Get PJ Media on your Apple

Self-Evident

Steinberg: [Mark] Levin pulled up an article from the ’70s, using the exact same terminology against Reagan that was used against Cruz last week. That’s 40 years of kicking the can down the road, at the least.

Gohmert: Right, I heard Rush Limbaugh had pulled an article George Will wrote about Reagan in ’79, saying that he was a “kamikaze,” and then he pulled out a recent article saying Cruz is a “kamikaze.” We’ve got a pattern here.

Steinberg: Right, the Kim Strassel piece at the WSJ.

Gohmert: After the fact, it’s “I supported Reagan, I loved Reagan.” Karl Rove says that. Well, actually Reagan wasn’t popular among establishment folks back then.

And those that supported George H. W. Bush for president, they got on board once he was the VP candidate, but they really didn’t trust that crazy actor. They’d always call him the “B-movie actor,” try to denigrate him. He was a smart guy.

And there are a lot of smart guys here in Congress now that get denigrated. They get marginalized, people say “they’re conservatives, so obviously they’re not very bright.” People hear a southern accent and immediately deduct 50 IQ points. Some of that goes on, too. Anyway, regardless of how smart anyone is, if they make promises when they ran, and get elected, they should do all they can to keep those promises. That’s what we want to see happen.

Steinberg: Why does the leadership still consider moderation — hiding your conservatism, I suppose — why do they still consider that a winning strategy?

Gohmert: They talk in terms of trying to win the independent votes. What some of our leaders don’t understand is that Tea Party people are from all races, creeds, national origins, ages, but they pay taxes. They don’t want a wasteful, bloated government. And what’s wrong with that? They consider themselves conservative, but independent. Perhaps they number more than anyone else independent. They consider themselves conservative more than they consider themselves of a party label.

What our leaders don’t get, as evidenced by 2012 — they alienated independent conservatives, they stayed home by the millions and allowed Obama to get elected to a second term.

Steinberg: If you win the Senate, do you see leadership turning conservative once they have the gavel back? Or is this pattern going to continue, this is just how they think, this is the way they appeal to independents?

Gohmert: If you look at the GOP members of the Senate and the House, you see that it is a hugely conservative group of people. And yet we have people in charge that go with the moderates as the party leaders. We say, “Wow, we’re basically a very conservative group, but we put moderates in charge that keep us from enacting the conservative principles that will save America, what we promised we would do when we got elected.”

I just think it is important to do all I can to help those who make promises and want to keep their promises.

Steinberg: So is this PAC not just about defending conservatives, but also about pulling some of those with a less conservative record up until now out of the closet?

Gohmert: Well, I want to help anyone that will stand for their principles. I’m Christian, I’m forgiving of anyone, it’s what you do today and tomorrow that’s important. That’s what we want to do, we want to help anyone that may have been going along with leadership, and may say, hey, I’ve been a team player for two, three years and it hasn’t gotten me to the point where I can keep the promises I made when I got elected. I’ve had a number of people tell me, “Wow, Louie, I was told to be a team player and I would have all my promises kept, and now I see we still haven’t gotten around to them.” We promised Americans we would cut $100 billion the very first year in the House majority. We sure didn’t get close to that.

Steinberg: Last question — I’m in New England, in Connecticut, and it’s Kelly Ayotte, the only member of the House or Senate who is a Republican, let alone a conservative. Do you see any talent coming out of this area, anyone worth supporting as of now?

Gohmert: I don’t know, I haven’t looked closely enough at that, but we have to recognize a state or district for what it is. If it’s a moderate district, then there are people that I would be glad to have elected as Republicans so that Pelosi does not get the gavel back and take the country on down this road that ends with going off the cliff, a tragic end. I would welcome moderates from moderate districts to represent those districts for the party.

But for states and districts that are conservative, they ought to be allowed to represent their districts. I want to help them do that.

Steinberg: Thank you for your time, Louie.

Gohmert: No, thank you! Thanks for the interest. And that’s “GOHConservative.com.”

<- Prev  Page 3 of 3   View as Single Page

Comments are closed.

Top Rated Comments   
I am no longer in the "go along to get along" camp. The so-called Republican "establishment" (a word that the Founders would have despised) is almost as bad as the Democrats. Worst of all, they repeatedly campaign on "smaller government" and "lower taxes" and never deliver anything except lies.
33 weeks ago
33 weeks ago Link To Comment
You lost half your audience right there Mr. Ghomert. It may or may not be be true depending on the person but what is your point? That non-Christians are not forgiving? And claiming to "stand up for principles" is also a dangerously encoded phrase. Which principles are you referring to . . the Christian ones or the libertarian ones? Once you are in power, do you intend to assert Christian principles in legislation? Which ones?

No, he didn't. I'm not a Christian, but I could understand the man's value system via the rest of his statements.

Gohmert's point was that Christians forgive people their former trespasses. He's saying "it's okay if you weren't very conservative yesterday, because what matters is how we approach it tomorrow."

You've completely ignored the context of his message so you could rush down to the comments to make your point.

You've got some good views, but you need to let others express their own views before rushing to lecture them.
33 weeks ago
33 weeks ago Link To Comment
The RNC deliberately let Democrat McAuliffe win the Virginia governorship last year when they refused to give Tea Party supported Republican Cuccinelli a dime while the DNC gave his opponent McAuliffe millions of out of state money for last minute attack ads. If Gohmert's PAC supports all conservative candidates, I'll support his PAC. For the RNC they'll get no more support from me, forever! I don't know who the RNC represents but they all are traitors to freedom, liberty, and Constitutional government.
33 weeks ago
33 weeks ago Link To Comment
All Comments   (50)
All Comments   (50)
Sort: Newest Oldest Top Rated
Gohmert just can't shut up about truth, truth, truth, but he damn sure can't speak any. He has no more trouble creating and spreading bull^$@^ about others while jerking his Bible open to the Old Testament. He's an Old Testament kind of guy because it provides plenty of scripture to condemn somebody else with. He loves that stuff. However he can't seem to find anything comparable from the New Testament, because it preaches the principles of forgiveness, charity and humility rather than the stone them to death or throw them in a hole and let them starve solution that salves his sense of entitlement because he's better than everyone else.

I don't care much for Congressman Gohmert's brand of hurtful, denigrating, exclusionary, we'll tell you how to live, yea freedom politics.

32 weeks ago
32 weeks ago Link To Comment
Why would the NRSC think we would believe them?
32 weeks ago
32 weeks ago Link To Comment
Thanks, David and PJM for this interview with Rep. Gohmert and alerting us to GOHConservative.com. I agree with Louie 3000%. Sure wish he had taken on Cornyn. I'm going to trot on over to the website and send them a donation.
32 weeks ago
32 weeks ago Link To Comment
I have watched the civil war within Obama's opposition with distress. The goal should be unseating the Democrat turn toward populist anti-capitalism, not triumphalism for social conservatives, who already are protected under the First Amendment. I wrote about the endangerment to capitalism itself here: http://clarespark.com/2012/11/07/capitalism-is-on-the-line/. It analyzes the 2012 election in terms of the women's vote, which the Republican Party must capture to win, and not by keeping women barefoot and pregnant.
33 weeks ago
33 weeks ago Link To Comment
Clare, you might reconsider your career choice. For a woman like yourself, having children and maintaining a comfortable home for your man might be a better path to a fulfilling life.
32 weeks ago
32 weeks ago Link To Comment
The Tea Party has nothing to do with triumphalism for social conservatives.

You fail from the get go.

Moby.

I make the accusation because, you sound like one.
32 weeks ago
32 weeks ago Link To Comment
The only people saying Republicans want women barefoot and pregnant, are leftist operatives and the State-Run media.

It sure isn't anyone on the right. The mythical "War on Women" is nothing but a fabricated, false campaign issue, dreamed up by the Obama campaign to distract everyone from his abysmal economy, 92+ million Americans not working, ObamaGlitch and now his pathetically weak, aimless foreign policy (or the complete lack there of).
33 weeks ago
33 weeks ago Link To Comment
“We really don’t know what Congressman Gohmert is referring to. The conservative grassroots movement and the tea party brings energy, enthusiasm, and a commitment to defend liberty that is essential in building a Republican Senate majority." - NRSC Spokesperson

Is that why you've been doing everything possible to defeat and marginalize anything and everything Conservative or Tea Party since just after the 2010 mid-terms?

Is that why the NRSC declared war on the Senate Conservatives Fund and Conservatives like Mark Levin, because we're "essential in building a Republican Senate majority"?

Riiiight.
33 weeks ago
33 weeks ago Link To Comment
The jerk that said that needs to clean off his glass belt buckle. Bet he thinks he's cute. Yeah, by half.
33 weeks ago
33 weeks ago Link To Comment
I've seen this dynamic play out in Canada. Because there was also a clear regional split, the result was that the backstabbing and badmouthing from the "Progressive Conservative Party" (not making that up) led to the creation of a separate party. Its initial leader was a guy named Preston Manning, who knew (and still knows) more about the history and operation of populist Tea Party like movements than anyone else in North America.

The Reform Party was laughed at initially, and there were a couple of national elections won by the Liberals against a divided opposition. But Reform had a regional base that led to national election wins in their area of the country, and they entrenched themselves solidly as a regional bloc. Meanwhile, the PC Party found that it had little power, and struggled to win enough seats in more leftist areas of the country. The end result was the the PC party (yes, that was their official abbreviation) went bankrupt, and was taken over in a merger by the Reform Party.

Current moniker: Conservative Party of Canada. They've been the government since 2006, and a majority government since 2011.
33 weeks ago
33 weeks ago Link To Comment
Gohmert continues to 'do the right thing' in spite of what the 'establishments' of BOTH parties are doing, in concert, to punk us all. The 'tools and dupes' that make up those 'establishments' are what George Washington tried to warn us about in his Farewell Address. We the People had best come to terms with the fact that BOTH parties 'establishments' are in it together and are up to their collective arses in political and 'control' scat. They are nothing more than self-aggrandizing, self-serving 'servants' to their Progressive/Socialist masters. It should be very clear to ALL of us that the only way to save our Republic ...is to...retire most of them to the trashbin of history. Send them home in shame.
33 weeks ago
33 weeks ago Link To Comment
RNC sounding more out of touch each day....Read in the paper...Sound familiar?
33 weeks ago
33 weeks ago Link To Comment
The days of me donating to the GOP are long over. Since the Romney embarrassment of 2012 and the McCain embarrassment before that in 2008, I am no longer a Republican. I am registered as unaffiliated.

I contribute to, and support individual candidates that I like and that I know won't stab me in the back the first chance they get. I will no longer vote for anyone just because they have an (R) next to their name on the ballot.

Progressives, and "establishment" (whatever that is) Republicans that hate me, as a Conservative, will no longer get my money or my vote.
33 weeks ago
33 weeks ago Link To Comment
Big Conservative,

Please re-think your position. You can't vote in primaries if you aren't voting as a Republican. Don't make the mistake I did. I refused to register as Republican for years, because "they don't represent me". Then I realized, I was shutting myself out of the opportunity to change the Party from the inside.

You can be a Republican without losing your mind. More guys like us need to be more involved, not less involved.
33 weeks ago
33 weeks ago Link To Comment
" You can't vote in primaries if you aren't voting as a Republican."

I s he in a state with open primaries?
32 weeks ago
32 weeks ago Link To Comment
JaycenR, I hear you. That was one aspect I struggled with before I changed my affiliation. When I was a registered (R) though, and I have been my entire voting life until November of 2012, I used to vote in all the primaries.

Unfortunately though, GOP primary rules are such that in some states, (D)'s can just change their affiliation to (R) to vote in and influence the primary, and then change it right back to (D). What this does, is essentially negate my and many other (R)'s votes. It nullifies our votes.

So, when the GOP nominates (D)-Lite Republicans for two straight Presidential elections (many more than that if you go back to Bush 1), I don't see how the GOP is even remotely capable of doing what they have to do to win, which is to nominate a Conservative. Do you?
33 weeks ago
33 weeks ago Link To Comment
When Boehner is out on his weirdly orange ass, will you change your mind?
33 weeks ago
33 weeks ago Link To Comment
That's a start. Boehnhead is definitely part of the problem, but so is McConnell, and Grahamnesty, and McCain and Priebus and many others.

There are many in the GOP "leadership" that have proven they're nothing but part of the problem. I hope they change directions, I really do.

It's really sad, because if the GOP had reached out to disillusioned Conservatives and Tea Party supporters, made strides to get us back and on board with the GOP, they could have all but crushed the DimocRats and we wouldn't have had a second term of Obamism.

But instead they chose to call us names, stab us in the back and declare war on us. Not a good way to get us back on board.
33 weeks ago
33 weeks ago Link To Comment
It really depends upon the state where you live whether you can vote in a Republican Primary. If you have to be a Republican to vote in the primary, it is best to remain a Republican so that you have a chance to nominate a conservative for the general election.
33 weeks ago
33 weeks ago Link To Comment
I am no longer in the "go along to get along" camp. The so-called Republican "establishment" (a word that the Founders would have despised) is almost as bad as the Democrats. Worst of all, they repeatedly campaign on "smaller government" and "lower taxes" and never deliver anything except lies.
33 weeks ago
33 weeks ago Link To Comment
1 2 Next View All

One Trackback to “(UPDATED: NRSC Responds To Charge) Louie Gohmert (R-TX) Targets GOP Leadership with New PAC”