Texas Think Tank Toasts GOP Freshmen

Early risers got a chance to start the second day at CPAC by quaffing champagne mimosas and rubbing shoulders with a group of freshman GOP representatives. The reception was hosted by the Texas-based Institute for Policy Innovation, a think tank founded in the 1980s by Dick Armey and dedicated to “Advocating lower taxes, fewer regulations, and a smaller, less-intrusive government.”   Greeting the mimosa drinkers was IPI President Tom Giovanetti, who once complained that Republicans “blew it” in the 1990s when they got a congressional majority and failed to fire all the Keynesians from the Congressional Budget Office.

IPI pushes a libertarian economic agenda: no estate taxes, privatized social security, etc. Giovanetti urged the new members of Congress to rely on his scholars for free expertise on free-market-oriented health and technology policies. Incidentally, Newt Gingrich spoke at the group’s “Reclaiming Liberty” event last November, at which he lavished praise on Rep. Louie (“a terrific national asset”) and evangelist James Robison (“an amazing person.”)Gohmert
 
But I digress. The CPAC reception featured several GOP freshmen who took turns talking about why they ran for office. Most said they ran to secure America on behalf of their children and/or grandchildren; two had personal beefs with the Obama about family car dealerships that were lost when GM was reorganized as part of the federal bailout.
 
Not surprisingly, each of the members praised National Republican Campaign Committee chair Pete Sessions for overseeing the big GOP gains in the House. Sessions’ remarks were notable primarily for what may be the single least inspiring evocation of “American exceptionalism” ever uttered: “an idea and a thought process that we need to buy into.”
PFAW Foundation

Armey Accuses Religious Right Of Trying To Impose It's Will Through Tyranny

Earlier this week we noted that Dick Armey, after having spent the last several years calling the Religious Right a bunch of stupid demagogues and bullies for trying to make their social issues the center of the GOP agenda, was suddenly talking about the fighting abortion if Tea Party candidates help the Republicans regain control of the House.

Alan Colmes had Armey on his program Tuesday night and asked about this seeming change of heart:

Everybody needs to deal with this, but you do not deal with it by expanding the power and control of the state to impose your point of view.

When the social conservatives and the economic conservatives work well together is when they work with a common resistance to the growth of the power of the state. And what happened was there was a small cadre of very strongly assertive people on the social issues side that were saying "let's expand the power of the state" in order to impose our values on the community.

And you do not ... my point is very simple: you live a righteous life, you're an encouragement to other people; [but] use the state to impose it and you're a tyrant.

So I am guessing that whatever thawing of tensions between Armey and the Religious Right there may have been after his first statement was all but undone by the fact that he's accusing them of trying to impose their will through tyranny.

PFAW
Filed under:

Dick Armey Sees The Light On Social Issues?

Most of the posts I have written in the past about Dick Armey have revolved around his attacks on the social conservatives in the movement, starting back in 2006 when he blasted the Religious Right for trying to make things like the Ten Commandments and Terry Schiavo issues on which the GOP was expected to take a stand, with Armey lashing out at "[James] Dobson and his gang of thugs," calling them demagogues and "real nasty bullies" and saying that "being a Christian is no excuse for being stupid."

Needless to say, the attack did not sit well with the Religious Right, which lashed back at Armey and set off a fued that continued for years ... until President Obama was elected and then the Tea Party leaders like Armey and social conservative leaders like Tony Perkins decided that they should all try to work together. But that truce tended to focus mostly on letting social conservatives sign on to Tea Party activism, and not with Tea Party leaders adopting the issues that social conservatives care about. 

Given this history, you'll have to forgive my amazement at the fact that Dick Armey is now suddenly touting the importance of abortion at an issue for Tea Party candidates:

When asked Monday at a Monitor-sponsored breakfast for reporters about the possibility of a truce on social issues going into the presidential campaign, Mr. Armey said, “A truce? No. These are issues of the heart. People are not going to turn their hearts and minds away from things that they have so heartfelt.”

Armey, who served as House majority leader, added, “the fact of the matter is there is sort of a question of first things first priorities. If we lose this nation, if it falls into insolvency, then all of these issues pretty well fall by the wayside too, don’t they. So i think there is a setting of priorities.”

He specifically referred to the abortion issue. “Since President Obama has been elected, there has been extraordinarily high levels of funding for international abortions through what is called the Mexico City language. That fight hasn’t been had for a few years. Now that fight will be had with this majority," he said, referring to his stated expectation that Republicans will win control of the House, and perhaps the Senate. He added, “these issues are too important to be left behind and they won’t be left behind.”

Presumably, Armey is trying to reassure the Religious Right that they still have a place in the conservative movement in order to quell their fears that the GOP is ignoring their issues.

PFAW
Filed under:

Get Ready For the Virtual Tax Revolt

Do you remember earlier this year when the Virtual March for Life was held to coincide with the annual National March for Life, where individuals could create avatars of themselves and join in an on-line march with the avatars of Sarah Palin, Mike Huckabee, and Tony Perkins?

Well, if you missed out on that, get ready to participate in the "Online Tax Revolt":

Tea Party activists are planning an Online Tax Revolt that will send an army of avatars on a virtual march on Washington on Tax Day, April 15.

The interactive march is being spearheaded by conservative activists such as former House Majority Leader Dick Armey, former Arkansas Governor Mike Huckabee, and Americans for Tax Reform president Grover Norquist. It also includes some current members of Congress, such as Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., and Rep. Jeb Hensarling, R-Texas. The campaign is protesting the tax policies of the Obama administration.

Once again, Mike Huckabee is participating as are Grover Norquist, Dick Armey, John McCain, Joe The Plumber, Phyllis Schlafly, Richard Viguerie, and dozens of others:

PFAW

Armey: Obama is an Arrogant, Incompetent Ideologue

I have to say that it is more than a little ironic to watch Dick Armey of all people unleash an attack on President Obama at CPAC, blasting him as nothing more than a self-righteous, self-indulgent, shallow, arrogant, incompetent ideologue who doesn't know anything about anything: 

PFAW
Filed under:

Armey Partners With Stupid, Lazy Demagogues

It was just the other day that I was noting that Mike Huckabee, who had long been identified with the socially conservative wing of the movement, had suddenly jumped on the Tea Party bandwagon.

But for those who need more proof that tea party activism has become the driving force of the entire right-wing movement, look no further than fact that the Family Research Council is hosting an event next week featuring several tea party groups

On Tuesday, February 2 at 8 p.m. EST, Family Research Council's headquarters will be the host site for a special webcast, State of the Union, Voice of the People. This live webcast, one week after the President's address, will provide a voice to the American people and an opportunity for them to give their own State of the Union response. Family Research Council is partnering with TVTownhall.com and eight leading national conservative organizations that represent a combined membership estimated to be over 15 million Americans.

...

Organizations joining Family Research Council include THE New Voice, the Institute for Liberty, Media Research Center, Let Freedom Ring, Americans for Prosperity, Concerned Women for America, TEA Party Patriots and Freedomworks.

The inclusion of Freedomworks is especially telling.  While the organization has been at the forefront of the tea party activism, it has long had a rather icy relationshyip with the Religious Right.  Back in 2006, right around the time Republicans lost control of Congress, Freedomworks' chairman Dick Armey had this to say about the socially conservative wing of the party: 

"[James] Dobson and his gang of thugs are real nasty bullies. I pray devoutly every day, but being a Christian is no excuse for being stupid. There's a high demagoguery coefficient to issues like prayer in schools. Demagoguery doesn't work unless it's dumb, shallow as water on a plate. These issues are easy for the intellectually lazy and can appeal to a large demographic. These issues become bigger than life, largely because they're easy. There ain't no thinking."

That set off a round of attacks and counter attacks between Dobson's supporters and Armey that eventually involved FRC's Tony Perkins.  It continued into 2008, when Armey even attacked Perkins outright and questioned his conservatism.

Tea party activism is so entirely driving the right-wing movement at the moment that the most influential Religious Right organization is willing to co-host an event with a group lead by a man who publicly and repeatedly insulted them as stupid, shallow demagogues just to get in on the action.

If that doesn't tell you just where the Religious Right fits in to the conservative movement, I don't know what does.

PFAW

Huckabee Too Polite To Come Right Out And Say It

If there is one word that can best describe Mike Huckabee's response to losing the Republican primary to John McCain after being savaged by the fiscal conservatives and snubbed by the social conservatives, it would be "bitterness."

As we've noted a few times before, for a guy who is presumably planning on making another run for the White House in 2012, Huckabee seems to be spending a lot more time settling scores with those who refused to back him than attempting to win them over ahead of his next campaign, which doesn't seem like a particularly smart political strategy.

And here he is yet again, calling out FreedomWorks' Dick Armey for mocking Huckabee's anti-Wall Street message when he was running for office while now trying capitalize on the right-wing "tea party" opposition to the bailouts and stimulus package and whatever else all those protests were supposedly about: 

"The tea parties are mostly an honest spontaneous effort by ordinary people from all over the political spectrum to express their outrage at government hubris from absurd spending, corporate bailouts, etc.," former Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee told ABC News in an email today, asked for a comment about today's protests.

...

Now, of course, Armey and FreedomWorks are rallying the tea party protests around the country that are protesting big government, Wall Street bailouts, higher taxes and President Obama's housing plan.

"As for Armey," Huckabee writes when I ask him to weigh in, "he and about 75% of the so-called 'conservatives' owe me a big apology. They misrepresented my record, took my statements totally out of context, and accused me of economic liberalism, which is utter nonsense. My campaign upset their orderly apple cart, because it really was run by grass-roots conservatives and small business owners and not those who as it turned out were wholly owned subsidiaries of recklessly run corporations and lobbyists.”

Huckabee says Armey and his cohorts "never listened to what I was saying, but just spoke out to protect their pals who were funding their faces—there’s a word for people who get to paid to show love, but polite people don’t use it openly. I’ve found it amazing to watch the huffy puffy types who skinned me alive during the campaign jump out and support TARP, and then change their tune when Obama and the Dems proposed stimulus.

We'll try and be polite here as well and not mention the word that Huckabee obviously has in mind.

When he was running for the nomination, there were lots of articles quoting sources familiar with Huckabee's tenure in Arkansas that remarked on his petty vindictiveness and willingness to hold a grudge.  Those tales never worked their way into the narrative around his campaign as they couldn't overcome his media-driven reputation as a "aw shucks" bass-playing everyman ... but it sure seems as if Huckabee is doing everything he can to make sure that it becomes a theme in his next potential campaign.

PFAW
Filed under:

Right Wing Leftovers

  • A while back we chronicled the on-going fight between Dick Armey and James Dobson in which Armey proclaimed that "Dobson and his gang of thugs are real nasty bullies." Well, judging by Amey's appearance on "Hardball" last night, it seems that the same could quite easily be said about him.
  • Former Rep. Ernest Istook suggests that President Obama ought to get Al Sharpton, Julian Bond, Jesse Jackson, Ward Connerly, CORE (Congress of Racial Equality), Herman Cain, Ken Blackwell and J.C. Watts together to figure out what to do about affirmative action and "gather them all and others in a public setting to chart a simpler, fairer future course that reflects America’s great progress over the last 50 years."
  • A gaggle of right-wing Representatives and Senators have "re-introduced the Life at Conception Act, legislation that declares that life begins at conception and the unborn to be 'persons' under the 14th Amendment to the Constitution."
  • Finally Wendy Wright of Concerned Women for America explains why the Right was so opposed to efforts to including funding for family planning in the stimulus bill - because it would have cut down on the number of children, and we need those children to pay down the debt:
  • The economic stimulus bill shifts the burden of the debt onto the next generation; yet if we are spending billions of more dollars in 'family planning,' there won't be much of a next generation to pay this huge debt."

PFAW

An Armey of One

Just last week we were fondly reminiscing about the battle that raged for several weeks back in 2006 between Dick Armey and James Dobson that, in many ways, embodied the tensions that existed, and continue to exist, between the economic and social conservative wings of the Republican base.

While that particular clash eventually subsided, the underlying issues did not go away and they seem to have resurfaced in recent weeks, again thanks to Armey's seemingly unprovoked attack on the Family Research Council’s Tony Perkins over the latter's suggestion that John McCain ought to announce that he will appoint a "family czar" in order to appease the so-called "Values Voters" FRC and the like claim to represent.

Not surprisingly, Armey thinks the idea is idiotic and is not shy about saying so:

Think about that for a moment: A federal bureaucrat to oversee families. I'm sure Perkins would find a way to claim he's just there to give America's families a helping hand, that he's promoting our country's precious faith and values. But as Ronald Reagan said, the most frightening words in the English language are, "I'm from the government. I'm here to help." If there's anything our families don't need, it is Washington mucking around in their lives. Could anyone imagine a less conservative idea?

There are all sorts of problems with Perkins' notion, but the biggest one right now is that no one even knows for sure what a family czar would actually do.  Every time Perkins has brought it up, he's brushed quickly over the topic, as if he doesn't want to discuss what it means. That's probably because it is a political stunt and not a serious policy idea.

Armey goes on to basically say that Perkins and his allies are power hungry and that he’s not even sure that Perkins ought to be claiming to be a conservative and cites Perkins’ support of Mike Huckabee as evidence:

[Perkins threw] his support behind Mike Huckabee, a candidate whose conservative credentials were anything but solid. By supporting a politician who governed in large part by taxing, regulating, and moralizing, he made his own declarations of conservatism subject to doubt.

It is not everyday that we come to the defense of Tony Perkins but in this case, it is simply untrue that Perkins ever supported Huckabee.  In fact, Perkins’ repeatedly pledged neutrality on the GOP primary race, though there was plenty of speculation that he preferred Mitt Romney, and his failure to back Huckabee was a constant source of irritation to the Huckabee campaign.

For his part, Perkins himself doesn’t seem particularly fazed by Armey’s attack, dismissing him as “grumpy” and saying that Armey’s “disregard for the importance of strong families is shocking.”    

It is safe to say that the relationship between Armey and the Religious Right has undergone something of a transformation since he left office.  His relationship with the FRC seems especially strained and it is difficult to imagine that they’ll ever be able to get back to the good old days when Armey “met with us every single week. His staff is available to us when we go there, so it has been a close relationship. Over the years he has been the defender of the family."

PFAW

The Earmarks Candidate

In his last State of the Union speech, when President Bush promised to make his top budget priority the trimming of earmarked special projects, it may have seemed like a gimmick; after all, there was no veto threat when his own party had control of Congress and special projects ballooned. But at CPAC this afternoon, the earmarks obsession took center stage, and provided an aimless crowd of activists with a clear path to the only candidate they seem to have left.

It began with Rep. Jeb Hensarling, chairman of the right-wing Republican Study Committee in the House, and continued through a panel on the GOP being “lost”: Rep. Jeff Flake, Rep. Thad McCotter, Sen. Tom Coburn, and Sen. Jim DeMint all endeavored to explain that, although earmarks only make up about one percent of the budget, they are a threat “even greater” than that of terrorism, in the words of Coburn. And so they launched, parallel with the war on terror, a “war on pork—the gateway drug,” Coburn said, “to the spending addiction” that in turn will be “bankrupting” the country. The battle against earmarks, as former House Speaker Dick Armey put it, is a method of “leading the Republican Party back to its way.”

But in the short term, it was method of leading the CPAC crowd to the GOP candidate. DeMint, as he lectured on earmarks, complained that Republican voters “missed an opportunity of a lifetime” by not rallying around Romney, but he looked through his “tears [!] and disappointment” to a need to oppose Democrats in the general election. Armey groused about McCain’s one-time position on high-end tax cuts, but complimented him on the issue of earmarks, urging activists to “shape” their inevitable nominee—to extract promises. Surprise speaker George Allen—two years ago, speaking as CPAC’s hope for 2008—lauded McCain’s “character” and promised leadership in the war, in appointing judges, and in vetoing earmarks. And Coburn offered his grudging support, saying McCain would have the “courage” to face down Congress (except on immigration, he added quickly). McCain, he said, would appoint “strict constructionist judges” like Bork, Roberts, Alito, and Janice Rogers Brown, and yes, would take on those earmarks.

After all that, it was an anticlimax to hear McCain pledge that he “will not sign a bill with any earmarks in it.” But the rest of the candidate’s speech consisted of his effort to make clear to the assembled activists that he himself would emerge from CPAC larded with right-wing policy earmarks. Of course there was his about-face on comprehensive immigration reform and his revelation that he now supports making the “Bush tax cuts” permanent. But more broadly, he promised to fight for “our principles”: from protecting the “life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness” of “the unborn” to appointing judges like Roberts and Alito.

Ignoring Laura Igraham’s dig earlier in the afternoon, McCain told CPAC he had “come to public office as a foot soldier” in their movement, and assured them he remains one today.

PFAW
Syndicate content