If you are a conservative independent or Republican, right now your eyes should be on the party to which we are all inextricably linked. What happens in the next two months or so will determine whether or not there has been a significant change in Washington, or simply a reshuffling of the old guard.
It is already clear that Barack Obama does not intend to work with the incoming leadership in the House, by his “blame the messenger” attitude regarding his policies. “If I had only explained them more clearly,” is the message Obama is heralding this week. From this we can determine one of two things: The President is either the dumbest imbecile to ever sit in the Oval Office, or he is so closely wedded to his utopian vision that he cannot bare to bring himself to the center-left of his own party.
It is, I assure you, the latter.
Enough said. Americans far and wide, on both sides, know Barack Obama now. What is important to conservatives, however, is the House, and to a lesser degree, Senate leadership. But let’s look at the Senate. Nowhere can this be seen more clearly than in the Miller-Murkowski count-off in Alaska.
This week, only after pressured by talk radio host Mark Levin, did NRSC chairman John Cornyn make an appeal for funds for Joe Miller in Alaska. Money is desperately needed to help Miller with the costly legal and counting process that will be necessary to assure that the Murkowski machine will not be able to rubber stamp the rejected Senator back into office.
The question, obviously, is why a radio talk show host had to be the impetus for the National Republican Senatorial Committee chairman to call for funds for the Republican’s nominated candidate? This should be disturbing to any registered Republican, and doubly so for any conservative Republican. If a party can’t stand behind its nominee, regardless of its distaste for the candidate, something is amiss.
We saw this in Delaware with the Christine O’Donnell candidacy. The Republican talking heads came out in droves to distance the party l from O’Donnell, before the ink was dry on the certification slip. The party made no bones it wanted the very liberal Michael Castle.
Regardless of your opinion of O’Donnell, she was the Republican Party nominee in Delaware, and short of some evidence of ethical or criminal wrongdoing, the Party had an obligation to give her its full support. That clearly did not happen, and it has not happened in Alaska, at least without a lot of kicking a screaming.
Understand this is not strictly about Miller’s conservative leanings. A number of conservative Republicans are very powerful in Washington. This is about power, and the Tea Party, its candidates, and particularly Sarah Palin, have amassed an enormous power base in a very short time.
And at the bottom of this, both Miller and O’Donnell are about Palin.
Again, whether or not you like Palin is not the issue here. Last week Scott Rasmussen released a national poll that says 82% of the GOP electorate has a favorable opinion of Palin, 50% very favorable. That did not go unnoticed inside the Beltway.
Here’s how it went down last week. While Sharron Angle was a hairsbreadth from a win against Harry Reid in Nevada, and Joe Miller desperately needed funds in Alaska in a tight race, Cornyn sent $3 million—more than any other candidate in the nation—to Carly Fiorina in California, who was nearly 10 points behind incumbent Barbara Boxer. Cornyn cited “internal polling” that showed Fiorina in a dead heat with Boxer, but that polling, if it even existed, was wrong. Consequentially, the GOP lost Nevada and California, and may now lose Alaska.
You may be saying, Wait a minute. Fiorina was a Palin endorsee. Indeed she was, but she was a political payoff endorsee. Just as with McCain in Arizona Palin owed Fiorina her endorsement. Fiorina was the McCain campaign “point man” on economic policy. Palin owes McCain.
On the other hand Sharron Angle was extremely viable—should have won—against Reid, and Miller could win against Murkowski. These were two of Palin’s strongest Tea party endorsees. Why in the world would the NRSC send so much money to a sure loser, when a sure winner so vitally needed it?
Why? How does this make sense? No, Angle was not the best candidate in the world, but she should not have lost.
Is it possible that the GOP leadership would rather set out two more years as the minority party than have a majority with new Tea Party Senators? It damn sure is. But more likely, the RNC knew several months ago that it would not gain the majority during this cycle, so leaving a few teabaggers to dangle didn’t matter a whole heck of a lot.
Keep your eyes on this. It will tell you who not to vote for in 2012.