Oh my...Brent Bozell just UNLOADED on the GOP leadership at CPAC!

[alp227]

Last edited Sun Mar 17, 2013, 02:32 PM - Edit history (1)

Paul Ryan "Democrat Lite"? NPR, PBS, NEA, and Legal Services Corporation "utterly useless"/"immorally funded by our tax dollars"? The HHS secretary forcing Americans "to pay for the murder of babies"?

"It looks like the war between establishment Republicans and right-wing agitators like Bozell will be continuing for some time," comments ConWebWatch based on the following excerpt of Media Research Center president Brent Bozell's speech at CPAC:

"Paul Ryan, you're a good man and you mean well, and good for you for your courage trying to reform Medicare and rid us of Obamacare. But your proposed budget that has the federal government spending $41 TRILLION over the next ten years, with more and more and more spending increases every single year, and assumes all the oppressive Obamacare taxes. Congressman, that's what liberal Democrats do, not us.

"This is not conservatism. It is, literally, Democrat Lite.

"Do you have national aspirations? Do yourself and your country a favor. Rip that budget up and come back with one that truly does reduce the size of government, which puts us on the path toward a balanced budget by reducing deficits, and one that puts us on the path of solvency by eradicating our debt. Watch what happens to both your national aspirations, and your legacy.

"Haley Barbour, my friend, when you call for unity and on conservatives to "sing from the same hymnal" and then publicly trash good conservative groups like Club for Growth for supporting good conservatives, you're out of tune, and you're out of line. Do you want to be seen as a national conservative leader? Start supporting national conservative groups.

"John Boehner, Eric Cantor, and Kevin McCarthy: You said all the right things to conservatives to propel the GOP back to the majority and you to the top three leadership positions in the House.

'You, like virtually every single other Republican elected to Congress solemnly vowed to rid us of Obamacare, which you can do simply by refusing to fund it. Why haven't you done so?

"While we're at it... when the Secretary of HHS decrees that we should be forced to pay for the murder of babies, why don't you decree that Americans are no longer going to pay for HHS? What of all the other oppressive, and in the case of Planned Parenthood, evil organizations immorally funded by our tax dollars? What of the utterly useless agencies like NPR, and PBS, and Legal Services, and the NEA and so many others you solemnly pledged to put out of our misery?

What? I didn't know that McConnell, Boehner, etc. pledged to defund NPR or the Legal Service Corporation or National Education Association! National Endowment for the Arts (thanks to the poster who corrected me)

[quaker bill]

1. What is cool about this is that they still think they can win with this stuff

The people are over it, and but for a low turnout throwback in 2010, have been over it for some time.

Curiously, people really do not want smaller government. They demand more laws all the time, they want more programs and projects in many different directions. When you add it all up, big government arises.

It starts small, perhaps you don't like that your neighbor has parked his "project car" on blocks in front of his house. You raise cain and get an ordinance passed against the practice, so the city then hires a code enforcement officer or two to have them moved or towed off. Once you decide that it is government's job to keep your neighbor in line, the rest is all but inevitable over time. Each little part comes into existence for a specific and seemingly very good reason at the time.

Try to roll it back, almost any of it, and the people become quite unhappy.

We (the people) invented government. We like it just fine when it is sorting our neighbors out, we like it less when it is pointing in our direction or we have to pay for it.

[tanyev]

2. Even the people at CPAC don't really want smaller government.

They just want to be the ones controlling it.

[Aerows]

3. Bingo! n/t

[quaker bill]

6. and more importantly

getting large slices of the tax dollar pie as consultants or contractors.

[GoCubsGo]

14. Yup.

They only want certain parts of the government to be small--the ones of which they can't soak the taxpayers.

[sadbear]

5. This is absolutely true.

I was driving home from a camping trip in south Texas yesterday, and as I normally do on such long road trips, I explore the lower end of the FM dial. Where I was, it was almost exclusively populated by right-wing Christian stations.

Of course, these stations are staunchly pro-republican, anti-Democrat, blurring the line, if there actually is one, between their Christian "faith" and their political "faith".

Anyway, one of these programs devoted its entire hour broadcast to defending "traditional" marriage and they were convinced that if only Mitt Romney had dedicated himself to it, he would have won. In addition, they truly believe that if the republicans embraced that platform, they would easily take back the White House and the Congress. Bizarre.

(At one point, they brought in some self-identified Millennial who said all they have to do is explain to other Millennials that being against same-sex marriage is not homophobic. I almost died laughing. Of course, he neglected to do any explaining.)

[quaker bill]

9. Romney was viable when people thought he did not mean it.

The 47% video was deadly because people started thinking he really did mean to do all the conservative claptrap. It was not scandalous to call the 47% "moochers" as this was the republican platform. It only seemed scandalous when people started thinking a potential President might actually agree with their platform.

His candidacy sunk because he became a believable republican, not the opposite.

[sadbear]

11. You have to wonder if they are actually interested in electoral victory.

Because if they are, they have no idea how to achieve it.

I tend to believe that it's something more sinister, that they think they can get more accomplished from a minority-victim political station. I mean, nothing keeps coalitions together like a common perception of oppression.

But who knows? These people are certifiable.

[Yavin4]

16. They're not interested in electoral victory. They're interested in their brand identity.

Bozell, et al., make their living throwing red meat to their demographic. They're not interested in actually winning office, let alone governing. They're interested in selling books, speeches, radio shows, columns, etc.

Being sane and reasonable is not good for their brand.

[tarheelsunc]

4. They actually invited Brent Bozo?

I thought this guy would be too insane even for them. His little website makes him look extremely paranoid, nearly at the level of the conspiracy theorists.

[Honeycombe8]

7. I'm thinking the war is over. The rightwingbats have won. ???? nt

[liberal_at_heart]

8. so this guy doesn't think the Ryan budget cuts enough?

[Skidmore]

15. This guy's mother was one of the Buckleys, as in National Review Buckleys.

Need we say more about how he got to his smarmy little station in life.

[pinboy3niner]

10. I think he means the other NEA--National Endowment for the Arts. nt

[hootinholler]

12. Conservatives are miserable?

Why yes, yes they are.

[Initech]

13. I told you the implosion would be fun to watch!