BULL-poop.
This is what happens when you're in the 'center'....
Posted on 12/11/2006 11:06:46 PM PST by Luis Gonzalez
Our view: In Arizona and nationwide, voters rejected rigid ideologues in favor of those who promised moderation, dialogue.
The picture that emerged from last month's elections, at both the state and the federal level, showed a majority of voters weary of hard-line, intransigent ideologues on the far right.
We know that, because voters turned both houses of Congress over to the Democrats and for the first time in many years gave Democrats 27 of the 60 seats seats in the Arizona House of Representatives.
They also re-elected Democratic Gov. Janet Napolitano, giving her a 27 percentage point victory over her ultra-conservative challenger, Republican Len Munsil.
And so there is some irony, to put it kindly, in the comments from some Republicans who believe the party suffered because its candidates were not conservative enough. That line of thinking suggests that what voters really wanted were tougher, more rigid conservatives. If that were true, then candidates like Republican Randy Graf, an aggressive conservative who was running for Congress in District 8, should have trounced his Democratic opponent, Gabrielle Giffords. But the opposite happened. Voters told Graf to take a hike and sent Giffords to Washington.
It is remarkable, then, to hear Republicans like Bill Montgomery, who did so poorly in his race against Attorney General Terry Goddard, declare: "The Republican Party took a hit because we strayed from the principles that make our party so strong and that serve to unify our membership, which consists predominantly of fiscal and social conservatives."
This is the same as saying Republican conservatives should stick to the principles that made them unpopular and that voters, for the most part, rejected.
Montgomery was quoted by reporter Daniel Scarpinato in a Star story last Wednesday. We are more inclined to agree with Steve Huffman, a Republican moderate who ran a primary against Graf and lost.
"I think the most important conversation we have to have right now is: 'Are we where the voters are?' " Huffman said.
It's an important, practical question that suggests that candidates should be responsive to voters' concerns. It makes perfect sense, and if other Republicans were to accept reality they would see that there was nothing mysterious about the election results. Voters rejected the fringes and moved toward the political center. The Republicans in District 8 who rejected Huffman didn't get it.
Many of them would undoubtedly agree with Montgomery, a political novice, who told Scarpinato, "I've always had a problem with the term 'moderate.' If you always take the middle ground, I don't see how that's a virtue. That's not leadership."
On the contrary, we would say that it is both a sign of leadership and a necessary asset to realize the wisdom in compromising on 10 or 20 percent of the issues in order to achieve success on 80 percent of the others.
Compromise is not a dirty word, nor is it fatal to try to understand another viewpoint in the hope of negotiating an issue that gives both sides some of what they're seeking. A case can be made that compromise is a sign of wisdom and maturity.
The point that hard-liners like Montgomery miss is that public service does not require rigid adherence to a personal ideological agenda. It requires an ability to remain flexible enough to respond to the people who elected you as their representative, not their emperor.
Failure to accept the fundamental message of the last election will eventually dilute Republican power at the state level as sure as it has at the national level. Voters want a change, not a restatement of the same old manifesto.
Yea, but it'd be the short bus, we'd have to sit all the way in the back, and you'd make us wear helmets.
Which would most likely be the right thing to do.
L
Many blue people run from the chaos and high taxes they brought to their home state, then leave for safer pastures, bringing their blue brains with them. Sad but true.
Amen ......
The real conservative essence of The Constitution will seldom any longer take form in politicians elected as long as the government itself ALLOWS and PROMOTES a media as it is constituted today.
I have no solutions (none that I can talk about). I wish I did. The media is killing this once great Republic, and the real sick thing is that it is being done purposefully. The Marxists win.
****
The socialist/Marxist/liberal media is the most destructive, relentless, and ruthless enemy of this Republic.
****
I'm sorry, I've seen the media and closely observed it for too many decades now. Nothing will change, the country will continue to be diminished until we excise these people from the old media. They are stone-*ss evil.
It really is time for a revolution (of sorts). But, nothing will change. After all the people are so comfortable..... or so they think.
They fed into the media spin that the republicans are the problem.
These elite know-it-alls betrayed the President, the troops and our allies.
Guess they're happy now.
For their own good, they really should stop holding their breath.
It's rare you see such a huge gap between the governed and the government.
Regards, Ivan
Yes indeed. And that ugly old anti-American media drumbeat NEVER took a day off FOR YEARS!!!
I hate those b*stards.
They foul their own state and then proceed to foul their new state!
Never figuring out that they themselves are the problem.
Your side lost, Luis.
"and they know that the war is not as good as they hoped it would be."
Actually, what they "know" is what the MSM has told them about the war. They live the economy every day, but they only know about the war through the media. And the MSM has been lying and distorting the Iraq war from the beginning in order to bring down the Republicans and the President.
If you take a look at the bulk of those names, many were either troubled incumbents or ran away from Conservatism. One of those on there lost because he choked his mistress in a hotel room. Again, the Republican party lost, Conservatism did not.
The ACU ratings do not tell the whole story. Dewine lost because he supported the Dems and RINOs against the juse of the nuclear option.
BULL-poop.
This is what happens when you're in the 'center'....
Look what happened in Ohio -- our new Governor's (Strickland) ACU rating and our new Senator's (Sherrod Brown) ACU rating -- they're both right there with Kucinich's rating. We lost for more than one reason: (1) the media (the main reason), (2) Iraq, (3) corruption in Ohio. Look at how the people voted in Ohio on the four issues on the ballot (which were all bad law) -- two of them passed (one was indented purposely to be voted down). More DEMs came out to vote than GOPers. More independents went to the DEMs. I think it was this: (1) more voters tended to side with the non-constant negativism of the media (i.e, change needed for change sake -- ignorance), and (2) more voters went over to the other side without thinking of the consequences (e.g., the two Ohio issues that passed that are bad law and which were NOT necessary (i.e., minimum wage and smoking).
Since the election, I have finally heard DEMs speaking out with ridiculous comments (i.e., Bush Administration spying on Americans) and Mary Cheney being pregnant (GOPers supposed to be the examples).
My conclusion: Many people did not think of the consequences of what they were voting on nor did they bother to do a little research (yes, I call this ignorance and stupidity), constant vicious negativism of the media and voted for change for change sake. Couple that, with the lack of knowledge (emotions) on what you are voting on, along with this country truly being split down the middle of party lines, and I think you have the answer.
Spot on for all points!
The Dems and their media allies ran a brilliant game. They ran to the right and relentlessly portrayed their opponents as corrupt, wishy-washy or somehow extremists. It was a masterfully coordinated attack on all fronts. The GOP never figured it out or knew what hit 'em. They still haven't and likely won't.
This was a perfect Clinton Triangulation Strategy operation and it will be enshrined in the political handbooks for the next 100 years (if we are lucky enough to survive the next 14 years).
Look for a repeat, improved version of this in 2008. In fact look at Hillary and Obama today and you will see it has already started. There is no "there" there. But there is plenty of media excitement and accompanying crowd noise.
The 2006 election had nothing to do "moving toward the middle". There was no middle. It was all muddle. Raum Emmanuel (Hillary's tactician folks, be afraid, very afraid) and the Media were able to peel off enough voters sick of "the mess" (framed by the Dems and their media allies, of course) who believed the hype they would "change" it all without a plan.
The Dems ran on "nothing" and phony promises. The GOP ran on their "record". Guess who won, and why!
That's what I was trying to say in my post that is preceding your's here. Do you agree with mine? I fear my words weren't very clear.
You stated it so well. Thank you !
Nope. I am not a socialist.
Big government is the drug of choice from the single mom, to the farmer, to the medical researcher, to the tort lawyer, to the school teacher, to the masses.
The Dems were cagey enough to put "minimum wage" proposals on a lot of State ballots. This energized their Union base as well as brought out their bottom-feeders looking for a free raise.
Also, notice how quiet the legions of poll-challenging Democrats lawyers were? There is a reason for that, and it isn't because there was no corruption. It was because they "won" (often by tiny margins) and they don't dare draw attention to their own poll stuffing antics. Why should they? The GOP, of course, took the high road and ignored the antics when they lost. As usual, they took the masochistic position on the sado-masochistic program.
You are so right. I can't tell you how many times I hear single moms complaining. I've been told many, many times, "But you're married." I'm to the point that I want to respond, "Yes, I've made good choices in my life." One day I'll reach the point and will do that.
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.