Killing the GOP One Race at a Time

December 17th, 2009 at 8:58 am | 59 Comments |

| Print

On Tuesday, Redstate.com’s Erik Erickson penned a piece calling on “real conservatives” to take another look at whether or not they really want Mark Kirk to get the GOP nomination in Illinois: “ Kirk is not a conservative. The question is: is Mark Kirk the most electable guy the Illinois GOP can put up in 2010?”

The short answer to this question is yes – and for exactly the reasons that make Erickson so dubious.

Erickson proposes that:

conservatives who are happy to ‘grin and bear it’ with Kirk may at least want to consider the following:

Kirk voted against the Defense of Marriage Act.

Kirk voted against the partial birth abortion ban.

Kirk opposed the Iraq War surge strategy.

Kirk has an “F” grade from the National Rifle Association.

And let’s not forget TARP, Cap and Trade, etc.

Erickson’s list is not quite accurate. Kirk did cast a vote in favor of a February 2007 non-binding resolution opposing the Iraq surge. But whenever his vote was needed to support the money and men for the surge strategy, Kirk voted aye.

Now then: here are a few more facts to add to the equation

  • The GOP has lost 9 of the 10 last Illinois Senate Races
  • In 2004, Barack Obama won the Senate seat currently up for grabs by a margin of 70% to the meager 27% that Republican nominee Alan Keyes commanded.
  • In 2008, Dick Durbin won a third term in the Senate, commanding 67.84% of the votes
  • In the 2008 Presidential race, then Illinois Senator Barack Obama beat John McCain 61.92%-36.78%
  • In the 2004 Presidential race, John Kerry defeated then President Bush in Illinois 55%-44%
  • In 2000, Al Gore defeated then Texas Gov. Bush 55%-43%
  • In 1996, President Clinton beat Senator Dole 54%-37%
  • Democrats control both houses of the Illinois State legislature

See a trend?

Now more:

Mark Kirk is the best vote-getter and fundraiser that Republicans have in Illinois. He won outright majorities of the vote in his North Shore district in 2006 and 2008 – despite a 61% Obama landslide in his district.

Erickson concludes: “given those dynamics, Washington, D.C. conservatives may want to take one more look at Patrick Hughes before getting into bed with a man they all admit will knife them in the chest with a smile once he gets to D.C.”

The key phrase here is “Washington D.C. conservatives.” Illinois conservatives should have a better grasp of political realities. The nomination of Patrick Hughes – or a bloody primary fight that divides the party and weakens its nominee – will leave smiles only on the face of Illinois Democrats and the Obama administration.

Recent Posts by Jeb Golinkin



59 Comments so far ↓

  • franco 2

    I give more credit to the primary voters. I don’t believe they voted for McCain because they thought McCain would receive favored treatment from the MSM.”

    It wasn’t just the primary voters, it was Huckabee siphoning off conservative votes from Romney and so-called independents and Democrats crossing over in various primaries to vote for McCain. Mvc Cain was the #1 choice of a small minority of real Republicans, yet he somehow managed to get the nomination. Something is very wrong with this. The States that allow Dems and independents to cross over and vote in GOP primaries have to change. The GOP, Steele and others need to fix this now! But they aren’t as far as I know. This is pathetic!

    And Huckawannabee was a stalking horse. He colluded with McCain, it was obvious. They squeezed Romney out. They pulled every stunt they could to negate Romney with the GOP and Bushies in on it.

    It was the idea that independents would and some Dems would vote for MCain in the general too which is ridiculous.

    I encourage you to read some of the commenters here and please read them carefully with your skeptic module enabled. Now besides the trolls who are giddy left-wing activists getting their jollys watching an internal squabble of their enemies, there are people who seem to be “real” independents.
    Here is one example;
    James Cody // Dec 20, 2009 at 1:25 pm
    I’m a moderate independent. I’ve voted for Bush, I’ve voted for Obama. I’ve sensed that I’m the type who votes against whomever is in office. I’m waiting to see if that’s actually true or whether I will continue to support Obama. But I most definitely am “gettable” as a voter. But if you want to win me over to your project here, you’re going to have stop assuming the facts that you want to be true because their conveniently consistent with your ideology (which I see you doing time and time again — it’s kind of funny how people who pride themselves on being non-ideological think that just because they don’t tow a party line, that means they’re not ideological themselves). You’re mostly definitely going to have to cut down on the snide and ridiculing sarcasm (I’m increasingly finding you as irritating as Rachel Maddow, which is funny because you were on her program to criticize her for her snide, ridiculing sarcasm). And you’re going to have become more intellectually rigorous. Because you’re really, really close to losing at least this independent vote.”

    Now what exactly do you think the ENTIRE GOP has to do to get this person’s vote? I would say this person is as partisan as they come – just doesn’t know it. Rachel Maddow irritates this guy. Great… but he watches Maddow doesn’t he? He is what I call a default leftist. This is NOT the kind of voter the GOP should waste it’s time on.

    Moreover these people continually make IMPOSSIBLE demands on the GOP. And notice how it is only the GOP that is ideological with these folks. It is a common thread. The Democrats they consider wise and neutral (if perhaps wrong on a few things…) and they can see extremes ONLY on the right – the radical left – even the Senators and representatives, not just pundits, they ignore somehow.

    Here is another from the same thread, very possibly a Democrat troll, but calling himself “independent”. .

    “I want to se a vibrant conservative party led by intellectual, compassionate, and articulate conservatives who obviously have this nations best interest at heart–that last part is clearly lacking in the party lately. No vacuous zealous religious fascists who advocate a theocracy, disingenuous corporate shills, Randian or Paulian extremists, or birthers need apply.”

    This guy won’t vote GOP , he just want the GOP to shut up all those he disagrees with. I guarantee this poster won’t vote GOP unless they literally put Palin before a firing squad.

    Or this pathetic argument : “It is possible that something can be, at the same time, a corrupt corporate giveaway AND an improvement over the current horrible system. That happens to be the case here: coverage would be greatly expanded and people who are now priced out of the market will be given help. From a simple humanitarian standpoint, it is STUPID and CHILDISH to kill this bill. It’s really a very Republican thing to do.”

    As to the future, it can play either way. I can argue that, as coverage expands, healthcare will be seen more as an entitlement, and less like Limbaugh’s “house on the beach.” I don’t think, as you say, that it can entrench permanently a system that will destroy the economy. If the insurance model in the end is structually so deficient, it will fall.

    It’s phony outrage, with a false mantle of principle.”

    This sounds like an outright left-wing koolade drinker, but why is he not at Kos ranting? He is one of those people who calls himself “independent” and votes in GOP primaries….for McCain.

    The GOP can do no right with these people and to listen to their advice is utterly foolish.

    And I believe I commended the current GOP pols for standing strong on this issue and it is mainly because they see the strength of the popular opposition, (unlike with the immigration bill). And I really like McConnell’s statement. This is a clear-cut case. On others I’m not so sure.

    As to buying the left’s propaganda, you have me all wrong. I feel safe in saying that I probably can see through it better and faster than you and probably anyone here. I am practically and expert on this. Please read that paragraph again, I may have not made myself clear but it is all there.

    I’m saying that Bush did not push back, for whatever reason, and they made a tactical error in putting all the eggs into one basket -the WMD’s. There really were strategic and global reasons behind this and WMD’s was just one part. They over emphasized this factor to get UN support and then when it failed they were stuck with it. Still they should have been more articulate, and they did not speak AT ALL about other countries stake in Sadaam’s Iraq. France China Russia all were dealing with Saddam through the oil-for food program, deriving revenue in a highly corrupt scheme, which is why they vetoed the UN vote for war.. The administration was silent. Why?

    Obviously we are never going to agree. But let me ask you this. At what point, when the GOP is taking us in the wrong direction election after election and nominating GOP droids as candidates in a craven attempt to gain and hold “majorities”, does someone who champions the free market and smaller government rebel? Or Mutiny with all respect to your Caine Mutiny analogy? The message needs to be sent. This was the year to do it. Actually we conservatives are winning, despite what many say here holding onto worn-out ideas and memes. Specter is gone and in a fight for his life with Toomey, Crist has a powerful opponent in Rubio, Republicans won elections in NJ and VA running conservatives. Conservatism wins. Politicians who have ideals get repect and they win. Politicians who play ideological games will lose. We are entering a new era where the eletorate is fired-up and ready to take on the left DIRECTLY not just biting aroung the edges as the current GOP is doing. Steele isn’t too bad but he is behind the curve on a lot of this. The tea party eruptions are something to include and use. I don’t see any clamoring moderates who want more appeasment of the Democrats getting any traction outside the beltway.

    The idea that the GOP can attract these so-called moderates without depressing the base is a non-starter for me. People who think Obama is benign and a centrist are basically leftwingers, face it. And those who thought so before the election and have changed their minds now, are somewhat centrist BUT THEY ARE IDIOTS. These people fall prey to the leftist propaganda put forth in the MSM and there isn’t much we can do about it. Put up a candidte like McCain and these folks believe what they hear from the MSM, so there is no winning them over.

    People who profess they want non-ideologues have no fundamental ideology themselves. It is a complete and utter myth that ideology is bad and/or that these people don’t have a default ideology. Everyone has guiding principles and if they claim they don’t they are morons and will fall for every two-bit propaganda ploy from Democrats.

    Really, you are either for capitalism and free markets or against it. The idea that if someone is four-square FOR free market capitalism does not mean they are pure “Randian” or want to end government funding of all social programs. It is just the DIRECTION we move that is important. Therefore these folks are kidding themselves that every politician needs to compromise and add more social programs as though we can do this forever. We can’t. Therefore. a hard line must be held and let them call us names. It means nothing.

  • grackle

    I said earlier: I give more credit to the primary voters. I don’t believe they voted for McCain because they thought McCain would receive favored treatment from the MSM.

    It wasn’t just the primary voters, it was Huckabee siphoning off conservative votes from Romney and so-called independents and Democrats crossing over in various primaries to vote for McCain.

    Oh, but it WAS the primary voters that elected McCain. You can say it wasn’t or imply it wasn’t until you are blue in the face but that doesn’t change the fact that the primary voters elected McCain. Franco, it’s obviously non-factual statements like this that hurt your cause. Repeating allegations over and over again does not make them true.

    As for Huckabee “siphoning” votes, of course he did. And Edwards siphoned votes, and Hillary. And I suppose Huckabee thinks that McCain siphoned votes from Huckabee’s primary campaign. And in the general election Obama siphoned votes from McCain and won. “Siphoning off” votes, as you put it, is what campaigning for office is all about. Franco, you take something that is ordinary, expected and commonplace and try to elevate it into some kind of immoral act. All candidates try to siphon votes from all other candidates. Didn’t you know that? This is like your earlier expectation that McCain was duty-bound to campaign for his opponents. Totally unreal.

    McCain was the #1 choice of a small minority of real Republicans, yet he somehow managed to get the nomination. Something is very wrong with this. The States that allow Dems and independents to cross over and vote in GOP primaries have to change. The GOP, Steele and others need to fix this now! But they aren’t as far as I know. This is pathetic!

    You impugn McCain unfairly. McCain campaigned under the laws of America and the rules of his party and won the nomination fair and square. Every candidate campaigned under the same rules. And this term, “real Republicans.” Who are you to decide who are valid Republicans? Who elected you? And McCain certainly did not win the nomination by the votes of a “small minority of real Republicans.” Franco, you need to stick to the facts.

    And Huckawannabee was a stalking horse. He colluded with McCain, it was obvious. They squeezed Romney out. They pulled every stunt they could to negate Romney with the GOP and Bushies in on it.

    Here you go with the wild conspiracy theories. You can spout this stuff all you want but it doesn’t make it true.

    It was the idea that independents would and some Dems would vote for MCain in the general too which is ridiculous.

    “It was the idea …” WHOSE idea? As for independents voting in the general election, ANY candidate that does not get those votes has very little chance of winning, so OF COURSE most candidates take that into consideration. That’s one of the reasons people other than official members of the parties are allowed to vote in the primaries. Here again you take the commonplace and try to give it an ominous significance it doesn’t deserve. It’s like exclaiming with bated breath, “Skinny people wear shoes!!!” Of COURSE THEY DO but that has NOTHING to do with anything.

    I encourage you to read some of the commenters here and please read them carefully with your skeptic module enabled. Now besides the trolls who are giddy left-wing activists getting their jollys watching an internal squabble of their enemies, there are people who seem to be “real” independents.
    Here is one example;
    James Cody // Dec 20, 2009 at 1:25 pm
    I’m a moderate independent…[etc., etc., etc.] Because you’re really, really close to losing at least this independent vote.”

    Now what exactly do you think the ENTIRE GOP has to do to get this person’s vote? I would say this person is as partisan as they come – just doesn’t know it. Rachel Maddow irritates this guy. Great… but he watches Maddow doesn’t he? He is what I call a default leftist. This is NOT the kind of voter the GOP should waste it’s time on.

    And your point is …. That for Republicans to campaign at all is not worth the trouble? Franco, do you believe that Republican candidates can be consistently elected with just the votes of the SoCons? And another thing: To really know anything about the possible significance of the comment you quote I would have to read the post and all the comments – which I’m definitely NOT going to do. You are going to have to start making your points in some less time-consuming manner.

    Look, Franco. To my mind quoting all these comments prove absolutely nothing. Who the hell knows who any of them really are, what they really believe or how they really voted? Anecdotal stuff like this proves nothing. It’s like the “man on the street” interviews the local news stations run on slow news days. Filler. Fluff. On the general issue of the independent voters, I will just repeat that any candidate that does not get the independent vote in the general election stands almost no chance of winning.

    And I believe I commended the current GOP pols for standing strong on this issue and it is mainly because they see the strength of the popular opposition, (unlike with the immigration bill). And I really like McConnell’s statement. This is a clear-cut case. On others I’m not so sure.

    As to buying the left’s propaganda, you have me all wrong. I feel safe in saying that I probably can see through it better and faster than you and probably anyone here. I am practically and expert on this. Please read that paragraph again, I may have not made myself clear but it is all there.

    Well, you seemed to have fallen for the anti-war meme that the Iraq war was just about WMD. If there was something else then spit it out.

    I’m saying that Bush did not push back, for whatever reason, and they made a tactical error in putting all the eggs into one basket -the WMD’s. There really were strategic and global reasons behind this and WMD’s was just one part.
    They over emphasized this factor to get UN support and then when it failed they were stuck with it.

    If I’m reading correctly you are saying that Bush over-emphasized WMD. What about the 500 metric tons of yellowcake? Do you believe Saddam was going to use it as fertilizer for his garden? Don’t you remember that every major intelligence agency in the WORLD(not just the CIA) was convinced that Saddam was trying to develop WMD? Even with those assessments of WMD danger from Saddam Bush’s speech to the UN cited a lot of other reasons to topple Saddam, not just WMD. Honest to God, I could be arguing with an anti-war Progressive here.

    Still they should have been more articulate, …

    Bush and Powell BOTH spoke to the UN. Bush administration folks were on all the talk shows. Were they ALL “inarticulate?”

    … and they did not speak AT ALL about other countries stake in Saddam’s Iraq. France China Russia all were dealing with Saddam through the oil-for food program, deriving revenue in a highly corrupt scheme, which is why they vetoed the UN vote for war. The administration was silent. Why?

    Franco, “other countries stake” was generally known, discussed and written about. Were you hibernating during that period? As for the administration being “silent,” I don’t believe they were. I’ll grant you that Bush didn’t loudly condemn “France China Russia” from the treetops. You don’t usually do that when you are trying to get approval for your war from major nations. This is another case of you elevating the ordinary to something it’s not.

    Obviously we are never going to agree. But let me ask you this. At what point, when the GOP is taking us in the wrong direction election after election and nominating GOP droids as candidates in a craven attempt to gain and hold “majorities”, does someone who champions the free market and smaller government rebel?

    You, and others like you, SAT OUT THE ELECTION IN A SNIT. Get out and work hard for the GOP candidate next time and I might listen to all this schoolboy bitching. “Droids?” Don’t you realize that you insult me by calling candidates for which I enthusiastically voted, “droids?” Nothing you say in the above has ANYTHING to do with McCain’s defeat, except that it reveals that you and folks who think as you do would rather have Obama in the Whitehouse rather than McCain and Palin. You got your wish – are you happy?

    Or Mutiny with all respect to your Caine Mutiny analogy? The message needs to be sent. This was the year to do it. Actually we conservatives are winning, despite what many say here holding onto worn-out ideas and memes. Specter is gone and in a fight for his life with Toomey, Crist has a powerful opponent in Rubio, Republicans won elections in NJ and VA running conservatives. Conservatism wins.

    “Conservatism wins?!!” Specter gives them the 60 votes in the Senate they need to pass the Health Scam. That’s not winning, Franco, that’s losing. On the NJ and VA races, those candidate won because they attracted INDEPENDENT voters(who you say are not worth trying to attract) because they stuck to the tried and true legitimate political issues of limited government, free markets, fiscal responsibility and downplayed the SoCon quasi-religious morality stuff.

    Politicians who have ideals get respect and they win. Politicians who play ideological games will lose.

    Does that include Obama, who played ideological games and spanked the GOP like a baby?

    We are entering a new era where the electorate is fired-up and ready to take on the left DIRECTLY not just biting around the edges as the current GOP is doing. Steele isn’t too bad but he is behind the curve on a lot of this. The tea party eruptions are something to include and use. I don’t see any clamoring moderates who want more appeasement of the Democrats getting any traction outside the beltway.

    I like the Tea Party, too. But I hope they don’t start a 3rd party and hand the next Presidential to Obama. If the GOP manages to stay away from all the SoCon crap and campaign on legitimate political issues I would say the GOP has a brighter future, but that’s a huge “if.”

    The idea that the GOP can attract these so-called moderates without depressing the base is a non-starter for me.

    Franco, if you throw away the “moderates,” you throw away elections. I’ll repeat this again: The GOP cannot win many elections unless they attract “moderates,” “independents,” whatever you want to call them.

    People who think Obama is benign and a centrist are basically leftwingers, face it. And those who thought so before the election and have changed their minds now, are somewhat centrist BUT THEY ARE IDIOTS.

    Always the name-calling: idiots, cretins, dolts. Franco, you need to realize that people do not usually vote for candidates in a party whose base constantly shows contempt for them.

    These people fall prey to the leftist propaganda put forth in the MSM and there isn’t much we can do about it. Put up a candidate like McCain and these folks believe what they hear from the MSM, so there is no winning them over.

    You are digging yourself into a hole. You hate moderates, independents, etc. and write them off but the hard fact is that the GOP is doomed without their votes.

    People who profess they want non-ideologues have no fundamental ideology themselves. It is a complete and utter myth that ideology is bad and/or that these people don’t have a default ideology. Everyone has guiding principles and if they claim they don’t they are morons and will fall for every two-bit propaganda ploy from Democrats.

    You know, I don’t much blame these “morons,” as you call them, for voting for the other side. It’s obvious that you despise them.

    Really, you are either for capitalism and free markets or against it. The idea that if someone is four-square FOR free market capitalism does not mean they are pure “Randian” or want to end government funding of all social programs. It is just the DIRECTION we move that is important. Therefore these folks are kidding themselves that every politician needs to compromise and add more social programs as though we can do this forever. We can’t. Therefore. a hard line must be held and let them call us names. It means nothing.

    Yeah, it “means nothing,” it means defeat and calamity but that’s nothing. My reading of the independents are that they would go for “capitalism and free markets,” it’s the insults and contempt that turns them to the other direction. You can’t expect the support of those you constantly insult.

  • franco 2

    “it’s the insults and contempt that turns them to the other direction. You can’t expect the support of those you constantly insult.”

    Wrong bucko. They are idiots. Please make the case that those who voted for Obama thinking they would get centrism are not political idiots, and they are idiots because they don’t understand the difference between the left, and what they want, and the right. They think both sides are wrong and they should play the middle. No other thought is needed.That is in a nutshell is their basic operating strategy.

    And I suppose you don’t get out much, or watch TV or payperview or the Sunday shows nor do you surf the net, because it is THEY who are calling US idiots and worse. Every day. And McCain encouraged these folks (he’s done this kind of thing before it’s not like it was a gaffe ) by saying “You have nothing to fear from an Obama Presidency” He didn’t just say this once – it was they way he campaigned…it is in his bones… he has a personal issue with confrontation even when it comes to ideology that you and I know is lethal. So he doesn’t see the threat. My central point. You don’t want a General who doesn’t see the threat. They get all their troops killed, no matter how hard the troops fight or how worthy the cause.. I predicted this because he’s been doing this kind of thing for years .

    Frum and company are trying to make the case that these moderates who voted for Obama will come to the GOP if we just all be nice and if somehow Rush Limbaugh would go away and Glenn Beck and Mark Levin and Ann Coulter and a whole lot more, and of course Sara Palin and Michelle Backman. Dream on! If that is what counts for conservative punditry… Its like Obama’s foreign policy, be nice to them and they will like us. What a fool.

    You really don’t know what you are talking about. The growth of government and corrupt politicians INCLUDING Republicans, and you seem fine with it. Yes I’m insulting you, and you are insulting me. You are going to vote for a Democrat over a conservative Republican? Some guy on a comment board insults you and you are gonna spite him and vote Dem? C’mon. And the fact remains that you are writing off conservatives who are more important than moderates = the kind of moderates who vote for Obama I mean. The conservatives aren’t going to change and they aren’t going away. The GOP right now is gaining cred with them holding fast on this Health Bill, and they should continue to fight and fight hard to keep them from starting a third party, because that may well be a disaster, and we both probably agree on that. So what is more realistic, for the world to change as Frum would like or Republicans to get a spine and hold fast to basic conservative traditions. The Tea Party movement is not a social conservative movement. They aren’t bible thumpers, so this should not interfere with the more moderate GOP pro-choicers = just the statists better watch out. Stop appeasing to try to gain majorities! Jim Jeffords switched in( 2004?) These assholes are unreliable.

    Angry? Take up your cause with Republican(?) moderates like Colin Powell Chuck Hegel and Lincoln Chafee. And to some extent John McCain, who likes to bash other Republicans in public…right now he’s doing OK…for now.

    Oh, and by the way, I have never used the word RINO in any of my posts as you mentioned previously. You read a lot more into my posts than are there and you seem to miss quite a lot. Perhaps it is my writing style, I don’t know why you miss so much, but you are pretty closed-minded and have a habit of manufacturing things that aren’t there.

    I gave up years ago using that term as unfortunately. They are Republicans, and I have no right to assign my beliefs to the Republican Party. Get it? I am not a Republican anymore if these guys are Republicans. Get it? I say now that I have in the past voted Republican and that I now still sympathize with most Republicans and that I probably will NEVER vote for a Democrat. But I am not a Republican and I stopped giving money to the party.

    See ya. This is my last post on this subject. It’s been fun!

  • grackle

    “it’s the insults and contempt that turns them to the other direction. You can’t expect the support of those you constantly insult.”

    Wrong bucko. They are idiots. Please make the case that those who voted for Obama thinking they would get centrism are not political idiots, and they are idiots because they don’t understand the difference between the left, and what they want, and the right. They think both sides are wrong and they should play the middle. No other thought is needed. That is in a nutshell is their basic operating strategy.

    I see it a bit differently. The center has been gradually drifting to the Left since the sixties. Through the politicization toward the Left of the MSM, academia and the intelligentsia, ersatz Marxist concepts have become internalized in our society to the point to where they are embedded within the conventional wisdom. Thus Obama can speak of “spreading the wealth” to Joe Sixpack and it doesn’t cause a ripple except among the Right.

    Most voters get their news from the MSM and the MSM promotes Leftist ideology and of course covered for Obama. I was at a friend’s home and she had MSNBC on during the Rev. Wright controversy. MSNBC NEVER ran clips of Wright’s inflammatory statements, just video of Wright doing some ordinary preaching. I was astounded.

    My friend and I discussed the Wright segment afterward. Her reaction was that the conservatives were prejudiced against Wright because he was preaching in that excitable style that most popular black preachers use – the dramatic gestures, tone of voice and turn of phrase – and that Rightwingers held that against him. To this day I don’t think she has any idea why Wright would seem so controversial, although I tried to explain. I guess she thought I was exaggerating or simply repeating hearsay.

    Condemning the middle of the roaders for not realizing the danger about Obama is like condemning the colorblind for not knowing the difference between red and purple. All their news is filtered through the Progressive MSM template. The MSM is feeding middle America a pantload about the Health Crap the Dems are about to pass, too. My friend is quite happy about it and thinks I am a cruel, heartless denier of healthcare to the needy. She doesn’t realize that when she becomes older she most likely will be denied quality of life procedures – as they do in Great Britain.

    But you, Franco, you KNEW that Obama was a radical. You have no excuse.

    And I suppose you don’t get out much, or watch TV or payperview or the Sunday shows nor do you surf the net, because it is THEY who are calling US idiots and worse. Every day. And McCain encouraged these folks (he’s done this kind of thing before it’s not like it was a gaffe ) by saying “You have nothing to fear from an Obama Presidency” He didn’t just say this once – it was they way he campaigned…it is in his bones… he has a personal issue with confrontation even when it comes to ideology that you and I know is lethal. So he doesn’t see the threat. My central point. You don’t want a General who doesn’t see the threat. They get all their troops killed, no matter how hard the troops fight or how worthy the cause.. I predicted this because he’s been doing this kind of thing for years.

    Still favoring Obama over McCain, I see. You and Ann Coulter. You are exaggerating again and making false connections. True, in past years McCain has worked as a facilitator between the Dems and the GOP in the Senate and during the campaign McCain dampened enthusiastic opposition to Obama when it wasn’t really called for but that’s a far cry from encouraging the Left to call the Right names – as you try to imply. McCain made a couple of bad split-second decisions on how to handle a couple of potentially controversial questions from the audience during the townhall campaign venues and was stuck with the decision lest he be labeled a flip-flopper. I don’t think what he has done translates to any pathological aversion to confrontation. He’s certainly been confronting the Dems on the Healthcare Crap. And I especially don’t think any of it means he would have been a bad Commander in Chief.

    Frum and company are trying to make the case that these moderates who voted for Obama will come to the GOP if we just all be nice and if somehow Rush Limbaugh would go away and Glenn Beck and Mark Levin and Ann Coulter and a whole lot more, and of course Sara Palin and Michelle Backman. Dream on! If that is what counts for conservative punditry… Its like Obama’s foreign policy, be nice to them and they will like us. What a fool.

    I think Frum is wrong about a lot of things also. Especially about Sarah Palin. But like him I wish the emphasis could be on promoting the concepts I cherish – limited government, free markets and a strong defense – instead applying a SoCon quasi-religious litmus for club membership as if the GOP was a church.

    You really don’t know what you are talking about. The growth of government and corrupt politicians INCLUDING Republicans, and you seem fine with it. Yes I’m insulting you, and you are insulting me. You are going to vote for a Democrat over a conservative Republican? Some guy on a comment board insults you and you are gonna spite him and vote Dem?

    No, I’m going to vote Republican no matter who insults me. Unlike you and the others who sat out the election I try not to allow trivialities to divert me from doing the right thing, Franco. I try to see the big picture and not let the emotion of the moment defeat my purpose. I merely stated that I could easily see how someone who was in the process of perhaps crossing over to our side would be put off by being called “cretins,” “dolts,” and “idiots.”

    You say the other side calls us names. Now, try hard to fire up your imagination, Franco. Try to imagine you are someone who may be on the cusp of changing their mind. Someone who has voted mostly Democrat in the past but has accidentally read some columns by Krauthammer and they have set them to thinking, “Could I have been wrong? Should I start voting Republican?”

    On one side you see pundits and politicians calling the opposition names – as you say the Left does. On the other side you see them saying, “Come on in, the water’s fine. Learn more about our philosophy. We welcome you.” Isn’t that better than calling them idiots because they voted Dem in the past? Don’t you think the better approach is to respect their past opinions? They are only human, trying the best they can to figure things out and do the right thing. Have you always been right on everything in life, Franco?

    C’mon. And the fact remains that you are writing off conservatives who are more important than moderates = the kind of moderates who vote for Obama I mean. The conservatives aren’t going to change and they aren’t going away. The GOP right now is gaining cred with them holding fast on this Health Bill, and they should continue to fight and fight hard to keep them from starting a third party, because that may well be a disaster, and we both probably agree on that. So what is more realistic, for the world to change as Frum would like or Republicans to get a spine and hold fast to basic conservative traditions. The Tea Party movement is not a social conservative movement. They aren’t bible thumpers, so this should not interfere with the more moderate GOP pro-choicers = just the statists better watch out. Stop appeasing to try to gain majorities! Jim Jeffords switched in( 2004?) These assholes are unreliable.

    I agree with much of what you say. And I certainly believe the Tea Party can be a force for good. I give them money.

    Angry? Take up your cause with Republican(?) moderates like Colin Powell Chuck Hegel and Lincoln Chafee. And to some extent John McCain, who likes to bash other Republicans in public…right now he’s doing OK…for now.

    It is quite common for politicians in the same party to disagree. Happens all the time. Is this what you mean with the bashing accusation?

    Oh, and by the way, I have never used the word RINO in any of my posts as you mentioned previously. You read a lot more into my posts than are there and you seem to miss quite a lot. Perhaps it is my writing style, I don’t know why you miss so much, but you are pretty closed-minded and have a habit of manufacturing things that aren’t there.

    I don’t believe I have indicated that you have used the term, “RINO,” anywhere in our comments. Another straw man, Franco? And what have I manufactured? If I’ve made errors point them out instead making vague accusations.

    I gave up years ago using that term as unfortunately. They are Republicans, and I have no right to assign my beliefs to the Republican Party. Get it? I am not a Republican anymore if these guys are Republicans. Get it? I say now that I have in the past voted Republican and that I now still sympathize with most Republicans and that I probably will NEVER vote for a Democrat. But I am not a Republican and I stopped giving money to the party.

    See ya. This is my last post on this subject. It’s been fun!

    I guess I’m a Republican, Franco. I’ve been calling myself an “independent.” I donate a few bucks to the Republican Party now and then – not much. I always vote Republican. I think of myself as a classic Liberal(not as the term is used today) with a Neoconservative slant on foreign policy, but the fact remains that I am certainly no Democrat. We have our disagreements, Franco, but I wish you well. Please, for the good of us all, DON’T sit out the next election. Your country needs you.

  • FormerGOP

    Interesting arguments.
    In the 80s I voted GOP. In the 2000s, Democratic. And my beliefs have changed very little. What happened?
    I’m a social progressive and a fiscal conservative.
    While I don’t get worked up over these issues: I don’t care who marries who. None of my business. And making a big deal over it when there are more important things to talk about is really stupid.
    I think that the decisions that a woman and her doctor make are private in the first trimester. It always happened.
    Marijuana is less dangerous than alcohol. Why is it illegal?
    But the highly vocal idiots on the right would have terrible things to say about someone like me.

    And when I try to explain to my liberal friends that the insurance companies aren’t the problem in health care — the problem is distortions that create perverse incentives that keep the market from operating well — they listen to me calmly and reasonably and we have interesting discussions. They listen that profits in the healthcare market are an important part of reforming it by creating competition. I can explain to them that tort reform is essential to reducing overall costs and they listen and can be convinced that is one aspect that does need to be changed.
    I am not demonized. I am not attacked in anger. I am not branded in the ways my conservative friends brand me.
    And here is the fact: Clinton increased spending slower than either Bushes or Reagan. Clinton balanced the budget. And when the GOP had power, they seemed more concerned with engineeering a permanent majority than in running government efficiently.

  • FormerGOP

    grackle: If you are not an ideologue, than why vote GOP when they govern badly?
    Don’t you believe in accountability? If Bush grows spending faster than Clinton … and starts an unneccessary war … doesn’t someone have to answer for that?
    The GOP says it wants small government, but then Bush and Tom Delay grow government more than the Democrats. If you want to reward that behavior, vote the for GOP like a robot.

  • FormerGOP

    franco 2 said: “Wrong bucko. They are idiots. Please make the case that those who voted for Obama thinking they would get centrism are not political idiots, and they are idiots because they don’t understand the difference between the left, and what they want, and the right. ”

    franco 2: People like you chased me out of your party with your vitriol. Go stew in your diaper.
    Yes, centrists who vote on who they think will govern effectively are contemptible idiots .

    It’s like they say in church: God is love. And he will send people who worship him differently from the way I do, no matter how many kind acts they perform, into an enternal hellfire.
    I’ll see you there.

  • NH

    Please tell me what a ‘centrist’ is?

    You are either FOR the Republic or FOR the one-world socialist order under George Soros and the oligarchic bankers who run Obama.

    You can’t have it both ways.

    I choose the Constitutional Republic always as well as sovereignty… and we’re losing it fast under Obama.

  • Rockerbabe

    The GOP is trying to hold all of their candidates to a rigid idealogy; which is not always the best way to get elected. It also belies the notion that the GOP is a “big tent” that will accommodate varying pov on a variety of issues. Not so, when it comes to women, minorities and the common person who doesn’t make a high five figure or six figure salary.

    I would really like to have more choices of candidates to vote for; but I am not going to sacrifice my rights as a woman, to vote for a member of the GOP who undercuts everything I value. Such notions as reproductive rights, equal employment opportunity, equal educations rights, a fair and progressive tax structure, decent treatment of minorities, winding down the immoral and unnecessary wars we are currently engaged in and counting ALL the votes cast in an election. This also includes freedom from unwanted religious interference in my secular rights. I would love a balanced budget such as with former Pres. Clinton, but with Dubya’s wars, that will be a long time coming. So, I guess I will vote for the candidate that best respects my rights and offers me some notion of progress and right now, that is NOT the GOP.