Eric Cantor K.O.'d by Tea Party

[Wolf DeVoon]

"Eric Cantor's loss tonight is an apocalyptic moment for the GOP establishment," said Brent Bozell, a conservative leader who advises several tea party groups. "The grassroots is in revolt and marching." [AP]

Cantor became the first majority leader to lose a primary in 115 years. So who is Dave Brat? ... He chairs the department of economics and business at Randolph-Macon College and heads its BB&T Moral Foundations of Capitalism program. The funding for the program came from John Allison, the former CEO of BB&T who now heads the Cato Institute. The two share an affinity for Ayn Rand. Allison is a major supporter of the Ayn Rand Institute, and Brat co-authored a paper titled "An Analysis of the Moral Foundations in Ayn Rand." Brat says he has been influenced by Atlas Shrugged and appreciates Rand’s case for human freedom. [Mother Jones]

[Selene]

Ayn Rand Scholars Are “Too Liberal”

How did that work for you?

You could not ask for a better snapshot of the Tea Party capture of the GOP. Here is Eric Cantor, the "young gun," the man who helped the 2010 class scuttle any Boehner-Obama deal on the debt limit, running to the right of a guy who has published academic work on the moral foundations of Ayn Rand's canon.

http://www.slate.com/blogs/weigel/2014/05/27/eric_cantor_has_run_two_negative_ads_against_his_primary_foe_for_being_too.htmlhttp://www.slate.com/blogs/weigel/2014/05/27/eric_cantor_has_run_two_negative_ads_against_his_primary_foe_for_being_too.html

[Wolf DeVoon]

Eric Cantor was defeated by a single issue: the flood of illegal immigrants.

Americans are a kind and generous people, and photographs of a sea of small, frightened and hungry faces in U.S. shelters along the southern border are enough to break a million hearts. President Obama, whatever he intended, is largely responsible. Lured by lax immigration enforcement and the promise of citizenship as “dreamers,” the Obama children’s hour is changing the mission at the border from ensuring security to providing emergency assistance. Last week, the president declared the border an “urgent humanitarian situation.” He assigned the handling of the influx of children to Craig Fugate, administrator of the Federal Emergency Management Agency, which customarily provides relief following natural disasters. This is a disaster, sure enough, but it’s a man-made disaster.

Untended children leaving their homes in Mexico, Honduras, Guatemala and El Salvador to head north is anything but natural. On June 2, House Judiciary Committee Chairman Bob Goodlatte pinned the blame squarely on Mr. Obama’s broken border policies. “Word has gotten out around the world about President Obama’s lax immigration-enforcement policies and it has encouraged more people to come to the United States illegally, many of whom are children from Central America.”

Coming to America now means getting free citizenship, free health care, welfare benefits and even an Obamaphone. Illegal aliens crossing the border into Texas say news reports in their Central American homelands encourage them to risk the journey northward with the promise that if they make it to the U.S. border, they won’t be turned away. [Washington Times]

The main flashpoint in the race [was] immigration reform. Brat, like many in the conservative movement, sees Cantor and the House leadership as always one breath away from jamming amnesty and cheap Mexican labor down the throats of God-fearing White American people. Cantor, especially, since he’s a major fundraising conduit for the Republican business community, which wants to see immigration reform get done. Brat is playing off of these fears of What Cantor Might Do: “Eric Cantor represents large corporations who want a never-ending supply of cheap, low-wage foreign labor.” [salon.com]

[moralist]

Wow... what a surprizing upset.



(newsmax.com)



TEA PARTY CLAIMS HUGE SCALP AS CANTOR CRASHES IN PRIMARY





Tuesday, 10 Jun 2014 08:09 PM



By Cathy Burke, Greg Richter and Todd Beamon



In the most stunning upset of the midterm election season, House Majority Leader Eric Cantor was crushed in the Virginia Republican primary Tuesday by little-known tea party-backed challenger Dave Brat.



With 100 percent of the vote counted, Brat had 55.5 percent to Cantor's 44.5 percent.



Reminds me of "Dune"...









Greg

[Selene]

The 2nd Dune movie - really well done!

First one sucked.

[Jules Troy]

Damn seems there is hope after all!

[Wolf DeVoon]

Damn seems there is hope after all!

Sort of a mixed blessing, pun intended.

Brat and his supporters in the Tea Party were triumphant. “This is a miracle from God,” said the economics professor. [CBS]

Master of Divinity, Princeton Theological Seminary, Princeton, New Jersey, 1990 [brat's resume]

Appearing on Fox News after the race was called, Brat disputed the characterization of the race as being simply a battle between the tea party and establishment. He said he had won support from Republicans across the board who were attracted to his espousal of fiscal conservatism and “faith in God.” [Politico]

[Selene]

Here is Brat's statement on why he wanted/wants to replace Eric Cantor:

http://www.hyscience.com/archives/2014/06/politics_bigges.php?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+Hyscience+%28Hyscience%29

This insatiable desire for control, coupled with a sincere disdain for the conservative grassroots, explains why our "leadership" continues to take mind-boggling positions on issues long cherished by the left, such as amnesty, and why opposition to additional bloated government programs often seems contrived. The unfortunate truth is that control for Eric Cantor and establishment Republicans means cozying up to the comfy nexus of mega-big-business with mega-big-government.

As an economist, I can see the conditions for new manufacturing in this country. Low energy costs are one such condition that could bring good, new manufacturing jobs that will help restore our fraying social order by welcoming back to the world of productive work many of those now languishing on the margins.

Yes, he is religious.

I have no problem walking with, and working with, religious folks who share my values in terms of public policy, econmic theory and limiting the Juggernaut of centralized government.

A...

[Mikee]

The outcome is the result of democrats voting for Brat. Win-win for democrats. They have an easier opponent with Brat. If they lose they at least have gotten rid of Cantor. Once again republicans look like grade schoolers trying to play in the big leagues.

[Selene]

The outcome is the result of democrats voting for Brat. Win-win for democrats.

Was this an "open primary?"

I shoud know the answer to this, however I don't.

[Mikee]

Yes.

Well, I don't follow all the states and their rules but I've heard this on one conversation on the radio on the way to work and read a couple replies on a WSJ article which indicate the same thing. The democrats believe the end justifies the means, any means to an end. The most ruthless and able to obfuscate or equivocate wins. Create division and cynicism and the best liars win every time.

[Mark]

Quoting a Salon.com article:

Eric Cantor was defeated by a single issue: the flood of illegal immigrants.

... Brat ... sees Cantor and the House leadership as always one breath away from jamming amnesty and cheap Mexican labor down the throats of God-fearing White American people.” [salon.com]

Thus the liberal Salon expresses its disdain for whites who oppose open immigration. Translation: Cantor and the House leadership are trying to jam amnesty down our throats.

It's true, with or without God.

An article on Vdare.com by "Washington Insider" says "David Brat’s primary victory over Republican Majority Leader Eric Cantor" is

... the greatest electoral victory to date for the patriotic immigration reform movement.

Having worked in Republican immigration politics for many years, I’ve seen a ... pattern in challenges to pro-Amnesty politicians. ...

1) Establishment candidate supports amnesty.

2) Challenger runs anti-amnesty campaign.

3) Establishment candidate pretends to oppose amnesty [too] and outspends challenger by many orders of magnitude.

4) Establishment candidate fools voters and wins.

5) Chattering classes use election as proof that voters support amnesty.

6) Establishment candidate goes back to supporting amnesty.

...

... Eric Cantor was on the same path. ... Cantor has been ... supporting Amnesty for some time. Yet, faced with Brat’s challenge, Cantor began sending out campaign mailers stating "Conservative Republican Eric Cantor Is Stopping the Obama Reid Plan to Give Illegal Aliens Amnesty."

Money is what makes this campaign both stunning and such a win for patriotic immigration reform. Cantor raised over five million dollars to David Brat’s $200,000. Brat responded with a populist campaign calling Cantor a tool of the cheap labor and business lobby. ...

...

[brat] shows a real passion and understanding of the importance of the issue that goes far beyond the usual clichés of "secure the border" and "stop Amnesty" you hear from your average conservative shyster. And although Brat focused on Amnesty, he has expressed support for ending birthright citizenship, ending chain migration and reducing overall legal immigration levels.

...

While Brat portrayed himself as a Tea Partier, and toed the conservative line on most issues, he was able to attract voters because, the amnesty is the ultimate crony Establishment policy: not earmarks or a farm subsidies.

　

　

[Frediano]

How much is just anger at DC, period, and any incumbent in this totally out of control mess?

Perhaps the TeaParty is not nearly radical enough to fully tap into the nation's growing disgust and rage. Maybe a full out 'Take an Axe to DC' party would sell better.

It's platform could be summed up in a single image; a smoking crater in Northern VA before it is too late for this nation.

We are well beyond the 'scalpel' stage of fixing this turd.

[BaalChatzaf]

How much is just anger at DC, period, and any incumbent in this totally out of control mess?

Perhaps the TeaParty is not nearly radical enough to fully tap into the nation's growing disgust and rage. Maybe a full out 'Take an Axe to DC' party would sell better.

It's platform could be summed up in a single image; a smoking crater in Northern VA before it is too late for this nation.

We are well beyond the 'scalpel' stage of fixing this turd.

The "turd" is armed with rifles, canons, tanks, planes, gas, flamethrowers and nuclear weapons. Any talk about "taking it out" borders on the fantastic. It will have to collapse under the weight of its corruption and rot.

Ba'al Chatzaf

[George H. Smith]

http://blogs.wsj.com/washwire/2014/06/10/who-is-david-brat-meet-the-economics-professor-who-defeated-eric-cantor/

His other published works include the titles “God and Advanced Mammon – Can Theological Types Handle Usury and Capitalism?” and “An Analysis of the Moral Foundations in Ayn Rand.”

Anyone read Brat's article on Rand? It might be available online. I haven' t checked yet.

Ghs

[George H. Smith]

Yes, he is religious.

Left-bloggers are claiming that Brat is a "Christian Reconstructionist," which, if true, would make him a strict Calvinist who favors a type of theocracy. But the claim is highly suspicious, since Brat is a Catholic.

Ghs

[Reidy]

I couldn't find the Brat article itself, but here is a citation.

Here is an article that points up both the best and the worst about him. He refuses to play along with James Taggart and his drinking companions.

On the other hand, on the immigration issue he advocates coercive social planning in expressly anti-business, anti-market populist language. The article establishes that what what De Voon says (or is he quoting?) in #3 is incorrect. Brat does not simply oppose illegal immigration; he wants to raise barriers to legal immigration as well.

[Mark]

"Big business" for the most part is treasonous when it comes to the immigration invasion.

Legal immigration is even more of a problem than illegal.

[Michael Stuart Kelly]

From Brat's Randolph-Macon College page: DAVID A. BRAT - Department of Economics and Business Director, BB&T Moral Foundations of Capitalism Program, specifically here:

“God and Advanced Mammon – Can Theological Types Handle Usury and Capitalism?” By David Brat for Interpretation, April 2011

“An Analysis of the Moral Foundations in Ayn Rand” by Katy Holland and David Brat, presented and published in the proceedings of Southeast Informs, Myrtle Beach, SC, October 6, 2010

I tried looking into Southeast Informs, but it is hopeless right now. Lots of lefties are digging like mad, though (and snarking to high Heaven), so this paper should turn up on the Interwebs sooner than later.

As to Katy Holland, there is an author at Thoughtful Women who sounds like it could be her, especially the article on moral relativism.

Michael

[Selene]

As was noted by George's in post # 15, Brat did not get much support other than from Laura Ingram.

The blog failed to mention that Mark Levin also backed him big time.

I want to see the prior Cantor E.D. by E..D. breakdown in the 7th and compare to what happened yesterday.

My gut is telling me that these instant analysises are shallow.

Taranto had a very clever article today called, "Cantor Defeats Truman!" Here is the link:

http://online.wsj.com/articles/best-of-the-web-today-cantor-defeats-truman-1402513517?tesla=y&mg=reno64-wsj&url=http://online.wsj.com

/article/SB10001424052702303827304579618293713120958.html

Mitt Romney carried the district by 15 points in 2012, so Republicans face little danger of losing the seat. But the intraparty implications of the No. 2 House leader's defeat could be large. "Befuddlement hit and lingered within the House GOP leadership ranks," National Journal's delightfully named Billy House reported last night:

"Given the speculation [John] Boehner himself may decide not to run again for speaker, the idea had been out there that Cantor would simply walk into the speakership," said [an anonymous GOP] aide. "But now, who the hell would be the next speaker?"--particularly, the aide added, if Paul Ryan doesn't want it, or Rep. Tom Price of Georgia isn't interested.

House's colleague Tim Alberta calls Cantor's loss "a significant victory for a growing group of frustrated House Republicans who have been plotting to shake up the GOP leadership structure ahead of the 114th Congress." They may get a chance to make their mark sooner than that: Today Cantor announced he's stepping down as majority leader effective July 31.

A...

[Selene]

Apparently, according to Wiki, Virginia only has open primaries in Presidential elections. There are twenty (20) states with open presidential primaries...which is why Rush's Operation ___________? in 2008 was ok.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Open_primaries_in_the_United_States#States_with_open_primaries_for_other_elections

States with open primaries for other elections

A similar system known as a nonpartisan blanket primary has been used in Louisiana for state and local elections since 1976, and began to be used in Washington, after numerous court challenges, in 2008.

In California, under Proposition 14, a measure that easily passed, traditional party primaries will be replaced in 2011 with wide-open elections. Proposition 14, known as the open primary measure, will give every voter the same ballot in primary elections for most state and federal races, except the presidential contest.^[12][13]

So apparently, this was not cross-over Democrats that helped Brat beat Cantor.

A...

[George H. Smith]

http://www.vox.com/2014/6/10/5798904/the-bank-funded-libertarian-curriculum-david-brat-taught-at-randolph

David Brat’s controversial, Randian-funded economics program

David Brat's work at Randolph-Macon College gives one more clue to who he is. Aside from chairing the economics department, he is director of the BB&T Moral Foundations of Capitalism program. In this program, underwritten by the bank BB&T's charitable foundation and inaugurated in 2008, colleges teach a curriculum that promotes free-market economics, and notably, the ideas of Ayn Rand.

The man behind the program, former BB&T chairman and CEO John Allison has described the curriculum as a way of helping save America from economic decline:

Unless students (i.e., future leaders, teachers, professors, etc.) learn the principles that underlie a free society, the United States will continue to move toward statism and economic decline. The believers in "life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness" must retake the universities, or America will ultimately become a second-tier country with a dark future. That is the context in which BB&T began its program "The Moral Foundations of Capitalism."

Allison added that he was frustrated intellectuals had "dismissed" free-market economic ideas. This is no casual cause for Allison; he is the president and CEO of the Cato Institute and also sat on the board of directors of the Ayn Rand Institute, a think tank that promotes the objectivist writer's ideas. Allison adds in this article that Atlas Shrugged was usually included in the curriculum for the program.

According to Allison, under the program universities received $50,000 to $200,000 per year over the course of 10 years of teaching the courses.

Not that all universities happily accepted the BB&T money. The American Association of University Professors has criticized this sort of arrangement of payment in exchange for teaching a particular curriculum. With this in mind, some colleges started questioning how they accept these sorts of funds and how it might affect academic freedom, according to a 2010 AAUP article.

This isn't to say Brat is a Rand disciple himself. As Zack Beauchamp wrote earlier tonight, the National Review wrote in a piece on Brat that while "isn't a Randian," he is influenced by her writings and philosophy and "appreciates Rand's case for human freedom and free markets."

Corrected. This article originally misstated the AAUP as the American Association of University Presidents.

Ghs

[Selene]

Does anyone know if any Randian, Objectivist, or, libertarian groups made any endorsements in Virginia 7th?

[Reidy]

Concerning the "crossover" question in #9, #11 and elsewhere:

The open-primary rules mean that Democrats did not change their registration in order to vote for Brat, but it doesn't rule out the possibility that voters who consider themselves Democrats and plan to vote Democratic in November voted yesterday for Brat. This is a checkable claim of fact. What do your data look like?

Some pre-election indicators might be: a Democratic ad campaign promoting this plan; heavy news coverage of such a plan; polls or interviews indicating that lots of Democrats planned to cast such a vote; tallies showing that the Democratic primary candidates got conspicuously fewer total votes than usual and that Brat's totals plausibly included all of the "lost" votes. Post-election indicators might be followup polls or interviews confirming this.

I'm skeptical that any significant number of voters would be devious enough to go along with a crossover plan. Such skepticism leaves me to conclude, as Occam would advise me to conclude, that Brat's voters were Republicans who wanted to see him in Congress. Show me some hard data to the contrary and I'll stand corrected.

[Mikee]

This Washington Post article discounts the democrat crossover theory with data and analysis.