Respectfully Disagreeing With Andrew Breitbart Here

Posted on | April 3, 2010 | 43 Comments

by Smitty

In an otherwise splendid post on the Left’s deconstruction plans for our country, I submit that he may need to revisit an assertion:

The Democrats need to kill the Tea Party movement. They need to marginalize and demonize those who would stand up to their hardball, toxic and anti-democratic tactics. Their strategy is to bait and incite the Tea Party and to use whatever they can get to silence the awakening giant. They have failed, epically, and the American people now see these tactics for what they are. At long last, new people every day are beginning to understand the kinds of people we are dealing with here.

The Tea Party movement is at or near the ‘too big to fail’ point.

When anyone, e.g. Andrew himself, is calling their bluff to the tune of six figures, outright destruction will be too hard.

Expect judo.

If I’m the Left, I’m building up Sarah Palin, and her negatives as well. I want Ross Perot in a skirt. The only feasible strategy against the Right is to divide it against itself. Work to get Tea Party candidate victories who are as ill-screened as BHO himself to knock out more qualified candidates in the primaries, so that the video of them gathered with several species of small furry animals together in a cave, grooving can come out just in time for the election, bringing back the Democrat.

Too, these pesky cel phone cameras are making shenanigans rather hard.

Mark Steyn brings in the Duke rape case, noting:

As they did at Duke, the brain-dead press went along with it – and so, predictably enough, did much of the Republican leadership.

The press are more than brain-dead: they are complicit, wholly-owned subsidiaries of their lying overlords. If I’m wrong, I’ll cheerfully retract the accusation, but the evidence clearly seems to indicate that they say what they are told and when.

So the real approach to dealing with the Tea Parties is going to be divide and conquer, I expect. And those divisions will likely be about primary candidates, attempting to fragment Tea Partiers to be loyal to specific candidates, instead of supporting the GOP candidate, however odious. For example, in the case Rand Paul has to run as an Independent in Kentucky, and splits the conservative vote, then the Democratic Party overlords win. I would expect that copious funding will become available . . . from somewhere . . . in cases like that.

“We must, indeed, all hang together, or most assuredly we shall all hang separately.”
-Benjamin Franklin in the Continental Congress just before signing the Declaration of Independence, 1776.

Category: Andrew Breitbart, Tea Party

Comments

43 Responses to “Respectfully Disagreeing With Andrew Breitbart Here”

Robert Stacy McCain
April 3rd, 2010 @ 11:38 pm

Smitty, I don’t know that Democratic voters are as smart as you give them credit for being with your suggestion that they could play shenanigans in GOP primaries. Except, of course, for the fact that the only way John McCain got nominated for president . . . Well, I credit that more to Republican stupidity than to Democratic genius.
Robert Stacy McCain
April 3rd, 2010 @ 6:38 pm

Smitty, I don’t know that Democratic voters are as smart as you give them credit for being with your suggestion that they could play shenanigans in GOP primaries. Except, of course, for the fact that the only way John McCain got nominated for president . . . Well, I credit that more to Republican stupidity than to Democratic genius.
smitty
April 3rd, 2010 @ 11:40 pm

I don’t mean to accuse Democratic voters of being smart. They voted for Obama, after all, modulo the PUMA crowd.

No, I mean the MoveOn.org brains behind all the purple muscle.
smitty
April 3rd, 2010 @ 6:40 pm

I don’t mean to accuse Democratic voters of being smart. They voted for Obama, after all, modulo the PUMA crowd.

No, I mean the MoveOn.org brains behind all the purple muscle.
Adobe Walls
April 4th, 2010 @ 12:41 am

I have no doubt that part of the left’s strategy is to demonize the “Tea Party Movement” in a futile attempt to convince other less committed ordinary Americans that they are loonatic fringe. IMHO it’s too late for that. I don’t think that those who have fallen for Social Democrats spiel are reachable particularly as I have some saddening personal knowledge of this but for those whose minds haven’t been trapped in the leftist echo chambers covering the cities on both coasts I don’t think Tea Partiers are the only path to awareness. I believe the Tea Party Movement are the “tip of the spear”.
Adobe Walls
April 3rd, 2010 @ 7:41 pm

I have no doubt that part of the left’s strategy is to demonize the “Tea Party Movement” in a futile attempt to convince other less committed ordinary Americans that they are loonatic fringe. IMHO it’s too late for that. I don’t think that those who have fallen for Social Democrats spiel are reachable particularly as I have some saddening personal knowledge of this but for those whose minds haven’t been trapped in the leftist echo chambers covering the cities on both coasts I don’t think Tea Partiers are the only path to awareness. I believe the Tea Party Movement are the “tip of the spear”.
TheMadItalian
April 4th, 2010 @ 12:47 am

Time to revise this ditty…

“There is no way to bribe or twist
Thank God the British Journalist.
But seeing what the man will do
Unbribed, there’s no occasion to”
— Humbert Wolfe
TheMadItalian
April 3rd, 2010 @ 7:47 pm

Time to revise this ditty…

“There is no way to bribe or twist
Thank God the British Journalist.
But seeing what the man will do
Unbribed, there’s no occasion to”
— Humbert Wolfe
d.eris
April 4th, 2010 @ 1:48 am

“attempting to fragment Tea Partiers to be loyal to specific candidates, instead of supporting the GOP candidate, however odious.”

It is the GOP that will be the death of the Tea Party. The beginning of political freedom and independence today is freedom and independence from the dictatorship of the Democratic-Republican two-party state.
d.eris
April 3rd, 2010 @ 8:48 pm

“attempting to fragment Tea Partiers to be loyal to specific candidates, instead of supporting the GOP candidate, however odious.”

It is the GOP that will be the death of the Tea Party. The beginning of political freedom and independence today is freedom and independence from the dictatorship of the Democratic-Republican two-party state.
d.eris
April 4th, 2010 @ 1:50 am

GOP hacks, like their Democrat counterparts, will stop at nothing to ensure to ensure that Americans continue to support the ruling, Democratic-Republican, criminal political class.
d.eris
April 3rd, 2010 @ 8:50 pm

GOP hacks, like their Democrat counterparts, will stop at nothing to ensure to ensure that Americans continue to support the ruling, Democratic-Republican, criminal political class.
smitty
April 4th, 2010 @ 2:14 am

@de.eris,
Sure, but if you repeat 1992 with Perot, you get Clinton.
So what do you do?
smitty
April 3rd, 2010 @ 9:14 pm

@de.eris,
Sure, but if you repeat 1992 with Perot, you get Clinton.
So what do you do?
Tea Party’s Wings « Si Vis Pacem
April 3rd, 2010 @ 9:43 pm

[…] Smitty, in usual incisive fashion, notes: “So the real approach to dealing with the Tea Parties is going to be divide and conquer, I expect. And those divisions will likely be about primary candidates, attempting to fragment Tea Partiers to be loyal to specific candidates, instead of supporting the GOP candidate, however odious. For example, in the case Rand Paul has to run as an Independent in Kentucky, and splits the conservative vote, then the Democratic Party overlords win. I would expect that copious funding will become available . . . from somewhere . . . in cases like that.” […]
jefferson101
April 4th, 2010 @ 3:06 am

I’m with you on this one, Smitty.

I’ve been known to announce that I’m giving the Republican Party one more chance. If they can supply people who are at least reasonably Conservative, (IE, no more John McCain or Lindsey Graham, or that ilk, at least in Red districts,) I’ll play along.

Once more.

But only once more. If they go squish again, it’s time for a replacement Party, or a new secession, or whatever else seems appropriate at that juncture.

If all I get is RINO’s, I don’t need the “R” anyway. Do any of us?
jefferson101
April 3rd, 2010 @ 10:06 pm

I’m with you on this one, Smitty.

I’ve been known to announce that I’m giving the Republican Party one more chance. If they can supply people who are at least reasonably Conservative, (IE, no more John McCain or Lindsey Graham, or that ilk, at least in Red districts,) I’ll play along.

Once more.

But only once more. If they go squish again, it’s time for a replacement Party, or a new secession, or whatever else seems appropriate at that juncture.

If all I get is RINO’s, I don’t need the “R” anyway. Do any of us?
Ran / Si Vis Pacem
April 4th, 2010 @ 3:08 am

Smitty,
We’ve got to take the Party from the inside… makes judo a whole lot more equal.
Ran / Si Vis Pacem
April 3rd, 2010 @ 10:08 pm

Smitty,
We’ve got to take the Party from the inside… makes judo a whole lot more equal.
richard mcenroe
April 3rd, 2010 @ 10:47 pm

Once again, THIS IS A VOTE AGAINST INCUMBENCY. That the GOP is slightly less bad than the Democrats is not a selling point.

Vote against the incumbent, GOP or Dem, in your primary and then follow your conscience in the election…
richard mcenroe
April 4th, 2010 @ 3:47 am

Once again, THIS IS A VOTE AGAINST INCUMBENCY. That the GOP is slightly less bad than the Democrats is not a selling point.

Vote against the incumbent, GOP or Dem, in your primary and then follow your conscience in the election…
Adobe Walls
April 4th, 2010 @ 4:01 am

Managing GOP House members should be fairly simple as they’re reelected every 2 years. The key is to constantly remind them of whom they serve and that we’re awake. The hard part is the Senate. Does the Senate have rules against constituents equipped with cattle prods accompaning them where ever they go? I’m sure some sort of rotation could be worked out.
Adobe Walls
April 3rd, 2010 @ 11:01 pm

Managing GOP House members should be fairly simple as they’re reelected every 2 years. The key is to constantly remind them of whom they serve and that we’re awake. The hard part is the Senate. Does the Senate have rules against constituents equipped with cattle prods accompaning them where ever they go? I’m sure some sort of rotation could be worked out.
Cousin Sam
April 4th, 2010 @ 5:03 am

“….in the case Rand Paul has to run as an Independent in Kentucky, and splits the conservative vote….”

Rand Paul does not HAVE to do any such thing. Nobody is pointing a gun at him forcing him to help elect a Democrat. He has not been possessed by the Spirit of Ralph Nader. If he screws us over by dividing the vote to make a meaningless point or over sour grapes, it is his CHOICE to do so.
Cousin Sam
April 4th, 2010 @ 12:03 am

“….in the case Rand Paul has to run as an Independent in Kentucky, and splits the conservative vote….”

Rand Paul does not HAVE to do any such thing. Nobody is pointing a gun at him forcing him to help elect a Democrat. He has not been possessed by the Spirit of Ralph Nader. If he screws us over by dividing the vote to make a meaningless point or over sour grapes, it is his CHOICE to do so.
Cousin Sam
April 4th, 2010 @ 5:17 am

richard mcenroe: “Vote against the incumbent, GOP or Dem, in your primary and then follow your conscience in the election…”

So, if my incumbent, a conservative who has voted exactly the way I wanted him/her to during his/her term, is running against a RINO challenger, I should vote for the RINO in the primary?

Or if my incumbent is the only viable candidate who might beat the Democratic challenger, a Lefty who makes Fidel Castro look moderate by comparison, I should vote against the incumbent thus guaranteeing that the Castro-clone will be representing me in Congress this time next year?

People voting based on that type of knee-jerk reaction, rather than investigating and understanding the relative merits of the candidates and making an informed decision, is what got us BARACK OBAMA in the White House! (McCain was a proxy for the incumbent Bush, people voted for notBush)
Cousin Sam
April 4th, 2010 @ 12:17 am

richard mcenroe: “Vote against the incumbent, GOP or Dem, in your primary and then follow your conscience in the election…”

So, if my incumbent, a conservative who has voted exactly the way I wanted him/her to during his/her term, is running against a RINO challenger, I should vote for the RINO in the primary?

Or if my incumbent is the only viable candidate who might beat the Democratic challenger, a Lefty who makes Fidel Castro look moderate by comparison, I should vote against the incumbent thus guaranteeing that the Castro-clone will be representing me in Congress this time next year?

People voting based on that type of knee-jerk reaction, rather than investigating and understanding the relative merits of the candidates and making an informed decision, is what got us BARACK OBAMA in the White House! (McCain was a proxy for the incumbent Bush, people voted for notBush)
Ran / Si Vis Pacem
April 4th, 2010 @ 12:53 pm

Stacy – the Left most definitely play at Republican shennanigans – especially during the primaries. Look at the Hawkeye Cauci: More political cross-dressers there than at Roy Cohn’s birthday party.

It is critical – existentially critical – that Republicans wrest control of their own nominations processes and primary-season from the influence of liberal poseurs.
Ran / Si Vis Pacem
April 4th, 2010 @ 7:53 am

Stacy – the Left most definitely play at Republican shennanigans – especially during the primaries. Look at the Hawkeye Cauci: More political cross-dressers there than at Roy Cohn’s birthday party.

It is critical – existentially critical – that Republicans wrest control of their own nominations processes and primary-season from the influence of liberal poseurs.
TJ Parker
April 4th, 2010 @ 1:05 pm

I’m amazed at what passes for strategic thinking here. The Tea Party is a collection of fringe conspiracy theorists with plenty of anger and rhetoric, but clueless about policy. If they are mainstreamed and civilized, then either they’ll blend into the shrinking GOP base, or they’ll split the GOP into low/high education and low/high net worth camps.

The smartest plan for the Democrats is to do whatever it takes to give the Tea Party legitimacy and, if possible, to make it the face of the GOP. Or the butthole of the GOP.
TJ Parker
April 4th, 2010 @ 8:05 am

I’m amazed at what passes for strategic thinking here. The Tea Party is a collection of fringe conspiracy theorists with plenty of anger and rhetoric, but clueless about policy. If they are mainstreamed and civilized, then either they’ll blend into the shrinking GOP base, or they’ll split the GOP into low/high education and low/high net worth camps.

The smartest plan for the Democrats is to do whatever it takes to give the Tea Party legitimacy and, if possible, to make it the face of the GOP. Or the butthole of the GOP.
theCL
April 4th, 2010 @ 2:35 pm

Sure, but if you repeat 1992 with Perot, you get Clinton.

Clinton’s domestic policy was to the right of GWB’s, so that example doesn’t prove anything. And Rand Paul will win outright as a Republican.
theCL
April 4th, 2010 @ 9:35 am

Sure, but if you repeat 1992 with Perot, you get Clinton.

Clinton’s domestic policy was to the right of GWB’s, so that example doesn’t prove anything. And Rand Paul will win outright as a Republican.
J Driscoll
April 4th, 2010 @ 5:11 pm

McCain has stood up to this administration when it matters most. he has fought hard for our Nation’s Security, fought against the government-run joke of a healthcare reform, and he continues to fight hard against earmarks & big spending. THAT is why Arizona needs him for the re-elect!
J Driscoll
April 4th, 2010 @ 12:11 pm

McCain has stood up to this administration when it matters most. he has fought hard for our Nation’s Security, fought against the government-run joke of a healthcare reform, and he continues to fight hard against earmarks & big spending. THAT is why Arizona needs him for the re-elect!
Lisa Graas
April 4th, 2010 @ 5:42 pm

Rand Paul run as an Independent? That’s the first I’ve heard of that. Where did that come from?
Lisa Graas
April 4th, 2010 @ 12:42 pm

Rand Paul run as an Independent? That’s the first I’ve heard of that. Where did that come from?
smitty
April 4th, 2010 @ 7:54 pm

@Lisa Graas:
“in the case Rand Paul has to run as an Independent”
It’s a hypothetical.
smitty
April 4th, 2010 @ 2:54 pm

@Lisa Graas:
“in the case Rand Paul has to run as an Independent”
It’s a hypothetical.
Cousin Sam
April 5th, 2010 @ 3:28 am

I still object to the phrase “*has* to run” (see my previous remarks). Or are we hypothetically assuming that terrorists have kidnapped his family and are forcing him to run as an Independent (thereby handing the Dumbocrats an easy victory)?
Cousin Sam
April 4th, 2010 @ 10:28 pm

I still object to the phrase “*has* to run” (see my previous remarks). Or are we hypothetically assuming that terrorists have kidnapped his family and are forcing him to run as an Independent (thereby handing the Dumbocrats an easy victory)?
d.eris
April 6th, 2010 @ 3:49 am

“@de.eris, Sure, but if you repeat 1992 with Perot, you get Clinton. So what do you do?”

Don’t split the vote by not voting Republican.

How many more times will folks tell themselves this is the last time?
d.eris
April 5th, 2010 @ 10:49 pm

“@de.eris, Sure, but if you repeat 1992 with Perot, you get Clinton. So what do you do?”

Don’t split the vote by not voting Republican.

How many more times will folks tell themselves this is the last time?