2014 June 25 Wednesday
GOP Bigwigs, Democrats Unite To Defeat Tea Party In Mississippi

Republican Senator Thad Cochran defeated a Tea Party primary opponent by appealing to Democrats. Cochran sees his role as gettng money from productive people in the rest of America and reallocating it to Mississippi.

Cochran is best known in the Senate as a quiet “workhorse,” skilled at directing federal dollars to Mississippi, the poorest state in the nation.

The Republican elite decided to mobilize black Democrats to vote in a Republican primary. Republican voters need to understand that Republican elites have only a minor role sketched out for them that involves being obedient to elite wishes.

"It's disgraceful that self-described GOP leaders like Mitch McConnell, John McCain, the Chamber of Commerce, and the NRSC [National Republican Senatorial Committee] would champion a campaign platform of pork-barrel spending and insider dealmaking, while recruiting Democrats to show up at the polls,” said Matt Kibbe, president of the tea party group FreedomWorks.

Some Tea Party organizations are already tools for the elites. But the elites still need to neutralize others by any means necessary.

Share |      By Randall Parker at 2014 June 25 07:38 PM 

Nick said at June 26, 2014 1:21 AM:

I wouldn't be surprised if the DNC helped get Democrats to vote for Cochran. The GOP and DNC elites are far more similar in their beliefs and goals than the colorful propaganda on FOX or CNN would have us believe.

Black Death said at June 26, 2014 7:36 AM:

A few years ago, Ron Unz wrote:

We always ridicule the 98 percent voter support that dictatorships frequently achieve in their elections and plebiscites, yet perhaps those secret-ballot results may sometimes be approximately correct, produced by the sort of overwhelming media control that leads voters to assume there is no possible alternative to the existing regime. Is such an undemocratic situation really so different from that found in our own country, in which our two major parties agree on such a broad range of controversial issues and, being backed by total media dominance, routinely split 98 percent of the vote? A democracy may provide voters with a choice, but that choice is largely determined by the information citizens receive from their media.

Most of the Americans who elected Barack Obama in 2008 intended their vote as a total repudiation of the policies and personnel of the preceding George W. Bush administration. Yet once in office, Obama’s crucial selections—Robert Gates at Defense, Timothy Geither at Treasury, and Ben Bernake at the Federal Reserve—were all top Bush officials, and they seamlessly continued the unpopular financial bailouts and foreign wars begun by his predecessor, producing what amounted to a third Bush term.

Consider the fascinating perspective of the recently deceased Boris Berezovsky, once the most powerful of the Russian oligarchs and the puppet master behind President Boris Yeltsin during the late 1990s. After looting billions in national wealth and elevating Vladimir Putin to the presidency, he overreached himself and eventually went into exile. According to the New York Times, he had planned to transform Russia into a fake two-party state—one social-democratic and one neoconservative—in which heated public battles would be fought on divisive, symbolic issues, while behind the scenes both parties would actually be controlled by the same ruling elites. With the citizenry thus permanently divided and popular dissatisfaction safely channeled into meaningless dead-ends, Russia’s rulers could maintain unlimited wealth and power for themselves, with little threat to their reign. Given America’s history over the last couple of decades, perhaps we can guess where Berezovsky got his idea for such a clever political scheme.


I've often felt that both parties are controlled by the "Deep State" - the big banks, corporations, defense contractors, media elites, etc. Some of these folks may be well aware of how things work, while others serve as willing tools (especially in the media). Elections are held, issues appear and disappear, but nothing changes very much. Barack Obama and George W. Bush are supposed to be polar opposites, yet they appear to be more alike than different. Bush starts the bailouts of the auto companies and the banks, Obama continues them. Bush brings us Medicare Part D and No Child Left Behind, Obama gives us Obamacare. Bush runs up deficits, Obama makes them bigger. The media are full of speculation about the elections later this year and the presidential ones in 2016, but nothing much will change, no matter who wins.

Dan said at June 27, 2014 5:42 AM:

Tea party voters in Mississipi really ought turn out in large numbers to vote Democrat in the general election and explain why they are doing it.

Mike Street Station said at June 27, 2014 6:34 AM:

This Mississippi primary race really proves the point that establishment Republicans really hate the Tea Party. And I mean hate it so much that they would rather a Democrat take that Senate seat than a Tea Party Republican. If McDaniels had won the primary, the seat easily would have stayed in the Republican camp, but the establishment decided to pour money into the race and even decided to use Leftie talking points (Tea Party=Racists). Considering the dirty pool involved, I wouldn't be surprised if a fair amount of Tea Party votes stayed home in November, putting the seat at risk.

And of course, Cochran ran on free stuff. He said he would bring home the bacon and McDaniels would cut the federal budget. Can't have that can we?

Post a comment
Name (not anon or anonymous):
Email Address:
Remember info?

Web parapundit.com
Go Read More Posts On ParaPundit
Site Traffic Info
The contents of this site are copyright ©