The GOP Establishment’s Willingness to Lose

How They see Us

Watching the post-South Carolina reaction of the GOP establishment and all of its various and sundry shills in media, I’ve come to the inescapable conclusion that there is a disease greater than Obama’s radical leftism that makes us vulnerable to him.  The Republican establishment is committed to destroying Gingrich because he’s not one of them, but I also think because they may not want to win.  If you listen to what they say, and compare it to what they do, it’s clear to me that staving off a candidate who Tea Party folk would prefer is more important to them than the possibility of losing the election. You shouldn’t be shocked that the establishment would prefer to lose to Obama, because in truth, they’re more interested in keeping their gravy train running than fixing the country, and there are at least three reasons this is true.

Culturally, the elite is more amenable to the ideas for which Obama stands.  Obama is a big government statist, and so are most of the people in the GOP establishment.  Their first response to any issue, much like Obama’s, is to imagine a government solution that will involve kickbacks and patronage jobs to their well-connected friends.  These people are all friends, left or right, and they tend to prefer the company of their establishment opposites to the “barbarians” and “riffraff” who constitute the base of their respective parties.  These are the people who descend from on high to participate with you in more humble fare when it suits their political ends. Otherwise, you’re the residents of flyover country, and your job is to shut up and do what you’re told.  They will not be hurt in the least by Obama-care, or any of the other plots and programs and government schemes concocted in Washington DC.  New health-care plan with death panels?  Not for them.  New regulations that make it impossible to start a small business?  Not with their friends.  An economic crisis that would make Herbert Hoover shudder?  It might make a small dent in their accounts, but the difference will generally be negligible.  The simple point is that Barack Obama offers no real threat to them, and besides, they’d prefer to drink cocktails with him than oppose him.  To this jet-set, you and I are unimportant, and our individual goals in life are so pedestrian.  They view us as they view the gardeners and mechanics and all the others they hire:  Important, but interchangeable cogs in support of their lifestyles.  Understand that I’m not talking about “class envy” here, because I surely do not begrudge them their relative wealth.  It’s their attitude that strikes me as fundamentally bankrupt, and it’s encapsulated in the sentiment: “I’ve got mine,” as they ignore the fact that you would like a similar opportunity to pursue your own.

The party insiders wants a safe nominee, who will neither cause them the loss of the House, nor even risk it.  They need to maintain control of at least one house of Congress in order to have the bargaining power necessary to shove provisions into legislation that will allow them to personally profit from the resulting market blow-back, and from insider information.  It’s what they do, and if the control of Congress is at least split, they will maintain that bargaining position. A “safe” candidate like Romney probably wouldn’t risk costing them the House, but such a candidacy might well not gain the Senate, or much of anything at all.  That’s fine with the establishment, so long as there are no losses.  The point is that Congress frequently functions as an extortionist’s protection racket, or plays favorites, and those who control the leadership are able to work out their own deals.  Worst of all, Gingrich is a guy who knows where some of the bodies are buried, and he’s exposed a few of them before.  Whether Gingrich would use that knowledge for reform is another question, but the establishment doesn’t wish to take any chances.

The party elite would just as soon lose because they hope the Tea Party will go away, and they see the re-election of Obama as a political repudiation of the Tea Party.  This is because the Tea Party has come awfully close to discovering how deeply the establishment’s profiteering runs, and the legislation the Tea Party-inclined Americans would like to see would upset too many profitable apple-carts.  More, the Tea Party is not under their control, and what they dislike even more than the party followers of their opponents is the somewhat less predictable nature of the Tea Party.  Tea Party folks don’t necessarily toe the party line, and it was mainly a number of their forerunners who in 2006 sat out the elections giving the House back to Democrats because of Republican over-spending.  These are Americans who don’t care so much about party, but instead are concerned with the general direction of the country, and the implications of gigantic deficits and debt.  These are the people whose wrath will be known in November 2012, and it is their energy that propelled Gingrich to victory in South Carolina.  One thing the party insiders hate is a segment of the electorate that can so easily overturn their plans, which is why when the Tea Party has come under attack from the left, they have generally sat by in silence,  saying little or nothing in defense of the Tea Party.  They are hopeful that the left will make some hay and beat down the Tea Party, because it’s a threat to the GOP establishment every bit as much as the left.  Re-electing Obama increases the chances that Tea Party will fizzle and go away.

These are the three most important reasons that the GOP establishment does not want a candidate with real Tea Party connections, and may be willing to lose in order to stave one off.  I’m not suggesting to you that Gingrich is necessarily a strong Tea Party candidate, but the fact that he is in search of a constituency while the Tea Party seeks a candidate may have made for a marriage of convenience, as South Carolina demonstrated.  What you ought to know and recognize is that the GOP’s elite are not very happy with the state of things, with Gingrich as the apparent front-runner at the moment, but they’re not done just yet, and if they can’t swing a candidate they want, many of them would just as soon lose as permit anything to bring their gravy train to a screeching halt.  It’s not merely direct and thorough reformers who they fear, but anybody who is not under establishment control.  The question for you may not be Romney vs. a purported non-Romney, but instead establishment vs. non-establishment, although for the moment, it seems the two are the same.

Leave a comment ?

11 Responses to The GOP Establishment’s Willingness to Lose

  1. Helen says:

    I have had this same feeling for a while. I was listening to Carl Rove one day and he made it clear, even though he didn't say it outright you could read between the lines, that what the established Republicans wanted was Obama winning the second term and then they would put Jeb Bush up for candidate and everybody would be ready to embrace him.

    I know one thing for sure, I am tired of a certain few of the elite running this country and picking our candidates for us. This has been what they have done for years so what happened in South Carolina really upset them all. They don't understand the power of the Tea Party but I hope and pray that by the end of this election year that they fear the Tea Party. Ha Ha Ha

  2. PalinSupporter2012 says:

    Do you think if the GOP positions to lose that Sarah may change her mind and run as an independent conservative? I think the Tea Party and conservatives are seeing how not only the left but also the right "establishement" is not for them just as you stated in your article. I dont know about you but I dont want to see a third member of the same family getting his "turn" to be president. South Carolina should be a good indicator that "We the People …" are tired of being told what to do and not be represented.

    I think she has the ability to pull off an independent run more than anyone else. Everyone says that that would split the ticket and guarentee a victory for BO. However, when the GOP is willing to throw it … it is time to reload and take another path.

  3. Kathleen says:

    I read today I believe it was at the Daily Caller. GOP Elite are begging Mitch Daniels to get in the run just to get Newt out of the picture. Lol, GOP Elite are running scared. There is even a rumor their asking Bobby Jindal. Who knows on that one?

  4. steve wilson says:

    could not agree more
    demd or rinos they are the same corrupt thing
    they are also planning for when the ability to borrow money ends and they can finally establish the kind of government they want

  5. Wally Palo says:

    I heard and read two Establishment GOP'ers say basically the same thing today. John Batchelor (radio talk show host) was presenting Romney's loss in S.C. as evidence that Tea Partiers want to lose. Another journalist , Brett Stephens of the Wall St Journal, had an article today titled "the GOP deserves to lose", which whined on about how Gingrich was a loser…blah, blah, blah. It really irks me that these GOP elitists are so opposed to their "social inferiors", that they'd rather have liberal elitists in charge of an ever-expanding government. At least that way, I guess, they'd get to occasionally help make the rules for the rest of us.

  6. catherine says:

    Havent been involved for long but Im starting to get the whole picture. The right is not as conservative as I had thought. After having ran McCain and I knew he wouldnt win, I watched his voting record since and it has backed up what I suspected. People have had enough of nobody listening to them. Its all out of hand and things need to change. Sorry about the elite, but we must take care of ourselves and it will start in 2012. Hope we can upset the applecart. This is the first time ever to open my wallet to make a difference.We can with some focus and green.

  7. just-a-guy says:

    Ah yes, the establishment…

    They do need the house, dont they!

    perhaps Sara and a few well placed individuals could start pointing out that Gingrich has that in the bag and more, He has prooven in the past that a (ugly word to use) 'Conservative' party platform like the 'Contract with America'
    can give We the People something tangible to hold on to, to get behind, support and actually vote FOR can turn both houses to the specific outline of the contract, and can initiate sudden, radical, and positive change in the direction of the country.

    Gingrich was always a reformer. He entered public service not to line his pockets, but to save and serve the Republic when it was in grave peril. His innovative approach and Savy ideas inspired the nation. He put the 'contract' together and it was perhaps the best marketing strategy ever for the Free Market System. He was a thorn in the side to the establishment because he wouldnt knock it off when power was achieved and actually wanted to pursue reform. As you said here
    he threatened to many fully loaded applecarts, simply because he was old school and thought that opportunism was ok, but that the opportunities should be created by creating a country with expanding opportunities. He wouldnt go along with raiding the existing piles of privately held monies for profit and thought that anybody should be able to create their own if this Nation returned to a free market system.
    Like our hero, Sarah, Newt found that there was very real, entrenched,
    and systemic resistance to the idea that Politicians should have to actually work for a living. He has admitted that his pecadillo with the women was a mistake and has prooven his reformation. In spite of
    the way that Romney is slanting the arguement Gingrich resigned, for
    the good of the party, and for the good of the Nation simply because the
    distractions perpetuated by the opposition made it impossible at the time for him to move forward to have any of the impacts that he desired.
    So he went rogue, and moved to the periphery of government where
    he could still fight the fight for a sane and 'Conservative' government.

    Romney on the other hand, as much as he says his 'experience' moved on a curve opposite to that of Gingrich, entered business as a man with good ideas on Business Management and had some early successes
    that I dont think coincidently dovetailed with the changes Gingrich was making in government. Where Gingrich created opportunities for main street businesses to grow, and Reagan certainly helped there, Romney made it big, had great success with VENTURE Capital. When the establisment forced Gingrich and resumed tax and spend and massive regulation Romney and Bain moved just as adeptly into VULTURE capitalism. Not that there are not justifiable reasons for Vultures in nature or capitalism…JUSTICE requires that I point out that it was the new Punishing form of government that moved in and put so many main street and manufacturing businesses on their dinner plate.
    Bain, and their Vulture partners colluded with government and
    bankers to serve these prooven business up for slaughter, many Vultures gorged themselves.

    I just dont think that is what we want for a president. We have too many walking wounded to permit the Vulture and his cronies to gain full control over us…The outcome I predict is not the slow slide into the abyss that many fear, but rather a feeding frenzy with few survivors, and
    an unrecognizable country.

    mchill/tampa fla

  8. what-happened-to-pub says:

    At least we can take comfort in the fact that Sasha and Milia will be okay:

    I'm in the 'anybody but Obama' camp. Would love to see the remaining four GOP candidates spend the rest of the primary directing their fire on the White House. We should know where they stand on the issues, after so many debates.

    But possibly the fix is in, and the GOP will do everything to allow the Pres to have another term, so ol' Jeb Bush can run unopposed in 2016.

Trackbacks and Pingbacks: