Posted on 10/02/2010 9:43:07 AM PDT by calcowgirl
(snip)
Whitman is representative of an emerging Republican type — what you might call the austerity caucus. Flamboyant performers like Sarah Palin get all the attention, but the governing soul of the party is to be found in statehouses where a loose confederation of uber-wonks have become militant budget balancers. Just as welfare reformers of the 1990s presaged compassionate conservatism, so the austerity brigades presage the national party's next chapter.
Mitch Daniels, the governor of Indiana who I think is most likely to win the GOP presidential nomination in 2012, is the spiritual leader. Gov. Chris Christie of New Jersey is the rising star. Jeb Bush is the eminence. Gov. Bobby Jindal of Louisiana and Rob Portman, a Senate candidate in Ohio, also fit the mold.
These are people who can happily spend hours in the budget weeds looking for efficiencies. They're being assisted by budget experts from the Hoover Institution, the Manhattan Institute and freelancers like Bob Grady, who did budgeting in George H.W. Bush's administration. Members of the caucus have a similar sense of the role history has assigned them. "This state had a party for 10 years and I'm the guy who got called in to clean up the mess," Christie says.
Christie is the Hot New Thing in the group . . .
(Excerpt) Read more at seattletimes.nwsource.com ...
I was responding to your post. End of story.
Me either, but he may see it as a "pro development" angle. Don't know. He was the only half-sane voice in SF politics for a very long time. He's 82 years old now, but I've scanned enough of his writings to be convinced he's not daft.
Brown fought 13 tooth an nail — until we passed it, then you would have thought he wrote the bill instead of Jarvis.
I just don't have the time for FR that I used to spend as the work I set out to do in coming here is largely accomplished. So, I confine myself more these days to quips, insights, and syntheses. I refer people to the Wildergarten Press article page a lot, not because I'm promoting anything as much as I think the set is as original and explanatory synthesis of what has happened to our "constitutionally protected" liberties as any on the net.
Some may come to think of you two as prophets, with warnings unheeded and all that has come to pass. But if one were to read through the research presented by you two as well as other conservatives, it's all about being informed and making principled decisions based on that knowledge, with some life experiences thrown in.
A California Freeper hall-of-fame, dedicated to those who have fought valiantly and honorably for the conservative cause as articulated in the original mission statement, ought to include you two, as well as Jim Robinson, amongst the first inductees.
Well, enough compliments for now. Back to the struggle for freedom...
Unlike your own rather poorly drafted and snarly posts, hers are always confined to the facts and the issues. I have never known her to take a position solely out of spite nor have I ever known her to attack another poster unless provoked beyond all reason (e.g., see your posts) and then only to defend herself.
As for Whitman v. Brown, that is a contest detested by all true conservatives on FR. We reject Jerry Brown because we know that Jerry Brown represents everything conservatives despise. Whitman is also a big problem for all the reasons the posters addressed by this post have already discussed in such a well composed and comprehensive manner. I am familiar with all of them, respect their comments and know them to be loyal conservatives. There isn't a kneejerk "pull the RINO lever" among this group. You might reflect on that.
You have made a very poor start with your posts on this thread. If you expect to do well on FR and enjoy the experience of interacting with our talented crew of conservatives, you are going to have to change your ways. If you sincerely want to be accepted around here, a good way to start would be with a prompt apology to calcowgirl. If you are unwilling or unable to do that, then I would suggest you either withdraw from FR or change your FR handle from ncalburt to something else. And, oh yes, when you begin posting under the your new FR handle, bring a more knowledgable and courteous attitude with you. You will find that far more rewarding.
OTOH, you are the champion of direct activism around here in the Bay Area, while NormsRevenge posts a lot of what we see and discuss in the first place, and I don't think I have ever properly thanked either of you for that. So there you go. JR on the other hand, I thank every month :-), as should we all. FR beats a subscription to The Economist, and a monthly donation of $10 is cheaper to boot.
Thanks, CCC, Czar, and C.O. I’m overwhelmed by the praise. But it is nice to know that the hours of often dull research trying to satisfy my unending curiosity about all things is not a total waste, LOL.
I agree with C.O. — many of you and others contribute in so many different ways. It is all notable and important, IMO.
And then there is FR itself, the vehicle that brought so many good folks together to fight the good fight. Thank you, Jim Robinson.
It kinda makes me feel somewhat soiled. ;-)
LOL. Good point.
Time for a shower.
;-)
Something may have gone wrong there too in a number of cases. I am seeing more and more of the Sharon Angle's , Rand Paul's and others that are backtracking on prior statements about Social Security reform, the fair tax and repealing Obama-care mandates. It is not just that they fold under political pressure, it is also that they have not thought out a way to articulate their beliefs beyond their primary voters. It is like they never thought beyond the primaries except try to deny they ever took those positions.
SS reform is really getting to me. Democrats are attacking Republicans for proposing SS reform, while claiming that SS is paying for itself (an outright lie, the SS IOUS are being redeemed by the treasury adding to the national debt ) and many of these ‘conservatives’ are running too scared to even point out why it makes sense to reform SS, why it is a problem.
Oh you!!!!! Heh heh heh...
No problem at all.
I think of the Tea Party as an attitude, not necessarily any individual(s). Many have tried to avoid the TP while painting them as whackjobs; others have tried to take it as their own. IMO, without defining a specific mission or platform of the TP, it is hard to say who is and who is not a member/leader. Mostly, I see politicians using it for political gain which is exactly NOT what it was about at the onset. Call me a tea partier of the Santelli 2008 breed, LOL.
With respect to California, the tea party or something like it (eg.g. a massive grassroots effort) is about the only way to get the GOP ‘leadership’ to change their path of wanting to be a “purple party.” JMHO
Meg wouldn’t know about Rose Bird. This was during her sabbatical from actually giving the damn most citizens would about their government, in this case California Supreme Court Justices. There’s a mountain of information Meg knows nothing about. She was busy...
Now she’s not, she’s goy plenty of time on her hands, and literally hundreds of millions to burn off on a whim.
Must be nice...
Do you imagine she woke up one day and said, “Shazam, I could be governor?” Well, yes, essentially that’s it.
Well, on the good side we only have to wait four or eight years to see who the next idiot stick the Republican establishment has in store to defeat Conservatism in California.
Stop waiting. It's Abel Maldonado.
” Well, on the good side we only have to wait four or eight years to see who the next idiot stick the Republican establishment has in store to defeat Conservatism in California.” D1
Stop waiting. It’s Abel Maldonado.
LOL!!
” Meg wouldn’t know about Rose Bird. This was during her sabbatical from actually giving the damn most citizens would about their government, in this case California Supreme Court Justices.”
I was a kid in my mid 20’s and worked on the recall effort. What a turd she was!
Obama would hire her ;-)
There is already one Rose Bird on the SC and her name is Ruth B Ginsburg but there may be more lurking under the robes...
Yep -- he's been at the top of their list.
What a good little puppet he is.
The puppet masters are a very sick bunch, IMO.
Correct!
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.