March 26, 2017

December 10, 2012

In Light of the Purge, House Conservatives Must Unite

From RedState, where there is more:

Well, that was quick.  After denying that conservatives were thrown off committee spots for ideological purposes, Boehner now admitted it in front of his conference, according to The Hill:

Speaker John Boehner (R-Ohio) warned his conference on Wednesday that leaders are “watching” how the rank-and-file vote to determine committee assignments, according to sources in the closed-door meeting.

Boehner addressed the firestorm over the removal of four lawmakers from plum committee assignments at the weekly GOP conference meeting.

According to Rep. Tim Huelskamp (R-Kan.), one of the lawmakers denied a spot on his current committee in the next Congress, Boehner did note “that we [leadership] have punished four members, he claimed that it had nothing to do with their conservative ideology, but had to do with their voting patterns.”

Also removed from committee spots were Reps. Justin Amash (R-Mich.), Walter Jones (R-N.C.) and David Schweikert (Ariz.).

Huelskamp added that Boehner warned GOP lawmakers that “there may be more folks that will be targeted … ‘we’re watching all your votes.”

Share this story:

Recent Related Posts



While I understand the desire to be united as much as possible on all fronts, I hate, really hate seeing this…esp given the convervative records of those purged.

[1] Posted by B. Hunter on 12-10-2012 at 02:04 PM · [top]

Speaker Boehner and Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell had better be careful or they risk facing primary challenges from the right in 2014. McConnell also faces the possibility that actress Ashley Judd could seek the Democrats’ nomination for his Senate seat, although I don’t see her winning in a state where voters elected Rand Paul two years ago.

[2] Posted by the virginian on 12-10-2012 at 02:13 PM · [top]

Fooling with Republicans is like Charlie Brown kicking tht football.  They always betray is, give in for more taxes, higher debt limits and bigger government and more regulations.  We are just suppose to not notice and follow on behind them and keep our mouthes shut.  We are doomed.  IMHO

[3] Posted by PROPHET MICAIAH on 12-10-2012 at 02:14 PM · [top]

Actually I am in the mood to move from the Republicans to a more principled Constitutional party.  It is clear that a lot of the Republicans are more interested in the trappings of office and their principles are slim and none.  Any suggestions?

[4] Posted by Br. Michael on 12-10-2012 at 02:25 PM · [top]

I don’t really think this is a big deal.  The “purged” members will be replaced with other “conservatives” on the committees and life will go on.  And other members will think twice about sniping at the House leadership when it’s trying to compromise with the Democrats.  Truth is found in our faith, not in politics.  Public policy is about compromise.

[5] Posted by S. Hamilton on 12-10-2012 at 04:10 PM · [top]

Sometimes compromise equals capitulation.  I once had a politician describe compromise as a political mugging.  If we both want to tax and differ over the amount then there can be a compromise, but if I want no tax and you do where is the compromise?

In the current fiscal situation the best compromise is for the Republicans to do nothing.  The Democrats will get their taxes and the Republicans will get real reductions in the rate of spending increases.

[6] Posted by Br. Michael on 12-10-2012 at 04:35 PM · [top]

RE: “And other members will think twice about sniping at the House leadership when it’s trying to compromise with the Democrats.”

Oh that sounds like an establishment Republican doing a little wishin’ and hopin’ and dreamin’.

I think quite the opposite—I think it will mean that *more* will disagree—and openly—with House leadership and the the revolt and chasm between the two groups within the Republican Party will come more out in the open.


RE: “Truth is found in our faith, not in politics.”

All truth is God’s truth and truth may be found in any category of thought.

As S. Hamilton demonstrates, the differences between the two groups are, at foundational level, not policy differences but philosophical.

[7] Posted by Sarah on 12-10-2012 at 05:12 PM · [top]

Br. Michael (#4):

RE:  “Actually I am in the mood to move from the Republicans to a more principled Constitutional party.  It is clear that a lot of the Republicans are more interested in the trappings of office and their principles are slim and none.  Any suggestions? “

As a matter of fact, yes.  And the name is easy to remember, too.

I was an elector for this party in Ohio, during the recent election;  and will be (D.V.) seeking an appointment to be either county or district chairperson in my state. 

My complaint about the party is that they tend to shoot too high, with candidates who don’t have the “zest appeal” to win the seat (at best) or perrenials (generally speaking).  They need to grow from the bottom up, rather than the top down;  and that’s going to take lots of time.  Probably two or more generations before they can garner enough respect and attention to be ready for the Show. 

There seems to be some bad blood between Alan Keyes and the party from their 2008 convention;  though Keyes and the CP’s recent presidential candidate are virtually the same on the issues imho.  I’ll have to dig into that more as time goes on. 

Finally, the party doesn’t make any sense unless one has a Christian worldview.  The Libertarians will probably prosper faster, given our society.  But, I’ve soul-searched enough to know that my own worldview doesn’t reconcile with the Libertarianism.

[8] Posted by J Eppinga on 12-10-2012 at 08:01 PM · [top]

8, thanks I will check them out.

[9] Posted by Br. Michael on 12-11-2012 at 07:23 AM · [top]

There are, it seems, two types of Republicans - big government Republicans who want the big government to favor business (especially large corporations) and small government, states-and-individual rights Republicans.  I favor the latter, but the trouble is that the government has become so enmeshed in daily life that few of us can appreciate how deeply we are tied to government.  This is far from a perfect parallel, but it is like a cancer that has intertwined with a healthy organ system so that removing it damage the organs in the process.

In addition, since our culture now lacks a common worldview, and so many do not hold the Judeo-Christian values that were a large part of forming our Constitution, to restrict government’s power would lead to societal collapse even more quickly than we are headed that way already, even though there is too much power.

A government of free people requires self-disciplined people.  We have too few such people.  Only a spiritual awakening can help us, or we will collapse, and perhaps rebuild out that rude reminder of the need for self-discipline.

[10] Posted by AnglicanXn on 12-11-2012 at 08:18 AM · [top]

Indeed.  In fact as a different worldview that is hostile to Christians, become enshrined why should Christians invest any effort to defend it?  We may not be overtly hostile to it, but we don’t need to actively support or defend it either.

[11] Posted by Br. Michael on 12-11-2012 at 09:11 AM · [top]

Compromise implies that both sides give up or gain something meaningful.  I would assume capitulation would mean that one side doesn’t much of anything.

We shall see what happens in terms of what the “purge” causes other Republicans to do.  I’m far from an establishment Republican.

“All truth is God’s truth and truth may be found in any category of thought.”

That is true, though it becomes a problem when Christians approach articles of political thought as we approach articles of faith.  “No compromise!  Stand up for truth!”

[12] Posted by S. Hamilton on 12-11-2012 at 01:47 PM · [top]

More evidence that this isn’t a fight between “conservatives” and “moderate, establishment republicans” but a fight among conservatives.  It sounds like it’s more about personality and backbiting.

[13] Posted by S. Hamilton on 12-13-2012 at 10:41 AM · [top]

No evidence in that article at all—as no conservative accepts the actual quote from one of the members of the committee that actually did the deed!

Of course, there’s also the fact that Boehner made the mistake of making quite clear why those conservatives were purged.

RE: “one member of the Steering Committee called them “the most egregious assholes” in the House Republican Conference.”

Heh—yup.  That’s what conservatives who call out establishment Republicans get named.

An honorable title.

It’s war—and it’s war between conservatives and the establishment Republicans who have been an epic catastrophe over the past two years in the House leadership, in the Senate leadership, and in their horrendous selection of a non-conservative Republican nominee for president.

It *is* gratifying to see the little scrambling, scrabbling attempts by establishment Republicans to make the sides on this conflict less clear and obvious.  But they’re failing at that as well.

[14] Posted by Sarah on 12-13-2012 at 10:52 AM · [top]

Registered members are welcome to leave comments. Log in here, or register here.

Comment Policy: We pride ourselves on having some of the most open, honest debate anywhere. However, we do have a few rules that we enforce strictly. They are: No over-the-top profanity, no racial or ethnic slurs, and no threats real or implied of physical violence. Please see this post for more explanation, and the posts here, here, and here for advice on becoming a valued commenter as opposed to an ex-commenter. Although we rarely do so, we reserve the right to remove or edit comments, as well as suspend users' accounts, solely at the discretion of site administrators. Since we try to err on the side of open debate, you may sometimes see comments which you believe strain the boundaries of our rules. Comments are the opinions of visitors, and do not necessarily reflect the opinion of Stand Firm site administrators or Gri5th Media, LLC.