Jeff G @ Protein Wisdom:
As Malcolm Blackwell noted last evening on Mark Levin’s radio program, there is a natural impulse from those in power to try to secure and consolidate that power — and in essence, that’s what the RNC and Mitt Romney, with the cynical and dishonorable aid of Speaker Boehner (who had literally to pretend to be deaf and blind), did yesterday with their rules changes, assuring that the national Party establishment can now effectively control, thanks to their power of the purse, the various state parties and their delegates. That is, they’ve established a top-down, crony system that will be run through a centralized national Party, and in so doing, have set up a system that neuters state challenges to its authority — voting themselves the right to use rule changes in between conventions as needed to manipulate various aspects of the nominating and primary processes. That’s the what: the changes retain the same appearance of traditional GOP convention rules, but because the RNC establishment has granted itself permission to change rules with a supermajority — and because the RNC wields tremendous power with respect to money sent to state parties, creating a mechanism for the potential withholding of funds and other support, should state parties not “get their asses in line” — they have created what is, in essence, a process that mimics bottom-up power while effectively using a top down model run from the shadows.
Which brings us to the question of why. Is it purely an instinctual move to consolidate power — and to do so at the expense of the grass roots and conservatives? Because if that’s the case, one wonders why such rule changes are not more common. Or is there something else operating here — some signal being sent that the national party is looking to insulate itself from some potential challenge down the road?
That is, what is the Romney camp — and the non-existent GOP establishment — trying to insulate itself against, particularly if it wins the election? Or rather, going back to interest in why rather than what, why, if they are preparing for an election win, would they be working preemptively to weaken the state delegations and the grass roots movement?
And the answer that keeps occurring to me is that the GOP must already fear a challenge to its authority from the TEA Party and the movement conservative base — they can see what’s happening at the state levels to any number of incumbents who have been defeated by upstarts and political outsiders — and they are concerned enough about such a challenge going forward that they were willing to alienate the conservatives now, at a time when We Simply Must Defeat Obama, essentially daring the base to walk away and give Obama another term, which they’ve calculated the base won’t do.
Or, to put it another way, never let a crisis go to waste.
But again, why? Why, if Romney wins, would the RNC be so insistent on giving itself power to change the rules and centrally control the nominating process in the runup to 2016? What are they anticipating, and why are they anticipating it?
justme95
hi,
your opinion is your right,
but my problem is, why now? 67 days are very close to the voting time,
so is in it too late to mingle in theses questions in a destructive way as to minimize AND ON A PUBLIC FORUM
and do harm to THE LEADER CHOSEN BY MANY EVEN WITH THAT CHANGE OF RULES
WHICH SEEM TO BECOMING OVER BLOWN BY ASSUMING THIS AND THAT ALL NEGATIVES WHICH PROBABLY WILL NEVER HAPPEN , AND PUT HIM ALMOST ON THE LOW LEVEL OF OBAMA, BY USING WORDS WHICH ARE DANGEROUS BECAUSE OF THEIR EFFECT THEY PROJECT,
IS THAT SO IMPORTANT TO BRING IT UP NOW THAT MITT ROMNEY IS BEING ACCEPTED TO BE THE CHALLENGER OF OBAMA, WHEN HE NEED ALL SUPPORTS, THE POSITIVE ONE,
WE SHOULD MORE CONCENTRATE TO CONTINUE THE EXPOSURE OF THE OBAMA REGIME INSTEAD OF PICKING ON OUR NOW NOMINATE CANDIDATE,
TO RESTART THE PROCESS SO TO TALK ABOUT YOUR AND OTHER DOUBT AND FEAR, IS NOT POSSIBLE AT THIS POINT, THE FACT THAT MITT ROMNEY WANT TO MAKE A CHANGE TO SECURE A FACT HE WAS NOT COMFORTABLE WITH IS NORMAL THING FOR HIM TO DEMAND,
AND IF YOU AND OTHER SEE DANGER FOR THAT CHANGE, THE BEST THING TO DO IS TO CONTACT
MITT ROMNEY CREW AND DEMAND IT TO BE ANSWERED AT ONCE, SO TO BE CLARIFIED PROPERLY. THEN WE CAN DISCUSS THE AFTERMATH,
I’m JUST THINKING OF SOLUTION HERE,BEFORE THROWING THE TOWEL AT HIM,
Bees One thing I’ve learned here at F.A. is the true Conservatives like Mata and J.G.and Word and Aye are very principled. Others here I find are simply wannabees. Their personal animosiy towards Obama clouds their judgement and allows them to support a country club RINO. Mac. was more Conservative and a better candidate.
Many here have caved.Others have not and I SALUTE THEM.
Semper Fi
Had to leave the conversation for a while, a few things on my own site I had to take care of..
RW: McCain make himself clear when he called conservative activists hobbits, and frankly I never thought McCain put his heart into the 2008 campaign..
“Personal Animosity towards Obama”
I suppose you could say that. I happen to have this thing about having a communist in the White House. I said this earlier, his parents were both communists, his grand parents were communists, his mentor was a communist, by his own admission in college he was drawn towards Marxist Professors and radical left organizations. He was a member of the New Party, a communist front.
We can tie him directly to Ayers, Dohrn, Klonsky, and Tom Hayden. Indirectly we can say with a reasonable amount of certainty he has ties to Naomi Jaffe, Mark Rudd and several other communists who by their own admission committed treason against the United States. Hell, four or five years ago Ayers gave a speech in Venezuela talking about how he was using his influence in the education to continue the revolution. Jaffie who went to Hanoi with Jane Fonda and Tom Hayden claimed to have shot down an American fighter and helped capture the pilot..
Jarrett, Axelrod, Rahm Emanuel, Arnie Duncan all had parents with close ties to CPUSA. During the last days of the Clinton Administration Holder was instrumental in getting communist terrorists from several different communist organizations pardoned. Valerie Jarrett’s mother had ties to Frank Marshall Davis..
In my lifetime over 100,000 Americans have lost their lives fighting communism over there, so we wouldn’t have to fight it here…
Yep, you can call it “Personal Animosity
Grumpy
hi,
I sure hope they get what they deserve after they leave,
OBAMA said, we cannot go back, of course he would not want to go back
all his acquaintances would come to haunt him, but we sure can go further than him
and make them pay for treason to their country, all of them,
he try to blame GEORGE BUSH FOR CRIMES, BUT IT WILL BE HIS TURN .
THAT’S WHY HE DOESN’T WANT TO LEAVE EITHER, HE KNOW WHAT IS COMING
TO HIM AND HIS CROWD
GERALDO IS BASHING CLINT EASTWOOD, HE IS USE TO WHAT ‘S HIS NAME MAYER,
AND THE OTHER PHONEY JOKES BASHING THE CONSERVATIVES, WITH JOKES NOT EVEN TO LAUGH FOR,
GERALDO GET OUT OF THE FOX TEAM, YOU ARE NOT INTERESTING .
@ilovebeeswarzone:
I think he has another reason– just as serious and much closer, It costs somewhere well over $11,000,000 a year to keep Michelle in clothes, vacations and servants. He’s gonna have a problem when that starts coming out of his pocket, instead of ours..
Grumpy
yes, you know, it gave me an idea,
feaseble, but he would not like this,
how about them having a limit of expanses and if they want more they pay with their own pocket,
why , the people are struggling to pay their expanses, they would not do like them even a fraction
because they have to pay with their pocket, so that is for them to do the same, BUT THE PEOPLE MUST ASK FOR IT TO
BE A LAW, BECAUSE THE GOVERNMENT HAS ABUSE THEIR
PRIVILEDGE, HOW ABOUT ONE MILLION AND ENOUGH
like CLINT EASTWOOD SAID THEY ARE OUR EMPLOYEE AND THE PEOPLE OWN AMERICA,
JUST AN IDEA 10 MILLION SAVE
BYE
GRUMPY i fought communism as a Marine Corps platoon commander in Viet Nam.
i find your #53 ridiculous but does more than make my point,
Semper Fi
@richard wheeler:
Please tell me what I said that was inaccurate?
@richard wheeler:
You call his assertions in #53 “ridiculous” but you make no effort to factually refute any of them.
Why is that?
I can tell you that what Grumpy said in his post is pretty dead on factually accurate.
On a related side note, have you and your wife seen the Dinesh D’Souza movie 2016 yet?
I’m in La jolla watching N.D. crush Navy from Dublin. Great b-day last night.
“Communist in White House” NUFF SAID
@richard wheeler:
That is correct Mr Wheeler, there absolutely appears to be a communist in the White House. Barrack Obama said we would know him by the people around him. If you look at those people you find Communists, Red Diaper Babies raised by communist parents and a contingent that was financed and trained by communist countries powers to wage internal war against the United States–
Calling a statement ridiculous does not make it untrue
Grumpy
Richard Wheeler is a radical stuck on OBAMA, HE DECIDED TO PROTECT HIM BLINDLY,
SO WITHOUT HIS BRAIN, HE CANNOT FIGURE HIM OUT,
HE JUST THE SOLDIER PROTECTING OBAMA FROM ANY CRITICS WHAT SO EVER,
HE WOULD SURELY SELL HIS SOUL FOR OBAMA,
THIS IS AN ADORATION DEVELISH AS IT CAN BE, IT IS A ROBOTIC BEHAVIOUR OF SOMEONE WHO
LOST HIS SOUL, LIKE MANY OF THOSE WE SEE AROUND OBAMA,
MANY ARE BREAKING RANK AND JOIN THE SIDE WHICH OFFER TANGIBLE SOLUTIONS, BUT SOME WILL NOT BE ABLE TO SEE THE LIGHT, BECAUSE THEY LOST THEIR SOUL
The former LT’s position is a little surprising– only about 1 in three who have ever worn a uniform believe Obama should be CIC according to a recent Rasmussen. I think the actual number was 64 -35 with only one percent unsure..
However he’s more than earned the right to have an opinion, assuming he can justify it.