Liberals gin up their engines for kamikaze missions

Pundits on the Left are suggesting that the reason Massachusetts voters rejected Martha Coakley -- aside from her personal failings as a candidate - is that Democrats in Washington failed to pursue a sufficiently liberal agenda.

As Sen. John Kerry and the other leaders of the Massachusetts Democratic Party were still standing on stage, jaws slack and eyes vacant, commentators Chris Matthews and Rachel Maddow on MSNBC said that the vote was proof that President Obama and his team had to act urgently to jam his health care bill through Congress by any parliamentary means necessary. Maddow, astonishingly, said it had to be done in 30 days.

Over at the Boston Globe, which was the only organization to have a worse showing in the election than the Coakley campaign, editorial writers pretended that Republican Scott Brown's election had been a certainty for some time. If they thought so, they certainly hadn't shared it with their readers.

If you relied only on the Globe for your news, the last poll you read about before Election Day was the one from Jan. 6 from the paper and the University of New Hampshire that showed Coakley winning in a 17-point walk over Republican Scott Brown.

The Globe editorial, having dismissed Brown's win as an event as common as the start of the maple syrup harvest, then picked up the argument that now was the moment for a kamikaze mission to pass the Democrats' health plan.

"Both houses of Congress have already passed credible reform bills. At this point, President Obama and House Speaker Nancy Pelosi should bring the legislative process to a close by pushing House members to pass the Senate version," counseled the Globe.

I’m with you. I can work with Blue Dogs and RINOs. Southern Dems are often more conservative than Republicans in other parts of the nation — but we have in common a love for this country and our way of life. We CAN work together.

Re: Scott Brown. I may get brickbats for saying this, but I hope FReepers will be gentle with him and let him do his job.

He was elected by moderates and liberals to best represent the people of the state of Massachusetts. If Brown does a good job, he may well have a place on the national table in the future. However, for now, no matter how many of us cheered him on and sent him money, his job is to represent the wishes of his constituents.

That means he may not always vote the way we’d like him to, and we need to understand that.

I’m interested in defusing the Obama agenda and exterminating the cockroaches in the White House. The enemy of my enemy is my friend. I can work with anyone toward a passionate common cause.

Subversive elements right here on Free Republic, in some cases ON PURPOSE, are trying to divide the “anti-socialist” voting block (Center-Left, Center-Right and Conservative).

I don't see how standing for principle is "subversive". If that had been done more in the last century, we wouldn't be in this mess.

Offer an alternative to the slavery of endless debt, taxation, and government meddling, and I think people, especially now, will decide it is a better alternative.

They have seen what the left has to offer. How many have had their mortgage paid, their gas tank filled, and are living fat in the Socialist utopia that is Obama Policy?

Lies, all lies, even to those who believed he was going to change things for the better.

As much as I despise RINOs, we need to realize that forcing them to leave the GOP on the national level may likely set up in 2012 a historical repeat of 1912 and 1992 — allowing the Progressive candidate to win the Presidency. It will be a balancing act, in the months and years ahead leading into 2012, to restore Conservatism to the GOP, while not forcing these less-Conservative elements of the Republican Party to feel shut out and fail to vote with the Conservatives.

Leave? Not necessarily. But a big dose of STFU is in order. They have compromised us into this mess in the spirit of 'bipartisanship', and now it is time to let the grown-ups drive. It is time to stand on principles, solid Conservative principles which provide a clear alternative to the Socialist morass we are in. If they do not want to vote with the Constitution, if they do not want to have a Republic, they are the subversives, not the Conservatives who decry their policy.

“As much as I despise RINOs, we need to realize that forcing them to leave the GOP on the national level may likely set up in 2012 a historical repeat of 1912 and 1992 — allowing the Progressive candidate to win the Presidency. It will be a balancing act, in the months and years ahead leading into 2012, to restore Conservatism to the GOP, while not forcing these less-Conservative elements of the Republican Party to feel shut out and fail to vote with the Conservatives.”

BP2, with the exception of a few very liberal and deceitful RINOs, (McCain, Graham, Voinovich, Chaffee, Specter, Jeffords, Collins, Snowe,) we are not trying to force out those whose values MOSTLY comport with the stated platform of the GOP.

The people I mentioned have a proven track record of betraying us over and over and over, delivering us into the hands of our enemies at the most crucial junctures when we desperately needed them. Every one of these people has been the last vote the liberals needed to pass a bill that screwed the entire country at least once, and in some instances, many times MORE than once. They have repeatedly snatched defeat from the jaws of victory and that is why we are in the situation we are in now.

Of ALL of them, TWO have switch parties. Jeffords’ switch gave over an entire election that we spent blood and tears on to achieve a majority in the senate and gave a ONE vote majority to the democrats so we could not assure our Supreme Court Judges would be Conservatives and Constitutional Constructionists.
Specter swiched and gave the democrats the same edge, a ONE vote majority.

Collins, Snowe, and Chaffee could be counted on to give the dems a victory regardless of whether they had a majority or not.
McCain is a vindictive meglomaniac and can be counted on to sell us out at the drop of a hat. He has taken Soros money, runs as a Conservative, then does everything in his power to defeat Conservatives.
You can NOT fault us for wanting to rid ourselves of these traitors.

Look at the race in Florida. Crist and Rubio. Crist is a flaming liberal but McCain backs him a hundred per. We are trying as hard as we can to RUN Conservatives in PRIMARIES and defeat these guys before they ever get the nomination. We already know that voting for an “R” will NOT guarantee they will vote “R” once they are elected.
We can’t afford them anymore.

I don’t usually disagree with you, but this time, I am saying that if we fail to drive the RINOs, who are NOT even CLOSE to Conservatives out of the party, then we have more worries than just obama because they have shown us time and again that they are liberals and will vote for liberal agendas regardless of what letter is after their names.

WE did not “split” the party. THEY did. They infiltrated and destroyed us from within. This is war, BP. And they have set a price on our souls to sell us out far too cheaply. I am not willing to pay that price anymore. With them in place, we lose anyway.
Nothing we do now could make things any worse than voting for more of the same.

You cannot compromise with the devil. EVER! I used to think that voting for the lesser of two evils would at least give us time, just like BP2 is saying now. It has been the exact opposite. WE have given THEM time to become more entrenched. It never worked the way we were all told and cajoled into believing it would. Every time we have done it, the GOP has swung further and further to the left. This time we fight. More RINOs is suicide by any other name.

I'm not saying to compromise on principle, quite the opposite. We need to be steadfast to provide a clear alternative to the Socialism people are beginning to awaken to, otherwise, it is just 'rat-lite', which hasn't worked in the past, either. The electorate will adapt and grumble about whatever burden they are forced to bear--when it is first imposed is the time to get them to shrug it and those who imposed it off, if we can't get them to see it coming and duck the load entirely.

If the RINOs want to vote Conservative, that is fine with me.

Where there is no one else, wait until there is a solid Conservative waiting in the wings to displace the RINO (rather than hand the seat to a socialist), but conservative candidates of the future should be paying their dues in more local offices now to move up later.

Fill the structure from the bottom up.

Where possible, replace RINOs with Conservatives now, and keep making progress for the future.

Primaries, people, are the place to fight, when the general elections come around we have to do what we can, even if it is only damage control.

> Furthermore, there is no such thing as a “center-left.”

It's all relative, but where I come from and what I know thus far about Senator-elect Scott Brown, I would consider him a Center-Left Republican.

I would consider myself the quintessential Conservative in my circle of influence. Even I recognize that with 3.79 million square miles and more than 307 million people in the United States, there is no single one-size-fits-all Conservatism.

I wished EVERYONE had exact Conservative core values as my own, but that's impossible. Big Tent does NOT mean accept and elect every RINO politician that comes down the pike. FWIW, I'm against the Big Tent philosophy personally, but I do recognize that Conservatives have slightly differing principles and priorities, based upon region, life experiences and other factors. All things being equal, I'd prefer a RINO as a political ally than a Progressive at my side.

The Liberals are willing to fall on their swords because of political zealotry, as they continue to show with their nonsensical pursuit of ObamaCare.

Photobucket

Don't make their mistake; pick your battles wisely.

> I don't see how standing for principle is “subversive”.

Obviously not all commentary here is "subversive."

There ARE some subversive posters here on FR that are trying to influence the Conservative political process, purely for the benefit of their Liberal political process. I've encountered (and personally exposed) several over the past 10 years as a FReeper; other FReepers have as well.

There's a lot of lurkers here who may not recognize the difference between opinion and propaganda. The subtlest “war bloggers” on the Left try to seem reasonable, pushing specific RINO candidates and incremental acceptance of Moderate ideals. In the end, most often accidentally expose themselves — one's ideology is hard to disguise.

We all have principles we will not compromise on. For many Conservatives, Abortion is one of those principles. If a Conservative absolutely cannot pull the lever for a properly-nominated Republican candidate who approves of first-trimester abortion, then obviously that Conservative must follow his conscience.

Keep in mind, however, that for all of the informed Conservatives who choose not to vote for the RINO running for office in their district, there are throngs of uninformed Democrat voters ready to cancel out those Conservative “no votes,” to sweep in the Democratic Candidate.

The best alternative is to pick the right Conservative candidate to represent the GOP in each contest, BEFORE the GOP Party Primary. For many 2010 races, that process is already well under way.

> Leave? Not necessarily. But a big dose of STFU is in order.

Oh yeah, definitely.

If RINOs and Center-Right Independents haven't gotten the memo, the pendulum is swinging hard to the Right — and fast! It's up to us Conservatives to help educate our RINO brethren to kindly "sit in the passenger seat" and let the Conservatives drive the GOP to victory in 2010 and 2012. On the other hand, we need to work so every RINO incumbent is replaced by a Conservative in 2010! Hopefully all Conservatives will make that happen leading up through the GOP Primaries.

IMO, the plan should be as follow:
1) influence the Primary process to nominate and elect as many Conservatives as possible in BOTH the GOP and the Democratic Party
2) support the GOP candidate in the General Elections in November
3) if the GOP candidate on the ballot is too RINO, consider supporting a strong Conservative candidate as an Independent

Step 3 is tricky, obviously. In NY-23, Doug Hoffman would have won if not for some last minute chicanery by the GOP candidate. With 438 US House, 33 US Senate and thousands of local Races up for grabs in an anti-incumbent election, each race will obviously be different and require good judgment to determine if the RINO candidate can actually be beaten by a Conservative independent candidate.

I would expect Democrats to anonymously finance a slew of Independent Conservatives candidates this year who sadly may have NO CHANCE of winning in purple districts — but WILL peel off a small percentage of Conservative voters — in tight races where RINOs are the GOP candidates. For example, a Libertarian Party candidate running in a Midwest Congressional district, where a RINO candidate is tied with a Moderate Democrat rival, might take just enough votes to allow a Moderate Democrat to win in this election cycle.

The good news is that this works both ways.

For individual Conservatives and Conservative groups who have deep pockets — using Thursday's SCOTUS lifting of campaign donation limits — and adopting a trick from the 2008 Obama donation handbook...

I will tell you how to subvert some close Democratic races in 2010:

Most of us can see that the Democratic Party this year, trying to regain disaffected Independent voters, will push left-Center Moderate candidates. This will upset many die-hard Progressives voters who cannot, for example, support a Democratic candidate who does not support third-trimester abortions.

The reality is that Progressives hate DINOs as much as Conservatives hate RINOs!

Conversely, many Progressive candidates will be left out in the cold, as the Democrats move through their Primaries.

Dozens of anonymous donations from "supportive" Conservative groups totaling $10,000-$20,000, using prepaid Gift Credit Cards through a Progressive candidate's website, would be good seed money to nudge the Progressive candidate to stay in the race, to pursue more donations and votes from halfhearted supporters of his Democratic rival. This is modified version of Rush's Operation Chaos.

It may sound like dirty pool ... but sometimes to kill a Rat, you may have to use more than just cheese.

Photobucket

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.