Skip to comments.Club for Growth Wears on Some Republicans
Posted on 05/17/2009 9:20:34 PM PDT by reaganaut1
Pennsylvania Sen. Arlen Specter's switch to the Democratic Party underscores the clout of Club For Growth, a conservative group that targets Republicans it brands insufficiently committed to low taxes and small government.
The move also has inflamed a debate within the party: Are the group's tactics good or bad for Republicans? [welcome to the club]
Mr. Specter fingered Club For Growth as the key factor behind his decision, saying he would have lost the Republican primary to a Club-backed rival. His decision has prompted some Republicans to turn on the organization, saying it backs those who are so conservative that they then lose to Democrats.
"If their goal is to increase the Democrats' numbers in Congress, they're doing a very good job," said Rep. Steven LaTourette (R., Ohio), a moderate who won his seat in 1994. "Do they want a permanent minority of 140 people as pure as Caesar's wife, or a Republican majority that can get them 70% of the issues that are important to them?" (Republicans hold 178 of the 435 House seats and 40 of 100 Senate seats.)
The group's leaders insist its actions only help the party.
"The Club focuses on issues that are the Republican brand -- economic-freedom issues," said Chris Chocola, a former Republican congressman from Indiana who now heads the organization. "I don't think we lost the majority because we stuck to those issues. We lost the majority because we strayed from those issues."
Pat Toomey, the previous Club president, jumped into the Pennsylvania Senate race after Mr. Specter became one of only three Republicans in Congress to vote for President Barack Obama's $787 billion economic stimulus plan.
(Excerpt) Read more at online.wsj.com ...
“If their goal is to increase the Democrats’ numbers in Congress, they’re doing a very good job,” said Rep. Steven LaTourette (R., Ohio), a moderate who won his seat in 1994.”
How blind can this guy be. McCain WAS your candidate. So was Dole and Bush 1 vs. Clinton. All losers and ‘compromisers’ with no gain for our side. Democrats won big in ‘06 and ‘08 BECAUSE most Republicans acted like Democrats from 2000 to 2006, not because they ‘stuck to the principles of CFG and conservatism.
THE 40 Rs VOTING FOR SCHIP EXPANSION
Listed alphabetically, by state, and by last name within each state
Don Young (AK)
Mike Rogers (AL-3)
Mary Bono Mack (CA-45)
Michael Castle (DE)
Vern Buchanan (FL-13)
Lincoln Diaz-Balart (FL-21)
Mario Diaz-Balart (FL-25)
Ileana Ros-Lehtinen (FL-18)
Bill Young (FL-10)
Mike Simpson (ID-2)
Mark Kirk (IL-10)
Jerry Moran (KS-1)
Joseph Cao (LA-2)
Vernon Ehlers (MI-3)
Thaddeus McCotter (MI-11)
Candice Miller (MI-10)
Fred Upton (MI-6)
Erik Paulsen (MN-3)
Jo Ann Emerson (MO-8)
Dennis Rehberg (MT)
Rodney Frelinghuysen (NJ-11)
Leonard Lance (NJ-7)
Frank LoBiondo (NJ-2)
Chris Smith (NJ-4)
Pete King (NY-3)
Christopher Lee (NY-26)
John McHugh (NY-23)
Steve Austria (OH-7)
****Steven LaTourette (OH-14)
Pat Tiberi (OH-12)
Michael Turner (OH-3)
Charles Dent (PA-15)
Jim Gerlach (PA-6)
Tim Murphy (PA-18)
Todd Platts (PA-19)
Glenn Thompson (PA-5)
Frank Wolf (VA-10)
David Reichert (WA-8)
Thomas Petri (WI-6)
Shelley Moore Capito (WV-2)
The Davis-Bacon RINOs
Below are the 37 RINO Republicans who sent a letter to President Bush urging him to re-instate the Davis-Bacon Act, which he subsequently did.
Read ‘em and weep:
Rodney Alexander (LA)
Mark Kirk (IL)
Don Sherwood (PA)
Sherry Boehlert (NY)
Randy Kuhl (NY)
John Shimkus (IL)
Jo Ann Emerson (MO)
Ray LaHood (IL)
Rob Simmons (CT)
Phil English (PA)
***Steven LaTourette (OH)
Christopher Smith (NJ)
Mike Ferguson (NJ)
Frank LoBiondo (NJ)
John Sweeney (NY)
Mike Fitzpatrick (PA)
John McHugh (NY)
Michael Turner (OH)
Vito Fossella (NY)
Candice Miller (MI)
James Walsh (NY)
Melissa Hart (PA)
Timothy Murphy (PA)
Greg Walden (OR)
Jim Gerlach (PA)
Bob Ney (OH)
Curt Weldon (PA)
Nancy Johnson (CT)
Todd Platts (PA)
Jerry Weller (IL)
Tim Johnson (IL)
Jim Saxton (NJ)
Don Young (AK)
Sue Kelly (NY)
Chris Shays (CT)
Peter King (NY)
Joe Schwarz (MI)
Just because Clinton said it and the media played him up as a savior on a white horse doesn't mean that was the reason GHW Bush lost. GHW Bush came across as detached and not able to relate to regular people when the economy was going through a downturn. The country had been through 12 years of GOP administration and fatigue was setting in. Fatigue set in after 8 years of Clinton. It's too simplistic to say that trite phrase is what got Clinton elected. For whatever else he was, Slick Willie was an outstanding politician and great campaigner.
The country mostly agrees with the GOP on low taxes and limited government.
From another thread. Obviously, Frantzie isn’t going to change his/her mind, but one should do some search on what Moore actually said and while he headed CFG at one point, his immigration stance is not CFG’s and one would have to look at each candidates views on that. Toomey, who took over for Moore had an opposite view:
“Steve Moore is an open=borders, pro-illegal alien pr*ck. I stopped giving to the Club for Growth for that reason.”
“Moore was basically kicked out of Club for Growth and while he has outlined some myths about ‘illegal aliens’ - he’s for ‘pro-_legal_ immigration’. Pat Toomey who replaced Moore had a 100% rating by FAIR (who opposes amnesty).
GHB said “Read my lips. No new taxes.”
He raised taxes.
Clinton exploited it. Called for a “middle-class” tax cut.
Had the biggest tax increase and federal land grab in the country’s history...and got re-elected.
The GOP ran a tired dog in that race. But Jack Kemp knew the economy. They lost.
GWB lowered taxes and was pro-life, pro-death penalty, had two wars going, tried to save Terri Schiavo, stopped federal funding of emryonic stem cell research, was publicly religious, and got re-elected.
2nd term, he reverted to a freakin’ liberal on too many issues, and finally the economy.
John McCain was Obama in whiteface except for abortion.
Obama promised a “middle-class” tax cut. Obama promised to lower the oceans.
Good Lord. Race and uncommon stupidity got Obama nominated. But it was the meltdown in the economy, (hailed by the democrats who caused it as the Bush Meltdown,) that got him elected.
It IS the economy that both won and lost for Republicans.
The Club for Growth and the candidates it supports are EXACTLY what this country needs more of, and anybody who disagrees is probably a center-left Redumblican who got burned by them.
Anybody who understood economics and history would be in favor of fairly liberal immigration laws, as I am, but that doesn’t mean you are in favor of ignoring the rule of law. I don’t know exactly what Moore said but it could be that you misunderstood him.
The congressman who doesn’t like the club was elected in 1994 (I bet he signed the contract for america). Which states alot of things the club for growth stands for (less gov’t). As for Gilcrest in Md he should have been a Democrat(he voted with them more than he did the GOP). As for his district 2006-2008 was tough years for the GOP. Why? They spent to much which caused the Club for Growth to come out against them.
John McCain was Obama in whiteface except for abortion.
Race and uncommon stupidity got Obama nominated.
Fine. It lets us all know who these Republicans are. They don’t like Club For Growth because they are effective.
>>The country mostly agrees with the GOP on low taxes and limited government.
Too bad many in the GOP don’t, apparently including the knucklehead congressman from Ohio quoted in this article.
Nonsense. I have no interest in paying for these people. This idea of we need new bodies for economic growth and sprawl is idiocy. Illegal immigrants are bankrupting the nation and Moore is a pro-illegal RINO.
I just love how these RINOs run as fiscal conservatives, spend our tax $ like madmen once elected, and then get p.o.'d at anyone like the Club for Growth who dares to point it out.
You have the right to your opinion, but ideally a person understands what they’re talking about before they speak. I think you’ve been inundated with black-and-white anti-illegal immigration arguments, on top of which you don’t seem to understand economics. More people, and more nations to trade with is essential for growth. I find the growing numbers of big-government protectionists on FR disturbing. And that’s what protectionism is, a big-government policy that brings about the same results as socialism.
Well, since the Republican Party is supposed to be in favor of low taxes and small government, I can see why the Club for Growth might have a problem with those who don't see it that way, be they Democrat OR Republican.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.