It's About Liberty: A Conservative Forum
Topics => Politics/Legislation/Elections => Topic started by: charlesoakwood on November 08, 2011, 08:24:32 AM
-
Red flags from Red State (http://www.redstate.com). This (http://www.redstate.com/erick/2011/11/08/mitt-romney-as-the-nominee-conservatism-dies-and-barack-obama-wins/) article reads like a dime novel (hot and fast). If you have a weak heart skip this or take appropriate medication before reading. Also remove sharp objects or objects that can be thrown against the wall from the general area.
...
Newt Gingrich will not be the nominee because, despite his daughter’s rebuttals to the horror stories of how Gingrich divorced his first of three wives, Jackie Gingrich told the Washington Post on January 3, 1985, “He walked out in the spring of 1980 and I returned to Georgia. By September, I went into the hospital for my third surgery. The two girls came to see me, and said Daddy is downstairs and could he come up? When he got there, he wanted to discuss the terms of the divorce while I was recovering from the surgery.”
Gingrich went on to cheat on the second wife with the third. Regardless of the actual facts or even the spin, he won’t win women.
...
I’ve been reading the 200 pages of single spaced opposition research from the John McCain campaign on Mitt Romney. There is no issue I can find on which Mitt Romney has not taken both sides. He is neither liberal nor conservative. He is simply unprincipled. The man has no core beliefs other than in himself. You want him to be tough? He’ll be tough. You want him to be sensitive? He’ll be sensitive. You want him to be for killing the unborn? He’ll go all in on abortion rights until he wants to run for an office where it is not in his advantage.
...
Link (http://www.redstate.com/erick/2011/11/08/mitt-romney-as-the-nominee-conservatism-dies-and-barack-obama-wins/)
-
Why Conservatism Will Die
Conservatism is already dying. Republicans on Capitol Hill are about to raise taxes on the American people with this Super Committee, but they’ll say they are just “raising revenue,” not taxes. Conservatives will give them a pass as they have on virtually every other major issue. Conservatives keep giving passes to people who shouldn’t be given passes because conservative in Washington have been there so long, they’d much rather get invited to the cocktail parties and avoid awkward encounters.
Washington, D.C. conservatives will also rally around Mitt Romney, just as they kept doing over and over and over with George W. Bush even after steel tariffs in Pennsylvania, No Child Left Behind, Medicare Part D, the GM Bailout, and TARP. At some point the public will cease taking conservatives seriously when the most prominent conservatives — those in Washington who pose as the faces, voices, and writers of the conservative movement at large, keep throwing their lot in with a guy who keeps selling out the very principles conservatives claim to hold dear.
Some conservatives, of course, will not go all in for Romney. These conservatives will be blamed by major Republican and “conservative” mouth pieces for not doing enough to help Mitt Romney. They will be alienated, blamed, and made the scapegoat for the failures of the establishment GOP.
But there is something else too — Mitt Romney is winning the nomination without conservative help. The only time he pays conservatives any attention is when they cry loud enough that the media takes notice and Romney decides the story needs to go away. Once he is the nominee, it will be all about wooing the independents.
Hell, he can give the base Marco Rubio as the veep nominee, just like McCain did with Palin — a token for the base. But don’t delude yourself into thinking he will seriously take conservatives seriously. He got the nomination without them and he’ll only use them when it is opportunistically convenient for him.
Conservatism itself will not really die. But it might as well be dead as even conservatives in the heartland of the country stop taking Washington conservatives seriously.
The Contrast To Be Drawn
It is striking to me that in 2012 there is broad based popular angst against Wall Street and Washington and the Republican Party is on the verge of nominating a multi-millionaire scion of the Rockefeller Wing of the Republican Party whose closest encounters with the common man are accidentally touching one of the many hired hands in one of the many rooms of one of his many mansions. But then many of the DC-NYC Republican “conservatives” who support Romney are the same, only coming into contact with regular people when they are served their breakfast by a steward in the first class car on the Acela Express.
Neither Romney nor the Washington GOP crowd who loves him have very much at all in common with fly over country conservatives who see the GOP and Democrats both as out to lunch tools of K-Street and Wall Street. The party that could lead a conservative, populist campaign against Wall Street and Barack Obama, the former getting fat off the latter, will instead nominate a guy more at home on Wall Street than Main Street.
There are conservatives and then there are "conservatives", and Erickson's made a muddle by not clearly and consistently delineating one from the other. The "establishment GOP" is not conservative, and their supporters are not conservative, they're liberal Republicans, otherwise known as RINOs, and that includes the "conservative" mouthpieces and pundits.
Is he confirming the TEA Party-elected conservatives have been co-opted by the E-GOP? I can't tell, and I don't know that they have. There have been complaints voiced that "we" sent them to the House and they've done nothing, but I know the House has passed at least 15 pieces of legislation that would assist the private sector in job creation and they now sit in the Senate, gathering cobwebs.
Is Erickson calling Boehner a "DC 'conservative'"? I can't tell -- he didn't specify by name -- but he's definitely an E-GOP problem; once he decided to complicate a House vote on repeal of Obamacare, that was plain.
But, I get it; Erickson believes Romney will be foisted on us and, therefore, we're doomed.
SSDD
-
Dang good analysis Pan, I'd say you've got it dialed in.
And if Romney is forced on us, then it is entirely likely Obama will be returned to the White House. I have to believe of all the major candidates, he relishes a Romney match up more thatn any other.
I'm so tired of this tragically repetetive dance!
All we are doing is circling the drain...
And some days it seems unavoidable...
::gaah::
-
Erickson's policy at RedState is "Conservative in the primary; Republican in the general."
Well Erick, you are now choking on the applied results your own policy. Bile doesn't taste very good, does it?
-
Wouldn't D.C. conservatives be the neo-cons such as Krauthammer and Kristol?
I'm not clear on the term, E-GOP. It's a new one for me.
-
Wouldn't D.C. conservatives be the neo-cons such as Krauthammer and Kristol?
I'm not clear on the term, E-GOP. It's a new one for me.
Yah, sorry; I coined it as "shorthand" for "Establishment GOP".
-
Yah, sorry; I coined it as "shorthand" for "Establishment GOP".
Of course! (I can't believe I didn't get that) ::doh::
-
Yah, sorry; I coined it as "shorthand" for "Establishment GOP".
Of course! (I can't believe I didn't get that) ::doh::
That makes two of us IDP and as far as Romney goes if what he is saying were true how do you explain the 2010 Mid-Terms?
I think he doth protest to much. ::pokeineye::
-
If romney is the nominee and defeats obama....he will be a one termer because the tea party elective will hold his feet to the fire and the media will spend 4 years belaboring the point republicans are obstructionists and can't even support with thier own president.
It will be a blood bath every day in print.
-
I think he and the Tea Party folks are copacetic.
-
I think he and the Tea Party folks are copacetic.
To clarify: you are of the opinion that TEA Party folks are not opposed to the Mittster?
-
I think he and the Tea Party folks are copacetic.
Seriously?
-
1:14 ...they're doing nothing more than killing jobs.
It is a cemetary for jobs at the E P A.
Rick Perry's Tea Party Speech (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W67bLGiHiFk#)
9/12/11
-
That's Perry, not Romney. Some clarification would be appreciated with regard to your remark about the TEA Party folks.
-
I agree, the Tea party will embrace Perry....Not romney.
-
I agree, the Tea party will embrace Perry....Not romney.
Maybe. Not disputing that at this time. Charles' vid is of Perry, not Romney; that's what I'm trying to clear up here.
-
Don, mentioned Perry and the Tea Party and it went from there.
ETA: I need glasses.
::falldownshocked::
-
No, I posted if romney was the nominee and beat obama.....
-
Don, mentioned Perry and the Tea Party and it went from there.
ETA: I need glasses.
::falldownshocked::
No blood, no report, Charles.
Glad you clarified. And to be honest, a few of us are sighing in relief that it's you, not us. ;D
-
Well, something got lost in the translation. I think Charles is right - Perry could still garner the trust of the Tea Party folks. But so far, it looks as if his careless comments about immigration and his poor debate performances have left a lasting impression, and not a good one.
Romney? He'll be lucky to get endorsed by any group to the right of the GOP.
-
Romney will be the nominee unless conservatives do not allow
themselves to be divided. Right action is a great burden. It is
necessary to unify behind one candidate. He must not only be
a good choice but he must qualify to run the post primary gauntlet
and get elected.
Newt, tonight on Fox gave a left handed OK to climate change saying,
the majority of scientists on WhatEver committee thought it was real.
He is a genius and he's too smart by 1/2. And undependable too.
Cain, is a total wildcard. We don't know how he will fare with congress.
His schemes are more from the heart than technically functional.
He shoots from the lip and overloads it. And ...
Perry, the best exposition is how his state has fared vs the other states.
He is a man of his word and he holds no grudges when he makes stupid
mistakes and is called on it.
Nobody else comes to mind.
It's Perry or Cain who will garner the 36% base. For the other candidates
the base will stay home.
-
Just one problem ... Neither Perry or Cain can beat Stymie .
-
It was all a forgone conclusion. Mitt Romney the next Republican Nominee for President. Why? Simply it was his turn, and being moderate like butter, he will do nicely for the Establishment Republican Party. Just like Ten Little Indians, the prospects were eliminated. Now cheer up, Romney will come real close to defeating Obama, just like in Horse Shoes! ::bashing::
-
Just one problem ... Neither Perry or Cain can beat Stymie .
Cain can win handily if he puts this "scandal" down, which is beginning to look like
a fools errand on from the left, and stops stepping on his tongue. He will get at least
30% of the black vote which will offset other lost votes. This will also create an
attraction/interest in Republicanism and allow others to come "out of the closet" which
will be a long time win for conservatism.
Perry is very good on the stump, has a plan an a record to back it up. His border plan is
the most thought out and functional of all proposals. It will be necessary for Perry to
effectively educate people that fences are a farce. The "doesn't have a heart" crap will
be his biggest obstacle. - Possibly, if he faces the nation and in apology says it was the
stupid thing I've ever said, he may be forgiven. - However he does it, he's got to recover
from that.
ETA: Perry's burdens are those he's created between himself and the base which is a
bigger negative in the primary than the national.
-
The problem as I see it, the Republican brand made such a stink about the Tea Party when their message took off, made the Tea Party back off somewhat. With the incessant Liberal Media pounding and pounding, them, they became dormant somewhat. Now Romney is on the road to the Nomination, and doesn't really look like anyone is going to stop him. Then, Romney will come real close to defeating Obama, real close. If the Tea Party had stayed true to course, the threat of a new Conservative Party would have kept an attractive true Conservative like Sarah Palin in the running.
-
Many feckless Repub's led by the nose by Ruling Class operatives like The Butthead, have antagonized the Tea Party movement and its supporters, the correct response is to target every feckless Repub up for reelection in the primary if possible and in the general if necessary. This is primarily a congressional targeting mission, I don't think many members thought the Tea Party needed a particular horse in the POTUS stakes, they'd weigh in primary day and see what happens. I think their attention all along has been on congressional races. However, I think a real opportunity to nationalize the elections was missed, twice. First, by Palin not jumping in, second by Bachmann failing to stick to Tea Party principles when she began morphing into a politician.
-
Many feckless Repub's led by the nose by Ruling Class operatives like The Butthead, have antagonized the Tea Party movement and its supporters, the correct response is to target every feckless Repub up for reelection in the primary if possible and in the general if necessary. This is primarily a congressional targeting mission, I don't think many members thought the Tea Party needed a particular horse in the POTUS stakes, they'd weigh in primary day and see what happens. I think their attention all along has been on congressional races. However, I think a real opportunity to nationalize the elections was missed, twice. First, by Palin not jumping in, second by Bachmann failing to stick to Tea Party principles when she began morphing into a politician.
Bachmann was not ready for prime time. She got a thrill up her leg by Palin and took it to far. A great Congressional Republicans who works tirelessly for her constituents, but that is where she should have left it. I am not sure, with the free fall the Republican Party is in, if Sarah Palin should maybe offer herself up as an Alternative? I know I know she would just take votes from the Conservative side! ::gaah:: ::angry:: ::bashing::
-
Articles have said Palin has lost her clout, I disagree.
She still has the full faith and respect from conservatives
and Tea Party. She's not lost mine and not a soul's here.
Why should she have lost it with any of the group?
She is waiting for the moment where her voice will be
most effective, she understands the dynamics of the
new political realities better than most. She will speak
out. She will endorse a candidate.
If she and Rubio and DeMint all endorse the same man
it will be a big boost to his potential win. It would virtually
insure a Florida win.
-
Articles have said Palin has lost her clout, I disagree.
She still has the full faith and respect from conservatives
and Tea Party. She's not lost mine and not a soul's here.
Why should she have lost it with any of the group?
She is waiting for the moment where her voice will be
most effective, she understands the dynamics of the
new political realities better than most. She will speak
out. She will endorse a candidate.
If she and Rubio and DeMint all endorse the same man
it will be a big boost to his potential win. It would virtually
insure a Florida win.
Also, with the advent of who we have as Candidates now, Sarah Palin would look like a Hero. I really feel in my Heart, no one running could win against the onslaught brought on by Obama and the Mainstream Media. I am convinced, we true blooded Conservatives have been sold down the river!
-
DeMint said the other day he's not endorsing anyone
-
Articles have said Palin has lost her clout, I disagree.
She still has the full faith and respect from conservatives
and Tea Party. She's not lost mine and not a soul's here.
Why should she have lost it with any of the group?
She is waiting for the moment where her voice will be
most effective, she understands the dynamics of the
new political realities better than most. She will speak
out. She will endorse a candidate.
If she and Rubio and DeMint all endorse the same man
it will be a big boost to his potential win. It would virtually
insure a Florida win.
So true. The media would love for Palin to be ineffective.....She is still the 800 pound grizzly in the room and an endorsement with a few choice conservatives would change the dynamics and polls overnite.
-
DeMint said the other day he's not endorsing anyone
He must dispise the field.
-
DeMint said the other day he's not endorsing anyone
He must dispise the field.
Sen. Jim DeMint doesn’t think people much care about his presidential endorsement (“I don’t like the suggestion that there’s lots of people out there waiting for me to tell them how to vote,” he says).
...
The most disappointed GOP contender may be Mitt Romney, who received DeMint’s endorsement in 2008 and could have used the senator’s support to woo skeptical conservatives this time around. Why did DeMint decide not to endorse Romney again? “It’s a different race, different people in it, different time for our country,” he said, adding, “I would be very comfortable supporting any of .?.?. [our candidates] for president.”
Note that DeMint leaves himself a little wiggle room. When asked why, he said, “As we get into next year, if we have two at the top and one is clearly the conservative and one’s not .?.?. I might look at it again. But my commitment right now is to stay out of it.”
The reason he is staying out, DeMint said, is that “I’ve got to keep my focus on electing conservatives to the Senate who are going to come in here and help us change the spending culture and help our new president turn the country around.” The tipping point for DeMint came last week, when he watched 32 of his Republican colleagues vote with Democrats to kill an amendment offered by Sen. Tom Coburn (R-Okla.) to cut $1 billion from the Rural Development Agency, while 11 Republicans voted with Democrats against eliminating a paltry $6 million in funding for the Small Community Air Service Development Program. “I’ve realized over the last week, as I’ve seen how some of the votes were cast in the Senate, [that] we had some Republicans who were going to resist any cuts in programs.”
The lesson, DeMint said, is that while conservatives have made progress in the Senate, “We’re not there yet. We just need some more numbers.” He said he believes his role in 2012 is to unite conservatives behind the right candidates in critical Senate races. Notwithstanding last week’s votes, DeMint said, he is optimistic and believes conservatives are on the verge of reaching “critical mass” in the Senate. The arrival of newly elected conservatives has “brought out the best in 20 others” in the GOP conference. If he can help elect five or eight more like them in 2012, DeMint said, it “would give us a conservative consensus — a critical mass of conservatives .?.?. who understand the mandate and the necessity of actually devolving the role of the federal government.”
Another reason for his decision, DeMint said, is that staying out of the presidential primaries will give him greater freedom to hold the next president’s feet to the fire, if a Republican wins in 2012. “I’m not going to be beholden to anyone,” DeMint said. He will lay out conservative principles during the campaign, and “if a candidate wins and is not doing those things, then I think I have a good platform to challenge that president to be true to what America elected us to do.”
DeMint said he believes that getting conservatives elected to the Senate could mean the difference between success and failure for whoever succeeds President Obama. “I want to do better for our next president than we did for George Bush,” he said. Bush “had a Congress that wanted to spend money, and if he wanted anything done, he had to agree to that spending .?. .?. I want our next president to have a strong conservative Senate that can push them in the right direction rather than the wrong direction. ”
I could have paraphrased, but I looked for the link (http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/demint-not-endorsing-in-2012/2011/11/05/gIQAZxs2pM_story.html).
So, there we are; three excellent reasons and I believe the last two apply as well to why he declined to throw his hat into the presidential race this go 'round. He knows without a strong, conservative -- CONSERVATIVE -- congress, he'll accomplish nothing from the WH.
-
Thanks for the post Pan.
-
My pleasure and you're welcome.
-
DeMint said the other day he's not endorsing anyone
He must dispise the field.
Quite frankly, there isn't anyone to endorse, and he knows it! What seemed as a given in 2010, has turned into a lot of doubt right now.
-
Perhaps this is all a necessary turn of events. We've been trying for decades to make the GOP into the party of limited, constitutional government. With a few notable stalwarts on one side but lots more who give meaningless lip-service on the other, the GOP has stubbornly resisted these efforts. Even now, as the country is noticeably, palpably in a state of decline with alarm bells ringing everywhere they still stubbornly resist.
Why is this perhaps a necessary turn of events? Because it's time for the GOP to die. It's time for it to go the way of its Whig antecedents. This has the potential to be the stake through its heart and it's probably necessary. At this point the GOP is not even an uncomfortable, timid ally, it's an outright impediment. A roadblock. It's time for it to go away. Seriously, a minority with determination and guts in Congress could accomplish more in the service of limited government than a majority of these spineless cowards. The GOP has been kept on life support for quite some time now due to one thing in particular, and that's the mantra that going 3rd party or not voting only gifts the election to the Democrats. Well when the Grand Old Party finally goes to the Grand Old Glue Factory, that argument will no longer hold water. The GOP will be the 3rd party, if at all.
I honestly hold them in greater contempt than I do the Democrats. They've had ample opportunity to check the rampant infection of our entire culture, and they have consistently dropped the ball with cop-outs like "this is not the hill to die on". Well, here we are. Great job you treasonous snakes.
-
Hell the only improvement is that McCain isn't running.
-
Hell the only improvement is that McCain isn't running.
A negligible improvement at that. What's the saying? "Thank God for small Mercies"? We're faced with Romney instead, so smaaaaaalll indeed
-
Perhaps this is all a necessary turn of events. We've been trying for decades to make the GOP into the party of limited, constitutional government. With a few notable stalwarts on one side but lots more who give meaningless lip-service on the other, the GOP has stubbornly resisted these efforts. Even now, as the country is noticeably, palpably in a state of decline with alarm bells ringing everywhere they still stubbornly resist.
Why is this perhaps a necessary turn of events? Because it's time for the GOP to die. It's time for it to go the way of its Whig antecedents. This has the potential to be the stake through its heart and it's probably necessary. At this point the GOP is not even an uncomfortable, timid ally, it's an outright impediment. A roadblock. It's time for it to go away. Seriously, a minority with determination and guts in Congress could accomplish more in the service of limited government than a majority of these spineless cowards. The GOP has been kept on life support for quite some time now due to one thing in particular, and that's the mantra that going 3rd party or not voting only gifts the election to the Democrats. Well when the Grand Old Party finally goes to the Grand Old Glue Factory, that argument will no longer hold water. The GOP will be the 3rd party, if at all.
I honestly hold them in greater contempt than I do the Democrats. They've had ample opportunity to check the rampant infection of our entire culture, and they have consistently dropped the ball with cop-outs like "this is not the hill to die on". Well, here we are. Great job you treasonous snakes.
The last forum I was on, saying anything about a Third Party was a death sentence. The problem is, it's a true statement. The only way to kill Liberalism is to kill the Republican brand first.
-
Perhaps this is all a necessary turn of events. We've been trying for decades to make the GOP into the party of limited, constitutional government. With a few notable stalwarts on one side but lots more who give meaningless lip-service on the other, the GOP has stubbornly resisted these efforts. Even now, as the country is noticeably, palpably in a state of decline with alarm bells ringing everywhere they still stubbornly resist.
Why is this perhaps a necessary turn of events? Because it's time for the GOP to die. It's time for it to go the way of its Whig antecedents. This has the potential to be the stake through its heart and it's probably necessary. At this point the GOP is not even an uncomfortable, timid ally, it's an outright impediment. A roadblock. It's time for it to go away. Seriously, a minority with determination and guts in Congress could accomplish more in the service of limited government than a majority of these spineless cowards. The GOP has been kept on life support for quite some time now due to one thing in particular, and that's the mantra that going 3rd party or not voting only gifts the election to the Democrats. Well when the Grand Old Party finally goes to the Grand Old Glue Factory, that argument will no longer hold water. The GOP will be the 3rd party, if at all.
I honestly hold them in greater contempt than I do the Democrats. They've had ample opportunity to check the rampant infection of our entire culture, and they have consistently dropped the ball with cop-outs like "this is not the hill to die on". Well, here we are. Great job you treasonous snakes.
The last forum I was on, saying anything about a Third Party was a death sentence. The problem is, it's a true statement. The only way to kill Liberalism is to kill the Republican brand first.
'
The problem is that you just can't kill it,but you can slowly chocke the living shyt out of it in the voting booth. It takes longer but in the end you get to where you need to be.
-
I don't know if we have the time, but I have to pass it somehow, so might as well spend it doing the right thing!