John Boehner vs. the 'crazies' -- Should Republican Party let tea party win?

From The Christian Science Monitor via H/T at Instapundit:

To arch-conservatives, however, Senator Goldwater’s campaign laid the groundwork for America’s conservative revolution. His doctrine of low taxes and limited government became bedrock ideals for Ronald Reagan, who campaigned for Goldwater before becoming governor of California. The conservative Heritage Foundation calls Goldwater “the most consequential loser in American politics.”

Today, much remains to play out, and the establishment almost always has the last word. Rep. Kevin McCarthy (R) of California, a Boehner protégé, is a front-runner for the speaker’s post. And the presidential election, in many ways, has barely even started.

Yet even if the establishment reestablishes some measure of control, does the Republican Party need a Goldwater moment?

With Mr. Boehner’s departure, the tea party has outlasted a man of legendary political patience.* In the presidential race, they have taken a process that the Republican Party designed specifically to help establishment candidates and emphatically done the opposite.

In other words, there is little evidence to suggest the Republican populist rebellion is going away, though seismic changes in the country since 1964 – partly as a result of the conservative revolution – mean that the underlying situation is in many ways dramatically different.

On its face, today’s Republican insurgency echoes the conservative groundswell for Goldwater in 1964. The Atlantic’s Matthew Dallek writes that “in the late 1950s and early 1960s conservatives were widely dismissed as ‘kooks’ and ‘crackpots’ with no hope of winning political power.” Today, the conservative base is looked upon even by the Republican Party as “crazies,” said Michael Needham of Heritage Action Sunday. Mr. Boehner, only somewhat more charitably, called them “false prophets.”

“Absolutely, they’re unrealistic!” he told CBS’s “Face the Nation.”

So just to confirm, the editors Christian Science Monitor who signed off on this article by Mark Sappenfield, one of their staff writers, believe that those Americans who want the government to follow the Constitution, be fiscally responsible, and generally leave them alone — are “arch-conservatives” (are there any “arch-leftists” in the CSM’s worldview?) “kooks,” “crackpots,” and “crazies.”

* Conversely, this article also speaks volumes about Boehner’s ineffectiveness as a leader when he’s being so effusively praised by the other side of the aisle.

That's because the Establishment Republicans, i.e. RINO'S are just democrats, who are pro-business. They don't believe in smaller government, lower taxes, and less government regulations.

GOP Debate -- Jeb Bush Supports California-Style Gun Confiscation Laws

From Breitbart's Big Government:

During the September 16 GOP debate, host Hugh Hewitt asked Jeb Bush if he supported states confiscating guns when a family member expresses concern about the mental state of a particular gun owner. Bush said he not only supports it but that “we need to encourage that kind of involvement.”

Jeb Bush’s only stipulation was that a judge needs to sign off on the confiscation before it takes place.
.....................

The GVROs work just the way Jeb Bush outlined by opening the door for a friend or relative—or disgruntled former friend or spouse—t0 seek a GVRO against a certain person and, with judicial consent, have that person’s Second Amendment rights suspended and their guns confiscated.

In May 2015, the National Journal reported what gun rights groups had warned about all along—GVROs would not have stopped Elliot Rodger from carrying out his rampage—at least not in part—and would not have prevented the Democrats’ favorite go-to example, Adam Lanza, from attacking Sandy Hook Elementary because his mother did not see a “potential for violence” in him.

This only confirms it, he's RINO

The GOP establishment’s nightmare -- What if the race comes down to Trump versus Ted Cruz?

From Hot Air: A Trump/Cruz death match, while still implausible, is more plausible than it might seem thanks to Cruz’s surprising fundraising strength. He’s got the dough to make a long run if voters give him a reason to keep going. And so does Donald Trump, of course.

Cruz has regional strength in Texas and Louisiana, which could translate into his picking up Perry and Jindal supporters. Despite his clashes with Graham in the Senate, Cruz’ calls for a muscular foreign policy could appeal to the several dozen supporters the South Carolinian has amassed. Those of Christie’s supporters who came to him for his combative style might look to Cruz rather than Trump.

And then after the second round of dropouts, Cruz could gain even more support. Particularly should Paul leave the race; if he isn’t gaining ground, at some point he’s going to have to consider whether his smartest play won’t be to return to Kentucky to defend his Senate seat, and Cruz is a friend and partner in many cases (though for Paul so is Mitch McConnell, which makes for an interesting conflict). Should Mike Huckabee and Rick Santorum drop out, none of the others has put in more work to attract the social conservatives they represent than Cruz…

We could see a situation where Trump is ahead on the strength of his performance in the early states and still leads in the polls, though he might have commenced fading in the face of the various challenges befalling a presidential candidate and the terror gripping the party of having to nominate a bull-in-a-China-shop like the real estate magnate has not subsided. But while the establishment might believe Trump is beatable, they could be without candidates to beat him.

It's not a problem for me, Cruz all the way!!!

Is that what those “secret” chats between Cruz and Trump are about? Some master plan to clear the rest of the GOP field between them? Suddenly I’m imagining a “special message” from Trump next spring, aired live from his office in Trump Tower, in which he reveals that his candidacy was actually part of an elaborate pincer movement to outwit the GOP donor class and pave the way for the man he’s really supporting for president — at which point Ted Cruz steps into frame. Then they both laugh mwa-ha-ha style as Karl Rove, watching from home, leaps to his feet and covers his mouth in astonishment. My God — it’s all so clear now.

McKay’s prediction: If forced to choose, the RINOs would swallow hard and opt for the devil they know, Ted Cruz, over the one they don’t, which I think is true. Establishmentarians value stability above all things and Cruz, at least, is a known quantity, however much they may disdain his ideology. Trump, although a moderate and therefore closer to them on most policies, is a true loose cannon. Forced to choose between a guy who’d threaten the status quo from the inside and one who’d do it from the outside, they’ll take door number one every time.

It's only a problem for the Establishment.

‘John McCain Is in Real Trouble’

From Breitbart's Big Government:

Pulling no punches, it sent a letter that begins: “Senator Sen. John McCain (R-AZ) is in real trouble. If a strong conservative candidate runs against him in the Republican primary next year, he will lose.”

Please Arizona, retire this clown and make him just go away. He WAS a great military veteran and a war hero, but a lousy senator.

Eric Cantor Defeated by the Tea Party He Helped Create

From Joel Pollack at Breitbart's Big Government:

The stunning demise of House Majority Leader Eric Cantor in his congressional primary on Tuesday--by a huge margin--is a sign of how deeply the conservative base resents the Republican leadership's efforts to frog-march the party towards immigration reform before securing the country's borders.

The Tea Party's death turns out to have been greatly exaggerated. Ironically, it was Cantor himself who breathed life into the movement in 2009.

In February of that year, as Republicans licked their wounds from Barack Obama's historic victory the previous November, Cantor--then Minority Whip--marshaled a dejected and depleted House Republican caucus to vote a unanimous "no" against the Democrats' $862 billion stimulus bill. That gesture electrified the Republican base, and set the stage for the Tea Party's formal emergence weeks later, after Rick Santelli's famous CNBC rant.

When the new Republican majority failed to provide the strong opposition that the Tea Party movement had hoped for, some conservatives looked to Cantor as a possible alternative to Speaker John Boehner when new elections were held in January 2013. Yet Cantor declined to lead a mutiny.

Instead, he helped Boehner and the House leadership push "comprehensive" immigration reform throughout 2013 and into the midterm election.

So will there be more dead/retired RINOS this fall?

How Purity Undermined the Vitter Strategy

From John Fund at NationalReview.com:

Conservatives will debate the lessons of the 2013 government shutdown for a long time. Here’s one of the last ones: When the call for retreat has been made, it’s still possible to salvage something.

Yesterday, key members of the House GOP leadership had decided to add Louisiana senator David Vitter’s amendment stripping Congress of the special health-care contributions legislators and their staff had under Obamacare to whatever the House sends over to the Senate. They concluded forcing Democrats to vote on it made good political and strategic sense: It would embarrass Democrats if they struck it down, and if it stood, it would improve conservative leverage in future negotiations. The reason? Members of Congress and their staffs really hate the idea of losing their taxpayer-funded health-care benefits (valued at up to $5,000 a year for individuals and $11,000 for families) when they go to shop on the health-care exchanges. In the Senate, Lindsey Graham of South Carolina had declared his intention to demand a vote on the Vitter amendment no matter what the final shape of any budget or debt deal.

...(By)pushing for a vote on the Vitter amendment would have given conservatives something they could have used as a cudgel against Democrats and establishment Republicans who voted against it. A failure of imagination has for now taken that opportunity away.

You shouldn't reload and shoot your other foot.