DONATE

Showing posts with label Neoconservative. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Neoconservative. Show all posts

Thursday, February 7, 2013

Conservatives can Unite Thanks to Karl Rove

Karl Rove Knock-Out
John R. Houk
© February 7, 2013

I have a tendency to view Foreign Policy through the filter of Neoconservatism which in essence the promotion of American Exceptionalism, promoting alliances with democratic principled nations that view the USA favorably and make the effort to transform Third World nations to instill Liberty and representative democracy. The lesson learned about instilling Liberty and representative democracy in Muslim dominated nations is that the Western version is impossible. In lands dominated by millennia of Islamic indoctrination any Liberty and representative democracy will only work through the filter Islamic Sharia Law. Sharia is inimical to American Liberty at the very least.

I tend to view American Domestic Policy through the filter of American Conservatism which is Less Government, Lower taxes and a Free Market Economy.

I am definitely not a purist in either Neoconservatism or Conservatism because on minor issues I kind of do a mix and match depending on the effect an ideology affects American Exceptionalism and the promotion of Christian Morality in America. And so I have thoughts that tend to irk both Neocons and Conservatives.

The Neocon in me has often found favor with Karl Rove the architect of President GW Bush’s two election victories over acutely Leftist candidates in former VP Al Gore and current Secretary of State John Kerry. That made Rove a hero in my book. THE TIMES THEY A CHANGED.

Karl Rove has begun to filter his Neoconservatism through a love of Establishment Republicans and a hatred of true Conservatives in Tea Party candidates. This is unacceptable and punitive to true Conservatism.

Karl Rove is making my case that Conservatives MUST abandon the Republican Party and unify under a different political party that attracts voters supportive of true Conservative Principles and able to educate American voters that more apolitical in voting but are duped by Dem Party Leftist propaganda.

The key to unifying Conservatives is the Tea Party Movement. Currently the Tea Party is awesome on grassroots and deficient on moving voters on a national scale. Now how can Conservatives utilize the genius of Tea Party grassroots organization to find a unified national movement?

This is how: Unite Conservative leadership that is already recognizable on a national scale. Take that national leadership to form a political party with the various local Tea Party organizations gather to form a national caucus and/or a national political party convention to establish a political platform and develop candidates with a singular Conservative agenda to win the hearts of American voters tossing both Establishment Republicans and Leftist Dems to the political dung heap of nausea.

Maybe we Conservatives can thank Karl Rove for giving us an excellent reason to form our political party that has nothing to do with the GOP.

The inspiration for these thoughts is a recent column by Joseph Farah condemning Karl Rove who intends to target GOP Conservatives that are out of step with Establishment Republicans.

JRH 2/7/13
*****************************
Karl Rove steps up war on conservatives
Exclusive: Joseph Farah reveals how failed 'architect' is targeting tea-party Republicans

February 6, 2013

What lesson did Karl Rove learn from losing virtually every race in which his super-pacs supported a primary candidate as well as losing virtually every race in which they supported Republicans opposing Democrats in the November election – from Mitt Romney on down?

Apparently, his conclusion is these super-rich political action committees he runs must double-down against conservative and tea-party Republicans in the 2014 mid-term elections and other future votes.

In other words, Rove is planning to wage a scorched-earth policy against any candidates seeking office other than establishment, middle-of-the-road Republicans.

That’s according to a report in Rove’s newspaper of choice – the New York Times. And this is one New York Times report that actually seems to be credible.

This is why I have called upon Rove to be dumped by conservative and Republican donors. Not only does his strategy represent proven failure to elect Republicans, it presents more obstacles for conservative and tea-party candidates to win – which is exactly his point.

One thing should be clear by now: The establishment, country-club Republicans, formerly referred to in an earlier day as “Rockefeller Republicans” and more often today as RINOs (Republicans in name only), have not only lost their hammerlock grip on the GOP, but on their ability to win elections. Period.

Meanwhile, Rove has built his political consulting career building war chests worth hundreds of millions of dollars – much of that money coming from wealthy donors who don’t share Rove’s politically suicidal bent nor his liberal ideological rigidness.

Among the groups Rove commands is one ironically called the “Conservative Victory Fund,” which, of course, misleads many conservative donors into believing they are helping conservatives with their contributions. Nothing could be further from the truth. They are helping to defeat them.

For instance, one of the most dependable conservatives in the House – a thorn in the side of House Speaker John Boehner, who has betrayed the tea-party movement that placed him in power – is Steve King of Iowa. Guess who one of the first targets of Rove’s money-machine politics is said to be. That’s right. Steve King.

Steve King is illustrative of the kind of principled conservative Republicans should be enthusiastically backing. Not only does he win, but he gives the Washington establishment fits – both accommodating Republican leadership and the extremists in the Democratic Party.

Clearly, Rove would prefer to see a Democrat take King’s seat than for him to remain in office. He made the same decision about Missouri U.S. Senate candidate Todd Akin in his race against Barack Obama cheerleader Claire McCaskill in 2012.

Another one of Rove’s heavily endowed super-pacs is American Crossroads. Here’s what the president of that organization had to say about Rove’s internecine war strategy.

COUNCIL BLUFFS, Iowa — The biggest donors in the Republican Party are financing a new group to recruit seasoned candidates and protect Senate incumbents from challenges by far-right conservatives and Tea Party enthusiasts who Republican leaders worry could complicate the party’s efforts to win control of the Senate.

“There is a broad concern about having blown a significant number of races because the wrong candidates were selected,” said Steven J. Law, the president of American Crossroads, the “super PAC” creating the new project. “We don’t view ourselves as being in the incumbent protection business, but we want to pick the most conservative candidate who can win.”

The first test of the groups’ efforts to influence primary races could come in Iowa, according to the Time, where Republicans have a chance to win a Senate seat held by retiring Sen. Tom Harkin, a seat that hasn’t been open since 1974.

“We’re concerned about Steve King’s Todd Akin problem,” Law said. “This is an example of candidate discipline and how it would play in a general election. All of the things he’s said are going to be hung around his neck.”

In response, King said: “This is a decision for Iowans to make and should not be guided by some political staffers in Washington,” King said in an interview, pointing out that he won his congressional race last year even though Barack Obama easily defeated Mitt Romney in Iowa. “The last election, they said I couldn’t win that, either, and the entire machine was against me.”

Rove’s intentionally misnamed “Conservative Victory Fund” says it will be intensely vetting prospective contenders for congressional races to try to weed out candidates who are seen as too conservative to win general elections.

How will Rove’s highly paid political mercenaries conduct their war of attrition against conservatives? They will spend more Republican donor money in primaries against other Republicans they find distasteful and too conservative. That, of course, dries up money that could be used to beat Democrats. But that’s not as important to Rove as controlling the tenor of the party itself and preserving himself with the mythical monikers of “kingmaker” and “architect.”

What’s the ultimate solution to this?
It’s two-fold:

§  Conservatives – real conservatives – should not give a dime to any organization run or influenced by Rove.

§  A new super-pac must be created that supports the conservatives and tea-party Republicans with equal or greater sums of money than Rove squandered in 2012.

If Rove wants to understand the real problem the Republican Party faced in 2012 and in the future, all he needs to do is look in the mirror.
_______________________
Conservatives can Unite Thanks to Karl Rove
John R. Houk
© February 7, 2013
______________________
Karl Rove steps up war on conservatives

Joseph Farah is founder, editor and CEO of WND and a nationally syndicated columnist with Creators Syndicate. He is the author or co-author of 13 books, including his latest, "The Tea Party Manifesto," and his classic, "Taking America Back," now in its third edition and 14th printing. Farah is the former editor of the legendary Sacramento Union and other major-market dailies.
                                                                                             
© Copyright 1997-2013. All Rights Reserved. WND.com.

Monday, January 25, 2010

Philosopher Kings and the Political Spectrum



John R. Houk
© January 25, 2010


Let’s be clear: a majority of Joe (and Jane) Americans that are enfranchised voters really have little clue of the affect of public policy on their day to day lives. It is also a good guess that Joe American has little concern of how a political ideology (Left, Right, Moderate, Christian (Right and Catholic), Islamic or Humanistic) affects his/her day to day life.

As a Conservative (actually largely Neoconservative) it is easy to be critical of President Barack Hussein Obama imposition of his political agenda on the American public. Victor Davis Hanson (VDH) has termed this political imposition reminiscent of Plato’s advocating of “Philosopher Kings” to govern political society. Plato felt that a class of Philosopher Kings would be trained in such wisdom that their oligarchy rule would best benefit majority. Plato believed all classes apart from Philosopher Kings were incapable of governing themselves to a harmonious society. Hence Plato also believed if information did not benefit the well being of the other classes it was okay to lie to them to avoid the rabble rising affect. Trust me this is a simplistic explanation that leaves much out but I believe you get the gist of it.

It is time to be honest. There are many Conservatives that also wittingly or unwittingly would subscribe to the Philosopher King model. The Conservative Philosopher Kings would not emphasize the Leftist Collective model. Rather the Conservative Philosopher King would focus on less government intrusion in an individual citizen’s life and would utilize more security to enable the protection of a thrifty entrepreneurial society. Neoconservatives (more or less) would extend this protection by promoting alliances with like-minded (as possible) nations or nation-building of nations that threaten our thrifty entrepreneurial society.

Libertarians would definitely look upon the Philosopher King model with aghast because their core of governing strategy is the contractual agreement of an autonomous-individual class with security based on mutual agreement rather than supreme State oversight. One who considers himself an absolute Paleoconservative (SA Gottfried) might ephemerally denounce the Philosopher King model. And yet the Philosopher King model is exactly what the Founding Fathers had in mind in establishing the propertied class as people of wisdom and thus with the enfranchisement of voting.

So getting back to VDH (who I admire incidentally), who has criticism of President Barack Hussein Obama’s image of a Philosopher King. I am of the belief the VDH criticism is valid only as such that the Obama agenda is apparently a collective-Socialism (some might even say Marxism).

What say ye?

JRH 1/25/10