Posted on 06/20/2010 9:00:16 PM PDT by Steelfish
The Tea Party Is A Turn-Off For US Moderates America's angriest political force could learn from David Cameron, argues David Frum.
By David Frum 20 Jun 2010
The bill for the Republicans' Tea Party is about to arrive. Through 2009 and the first half of 2010, the media have buzzed with delighted horror over the supposedly unstoppable Tea Party movement in the United States. Now it's reality time. Compare two sets of Senate races. The first is made up of contests in New Hampshire, Ohio and Illinois. The first two of these seats had been held by Republicans who did not seek re-election; the Illinois seat was formerly held by Barack Obama.
To contest these, Republicans nominated a range of mainstream candidates. In Illinois they have Mark Kirk – a socially moderate, fiscally conservative member of Congress, who represents the suburbs north of Chicago. In Ohio, the Republican candidate is Rob Portman, a former US Trade Representative and White House budget chief. Kelly Ayotte is likely to win the Republican primary in New Hampshire. Currently the state's attorney general, she is a mainstream conservative: for lower taxes, against abortion. This is exactly the kind of candidate Republicans ought to nominate, and all three look set to win. Result: two holds and one net gain in the Senate.
But this good news for the mainstream GOP is balanced by the grim tally for Tea Party candidates. Consider another set of races. In Kentucky and Nevada, Tea Party activists won nominations for two of their own: Rand Paul and Sharron Angle. Both have aligned themselves with an array of wild positions. Mrs Angle wants to abolish social security and Medicare and has spoken favourably of armed insurrection against the federal government.
(Excerpt) Read more at telegraph.co.uk ...
No, David Frum is a turn off to most anyone (except libs).
So?
Our response should be to educate as many of our friends and family as possible as to the benefits and correctness of limited government.
Too often, this attitude or approach as expressed by David Frum is the exact same attitude of our so-called leadership in the GOP.
We need new leadership that correctly reflects our principles.
Wasn’t it following Frum’s advice that gave the government we have right now?
Damn! You beat me!
vaudine
The “moderates” already have their party, the GOP.
My observation - Mr. Frum has no idea what is going on in politics. That is a mouthful to say about a lifelong political (semi-Republican) fellow.
The really bad part of this is that he and his cohorts are ignorant of the people they pretend to represent - they have no idea of the revolution coming.
I would guess that would make them a bunch of ignorant but well meaning folks (with little experience of the people that they are suppose to represent) that have little idea of what is happening...
Hang in there Mr. Frum...
The ‘rats didn’t get to where they are today by playing nice with Bush. Neither for that matter did Gingrich lead the ‘94 revolution by playing nice with the Clintons. Now of course, you’ll notice that Newt is striking a more bipartisan tone - now that he’s out of office, retired, and it doesn’t matter one way or the other. If you want to relax and get along, then play nice. If you want to win, bring the fight and drop it at the ‘rats door.
I CAN SEE NOVEMBER FROM MY HOUSE!
Moderates = RINOS who are turned on by Obama, Obama-lites and McCain, a winning combination right there!
/sarcasm
Frum is no different than the libs. “People who disagree with me are a turn off for the independents”
Heh! Love it...
That's why they're usually the first against the wall....
OR: Why David Frum is a Pseudo-Conservative Moron
Heh... Well, maybe it’s time to bring back that lost art.
hahaha lol! a joker
Well, if the Independents don’t see the difference between Democrats and Republicans now, we are simply doomed to become a third rate country.
Is Sarah Palin actually Ronald Reagan Part 2?
I can’t help but notice numerous similarities between Sarah Palin and Ronald Reagan: both with a strong Christian faith and unabashedly pro-life. Like Reagan, Palin is a free-market advocate.
Both were governors of Western states and enjoyed the outdoors.
Both seemed to have supportive spouses content to stay in the background. Both have autobiographies titled “An American Life” (probably a conscious decision by Palin).
Both are vocal supporters of states’ rights. Palin, like Reagan, cites the Founders often. Like Reagan, Palin is attractive and charismatic but not supported by the political class.
Reagan was president of the actors union, and Palin’s husband is a union member. Both had the old-time Americana thing going (Reagan from a small town in Midwest, Palin from Idaho and then Alaska).
Both had monumental speeches at the prior term presidential conventions — as did President Obama in 2004.
Reagan won two elections by a combined 1,000 to 50 electoral votes.
So whether you are right, left, moderate or none of the above, you can see why Palin commands so much attention.
If the right is brave enough to nominate her, 2012 could be another Reagan-type landslide.
http://www.citizen-times.com/article/20100615/OPINION02/100614038/1006
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.