Posted on 10/27/2009 5:02:42 AM PDT by Kaslin
"Sometimes party loyalty asks too much," said JFK.
For Sarah Palin, party loyalty in New York's 23rd congressional district asks too much. Going rogue, Palin endorsed Conservative Party candidate Doug Hoffman over Republican Dede Scozzafava.
On Oct. 1, Scozzafava was leading. Today, she trails Democrat Bill Owens and is only a few points ahead of Hoffman, as Empire State conservatives defect to vote their principles, not their party.
Newt Gingrich stayed on the reservation, endorsing Scozzafava, who is pro-choice and pro-gay rights, and hauls water for the unions.
Scourged by the right, Newt accused conservatives of going over the hill in the battle to save the republic, just to get a buzz on. "If we are in the business about feeling good about ourselves while our country gets crushed, then I probably made the wrong decision." How Scozzafava would prevent America's being "crushed" was unexplained.
The 23rd recalls a famous Senate race 40 years ago. Rep. Charles Goodell was picked by Gov. Nelson Rockefeller to fill the seat of Robert Kennedy in 1968. To hold onto it, Goodell swerved sharp left, emerging as an upstate Xerox copy of Jacob Javits, the most liberal Republican in the Senate.
In 1970, Goodell got both the GOP and Liberal Party nominations, and faced liberal Democrat Richard Ottinger. This left a huge vacuum into which Conservative Party candidate James Buckley, brother of William F., smartly moved.
Assessing the field, the Nixon White House concluded that, with liberals split, Goodell could not win. But Buckley might. Signals were flashed north that loyalty to the president was not inconsistent with voting for Buckley. To send the signal in the clear, Vice President Agnew described Charlie Goodell to a New Orleans newspaper as "the Christine Jorgensen of the Republican Party."
The former George Jorgensen, Christine had undergone the most radical sex-change operation in recorded history.
Liberals went berserk, calling on New Yorkers to rally to Goodell, who began surging, at Ottinger's expense. Buckley scooted between them both to win. Hoffman may also. But even if he does not, Palin, a conservative of the heart, did the right thing.
And the GOP has been sent a necessary message.
For, according to Gallup, 40 percent of Americans now identify as conservatives -- only 20 percent as Republicans. If the GOP is not the conservative party, it will never be America's Party.
But what does "conservative" mean in 2009? And where do conservatives come down on the great issues? For what the right is against -- any repeal of the Bush tax cuts, the $787 billion stimulus, Obamacare -- is much clearer than what the right stands for.
In 2010, this may not matter, as the Obamakins rule the roost and will be held accountable, and Republicans can unite around what they oppose. Year 2012, however, is problematic.
Then the party must declare itself. And the reality is that the GOP remains a house divided.
What, for example, is the conservative view of the war in Iraq and the Bush economic policies that cost the party both Houses of Congress in 2006 and the White House in 2008?
Why did President Bush leave with 27 percent approval? Did Bush policies the GOP once applauded have anything to do with it?
Was Bush free trade responsible for the decline of the dollar and the loss of one in four manufacturing jobs? Is globalization still good for America and NAFTA the deal of the century?
What is the conservative position on reaching out to Russia, as BarackObama has done, on bringing Georgia and Ukraine into NATO, and on canceling that anti-missile system Bush planned in Poland?
"We're all Georgians now!" John McCain declared. Are we?
What is the party position on a "long war" in Afghanistan?
For if America has soured on the war and opposes more troops today, will America be enthusiastic about soldiering on in 2012, after 1,000 or 2,000 more American dead have been shipped home?
Do Republicans support negotiating with Tehran, or cutting off gasoline and starting up the escalator to air strikes on Iran's nuclear facilities that are today under U.N. inspection?
Will the GOP propose to stimulate the economy with tax cuts after four straight trillion-dollar deficits? Will the Bush line, "They'll pay for themselves," still be credible after Bush's deficits?
If the largest federal outlays are for Medicare, Medicaid, Social Security, defense and interest on the debt, followed by education, housing, homeland security and transportation, where would the GOP use the knife to balance the budget?
According to Gallup, America is moving closer to the Republican position on regulations, abortion, guns and union power. But half of all Americans now favor cuts in legal immigration. Are Republicans willing to call for a moratorium on immigration to tighten the labor market and force wages up? Or does the Chamber of Commerce still call the tune?
Ronald Reagan arrived with new ideas that fit the needs of his time. Where are the Republican ideas that fit the needs of this time?
Newt is irrelevant!
Newt - Hell no
Sarah - Hell yes!
New GOP? - Seeing is believing.
Pat is usually more coherent than this. It’s hard to make any sense of this article.
The media are going to plant Newt as the GOP candidate for 012. A sure loser.
Will we let them? Again?
Newt who?
Party loyalty? Newt?
He praises HIllary as the smartest woman in the world on health care.
He snuggles up to the global warming tools.
Now he’s trashing the tea party Americans.
Go away little man.
I disagree (respectfully) that Newt is irrelevant. To be sure, I am for Hoffman and I am piqued by those who give up our conservatism to pragmatism. That being said, I like to hear everything and Newt is a good thinker. I believe we (Conservatives/Republicans) will win again because we can listen yo other points of view.
my fear is a democratic win. but so bee it... NO MORE RINOs
and if Hoffman were ever able to pull a win that would be huge for Sarah
He sets the premise, but goes nowhere with it. He simply asks a lot of questions.
Easy, they won't stop America from being crushed because a democrat is a democrat even if they run rino.
Newt, like many educated rinos, is over the line in many of his personal and public decisions and is a typical middle of the road atheist and therefore will do the same things George Bush did and the domestic problems would get worse.
WTH??? Bush economic policies did not cost the party both houses in 2006! The economy was booming!
Why did President Bush leave with 27 percent approval?
Duh, ummm, could it be that manufactured polls kept insisting his approval ratings were low?
How is electing a Republican, who is really a Democrat ,calling herself a Republican doing anything save our country.
It’s time Newt and the rest of these RINO turds woke up to the fact that Conservatives MUST vote for Conservatives.
If we lose some RINO’s in the process, so be it , they werent helping us anyway.
Even should Hoffman lose but come in 2nd, that would be a major defeat for the RINO elites. The downside, of course, would be a Democrat win in a Republican district. But that would clearly be the fault of the Republicans promoting a Democrat in all but name. They've given their base no clear choice.
Nobody should ever fear to vote his first choice, at least on a first ballot, and nobody should ever hold any public office with less than 50% of the vote.
There should also be a None-Of-Above choice on all ballots for public office and if that choice ever wins, then the other candidates should be barred for life from holding any public office and the parties sponsoring them should be barred for at least ten years from sponsoring candidates for that particular office. The penalty for running dead wood for public offices should be severe.
Another item on such a voters' bill of rights should be something which would eliminate voting fraud for all time and if that means getting rid of the secret ballot or at least limiting it somehow or other, so be it, we're paying too high a price for it. Somehow or other it has to be possible to check up on votes when there are questions or evidence of fraud.
One last item on such a list would be a provision that when a president is impeached and removed, his VP goes out the door with him and the office is either vacant until the next election or an emergency election is held to fill the office for the remainder of the current term. Granted removing a president should be difficult but it should not be impossible and if we couldn't remove Slick, we'd not have been able to remove Hitler or Nero either.
What happened in 98/99 was that Trent Lott simply refused to hand the presidency over to Algor with a year to go on Slick's second term, for obvious reasons. The situation should not be possible.
It is difficult to inject BDS into every other sentence and remain coherent.
Newt is irrelevant!
And we Conservatives can not say it soon enough and let him know NOW, that his trial baloon he let out over the weekend is nothing but hot air and he will NOT have our support.
8 Years of "Compassionate Conservatism" a RINO-filled, big-spending, go-along-to-get-along Congress as well as a weak-kneed, DemoRat-Lite RNC, is what we DON'T need and will NOT support.
NOTICE TO ALL REPUBLICANS IN CONGRESS OR WHO INTEND ON SEEKING OFFICE: NO MORE RINO'S!!!
Newt just voted, it wasn’t for the founding principles of this nation, therefore, it was not a vote for liberty!!!
One, the conservatives are now awake and want no part of a 'moderate'.
'Moderates', such as what Newt has evolved into, are what got us into the mess we are in now.
Secondly, the conservative voices in the party are sending a message, "Pick and back the candidates who hold real conservative values or watch a lot of us choose for ourselves." Sarah, Pawlenty and a whole host of other conservatives backing Hoffman, have made that very clear.
Thirdly, 'moderation' gets us nowhere, and little respect. Newt drank the kool-aid, and is now trying to position himself as one of the 'leaders' of the party. Sarah, and others are re-defining the direction. Either the GOP, Steele, and other 'middle-of-the-road' Republicans follow, or get out of the way. Elitism in the party MUST die.
Newt the irrelevant. You used to have a set, where did they go? Never mind, we don’t care.
Too many politicians put party and personal power over Country!.
Neutered Newt is one of the above politicians!
“Will we let them? Again?”
WE have no choice in the matter. So long as the GOP allows open primaries and same-day registration WE will get the candidate Obama decides he wants to run against. Obama will determine the weakest link and then order his minions to flood the GOP primaries and vote that weak link to the nomination. My prediciton - Romney or Huckabee.
Unless and until the GOP closes the primaroes and does not permit same day registration in GOP primaries, the GOP will always have the left muddying the process to make sure we get people like Dole and McCain.
You’re right. But they’re not going to change that. Now what?
Newt can kiss his political but...goodbye.
And, I think he knows it.
Take over the local party go to the meetings or caucuses and take them over. Then you can make the rules that is the only way it will happen you have to get involved
As far as I am concerned, Newt can forget about running in 2012
“I disagree (respectfully) that Newt is irrelevant. To be sure, I am for Hoffman and I am piqued by those who give up our conservatism to pragmatism. That being said, I like to hear everything and Newt is a good thinker. I believe we (Conservatives/Republicans) will win again because we can listen yo other points of view.”
I mostly agree with you. I like Newt in that he is an IDEA man and has a good background in American history. I don’t always agree with him. His lack of support for Hoffman purely mystifies me. I can only hope that he will see his error in this. Overall however, his expertise about how to get things done and his creative ideas are a PLUS.
I don’t know if Hoffman can pull it out, but with all the attention on him, I guess it’s possible.
Should he win, that sends a huge message to Newt.
It’s the history part, right?
Even if Hoffman loses we conservatives will have made a statement that we are a force to be reckoned with.
Also whoever wins will have to run again next year. If Hoffman makes a good showing the RNC better run with him in 2010. Given the party endorsement he's got to be a lock.
The public then voted to put the Democrats in charge of the House ~ that, presumably, brought the homosexuals out in the open but I'm not sure it protected the former or current House pages from them or their friends.
Pat probably finds that issue distasteful.
More recently the same public voted Obama and his merry band of baby killers, taxdodgers and cowards into the White House ~ for what purpose no one on Earth can imagine. It's not like we had a shortage in those categories.
For, 2012, I'd like to see some “fresh blood”...
a true blue conservative with preferably a military background.
We're gonna be a war with the muzzies for decades so we might as well get used to it.
Semper Fi,
Kelly
Sarah- YES.
Mr.Newt- Yes. I have to disagree with you about him.
Mr.Newt has been more of an asset to the GOP than almost anyone else in the country now alive. In this case, I completely disagree with his support of the old power structure, as I have on one or two other issues. Nevertheless, I honor his service and his opinion. My honor for Mr.Buchanan has long since run its course, though.
I don’t believe he understands the dynamics in this area of NYState as well as I do, and due to that he made this error. I live within a couple miles of NY-23. I also worked very hard for Buckley when we won that Senate seat. The Conservative Party winning this seat was definitely within reach, and still is. The GOP has misread the tea leaves by giving the nod to Scozzy in this district. I understand the reasons they did so completely, but I argue they are wrong. I believe that Mr.Newt did not independently study this subject and instead relied on faulty info he was fed, and that someone more involved in this area’s political life could set him straight.
Perhaps Hoffman will win here. In this case, though, as long as Scozzy loses, the hope for a more conservative America will win, since those with their heart on the right, such as Mr.Newt, will discover there is more support for a strong conservative in Central NYState and other rural areas of the Blue States than they fear.
Malarkey. The above simply does not happen. I'm from Louisiana, and lived there while the state transited from "party primaries" to the "top two" flavor of open primary. That change worked completely in favor of the Republicans.
I'm now in Washington state, which state is going through the precise reverse process, moving from an open primary to party primaries. And the shift to party corruption in government is apparent already with the end result comparable to "Huey Long" (or Chicago mob) era shenanigans.
“Malarkey. The above simply does not happen. I’m from Louisiana, and lived there while the state transited from “party primaries” to the “top two” flavor of open primary. That change worked completely in favor of the Republicans.”
So, I guess those busloads of SEIU members and residents from Massachusetts who drove into N.H. in the `08 primary, registered using fictitious N.H. addresses, voted for McCain and hopped on the busses to return home were just a figment of my imagination?
Let’s not overlook the fact that this election is just to fill the seat until next year. With that in mind, any kind of good showing by Hoffman will set him up to run (and win) in 2010.
With the rampant voter fraud I am still not convinced the public voted anything into office. There are a number of SoS that should be facing court hearings by now, but what the hey, when you allow voter intimidation by Black Panthers, caught on tape red-handed, to get off scot-free what do we expect.
Exactly- that is essenial to understand the reasoning, also... and in fact that is why the main GOP strategists are pushing Scozzy, too. They see a completely safe “GOP” seat for a decade with Scozzy in it, whereas a Hoffman will always have a close battle for the “moderate” voters.
Well then, we live in a dictatorship. Sit back and enjoy the ride.
Tried that -- even became a delegate! I spent a day with my local state representative, a republican, and asked him point blank who was in the "central committee" that made the rules, when and where did they meet and who gave them the power to change the rules at the last minute. He simply looked at me like I was nuts -- and NEVER answered the questions.
Very likely. There are a lot of anecdotal horror stories about pretty much everything out there on the net. I have yet to see documented proof that anything like this has EVER even happened, much less had any effect on even a single election.
And what you are describing is voter fraud, not "cross-over" voting, which is what I had in mind.
I am opposed to any sort of taxpayer-funded party candidate selection process. Anything funded by tax dollars should be open to all voters. If the parties want to select candidates, they should arrange and finance their own process. The SOLE legitimate function of a taxpayer-funded primary is to reduce the number of candidates for a given office to a final choice of two.
And quite frankly, the vast majority of voters WANT such open primaries. The only people opposed are party hacks, trying to retain their influence over the process.
Agree 100%, esp considering this is a 1 year fill-in position. The seat is open again next Nov. In your scenario, assuming Hoffman ends up a strong 2nd, he is the natural “Republican” to compete for the seat next year. We all know that Obama’s policies will not have made things significantly better in 12 months, so the seat should remain quite competitive. And, Hoffman has already stated that he will run in ‘10 in this scenario.
Sarah’s FB post today is nothing more than a bitch slap to Newt. And I love it!
WW-I appreciate your considered and well crafted response. However, I do recall news footage of buses of people pulling up to the polling places. Buses with Massachusetts plates.
I also recall very well the coordinated effort in 2000 to de-rail the Bush nomination by the left in their efforts to rally around McCain.
2012 will tell for both of us. Obama runs unopposed. Let’s see what mischief the open primaries and same day registration have in store for us.
for the first time in my life I have decided that 2010 and 2012 willnot just be a rubber stamp support the Republican candidate just because they are better than the D alternative.
The NY-23 race has shown what a unified conservative movement can do.
In 2010 and 2012 if the candidate in my district, state or nationally is not a conservative, I will find the conservative in the race to support.
Thank you Sarah Palin and Tim Pawlenty for opening my eyes and putting Ideology ahead of party!
I'm wondering if he hasen't thrown in the towel as far as the GOP goes near term. He might be playing trojan horse to sneak into power by an appointment from Obama or maybe even being the 2012 Democrat VP candidate.
Wierd I know but even Rush said he was baffled by Newt's recent actions.
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.