The tea party is a grassroots effort by a wide cross-section of the American people.  Veterans, senior-citizens, people who have lost their jobs due to the heavily-regulated governmental system that has sprung from the massive expansion of government under both the Bush and Obama Presidencies, Moms and Dads, Constitutionalists, both Federalists and Anti-Federalists, patriotic Americans, and many other every day Americans, educated in the proper definition of American thought, human nature and common sense, have stood up to defend and restore our great American system of government.  A government meant to be limited in its reach.

The leadership of the Republican Party has made a very dire mistake in thinking that the tea party is a small group.  Its common bond with conservative elements of the party make its total influence about half of the party, and in Mississippi, more than half.  The contrast between conservative, limited government and big government progressive Rockefeller Republicans is getting more stark each day.   Since the 2010 election, the power-hungry leadership of the Republican Party has taken many actions to diminish the influence of the so-called tea party.  Each action intended to take power away from the grassroots in order to silence the input of the citizens who gave them power in the first place.  The recent manifestation of severing tea party influence has pushed the leadership, or establishment of the Party to openly celebrate the “crushing” and “beating” of the tea party by those in power, using any means necessary to hold on to that power.

In Mississippi, elderly incumbent Thad Cochran, brought in representatives of the power structure to speak on his behalf.  Among those representatives of DC, Mitch McConnell, minority leader of the Senate, went to Mississippi, but it was not enough to convince voters to return Cochran to his home in Virginia.  No, the Cochran campaign, controlled by super-lobbyist Haley Barbour and his nephews hired Democrat operatives to “reach out” to Mississippi’s liberal community, to help him win the Republican primary.

Since the vote on Tuesday, establishment voices have praised the tactics of the Cochran campaign, citing the cross-over vote as the epitome of the democratic process they profess to promote as they describe themselves as “Conservative Republicans.”  In doing so, they have opened a wound within the ranks of patriotic Americans, that forces all of us to examine what it means to be a Republican.

The poisonous race-baiting used by the Cochran campaign, using newspapers, robocalls and flyers to tell black communities that “tea party candidate” Chris McDaniel will take away their food stamps, and promoting the vicious lie that the tea party is racist impels me to clarify just who we are talking about when we identify ourselves in this Republican Party un-civil war.

The Republican Party formed at a time when Democrats not only openly praised slavery, but described it as a moral good, while many of  the Whigs, the other prominent political party at the time, turned a blind eye to it, enthralled with the profit of textiles produced by slave-labor.  It was Republican Presidential candidate Abraham Lincoln who brought back the intellectual rationale of the founders when he argued with Democratic politician Stephen Douglas.  It was the Democrat Douglas who designed the Kansas-Nebraska Act, which said that new territories can be opened to slavery, citing self-governance.  It was Lincoln who identified the truth of the Democrat’s scheme.

It was not the Democratic party, who argued against the immorality of using men as beasts.  That was Republican Abraham Lincoln, and in doing so, he defined the moral outrage that so many Americans felt about the ghastly traditional practice.

“The doctrine of self government is right—absolutely and eternally right—but it has no just application, as here attempted. Or perhaps I should rather say that whether it has such just application depends upon whether a negro is not or is a man. If he is not a man, why in that case, he who is a man may, as a matter of self-government, do just as he pleases with him. But if the negro is a man, is it not to that extent, a total destruction of self-government, to say that he too shall not govern himself? When the white man governs himself that is self-government; but when he governs himself, and also governs another man, that is morethan self-government—that is despotism. If the negro is a man, why then my ancient faith teaches me that “all men are created equal;” and that there can be no moral right in connection with one man’s making a slave of another.

Judge Douglas frequently, with bitter irony and sarcasm, paraphrases our argument by saying ‘The white people of Nebraska are good enough to govern themselves, but they are not good enough to govern a few miserable negroes!!'”  Abraham Lincoln’s Peoria speech of 1854

There is a parallel here of  the current state of our bloated Federal government, that seeks to govern us rather than reaffirm our natural individual rights.

So what has Republican Senator Thad Cochran done in Mississippi?  He has accepted the Democratic tradition of exploiting minorities for political and economic gain.  The difference now, is that it is the power of government over the individual, instead of the master over a slave.  Cochran knows that once government has you, by being your source for your basic necessities and entitled benefits, you are less likely to rid yourself of your master.

That is not what the Republican Party began as, and so it is at war with itself over its own definition.  The tea party, as a force in politics, threatens the power of the masters, and in doing so, reaffirms the arguments for independence from Britain, for freeing of slaves, and for returning our system of government to it’s original limitations defined by the Constitution.

What does Chris McDaniel speak about?  Limited government, first principles, equal rights under the law, in fact, the same things that the party of Lincoln and Reagan have held themselves to stand for.  The platform of the party reinforces those arguments and it has a tradition since the abolition of slavery to hold true to those principles.  Cochran did not stand for those principles, and the leadership of the party not only did not admonish him, but they preferred him over original Republicanism.

Identifying politicians who would work in your best interest depends on your point of view.  If you think taking what you can from other citizens through the force of government is in your best interest, you can find many people in both parties on Capitol Hill who would like to know you better, because they inevitably reap the benefits of your loyalty when they hand you your daily ration.  As we saw in Mississippi, it takes a mammoth effort by ordinary people to try to remove those types of power-hungry people from office, made more difficult by so-called Republicans who wish to revert back to the exploitation and ideology that the Republican party rejected in the first place.

 

The speech I referred to above by Abraham Lincoln in Peoria is well worth reading–> CLICK HERE.

Tagged with:
 

31 Responses to Mississippi Aftermath of The Republican Un-Civil War

  1. BearNJ says:

    The funny part Jen is that the "racist" Tea Party and conservatives, as described by the GOP elites, have actually made the GOP more diverse. if you play the race counting game the Tea Party /Conservativs gave us Hispanics with senators (Cruz, Rubio) two Indian governors (Haley, Jindal) and African American Senator (Scott) plus the great former congressman Allen West. All these Tea Party favorites were elected by majority white voters over white country club GOP Establishment types in the South because of their Conservative principals and policy positions. On election night in Mississippi a black conservative TW Shannon lost to a GOP establishment Oklahoma representative in the Senate race. 

    I've had always been proud to be the party that ended slavery, supported Reconstruction, passed the Civil Rights Acts of 1866 and 1875 granting blacks protection from the Black Codes and prohibiting racial discrimination in public accommodations. The GOP was the Party of most blacks prior to the 1960’s, including Frederick Douglass, Harriet Tubman, Sojourner Truth, Booker T. Washington, and Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. The founders of the NAACP were Republicans. Republican President Dwight Eisenhower sent U.S. troops to Arkansas to desegregate schools, established the Civil Rights Commission in 1958, The Republicans had 80% of it's legislature vote for the 1964 Civil rights act as opposed to just 64% of Democrats. GOP President Nixon raised the civil rights enforcement budget 800 percent; The U.S. Commission on Civil Rights in 1975 said, “It has only been since 1968 that substantial reduction of racial segregation has taken place in the South.”

    Under the last real conservative President Reagan black employment, black business ownership and black professional jobs all boomed. Between 1982 and 1988, total black employment increased by 2 million, a staggering sum. That meant that blacks gained 15 percent of the new jobs created during that span, while accounting for only 11 percent of the working-age population. President George W. Bush appointed more blacks to high-level positions than any president in history. There has never been Republican policy initiative by a GOP President or Congress that shows they hate or were against blacks. I can find plenty on the Democratic side. The Democrats are great at dividing the country by race and class and playing people for fools. It amazing they've attached THEIR racists past to a party that had nothing to do with it.

    Yet in Mississippi it was Rove, Barbour and the senile Cochran who used the tactics of the Democrat segregationists to earn a Pyrrhic victory and disfranchisement GOP voters from selecting their own candidate. These flyers, robocalls and walking around money used by the GOP establishment just like old segregation Democrats is a disgrace.

    • Roger Laux says:

      Well said BearNJ. With your permission I would like to post your above words on my facebook page as a piece of well written history lesson for my friends to read.

    • neilcell says:

      And now, the Tea Party needs to reach out to another overlooked groups; Asian Americans (particularly those of East Asian Heritage). The Confucianism 5 constants and 4 virtues are very much compatible with America's Judeo-Christian values.

      In particular, King Taejo the First, founder of Choseon Dynasty Korea said, "The power of the king comes directly from the people. Without the support of the people, the king is just a silly man in a silk robe." Yi Seong-gye (Taeko the First's birth name) lead a revolution against the Goreyo Dynasty that shares MANY similarities to the American Revolution.

  2. Danny says:

    CONSTITUTIONAL REAGAN TEA PARTY CONSERVATIVES WILL NEVER SURRENDER !!!!

  3. Deedee says:

    I am ashamed of the Republican "establishment"…Honestly, if I lived in Mississippi I don't think I could bring myself to vote for Cochran. What he, Barbour, McConnell and Rove did has brought deep wounds to true conservatives.

    • Jan Williams says:

      You are 100% correct. Behavior and tactics that was practiced in Mississippi should not be rewarded with your vote. That is what my family, friends and I do in our state for what it's worth. Double up and vote for the Dem. opponent. To quote: "what difference does it make" ? Defund the GOP !

  4. james says:

    The truth is, we now have a one Party System in Washington since the Republican Machine merged with the Democrats .. we need a two Party System again "The Constitutional Conservative Party of America .. let's get this ball rolling before November ..

  5. Abe says:

    That was pretty good.
    I need to add the subtle power brokers within the liberal progressive band of "R's" That would be the Chamber of Commerce. They pressed Reagan for that doors wide open amnesty, they are doing it again now. 33 million illegals aliens, that 12 million number is bogus.. Aren't we a bit short of jobs already? Aren't our resources taxed enough to borrow trillions every year?
    Also, they demanded the debt limit be increased last October, not very business like at all. THEN they slid off into the social area and endorsed LGBT and that "marriage", never no mind the children being exposed to such a thing.

  6. JAB says:

    A Republican for 68 years sorrowfully says, "goodbye" because Mississippi Republicans disgraced us for personal, not national good.

  7. Greg says:

    I am in MS and will not vote for Cochran
    I will write in McDaniel

  8. Roberty says:

    Maybe instead of the "Tea" Party we should be the "Lincoln" Party.

  9. James Madison says:

    Very intelligent article…..well done!

  10. Kay Munson says:

    This simply tells me the GOP cares not a smidgen for their constituents.
    Am I surprised? No, not a smidgen.
    I now consider myself a Tea Party Conservative.

  11. Temujin says:

    We will NOT again fall for the "banana in the tailpipe trick". PURGE the RINOs at any cost. They are no better than the neo-Communist demoncrats.

  12. Toni says:

    I went online today to see that the left accused Boehner of promising them to take a vote on immigration reform by last summer and they were outraged that nothing was done. So I am reading this and getting seriously pizzed off! HOW MANY TIMES DO WE NEED TO TELL THEM THAT THE AMERICAN DO NOT WANT TO GIVE ILLEGAL ALIENS AMNESTY!
    I also told him that Americans were tired of paying benefits for these people and that immigration reform is not needed….what is needed is that our laws are followed and that we stop IGNORING THE LAWS OF IMMIGRATION!

    I ALSO HAPPENED TO MENTION THAT IF HE AND KEVIN MCCARTHY CONTINUE TO PRESS FOR AMNESTY they may find themselves IN THE FALL joining the CANTOR IN HIS RETIREMENT!

    I also went to Kevin Mc Carthy's facebook and told him the exact message!
    I typed this in bold caps so there was no way they could not see it!

  13. Toni says:

    I had the tv on earlier and realized that the Communist Party USA was having a convention in Chicago! What a surprise! There was an older guy speaking his last name was Webb. Sorry I didn't really pay attention to his first name. He spoke of Socialism and a country in which there would be a fair wage and how the 1% of corporatists were getting rich off the backs of the people and he mentions several talking points that started to sound familiar. Global warming, the Right meaning republicans were racists and hating the black president, financial inequality and he mentioned the Progressive Agenda and the need for gun control, and it all started to sound just like a speech by the administration. This speech confirmed for me that Obama is a communist and a Marxist. He quoted Dr. King and he quoted Maya Angelou, he also quoted Lenin, his idol it seems. If you can find it on CSPAN it will give you an idea of what they have planned to expand their cause.

    He also spoke about the fall elections and how imperative it was that the right not get control of the Senate! This was shown on CSPAN.

  14. Larry says:

    I agreed when Reagan encouraged a "New Republican Party". But that was then … this is now.

    Reagan made that remark nearly 40 years ago … much, indeed, SO much has changed since he uttered those words. The GOP has drifted Leftward … not only with regard to policy but in its worldview.

    Conservatism enjoys a certain transcendence … a moral and ethical dimension which guides its political agenda AND the means by which it seeks to achieve them. That ethos, those objectives are no where to be found in today's GOP.

    Instead, warrens of power hungry, big government, unprincipled and corrupt establishmentarians honeycomb the GOP power structure at every level.

    It has become very similar in tactics and aims to the DNC of the 1980's and 90's. It has, in other words, succumbed to the entropic forces which virtually every institution finally surrenders to.

    • Larry says:

      Mission and guiding principle are replaced by the institutions consuming demands for power … and treasure. The institution becomes the focal point of its followers … its leaders become the institution's high priests, its foot soldiers become its acolytes.

      And they protect the institution (and their own self interests which become inextricably bound to the fate of the party) at all cost. They come to despise and ridicule as "purists" and "rigid ideologues" any who have the temerity to insist upon a guiding ethos … an embrace of principle.

      So far down this road, has the GOP wandered, that any attempts at reversal or renewal, which are by neccesity incremental, are simply overwhelmed and undermined by the systemic corruption endemic to the whole.

      In short, the GOP is beyond repair. Having decided that power is its aim, rather than liberty, it has joined the fate of its erstwhile opponent, the Democratic party. Now, they squabble over seats … not principles … not liberty. They are pirates dividing the spoils.

      • Larry says:

        That dynamic has awakened the "fierce urgency of now" which has gripped not merely conservatives, but many of that slumbering mass of Americans who now suspect that the nation's present course is inherently dangerous … and who are looking for another way forward. That multitude is larger than any single party. The level of dissatisfaction with both parties is now at an all time high.

        Additionally, we now have access to immediate, unfiltered and unfettered information that Reagan could only dream of when he urged the conservatives to remake the Republican party.

        Talk radio, cable news networks and the internet have now made possible the degree of instant information and communication which makes viral movements possible.

        This unique confluence of events and technology make very possible the rapid deployment of a new party. A successful new party. Remember, in the absence of these modern technologies, but under a similar demand for change, the GOP was born and swiftly overtook the Whigs as a dominant power more than 150 years ago.

        • Larry says:

          If we foolishly persist in devotion to the myth that our hopes lay with the GOP we will only hasten disaster … we will offer no real cure to the diseases which now suffuse the body politic of America. We will become mere observers to the end of the world as we know it.

          I find such passivity in the face of extraordinary threats as repulsive as they are insipid. Now is the time for an adult conversation about necessary things … not the time to find comfort in convenient myths fashioned to protect those who labor against our better interests.

  15. Dave-O says:

    It will be interesting to see if the Republican power brokers will support Dr. Ben Carson or Sen. Allen West if either one starts gaining any momentum.

  16. Steve says:

    As a Republican resident of Oklahoma for over 60 years, the comment that James Lankford is an establishment GOP is laughable. His endorsement by Sen. Coburn proves Langford is anything but a Rockefeller clone. Lankford would get Tea Party support in any state LESS RED than Oklahoma. I was disappointed when Shannon through his hat in the ring. He's a worthy consrevative, just like Lankford. He (Shannon) will be a star in the GOP soon.

    • beeblebrocs says:

      Lankford would be good in a purple state. He has a Heritage Action lifetime score of 78%. Which is a C+.

      Lankford never met a farm bill he didn't like, no matter how pork laden. The last farm bill was actually the Food Stamp bill. He still voted for it.

      He voted to kill the Sequester, breaking the budget once again.

      And he was supported by the establishment over a tremendous conservative, Shannon.

      If you're disappointed that Shannon threw his hat in the ring, consider why a true conservative might do that.

      Maybe because Shannon figured he would be a better rep for OK?

    • ...a... says:

      Steve, while I know that Lankford is neither a dempub nor a RINO, by my definition he absolutely is an "establishment" republican, just like Cantor R-VA and McCarthy R-CA. Explaining why takes a bit… sorry about that.

      In a one-paragraph nutshell, his votes in the House aren't quite good enough. Now, T.W. Shannon has no voting record in DC, but he had endorsements from folks that pay attention to how folks vote in DC, and Lankford did not. Cruz, Lee, Carson, Levin, Palin, Erickson, DeMint (Senate Conservatives Fund), Club For Growth, Freedomworks, Citizens United, ACU, etc. By contrast, Lankford got Trey Gowdy, and Huck (who is not known as a tea-party candidate). Why?

      If you look at Lankford's voting record, you can see where he falls. Rating-groups do that, if you want an easy-to-understand indicator (raw vote-records are tough to analyze). In particular, on economic growth, C4G gives Lankford 76% lifetime. Cantor is 77% and McCarthy is 78%.

      Since you mention you've been around the block, I'll bring up the other recent Oklahoma folks: Bridenstine is 97% which means strong-tea. Coburn, who Lankford will replace, was 96%, ditto. (Rand/Lee/Cruz get 99%+ scores which is *boiling* strong-tea.)

      Senator Inhofe does great: 93% which indicates "mild-tea" in my book. By my estimates, T.W. Shannon would have done about the same.

      McConnell R-KY gets 85%, which is not too shabby, despite his reputation (his voting record is quite good… his leadership is middle of the road). Mitch is what I call a Reaganite/mainline. Gov Fallin is ranked 87% lifetime, but to be fair, she started her first year with an estab-ranking, then got better and better, ending with 97% before leaving the House to run successfully for governor. Ernest Istook R-OK, one of the founders of the RSC back when that really meant something, scored 82% lifetime. These are not really tea-party-scores, but they *are* tea-friendly Reagan-friendly scores. Lankford doesn't even get that much.

      Now, Oklahoma has a bunch of reps in the estab-category with Lankford 76%, including Markwayne Mullin 75%, Frank Lucas 74%, and Tom Cole 73%. This category is about the same as Pat Roberts R-KS with 74% … he talks a good game, but votes for plenty of pork when push comes to shove, as it always does in DC nowadays. (Look into Milton Wolf R-KS for an improvement.)

      Does that mean Lankford is *bad* as a pick? Nope. But he's estab, on fiscal issues. He'll almost certainly vote for estab-leadership in Jan'15, which means voting for Boehner. He'll do as he is told, to get along. Or maybe, just maybe, he'll be like Gov Fallin, and get better and better as time goes by. Watch his votes.

      Listen to his explanations, see whether he backs Cruz and Lee and Rand, but at the end of the day, watch the votes: those are what really matters.

      • ...a... says:

        Lankford *is* up for re-election almost immediately, so if he does poorly after this special 2014 election, you *can* boot him in 2016. I hope he'll do great, but I expect he'll vote estab, since that's what he did in the House.

        Now, at least Lankford isn't a porker! Cochran R-MS scores 67% (the guy who just helped the estab shamefully disgrace themselves), Murkowski R-AK scores 60% (the lady who lost the primary to a tea-candidate but then ran an estab-funded write-in campaign). By contrast, most "estab" politicians have some honor: Eric Cantor, for instance, is NOT going to run a write-in campaign, and plenty of estab-repubs endorsed Brat after he beat Cantor fair and square.

        Anyways, sorry for the long lecture. Hope you found some worthwhile nuggets in there. My main point is this: there are plenty of estab-folks that say nice things about the tea party, and say good things about wanting to follow the Constitution, and so on… but watch how they vote! Now that the tea-party is a success, the estab-repubs are pursuing a multi prong strategy. In MS they are scorching the earth, using dem tactics and dem talking points, the worst. In VA they are acting mostly-honorably, but shadily pulling all the funding out, behind the scenes. In Oklahoma, they are pretending that Lankford is "almost the same" as T.W. Shannon, when in fact Lankford is almost the same as Eric Cantor, at least fiscally.

        VoteSmart.org has a collection of ratings/endorsements for candidates; you can also go direct to the source by checking the raw votes at house.gov and senate.gov , or view the scores of rating-agencies you trust like clubforgrowth.org / Americans for prosperity / national taxpayer's union (fiscal), as well as freedomworks.org / new american freedom index / john birch society (liberty), and so on.

        General endorsements worth paying attention to: Ted Cruz, Rand Paul, and Mike Lee all give personal endorsements, in non-incumbent races at least. They also have PACs in their names; former Senator DeMint runs Senate Conservatives Fund and also Heritage. Some people also like the ACU score. I recommend staying away from National Journal scores, they are misleading (estab-candidates get higher marks than tea-party folks in some instances). Don't just take their word for it, of course: for instance, NumbersUSA penalizes folks who support legal immigration, not just folks who support illegals, I found out last month. After a bit of digging, you will probably find rating-groups that match up with your views.

        Hope this helps. I've never met Lankford (nor Shannon for that matter) so most of my advice here should be taken with a grain of salt … but I urge you to please keep the tea boiling in Oklahoma, and make sure to watch how they vote, not just what they say.

  17. Guest says:

    I hope the conservative people in Mississippi write in Chris McDaniel in Nov. Let the chips fall where they may. Would they be any worse off having Cochran in office than the Democrat? It would send a message to the GOP establishment that the people will not back corrupt Republcans anymore than they would back corrupt Democrats. The elites can blame themselves if they lose the seat.

  18. JRW says:

    It's been said that politics is a dirty job, or a dirty business, all that is true. However in it's true form it's really a war where the encumbent must protect their turf at all costs, and turf in all cases is money. It's time for the Tea Party to read their own tea leaves, what are the chances of a Republican take over in the Senate this fall? If and only if the out look is on the positive side with a seat or two to spare the leaf readers should put their efforts behind Travis Childers!! This is a war that the Rinos are so proud of their victory the Tea Party would say "Don't tread on me" and this is just a shot across the bow!

  19. rikoshay says:

    Thank you for the article Jen. A third party would take too long to establish. I think we should send a message to the GOP establishment by supporting Mitch McConnell's democrat opponent. Taking out Mitch would send a message to all red state RINOs that conservatives demand a voice in this party. We can still win the senate without McConnell's seat.

  20. Patty Mofield Jones says:

    I listened to Friday's Mark Levin Show podcast today, which was the best thing I've heard all day, and this is the best thing I've read all day. Great work, Jen! Thank you.