95% of the demos probably voted for the tax increase.
Why the free pass for the demos?
You know, that really is a good question if taxes are the real reasons.
Show 'em my motto!
Posted on 03/29/2004 5:25:31 AM PST by freepatriot32
Oregon Libertarian Tom Cox is following up on his promise: He said last year -- when he was chairman of the state Libertarian Party -- that Republican legislators in his state who voted to approve a tax hike would be opposed when they came up for re-election. He is now running against one of those Republicans.
And his move has been noted -- and applauded -- by local media and lawmakers alike.
The Salem Statesman Journal, in the capital city, pointed out that both Libertarians and some Republicans said they would do their utmost to kick those lawmakers out of office, but that Republicans had not stepped up to the plate to challenge GOP incumbents.
Only Libertarians are fielding opposition to the 10 tax-increasing Republicans, and Cox stands a good chance of winning his campaign against incumbent Rep. Mary Gallegos for the state House District 29 seat, the Statesman Journal reported.
Cox ran a high-profile gubernatorial race in 2002, then was a spokesman on three state-wide ballot initiatives -- including Measure 30, which would have raised taxes by $1.2 billion over three years -- so he enjoys strong name recognition in the state.
The facts that Measure 30 was defeated in February by 59 percent of the state's voters and that the Libertarians were given much media attention in the tax hike's defeat shed an even more positive light on Cox's race, since he was a primary opponent of the measure.
Cox also has the public support of at least three incumbent legislators: "He's had several Republicans coming to him, saying 'I think you have a real good shot at this,' said Elizabeth "Pith" Lourdes, one of Cox's campaign workers.
"We have an extremely good chance against Gallegos," Lourdes said. "She is not doing an entirely bad job, but she voted to raise taxes a couple of times."
And those tax-raising votes are enough reason to want any incumbent out of office, she said.
"Gallegos is a very nice lady, but nice doesn't get the job done," she added. "She was under pressure, and she took the easy way out."
Two Democrats -- Chuck Riley and Elena Uhing -- have also filed in the District 29 primary. Riley was the party's nominee in 2002, when Gallegos won her first term.
Cox doesn't have to run in the primary, making for a three-way race in November.
95% of the demos probably voted for the tax increase.
Why the free pass for the demos?
95% of the demos probably voted for the tax increase.
Why the free pass for the demos?
You know, that really is a good question if taxes are the real reasons.
Show 'em my motto!
Taxes are the only things mentioned and this LP press release only mentions that.
Nothing about abortion or gay marriage, which I believe most LP'ers support.
What published statistics are you drawing your belief on?
The LP platform states that it is neutral on abortion, which basically gives tacit approval.
As for gay marriage my experience with strident LP'ers on FR is that they are for it.
Anyway, it is interesting that the demos get a free pass, since 95% of them probably voted for tax increases and nada from the LP about them.
It's true that they aren't targeting specific Democrats, like they are targeting specific Republicans.
But that's because you expect Democrats to raise taxes. They are not running against the real Republicans, who voted against the tax increase. What these weak Republicans did was go against their own party's leadership and philosophy to support a budget plan that included a tax increase, which the voters had already rejected.
It's sad that it takes Libertarians running to have any challenge to these squishy Republicans. The state G.O.P. should be willing to punish its own.
I'm a Republican. Here in Oregon, the Libertarian Party, while it includes some kooks, actually is building up a pretty good track record in helping to defeat tax increases, sometimes being the only ones out there campaigning against them. They were the people who successfully ran the "No on 28" campaign, traveling to every county in the state.
I sure don't want to lose the state house to the Democrats, but then again, I don't want a liberal majority ruling the house, regardless of party...and that's pretty much what we have now. Liberal Republicans join with Democrats, to create a tax-raising majority, which is unwilling to stand up to the public employee unions.
The Oregon G.O.P. is not well-run, although it is gradually improving, thanks, in part, to the Libertarians raising a stink. This state badly needs fiscal discipline, and I applaud the Libertarians for helping to steer it in that direction.
You don't think it has anything to do with the Republican Party's abandonment of smaller government as it continues to tack to the left and away from the concept of freedom, liberty and self-ownership, do you?
Republicans just seem to miss the writing on the wall.
Looks like the demos don't have to, looking at the reality of actions of the Libertarians in Oregon.
Really, the writing looks to me that the Libertarians don't want to challenge any democrats.
And what happens if the demo wins. That's called shooting yourself in the foot.
Like I said they are silent about the demos, 95% of them porbably voted for the tax increases.
It is interesting that they don't target any democrats. They would be more intellectually honest if they did.
Most likely because they use the equation:
Tax-increasing + "Republican" = Democrat. Works for me! Republicans have some vile leftism brewing in their party. There's no reason to challenge Democrats as Democrats never were champions of freedom, liberty and self-ownership. Republicans supposedly were.
Then you replace a liberal with another liberal.
Not good, but not a lot worse.
That's called shooting yourself in the foot.
Not really. In the race that they are talking about in the article, Cox has a reasonably good chance at winning. He has pretty good name ID. Probably better name ID than the Democrat or the Republican.
Sounds to me like they targeted those races where no tax-cutter is running. Why should they run against a tax-hiking Rat if a tax-cutting Republican is already running?
Tom Cox is doing Kevin Mannix a favor. He's being the "bad guy," and Mannix gets the benefit of better future party discipline, while not having to take any action against wayward Republicans.
The same reason the libertarians only bash Bush and Republicans on FR.
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.