormous time and expense just getting on ballots, while being fought by both local Democrats and Republicans. We are the party of Lincoln, Coolidge, and Reagan. Why not acknowledge our proud, long history and kick some Progressive butt, rather than fighting internally? That is my major case against a 3rd Party strategy for 2014 and 2016. Let’s do what the original Republicans did to the Whigs in 1860, and avoid ceding control of America’s future to American Marxists. CDE

                • CDE,

                  So you think Obama actually runs the DNC? I don’t. I think people like Soros do. Which leads me to ask: what is forcing Soros’s GOP counterpart(s) out of their positions of control? Because, until THOSE people are gone, the TEA Party is just being trapped on a political hamster wheel. As long as they are within the GOP framework — which is controlled by the money men — they can run all they won’t, but all they’ll get is tired.

                  • Joe: I agree that Soros, Peter Lewis and other shadowy plutocrats have been supporting and running Obama throughout his “career,” and probably funded his education. I think Valerie Jarrett is a likely suspect as the immediate controller. Those relationships may go back as far as the “older White homosexuals” his prep school classmates have talked about as Barry Soetoro’s sugar daddies in Hawaii, who are alleged to have supplied Soetoro with cocaine and cash in return for sexual favors. I’m not sure if these stories are true or if they result from the obvious frauds perpetrated in Mr. Obama’s two “autobiographies,” but their emergence, along with the ongoing efforts to conceal Our Dear Leader’s admissions records and academic transcripts going back to his prep school days are really bad for our nation.

                    On the GOP side I don’t have nearly as much concern. I’ve met many of the major Conservative and libertarian funders, including the Koch brothers, and I’ve seen nothing untoward about them. They are honestly concerned about the impact of the American Progressive movement on the political, economic and individual freedoms of America in the future. Republican and Conservative financial supporters, at this point at least, are not foreign nation-states or multi-national corporations, as they may have been in the past. With the exception of Fred Smith at FedEx and a few others, Big Business has been cutting its deals with Obama, and crony capitalism has been rampant, some of which has gotten out into the more evenhanded press outlets. So as I see it, the GOP funding sources are already inclined to support the American Conservative and libertarian movements and the Tea Parties are wonderfully grass-roots in their funding sources. So my GOP friendly take-over strategy should have powerful financial backing, as well as having the only viable ideas and strong grass-roots support. The media will demonize the idea, but that just reinforces its fundamental soundness and will be something that can be somewhat offset by an effective social media campaign.

                    So while I understand your concerns in this area, I think the risk is lower than you perceive. But that’s just my view, and I’m a non-political fellow. CDE

                    • CDE,

                      I can honestly say that I hope you are correct and I am wrong. But I would ask, as I am looking to history as my guide, where is the evidence in the historic record to suggest there is a reasonable chance for success in the direction you advocate?

                    • Joe: I hope I’m right as well, and the only potential historical example would be the Lincoln Republicans when they assumed the rump-end of the Whigs in the 1850’s. I’m hesitant to cite that case as the environment has changed so completely since that time. In the event my “friendly take-over” strategy cannot be implemented successfully, I will have no real choice but to embrace the third party effort that will inevitably follow. There is no future in the remnants of the GOP Establishment, and I am a firm believer in the requirement that successful organizations, like organisms, must live in a constant state of evolutionary change or die by failing to adapt. One of the Progressives most debilitating weaknesses is that they are constantly trying to achieve Marx’s vision, as if there is a static model of a perfectible society rather than 7-billion potential individual visions that together will produce a continuously improving world.

                      Matt Ridley’s THE RATIONAL OPTIMIST documents the actual trajectory humanity has been on for a 100,000-years and how it has accelerated in the last 200 or so. Obama and his crew deny what has actually been happening to humanity, as do the environmental extremists, the race hustlers and the Marxist totalitarians around the world, since they are heavily invested in the fallacy that centralized control and planning will somehow reverse a non-existent decline. It is fascinating how ideology can blind so many to the unremitting progress that has and is continuing globally in every important area. But Progressivism and its Marxist predecessor have never been about progress or a better quality of live for average citizens. They are about control of the many by the few, plain and simple. May they forever fail in their arrogance! CDE

                    • CDE,

                      Thanks. Also, I will have to get and read that book, but I suspect you and I know what that “speeding up” in human history is all about (I think He referred to it as birth pains 😉 )

  4. A lot of Good comments here this AM.

    I think a Successful Launch would HAVE TO involve BOTH the Social Media Grass-Roots thrust Joe mentions combined with something like Koch Brothers AND OTHERS Money. Remember,The original Republican Party grew from the Whig…..so it wasn’t created from the Ground up.

    And Movements need leaders. We have some in Gohmert, Lee, Cruz, Paul, Amash, Trey Gowdy, Steve King, Perry, Walker,Pence, Snyder etc….and some powerful organizers in Kibbe, Palin and Bachmann outside of Washington.

    BUT …… Any movement has to attack the reality of the IMMENSE power the MS-Press still has…….Joe’s use of Social media is one avenue of attack for that but we would need another Platform along side it….Radio…Levin and some others fit here and Beck’s Blaze would add the Video pressence……so it’s a start.

    The lesson in Virginia with what happened to Cuccinelli cannot be over-emphasized. AT THIS TIME….the niether the Infrastructure nor the popular momentum are sufficient to start a NEW movement…… But the possibility exists to START the process of “De-Whiging the GOP”….which with enough successes like Walker in Wisc…..Cruz in Texas….Lee in Utah etc WOULD lead to an Entirely new Structure……. We just CANNOT afford more Virginias…..nor more Christies.

    SO…..as Joe says START LOOKING FOR HOW WE DO IT…..how do we get more Constitutionalists elected. The effort we have to be doing AT THE SAME TIME is the Local efforts Mark Levin talks about which involves Building STATE movements to Keep control of our States and stem the new Carpet-Bagging that is happening….McAuliffe is from UpState New York…..and has only lived in Virginia for about 18 months for instance!

    • Don,

      Why is everyone fighting so hard to save the GOP? That’s like saying the way to defeat Hitler was to change his government from within. How well do you suppose that would have worked?

      I happen to think that we need to give some REAL thought to exactly what we believe and why. As for me, I value liberty. Franklin said it best:

      “Where liberty dwells, THERE is my country.” [emphasis added]

      To my way of thinking, this means we need to be willing to abandon sentimental allegiences to things such as patriotism and Party loyalty. If we do that, then Party is no longer the goal, nor is saving the nation. The goal is to save man’s liberty on earth.

      Now, how do we do THAT?

      • NOT save the GOP……change it in similar fashion to the Whig…
        …but ONLY because infra-Structure IS WHAT wins elections…..to create infrastructure from the Ground-floor up would be impossible to do in so short a time for the 2014 Midterms……which are HUGELY more important than the 2016 Presidential election…..the 2014 Mid-Terms are what EVERYBODY should be focusing on…..the LEFT IS !!!

        A successful 2014 with MORE Constitutionalists being elected would effectively start the process of a New Movement / New Party…. in other words the Momentum would carry through with what we Know and recognize as the GOP being both Defunded and De-populated….. Even the name “Grand Old Party” would change perhaps to Constitutional Party…..and Rove and Jeb Bush etc would migrate to the Democrat Party ( which is really where they belong ).

        We can’t create everthing from Scratch … it’s NOT going to happen ….. that’s why the Whig example is so important. People need a Structure and Network within which to excercise Political will.

        • Don,

          Isn’t the TEA Party movement the refutation of your argument? How many candidates did they successfully get elected in 2012, and 2010 before that? And how many this past week? So they are having success. Now, show me the ‘Party’ chairman, or the TEA Party National Committee. See my point?

          As for the way the GOP was formed: it was not a changing of the Whigs from within, it was the result of people leaving the Whig Party and the Whigs collapsing, leaving the people who left. I am arguing for something very similar to that. You are arguing for a remodeling of the same building…which will leave you in the same building 😉

          • Actually I think there are TWO lessons from the Tea Party.

            (1) That people are SICK of Business as Usual, Croney Capitalists and Socialists?Communists masquerading as Progressives……SICK of un-ending Taxes and Spending .

            They rose up and Formed Local units….But make no mistake THERE IS A NATIONAL NETWORK….Kibbe and Mary Beth Martin are examples….. They ARE NOT merely loose associations of Like-minded individuals. They endorse send $$ and send Reps to campaigns from out of State…..AS THEY SHOULD !!! And as such they act like a Party….AS THEY SHOULD.

            They had success !!!!…… When they were strongest …a STRONG 2010 Showing…..AFTER Obama and the IRS targeted them Less so in 2012.

            ( 2) This LACK of Success is a DIRECT result of (A) the Obama/Clinton/Holder Justice Dept / IRS Harassment……they effectively Broke their Party-like Structure. And (B) it is a reflection of the Tea Party making a Startegeic Mistake…..and that is not becoming even MORE powerful and Connected on a National level earlier and then Building on it…….Had they done so the IRS-Obama harassment could have been counter-attacked much earlier.

            What became the GOP WAS directly out of the Whigs……they left, but the Networking was there, the Political Connections were there…..they just left the “Roves”, “Bushes”, “Romneys” and “Christies” behind……. This very same thing can happen to the GOP Base….Call them “Conservatives” , “Classical Liberals”, TRUE “Libertarians”, “Constitutionalists”, “Originalists” what have you…..THEY will be connected via their GOP affiliations…..and with New energy and momentum will collect new folks too.

            In other words it has to be MORE than a mere repudiation of Good Ol Boy RINOs and GOP Progressives….. it has to be that in CONNECTION to a Place to Go……… and that place has to have genuine Political Power and Organization.

            • Organization does not = Party 😉

              Now, where you see mistake, I see the problem the TEA Party is fighitng — TYRANNY! If you think it will be any different trying to take over the GOP, well… You guys have been trying that since Reagan was in office. You let me know when you get tired. 🙂

              BTW: how are you going to get the independents and democrats to join you in the GOP? You MUST have them if you hope to take over, but most of us REFUSE to give you another chance. We got that “fooled me twice, shame on us” a few too many times, but we finally figured it out and we ain’t falling for the banana in the tail pipe trick any more 😉

              • In Virginia …. People did exactly what you say…..

                And it SPLIT the Vote for a True Tea Party / Constitution friendly and GENUINELY Anti-ObamaCare Candidate !

                    • With Respect To the Parliament and Tyrant George ….. they Belonged to the “opposition Party”…..
                      A united Opposition Party…..a “Declaration Party” if you will …… a Party of Unified States Unified around a Common Goal and Declaration…… A party acting together for a Common goal.

                    • Really? Don, I humbly suggest that you are twisting history and the language to meet the needs of your argument; your desire.

                      Again, with true humility, isn’t that joining the very thought process you claim to be trying to oppose? Isn’t that exactly how the GOP — a Party formed to champion the rights of man — evolved into an enemy of individual rights and liberty?

                      it might just be me, my friend; but I will not budge from principle. I did that for too long, and for too long, I was part of the problem. No more.

                • In VA, the GOP pulled out and let an OBAMA-backed candidate run as a Libertarian. So, yes, it is a perfect example of the point I am trying to make…that your way will NOT defeat the GOP establishment. 😉

                  • Had BOTH Pauls united sooner…..had there been unified help from a National Tea Party…..broadcasting to their members Nationally what was occuring in Virginia wrt the GOP lack of support….more Money could have come from TP members nationwide….. and in fact it would have Emboldened the TP further !!

                    And if Cuccinelli had in fact WON….that would have turned the Tide in favor of the TP being a True representative of Conservatves Everywhere.

                    What you suggest is kind of like ( In a Military Example)…..the Comminist Democrats having a Phalanx that continues to Grow…. that they can send in anywhere at quick notice to fight the TP skirmishers….loose collections of fighters with no center…………….. after a few defeats the skirmishers get demoralized and dispurse….

                    And THIS is what the GOP RINOs are hoping happens…… their opposition jhust gives up and goes away. Every incident of Roman Legion defeat was Gaulish and/or German attacks which were organized as Artmies…..NOT skirmishers.

                    • Don,

                      I appreciate your effort to put this in military terms, but you missed the mark. Look to the French resistance and the Russian Partisans. They are a better example of a few fighting a far superior force and causing damage in excess of their numbers.

                      Now I’ll turn it around. What could have been done had Kennedy actually sent REAL military support to the Bay of Pigs?

                    • Don,

                      One more thing — so i do not repeat MY mistakes of the past. I am not trying to claim that I have the answers. I beg you to understand that I am just VERY skeptical of the possibility the Republican Party can be salvaged. I’ve said it before (but more colorfully than now): I believe it is a wasted effort wrought with the perils of being co-opted in the process, misdirected or — even if successful – falling into the same mentality that led us to where we are now.

                      I hope you understand my position, and that my argument comes from that position, and that both are grounded in the best understanding of History and human nature I can muster.

                    • Right …. But not talking “damages”….Talking WINNING….Success…
                      and in the First case the Frenchie Partisans needed D-Day and Patton from the South….. and in the Second The Russian Partisans ( and their Jewish Allies) finally needed the Re-habilitated Red Army with New T-38 Tanks.

                    • OK, Don, I’ll play:

                      The 300
                      The American Revolution
                      The War of 1812
                      The Flying Tigers
                      The Battle of Britain
                      Wake Island
                      Port Morseby
                      Do you know the story of the 12SS in Normandy?
                      Or what happened to Task Force Richardson?

                      I could also tell you about the 12 Marines in Nam who took to a patty dyke and went hand-to-hand with 120 NVA regulars. Only 4 survived, but they won 🙂

                      ALL are stories of much inferior forces winning out against overwhelming odds, and these were just the battles I could think of off the top of my head

                    • Don,

                      The Russians never fielded a T-38, at least, not that I know about. The late war saw them using mostly T-34/76’s and T-34/85’s with a few JS Stalins thrown in. But this is a BAD example for you to cite, as the stories of very small forces holding off an overwhelming opponent by that time were on the German side. The defense of Hungry was impressive.

                      Still, the point here is the GOP has those T-34/85’s and you are trying to argue we can defeat them with panzerfausts. True, we can — the weapon has the ability to defeat individual tanks — but it aint gonna happen in real life. Too many tanks, not enough troopers. Which is why I am advocating disproportionate warfare. In terms of our analogy, make them come get you in the swamps and mountains 😉

                    • And I DON’T want the Republican party Salvaged…. What I want is the Party Structure to be a Jumping Platform to a NEW Quasi-Party along the line of the TP. A coalition of Constitutionalist Groups.

                      For what it’s worth… If Christie is the 2016 Nominee… I WILL sit it out….there is virtually NOTHING different between Hillary and the New Jersey Bloviator….NOTHING. Which is why the Democrats/ GOP RINO Leadership and the Press want to Pick him as the GOP candidate……I actually think he is WORSE than Romney.

                      Had JFK supported the Cubans fully, including all the way to the other side of the Island …. there would have been an end to the Cold War probably 10-12 years sooner. IMO

                    • Yah, you’re right….I knew I would get the Tank designation wrong. But The Point was New Tanks.

                      1812 was the Bankers war ….. we have to be careful using that one. It requires much more in depth analysis than we are given in Standard accounts….without the names of Loeb, Kuhn, Lazard Freres, Schiffs, The Barings, Warburgs, Fuggers …and Others we simply don’t really understand this “affair”……so let’s agree to disgard that one for now.

                      The “American Revolution is not a good example as it references the entire war….and is actually an example I would use for MY point.

                      The other you mention are Battles within LARGER ORGANIZED Wars…Which also proves my point…..We don’t yet HAVE a Central Command….and the TP doesn’t.

                      I hadn’t heard of the Nam reference I must admit…..but allow me to say that I’m impressed that ANY marines surved going up against a Dyke called patty…..had it been in SF…..they no doubt would’ve lost those last 4 too…. ;- 00 .

                    • LOL, DUDE! Every war since WW I has been a “bankers’ war.” 🙂

                      The Revolution was a classic example of a guerrilla force defeating the world’s strongest empire. If you claim that doesn’t count, then you are trying to frame the debate in a manner such that I cannot win — period (fal-la-cy, ba-by 🙂 )

                      But, OK, I will give in. You win. I will now keep voting for the Romneys, Grahams, Rubios and McCains and wait for the “reformation” of the GOP to succeed. After all, Rush has been telling me we are winning since he got on the radio 25+ years ago, so we must be winning in spite of what I think I see. (does the sarcasm show? :-)) )

                    • Now you KNOW who on RNL supports McCain … :- ))……. And you know it isn’t Me !!

                      I wouldn’t call the Continental Army a guerilla Army …. LaFayettes’ French D’amies a Les Armes

                    • Who do I think was in a better position to make the Call ?

                      The Colonials……..and Later the French regular army fighting along side them…. :- )) .

                    • Don,

                      OK, cool. The Colonials admitted they were guerrillas. They thought fighting in the stand up fashion of the time was suicidally stupid — and they said so.

                      You got too tricky by half, brother 😉

                    • Joe,

                      The Battle of Cowpens…….Jan 1781

                      It was fought and won Standing in line, in the fashion of Armies of the time. The American Commander Brig. General Daniel Morgan finally utilized a Classic double envelopement last succesfully employed by the Romans….Staying engaged frontally while units slammed the Brits in the Left, Right and finally Rear.

                      He won a pitched Battle….against even Scottish Highlanders, Hardened British Troops and the Bloody Tarleton. The defeat for the British was so bad that Cornwallis was never able to recover from it and in Oct 1781 he surrendered to the Continental Army and French Navy at Yorktown.

                      Cowpens was a Classic 18th Century Battle between two Armies….in a Field…In Lines.. This doesn’t negate the other tactics used or the Green Mountain Boys etc…..Just that the Colonials had to….and DID confront the Brits headon.

                      For those in Texas it is interesting to note that under Morgan’s Command was Samuel Houston SR. the father of Texas own Sam Houston !!!

                    • Don,

                      Do you see what has happened here? You have asserted that a weaker force cannot defeat a far superior force without a strong central command or direction. The American Revolution was one of the many objections I offered, yet you have argued that the Americans only won because of strong central control. Are you sure you are not a Progressive/big govt. type in disguise??? 🙂

                      Now, you know that was meant in fun, but it DOES hit on my theme about conservatives not realizing how much of the Progressive thinking they have adopted from their Progressive (RINO) leadership.

                      At the time, the Colonies were VERY weak, and France did not offer that much help, yet they defeated the world’s largest Army. If this does not illustrate my point, then I suppose we SHOULD join the Progressives as you will have made the case that they cannot be beaten.

                      After all, how can you take over the GOP when they have a strong central control by which to defend their power? 😉

  5. You know why I don’t have a problem with the retarded state called Massachusetts? Cause that’s what they wanted!!!! In my opinion, Romney only did his job by giving that state what it voted for. As I recall, there was a state vote, right? Wasn’t done like Obama and the Dems as I recall. I could be wrong…

    • Kells,

      Not really the point. Romney is supposedly saying he has no problem forcing the States to establish State-run health care programs. Even if you are masking it behind the notion that you are “allowing the States to decide how they do it,” it is STILL force.

      • Wrong silly B.! If you have a retarded poplace who wishes to give away their liberties, so be it. If that state’s congress is too foolish to understand that it is unconstitutional, so be it. They are one state. I say let them live in their own private Idaho.

        You know as well as I that Romney would never have pushed this agenda, much less have it pass. Romney was campaigning for jobs. Obama was campaigning for the FSA.

        • No, Kells, I do not know that. In fact, he gave indications during the campaign that he would do exactly what this article claims: force the States to institute health care.

          • Joe,
            I am “late to the ball” on this one,, but I thought I’d throw my 20 cents worth out ther(danged inflation)
            It seems to me , not from an educated position, just thinking out loud, so to speak. But I feel that the GOP is ripe for a take over, by tea party or libertarian forces, or a coalition of conservative personalities. If the tea party types (I include myself) can ginger up some enthusiasm for , at the least , some local and congressional runners, and we can cobble some libertarians , we just might be able to stage a small coup.
            I know that after the 2010 blood bath (driven almost exclusively by the tea party) we lost some steam. The level of vituperative from both Democrats and Republicans, scared off some of the bandwagoners, but , that level of spew told me we had hit some nerve-endings. NOW we need to step on the gas…..and OBAMACARE should be a great catalyst.
            As I said, some obstacles exist, but now we need to , while continuing to write on here and other conservative blogs, START MEETING AGAIN.
            If you look at the reception that Cruz and Lee are receiving , I can see a surge on the horizon.
            But we need to start WORKING NOW for 2014. Another 15 or 20 tea partiers in the house and a few more Senators, and the presidency really becomes much less important.
            And as my Old Man always said,”If you don’t vote, sit down , shut up and live with it. Cause you don’t count!”

            • Ralph,

              I understand, and I wish the people who think this will work well, but they will do it without me or my support.

              Now, if people will stop trying to “save” the GOP, then I might join forces. You see, so long as people think you are trying to save the “R’s,” you will not draw from the Independents and Democrats. If you could, they would already be Republicans. HOWEVER, if you make it known you are trying to destroy the GOP because the Party has turned traitor to individual rights and liberty — to America — then you will naturally draw from the Independents and Democrats and, when you succeed in destroying the GOP, you will have the Party you want. It will rise from the ashes of the GOP, only it will now have much healthier demographics.

              Anyway, this is how I see it, based on what I know of history, sociology and human nature. I’m sure many will disagree.

            • Ralph and Joe,

              It’s a Multi-pronged attack we need…..Encouraging the Base, by forging a new way….but also using already constructed Networking channels which the Party has…..

              I don’t see this as saving or even reconstructing the GOP……just using its infrastructure so as not to re-invent the wheel…………… I actually think the GOP will “whither on the Vine” as Newt was want to say some decades past.

              I don’t know if you heard the Levin show tonite…..But his quest host (Sussman from SF–anti-Climate change Guy)…..and he took a surprise call from Sharron Angle of Nevada ( Remember her?)……She said, and he confirmed that there is a STATE Senator from Indianna that is asking other Sates Senators to join him in Mt Vernon to discuss an Article 5 States Convention…..as Levin has called for !!!!

              This is fantastic news….it is right along the lines Joe is talking about………….. I really think the Spirit of a New Movement will be taking form, lighting fires , in many venues….. Locally and nationally !!

              • Don,
                I agree with you. I have stopped all contributions to the National Gop, and will only contribute to individual candidates.
                And I have no illusions about salvaging the GOP or it’s leadership.

                They have now had three years to “shite (a Gaelic term from my Great Grandfather) or get off the pot” and have chosen “none of the above”. Boehner , Graham , McCain and all their cronies—-GOTTA GO.
                Our Tea Party group here has D and R and I membership, and even some Yellow Dog Democrats. That’s why I always have to laugh at those pols and writers who refer to the Tea Party as “right wing extreemists”, cause they have not gotten off their collective asses and gone out to talk to us.

Talk Amongst Yourselves:

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.