Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Congress's true conservative
The American Spectator ^ | 6/30/2005 | John Samples

Posted on 06/30/2005 6:59:19 AM PDT by jla

"I mean, Pence meant it. At least I think so, and I'm pretty cynical. He warned against big government Republicanism and against a GOP that thought the federal government was the solution to every social ill."

(Excerpt) Read more at spectator.org ...


TOPICS: Extended News; News/Current Events; Politics/Elections
KEYWORDS: mikepence; pence
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 101-105 next last
To: Dead Corpse

Hmmmmm.

Maybe he could be extradicted down to Texas....


41 posted on 06/30/2005 8:22:05 AM PDT by ConservativeMan55 (DON'T FIRE UNTIL YOU SEE THE WHITES OF THE CURTAINS THEY ARE WEARING ON THEIR HEADS !)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 40 | View Replies]

To: Dead Corpse
"It isn't me that needs to compromise here"

Christian conservative out number radical libertarians.

"out there, someone may be doing something legally that you may not approve of."

That is fine and I wish them well,but I wont sanction it.
42 posted on 06/30/2005 8:23:13 AM PDT by Gipper08 (Mike Pence in 2008)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies]

To: Gipper08
No. It can't be done over night. Well, acutally it could, but no one has the political willpower to do it the way I'm thinking.

And yes, we need every conservative we can muster. We also need to start pushing things that ARE conservative, instead of pushing issues that really aren't that important in the grand scheme of things. So you've got a problem with fags getting hitched, fine. They aren't exactly my favorite people either, but what they do behind closed doors in no way threatens me whatsoever. Them having some kind of civil union does nothing to destroy my marriage with my wife. But can't worrying about a Marriage Amendment wait until AFTER we have straightened out Emminent Domain abuse, Second Amendment issues, the economy, the UN, Iraq, the border, taxes, ect... ?

You are worried about the gold plating on a handrail while an iceberg is ripping a hole in the stern.

43 posted on 06/30/2005 8:25:16 AM PDT by Dead Corpse (Never underestimate the will of the downtrodden to lie flatter.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]

To: Dane
Yes Paul teaming up with the biggest socialists numb nut in Federal government made me think he did not use good judgment.

That old adage that a person is know by the company they keep gives me suspicion about Paul.
44 posted on 06/30/2005 8:27:14 AM PDT by OKIEDOC (LL THE)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: Gipper08
Christian conservative out number radical libertarians.

Ah. So you don't actually want "Rule of Law" and a Constitution. You want YOUR mob in power. Law of the jungle. Ok. I've got you now.

Well, just remember that us minority libertarians like our guns. We also aren't as afraid to use them. Especially us "radicals" who think the Constitution means exactly what it says. Use of Force after someone initiates it against you is just dandy. Morally necessary in fact. LEt's not go there shall we?

Also, no one is asking you to sanction it, subsidize it, approve of it, or condone it. Quite the opposite. Don't associate with them. Don't have business dealings with them. Speak out against the lifestyle. It is your Right. What you DON'T have a Right to do, is to put a government GUN to someones head to force them to your viewpoint. Especially if what they are doing doesn't harm you DIRECTLY. If a gay person is pointing a gun at you trying to steal your wallet, that is one thing. If they are slow dancing on a dance floor in a gay bar, then what the hell are you doing in a gay bar?

45 posted on 06/30/2005 8:30:56 AM PDT by Dead Corpse (Never underestimate the will of the downtrodden to lie flatter.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 42 | View Replies]

To: Dane

Ron Paul advocates (and has always advocated) a non-interventionist American foreign policy. He certainly rejects the notion that the US government (or any government) can "build" a society or an economy...whether in Detroit or Baghdad because, like all real conservatives, he recognizes that government, even when its goals are benevolent, is inherently corrupt, inefficient and incompetent. That is a basic operating principle for all real conservatives....which is why American conservatism has always had a strong commitment to non-interventionism ("isolationism" the liberals used to mockingly call it)

Its not Ron Paul's fault that former Trotskyite militant liberals like Irving Kristol and his philosophical disciples co-opted the title of "conservative"


46 posted on 06/30/2005 8:35:38 AM PDT by Irontank (Let them revere nothing but religion, morality and liberty -- John Adams)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: Dead Corpse

" I'm 36, but I'd make a horrid President. I'd be tempted to bring back dueling as a method of "getting along" with Congress."

Not so bad - at least you'll be on the right side of RKBA. :)

Plus, duelling is between 2 consenting adults. There is already precedent that any action, even one that might result in death by STD, is OK between 2 consenting adults. If they don't both consent to the duel, then it's just murder. I think you might be onto something here.


47 posted on 06/30/2005 8:43:50 AM PDT by adam_az (It's the border, stupid!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

To: Gipper08
Christian conservative out number radical libertarians.

True, that doesn't mean though that Republicans are going to be able to win elections with just Christian conservatives. There are a lot of non-religious people who generally support smaller government but aren't exactly "radical libertarians." If the Republicans can't make a case why those people should vote Republican, they'll probably lose.
48 posted on 06/30/2005 8:48:56 AM PDT by JohnBDay
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 42 | View Replies]

To: Dead Corpse
But can't worrying about a Marriage Amendment wait until AFTER we have straightened out Emminent Domain abuse, Second Amendment issues, the economy, the UN, Iraq, the border, taxes, ect...

I agree.I just worry that you paint all Social CONS with the GWB big government brush.Many of us are very Libertarian-Pence-Coburn-Toomey.Also without "social" conservatism we would lose even MORE of the womens vote.
49 posted on 06/30/2005 8:50:20 AM PDT by Gipper08 (Mike Pence in 2008)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 43 | View Replies]

To: adam_az
Acts of Capitalism between consenting Adults.

I'd approve a Right to Life, but I'd want a Right to End My Life as well. After all, it is MY life. Either way, it isn't a Federal issue, but a State issue. At least, unless we Amend the Constitution.

Dueling used to be an acceptable means of settling irreconcilable differences. Even Vice Presidents engaged in it, although the Hamilton/Burr thing is still a bit murky to me. I know Hamiltons mechinations were ticking Burr off, but just imagine the look would be on Schumers face if I were to slap with a leather gauntlet and toss it at his feet.

50 posted on 06/30/2005 8:51:47 AM PDT by Dead Corpse (Never underestimate the will of the downtrodden to lie flatter.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 47 | View Replies]

To: Gipper08

I won't come join those "in the center". If you want people like me in the fold, then we need to MOVE the center back to the Right.


51 posted on 06/30/2005 8:53:34 AM PDT by Dead Corpse (Never underestimate the will of the downtrodden to lie flatter.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 49 | View Replies]

To: Gipper08

Free and fair non-partisan elections at al levels of government is the only way to protect us from big government. Republican party bosses wouldn't have much power without big government. Regardless of a few party members like Pence, party bosses will always make sure big government wins. Throughout history, powerful political parties have served no purpose other than to protect the power of big government.

If conservatives and libertarians worked for non-partisan elections at all levels of government, the Republican party bosses wouldn't be able to continue the advance of big government. Then Pence could represent his constituents instead of defending Republican party leaders.


52 posted on 06/30/2005 9:16:04 AM PDT by yoswif
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: ConservativeMan55

Gotta love Coburn! (from roll call)

Coburn Freely Placing Holds
June 23, 2005
By Emily Pierce,
Roll Call Staff

Senators, take heed: Sen. Tom Coburn (R-Okla.) may have a "hold" on your bill.

The freshman is using his power as a Senator to put a hold - or secret filibuster threat - on any bill he believes would create a new spending program, whether it is included in an appropriations bill or an authorizing bill.

That means that many a Senator's home-state pet project could be held up indefinitely by a man known for sticking to his guns, even to the point of making enemies.

"I don't think we ought to be passing new legislation, spending new money when we can't pay for what we're doing today, and we're not willing to cut what we're doing today," said Coburn in a recent interview.

Asked whether he targeted bills going through just the committees he sits on - Judiciary, Indian Affairs, and Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs - or whether he has any specific criteria for measures he finds objectionable, Coburn said every bill has a potential bull's-eye on it.

"I look at everything," he said.

Indeed, Coburn spokesman John Hart said his boss is known for personally reading and marking up conference reports and bills, and his staff "is cross-trained to think oversight and examine bills."

In addition, Coburn's previous reputation in the House as a relentless budget hawk has caused many outside organizations "to come out of the woodwork" to tip off Coburn's office to potentially objectionable bills and existing programs.

It's unclear, however, exactly how Coburn came to place holds on four bills passed out of the Commerce, Science and Transportation Committee in March. Three were intended to address ocean monitoring, mapping and research in response to the devastating tsunami that killed as many as 200,000 in southern Asia last December. The fourth would create a program to track waste being dumped by ships into the ocean.

But because all four created new programs that would have committed the federal government to spending tens of millions of dollars on each, they apparently ran afoul of Coburn.

Though Coburn did not acknowledge putting holds on all four bills, but he did admit to putting a hold on one of Commerce Chairman Ted Stevens' (R-Alaska) ocean research bills.

"It's not about Ted Stevens," Coburn said. "It's about, if we're going to spend new money then we ought to be able to say, 'Here's where we'll get the money to pay for this,' or we ought not to be doing this."

Stevens said this week that after a conversation with Coburn, he believes he received a commitment from Coburn to lift the holds on all four bills. One was sponsored by Commerce ranking member Daniel Inouye (D-Hawaii) and another by Sen. Olympia Snowe (R-Maine). "I think I got them all off. I'm not sure," Stevens said.

However, Coburn's office refused to confirm or deny Stevens' assertion. Indeed, Hart said Coburn did not want to reveal the number of holds or the specific bills he may be delaying in the Senate at any one time.

"He thinks he can be more effective in preventing those bills from moving forward if he does it privately rather than if he did it publicly," Hart said. "For every one he [announces] publicly, there may be 10 he does privately."

Placing a hold is essentially "a threat to filibuster or talk at great length" about the subject, said Sen. Trent Lott (R-Miss.). "It's a notification to the leaders that a Member wants to be notified if you're bringing up" a bill or nomination, Lott said.

Lott noted that holds can be "a serious impediment" to getting bills passed, given that many bills in the Senate are passed by unanimous consent at the end of each legislative day during what is known as "wrap up." In particular, many bills containing Senators' pet projects or dealing with purely parochial state issues are passed by unanimous consent in that fashion.

Of course, occasionally Senators don't want to come down to the floor to publicly oppose the bill or nomination.

"When I was Majority Leader, I'd call [the Senator with the hold] up and say, 'I'm bringing this bill up. Get on over here and filibuster,' and nine times out of 10, they didn't show. I called their bluff," Lott said.

So far, however, there is no indication whether Coburn is bluffing, and if so, on which bills. However, he expressed no reservations about telling Senators why he might find their bills objectionable. "If I think the legislation's bad, I'll tell anybody," Coburn said.

Besides using the time-honored hold, Coburn has another platform in the Senate to air his views on wasteful and unnecessary government spending. As chairman of the Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs subcommittee on federal financial management, government information and international security, Coburn has been holding hearings on government programs that are alleged to be inefficient and wasteful. Given that, Senators aren't even safe anymore thinking that their pet programs are protected because they've already become law.

"He's elated to have a forum like this and plans to use it to its full potential," Hart said.

Coburn has already held a hearing on President Bush's recommendations to sunset most federal programs to force regular Congressional reviews as well as a hearing on what Hart described as a "corporate welfare program" that pays technology companies for research they would do with or without federal funds.

Today, Coburn is hosting a panel on AIDS funding in the United States. While Coburn, a doctor by trade, supports AIDS funding for communities around the nation, he is concerned that some states and localities are getting more money than they can use, while others are not getting enough, Hart said.

Lott said he wasn't aware of Coburn's plan to hold up myriad bills, but said Coburn is "genuinely and legitimately concerned about the size of the deficit."

Still, during his more than 30 years in Congress, Lott said he has learned something about how to keep the likes of Coburn from stopping his pet projects from becoming law.

"The way I do it is, I fold them into bills where you can't find it," Lott said. "I've been around here long enough to know how to bury it."


53 posted on 06/30/2005 9:22:37 AM PDT by traviskicks (http://www.neoperspectives.com/scotuspropertythieving.htm)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: Dead Corpse
You are worried about the gold plating on a handrail while an iceberg is ripping a hole in the stern.

Well said.

I've always wondered why some conservatives get so steamed about petty issues while resigning themselves to an ever-growing federal government.

A friend's wife was running for office a few years back. The city faced budget problems, crime problems, a shortage of affordable housing, all the usual difficulties that come with faster-than-normal population growth.

So what does this candidate point to as the most important issue needing to be addressed?

Getting rid of an "adult toy store" that's too close to a residential neighborhood to suit her sensibilities.

Fortunately, she lost her race. Her husband would have been continuously embarrassed had she been elected.

54 posted on 06/30/2005 9:27:12 AM PDT by logician2u
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 43 | View Replies]

To: logician2u

Kinda proves my point. For people like that, it is all about getting power and nothing to do with real issues.


55 posted on 06/30/2005 9:43:58 AM PDT by Dead Corpse (Never underestimate the will of the downtrodden to lie flatter.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 54 | View Replies]

To: Gipper08
If libertarians will join with true conservatives they will have to put up with Things like the Flag amendment,marriage amendment, and Stem cells.But in the end True conservatives and libertarians must unite to stop the advance of big government.If we do not do it in 08 it will never happen.

I've noticed that the best candidates seem to attract both the libertarian and social conservatives. Tom McClintock is a textbook example of this.

56 posted on 06/30/2005 9:51:48 AM PDT by jmc813 ("Small-government conservative" is a redundancy, and "compassionate conservative" is an oxymoron.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: EternalVigilance
There are a number of other excellent conservatives, particularly in the House. Steve King of Iowa would be one example.

My rep, Scott Garrett(R-NJ) is outstanding as well.

57 posted on 06/30/2005 9:52:59 AM PDT by jmc813 ("Small-government conservative" is a redundancy, and "compassionate conservative" is an oxymoron.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: jmc813

Yep. It SHOULD be Governor McClintock, but the GOP'ers were more worried about getting a famous face instead of someone with real convictions and principles.


58 posted on 06/30/2005 9:55:00 AM PDT by Dead Corpse (Never underestimate the will of the downtrodden to lie flatter.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 56 | View Replies]

To: Dane
Yeah Ron Paul, is a "true' conservative" when he gets in bed with dennis kookcinich, and basically says, all we are saying, is give the terrorists a chance.

It's no worse than your boy Bush getting in Bed with Ted Kennedy to pass unconstitutional education bills.

59 posted on 06/30/2005 9:57:50 AM PDT by jmc813 ("Small-government conservative" is a redundancy, and "compassionate conservative" is an oxymoron.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: jmc813
Or the President kowtowing to Vincente on dissolving our Border.
60 posted on 06/30/2005 10:01:16 AM PDT by Dead Corpse (Never underestimate the will of the downtrodden to lie flatter.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 59 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 101-105 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson