As with the Pastor Jeffress' remarks on Mormonism, the "mainstream" media loves finding a news story with which to predict or create a divide among Republicans.
Such was the angle in yesterday's Politico story breathlessly revealing that their reporters had learned that David and Charles Koch are looking to spend at least $200 million during the 2012 election cycle on efforts to elect candidates they support -- presumably pro-free market Republicans.
From the article's title, "Karl Rove vs. the Koch brothers" to its text -- "Republicans worry that the emerging rivalry between the two deepest-pocketed camps in the conservative movement could undercut their party’s chances of taking the Senate and White House in 2012." -- Politico's Ken Vogel, who has been the target of conservative criticism in the past for "unprofessionalism and ideologically-driven writing" can practically be seen salivating over the prospect of division among anti-Democrat ranks.
Specifically, he lays out what he hopes will be some sort of internecine battle between the Crossroads group figure-headed by Karl Rove and the newly-expanded Koch efforts.
More from the article:
You get the drift.
But despite such dissent within the GOP ranks being Mr. Vogel's fond wish, is there any reason to believe that adding more fuel to a pro-conservative or perhaps more accurately pro-liberty fire will be a negative for Republican electoral hopes? I simply don't see how that can be the case.
A healthy debate among Republicans, including perhaps the spectacle of candidates for office at any level chiding other Republicans for drifting from pro-free market principles would do much to continue the return of the GOP, both in reality and in the minds of voters, to being a party of fundamentally American values and ideas.
Believe it or not, there are some Democratic Party-supporting organizations which are not to the left of George McGovern. Or at least there were, with the Democratic Leadership Council folding earlier this year. But in recent prior election cycles, did you ever hear the "mainstream" media even mention any discord between various Democrat groups?
Americans for Tax Reform President Grover Norquist puts it well in a speech I've heard him make a few times, as well as in his quite-readable book, "Leave Us Alone.". If I may paraphrase: The liberty coalition, which would certainly include Rove's and the Koch's organizations can relatively harmoniously coexist because they don't want to divide up pieces of a particular resource pie. The "takings coalition", however, which represents the base of the Democratic Party, includes groups from environmentalists to the welfare industry to subsidizers of all sorts, each of which is trying to grab a handful of the money -- taxpayers' money -- in the middle of the table. When they money flow dwindles, they are competing for a more scarce resource and cannot easily coexist as one group's funding represents another group's lost funding.
In the long run, the conservative coalition is more durable than the liberal coalition, particularly in a nation which is moving, slowly but perhaps inexorably toward reduced government spending due both to necessity and a rebirth of some degree of American self-reliance. For this we can thank the public's reaction to the disaster that has been the Obama administration; the frog is no longer being boiled.
Despite what one might think from listening to Pastor Jeffress (and the media reporting on him), Republicans are not stupid. They will not, especially in 2012, cut their own throats and hand control of any part of our federal government back to Barack Obama, Harry Reid, Nancy Pelosi, Eric Holder, or Lisa Jackson.
Liberals like Vogel may wish that a deep-pocketed jump into the political pool by the Koch Brothers will wreak havoc with other pro-Republican efforts. But for this pool party, the more the merrier.
|<< <||> >>|