Posted on 05/20/2006 1:16:03 PM PDT by Jim Robinson
Conservatives, nationwide are getting angry about the loss of principle by GOP'ers in office. Big spending in Washington and Sacramento. The inability to control illegal aliens. Failure to protect jobs and the failure to stop the social agenda of liberals in our schools in finally causing conservatives to say NO to GOP incumbents, even if it means we could lose seats in a legislative body. The thought is simple, why protect a Republican running for office if their voting record will differ little from the Democrats.
In Utah, GOP Congressman Chris Cannon could not win his Parties endorsement for re-election--his opponent got more votes in Convention then he did.
In Nebraska, Congressman tom Osborne, and legend in the state, was defeated for the nomination for Governor due to his weak stand on illegal aliens.
In Heardon, Virginia, five incumbent city council members lost re-election due to their creation of a "Day Labor Center" for illegal aliens.
In the California 50th Congressional District Special Election, the Democrat is ahead of the Republican, since the Republican has been portrayed as more liberal than many Democrats--has even supported Democrats in the past.
But, Pennsylvania last Tuesday should have been the two by four to every GOP candidate and office holder in the nation.At least 14 incumbent GOP office holders, including the top two in the State Senate were defeated in a Republican primary, by Republicans. The good news is that if they had not been defeated, many GOP voters would have stayed home in November. This is a lesson for us in California, and the nation, GOP voters have had enough of Republicans acting like Democrats. Our candidates need to stand for GOP principles, then vote and govern that way once in office.
No longer will GOP voters settle for, "well at least they have a "R" after their name." There is a revolt going on in GOP ranks and it is moving across the nation.
That would make a great Tag Line.....
Actually, when the DEMs regained control of the Senate, I sure didn't appreciate him very much. Zell can blab all he wants, but if his party affiliation, in a conservative state, helps the likes of Tommy Daschle lead the Senate, he's not a help; he's a hinderance. He's better than a lib, but worse than a RINO when it comes to the bottom line mathematics. Talk is cheap, especially in DC.
The other side has boatloads of Zells. And the Dems appreciate them all.
The other side will take what table scraps they can get, but if you think they appreciate being in the minority, you're crazy. They play politics, which is fine. They'd LOVE for you to deliver them a DEM majority, and they'd gladly trade every single RINO for a DEM of any stripe.
It would have been SIX, but there were only five people challenging the HernDOG city council.
Well, that's not really what I was discussing. I agree with you on that. As I said to JimRob in an earlier post: "Primaries are the appropriate place for this sort of housecleaning. "
I'd like to see the Republicanbots show even half the amount of venom toward those who vote RINO in the primaries as they show to conservatives.
Those voters give us weak sisters like Chafee, McCain, and Dole.
But we're the problem. Right....
you know, mr. robinson? i do not believe i overstate the case to say that you, personally, should be credited for some, if not all of this. good work. as you know, i do not make a habit of fawning over others in public, even my host who has provided countless hours of entertainment and learning for me. thank you. and bravo.
I think whether you support RINO's in the primaries is a critical piece of information.
That you refuse to respond is telling.
BTTT your post.
"Best" is a very subjective word choice, isn't it? To RINO Republicans, the "best" candidate is a RINO.
Two cases.
1] Bush wanted Alito approved in December. Specter dragged things out and it was almost February before he got in.
2] Brett Kavanaugh just got dragged back for a second hearing which will delay his confirmation.
What other possible reason for such delays other than to obstruct the process and hope for something to be revealed that will be devastating to the nominee?
If having a GOP Senate majority is important, and it's EXTREMELY important, then we need Specter. Like I said, he's part of the reason there's 10 GOPers for every 8 DEMs on Senate committees
WRONG! And even Specter acknowledged that his loss wouldn't effect the GOP majority status. and the results confirm it. We gained seats and we would have still been up even with Specters' defeat.
Same goes for Lincoln Chaffee, Susan Collins, and all the other RINOs. Actually, the miracle to me is that they're IN the GOP. They don't hurt us by being liberal Republicans. They help us immensely by not being Democrats.
Really? [1] How many of them are part of the Gang of 14 and are happy to obstruct our agenda?
Really? [2] Maybe the voters really want to elect a Republican and the GOP didn't allow a conservative to get on the ballot and all those voters could do was follow your advice and vote for the RINO.
Really? [3] Maybe you are right and that is the best we can hope for from those states, but I doubt it. I think that the fact that they are voting Republican is a repudiation of the Democrats. We need to offer better choices, if only the damn national party would stay out of it.
As an example, the reelection group that Liddy Dole runs (or ran) for GOP senators helped pro abortion Specter over pro life Pat Toomey. Now, in the Santorum Casey race, they are of course supporting Arlen by criticizing Casey as not being pro life ENOUGH.
Now, on to Chaffee. He was part of the group holding up the judicial nominations. While actively fighting Bush and most of the rest of the GOP, Dole was sending out mail asking for us to help defeat democrat obstructionists. Hell's fire, they are supporting an obstructionist within the party. They are still supporting him over a conservative challenger. They will try to crush the challenger. All we ask is that they stay out of the primaries and let US make our choice.
Remember Jumpin' Jim Jeffords? Imagine all the RINOs jumped. We're MUCH better off with RINOs than we would be with DEMs. It's not even arguable.
And there is your problem. You're afraid to do the right thing for fear that something bad MIGHT happen. Who, but us junkies, even remembers Jeffords. Is he a force to be reckoned with? Has he been rewarded for his perfidy? Has he even really been welcomed by the dems after the first hurrahs died down?
Jumpers, and potential jumpers know that they are pariahs -- just like any traitor -- and they are not loved or trusted. We hold the majority and they want whatever power that comes from that majority. They are going anywhere, unless and until we grow the collective stones to throw them out.
Why would they need a Dem to chair the committees when the RINOs can do it for them almost as reliably?
Cross your finger, but don't hold your breath.
Santorum is in deep trouble and Swann isn't much better off. His numbers are dropping because of some really stupid things. If he's his own man, he's in the wrong game. If he's getting bad advice, he's in the wrong game because he can't tell the good from the bad.
Both are having problems of their own doing.
How simple can this be? This will be my plan, as it has always been.
Notice how so many would miss the second part, about the general election and would use your words to continue to ferment the discontent within the the republican ranks.
He promised (or threatened) to veto it if it didn't contain some provision that now escapes me (or if it did contain that provision) (Damn, getting old is tough on the memory. LOL)
It passed without meeting his requirement and then he signed it anyway. Later he said that he thought that SCOTUS would veto it. Sorry. That's just not good enough. There was a huge uproar here over it.
I'm sorry that I cannot be more specific. I am sure that another FReeper with an unimpaired memory will confirm this.
John Roberts
Sam Alito
Yes, he did. He's threatened to veto only a few bills, most of them towards the conservative side, but he's never vetoed anything.
Also see my reply to supercat. He just asked the same question. My answer is in #253 or #254.
By the end of the Clinton term it was impossible to think America would ever elect another Reagan again. The closest we got was GW Bush and look at the fight we got from the left during campaign 2000 all the way up to now.
Believe me, we have to play it smart and get in conservatives when we can but a RINO is not always best for the republican party in the long term.
i have spent, on average, probably four to seven hours, EVERY SINGLE DAY for the past EIGHT YEARS here on freerepublic.
and i can tell you without equivocation, that you are absolutely spot on correct.
actually, i'll see your gop and raise you one population as a whole. from talking to the enemy, i know for a fact that they are just as unhappy about having another 193 million non english speaking welfare recipients shoved down their throats, too. (i do find that they're less concerned about them being demorat voters than me, though.)
on our side, we object to being saddled with having to pay for mama and papa rodriguez's retirement home in florida, health care for decades (and we all understand that there is going to be some, uh, "deferred maintenance" there, don't we?), and then ... let's see ... oh, yeah, they're going to need food, and clothes, and furniture. and, and, and.
on the other side, the enemy does not want to be shoved aside in their quest for receipt of the retirement home in florida at taxpayer expense, etc., etc.
actually, i'm starting to think, too, that a third party, vocal and sincere on this issue, would in fact win an amount of support that would shock everyone. in fact, i even do not believe it impossible that in 2008, we could have a president who is neither republican or democrat.
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.