BT - I didn't make such an assertion.
BuckeyeTexan Post #55 - "We can't afford to lose even one good conservative in 2014."
What does your above statement mean? Most readers would infer it to mean that you don't believe Bevin has as good a chance to retain the Kentucky Senate seat as McConnell. If that is not what your statement meant, please clarify.
*****
SSB - If McConnell were the rules genius you claim,...
BT - I didn't make such a claim.
BuckeyeTexan Post #77 - "McConnell does what he can to obstruct Reid's agenda, which is why the Democrats have labeled him 'Senator Gridlock,'..."
OK, some hyperbole on my part, but you clearly stated that you hold Mitch's rules knowledge in as high a level of esteem as the Senate Democrats who label Mitch as "Senator Gridlock.
Besides, you have taken my complaint out of context. The point of my comment was that Dems' nickname for Mitch is really false praise (ala Brer Rabbit) and that you & Mitch and the GOPe are suckers for believing it. At a minimum, you clearly believe Mitch to be competent in his knowledge and application of Senate rules. Given his lackluster results, I question Mitch's rules competency AND consider his application of the rules to be woefully inadequate.
****
SSB - For the last 20 years conservatives have tried it your way - not primarying RINOs and/or holding our noses and voting for the odious GOP moderate.
BT - Yet again, I didn't make such a suggestion.
Wha?? The entire point of your postings is to discourage the unruly Tea Partiers from primarying Mitch McConnell! You appear to suggest that Conservatives should not engage in such a coordinated action unless authorized by a FR state committee/subcommittee who has examined the incumbent's voting record. Hell's bells, you even volunteered to serve on your fantasy committee! Do you realize how GOPe that sounds?
****
SSB - Why are you so afraid of letting the good people of Kentucky choose their GOP Senate nominee?
BT - I'm not, never said I was, never even implied I was.
BuckeyeTexan, Post #33 - "I will not be led around by the nose banging the primary drums against any candidate who has a solid, conservative voting record."
I'll type this more slowly, so you will understand it better. A conservative voting record in the Senate means next to nothing!!!
It should be nearly impossible for any GOP member to not have a conservative voting record with Mitch McConnell aiding and abetting Dingy Harry's list of the items that are voted on in the Senate. Amazingly, Juan McCain, Linda Graham & a few other RINOs clear that barrier quite frequently.
****
It appears to me that you need to improve your reading comprehension skills because you clearly misinterpreted - seemingly intentionally so - every single word I wrote. You inferred assertions, claims, suggestions, and emotions that were neither made nor implied.
If you want to vote with your FRiend for a Democrat, good luck with that plan. We can part ways right here because I ain't votin' for a Godless, big-government, liberty-hating, Democrat over a Republican with a conservative voting record in any general election this side of Christ's return.
No comprehension problem here. Vote for whomever you want, but don't come to FR & pay lipservice to conservativism while accusing the Senate Conservative Fund of false statements (yet acknowledging you have no info on the particulars) and painting those who want to see Mitch McConnell removed from the Senate as unruly rubes in a circular firing squad.
If conservative voters in the Commonwealth of Kentucky want to send a message to Mitch (and the GOPe) by voting for the Democrat, I will defend their right to vote that way -- even if I disagree or dislike it -- as much as I will defend YOUR right to vote FOR Mitch McConnell or whatever GOPe/faux-Conservative Senate candidate you seem to want to support. Furthermore, I ain't votin' for a Godless, big-government, liberty-hating GOPe RINO in any general election this side of Christ's return.
What does your above statement mean? Most readers would infer it to mean that you don't believe Bevin has as good a chance to retain the Kentucky Senate seat as McConnell. If that is not what your statement meant, please clarify.
No, most readers would not infer that because I didn't mention McConnell or Bevin in that statement. I provided the necessary clarification with the sentence you quoted:
We can't afford to lose even one good conservative in 2014. We must make educated decisions about our candidates not knee-jerk, reactionary decisions that will damage our chances to take back our party.One third of the Senate is up for re-election in 2014 not just McConnell's seat. That statement applies generally to all conservatives up for re-election.
OK, some hyperbole on my part, but you clearly stated that you hold Mitch's rules knowledge in as high a level of esteem as the Senate Democrats who label Mitch as "Senator Gridlock.
No, I most certainly did not. I said, and I quote:
McConnell does what he can to obstruct Reid's agenda,How you got "high esteem" or "competent" from that is beyond me. If I said "I do what I can to be a good Christian and avoid sinning," would you infer that I hold myself up as a perfect Christian who does not sin? (I sure hope not.)
The entire point of your postings is to discourage the unruly Tea Partiers from primarying Mitch McConnell!
No, it was not. The entire point of my post was to caution FReepers about labeling those with conservative voting records as enemies and voting for Democrats. I support Bevin in the primary, but if he loses, I will support McConnell in the general election over a Democrat.
You appear to suggest that Conservatives should not engage in such a coordinated action unless authorized by a FR state committee/subcommittee who has examined the incumbent's voting record.
Nope. I suggested that we take FR activism to a whole new level by coordinating our research and trying to form a consensus - whatever that consensus may be.
Vote for whomever you want, but don't come to FR & pay lipservice to conservativism
If and when JimRob or the mods tell me to GTFO, I will do so.
while accusing the Senate Conservative Fund of false statements (yet acknowledging you have no info on the particulars)
The Senate Conservatives Fund did provide misinformation about the Continuing Resolution's effect on defunding Obamacare. I do have specific information because I pointed it out to FReeper Jane Long who sent the corrected information to the SCF. What I said was that I didn't know much about that group, which is a big difference from what you inferred.
and painting those who want to see Mitch McConnell removed from the Senate as unruly rubes in a circular firing squad.
I did no such thing. Yet again, you took a general statement about the 2014 primaries as a whole and applied it solely to McConnell and Bevin. I fully support the effort to primary Mitch McConnell precisely because I have examined his voting record. He's a 90/10 party-line voter.
If conservative voters in the Commonwealth of Kentucky want to send a message to Mitch (and the GOPe) by voting for the Democrat, I will defend their right to vote that way -- even if I disagree or dislike it -- as much as I will defend YOUR right to vote FOR Mitch McConnell or whatever GOPe/faux-Conservative Senate candidate you seem to want to support.
Any voter has the absolute right to vote for whomever he wants. I don't have to support it or like it. That wasn't the point. The point was that if McConnell wins the primary against Bevin, it is assinine to vote for a Democrat in the 2014 general election when we need every single conservative seat we can get.
Again, I ain't votin' for a Godless, big-government, liberty-hating, Democrat over a Republican with a conservative voting record in any general election this side of Christ's return.