Carolyn McCarthy, Mike McIntyre to retire

North Carolina Rep. Mike McIntyre and New York Rep. Carolyn McCarthy will not seek reelection this year, according to multiple Democratic sources familiar with their plans – marking a blow to Democratic efforts to win control of the House.

The 57-year-old McIntyre, who was elected in 1996 to the Wilmington-area congressional seat, narrowly defeated Republican state Sen. David Rouzer in 2012 and was poised to face him in a 2014 rematch. His retirement from the heavily Republican district will further thin the ranks of Blue Dog Democrats. It comes less than a month after another Blue Dog, Utah Rep. Jim Matheson, said his current term would be his last.

McCarthy, McIntyre to retire Republicans, who are trying to defend a 17-seat House majority, say those retirements show that Democrats in conservative districts are growing concerned about running for reelection when a debate over the bungled Obamacare roll-out is taking center stage.

“If it wasn’t clear before with the retirement of Rep. Jim Matheson, today’s announcement from Rep. Mike McIntyre solidifies the extremely difficult road ahead for Democrats in 2014,” Oregon Rep. Greg Walden, the National Republican Congressional Committee chairman, said in a statement.

But departures are creating opportunities for Democrats, too. The recent retirements of four Republicans in swing districts – Pennsylvania Rep. Jim Gerlach, New Jersey Rep. Jon Runyan, Virginia Rep. Frank Wolf, and Iowa Rep. Tom Latham – have allowed Democrats to compete for those seats.

McCarthy’s Long Island-area district is also a swing seat, but it will be easier for Democrats to retain than McIntyre’s.

The 70-year-old McCarthy, who also was elected in 1996, announced in June that she was undergoing treatment for lung cancer. She arrived in Congress after her husband and son were both shot in a December 1993 incident on the Long Island Rail Road. McCarthy’s husband, Dennis, was killed, while her son survived. She has been a key proponent of gun control during her time in office.

Read more: http://www.politico.com/story/2014/01/carolyn-mccarthy-mike-mcintyre-retirement-101906.html#ixzz2pq7U1BHl

Dunno. But Barack Obama's announcement in 2007 was a bit further removed from November 2008 than we are now removed from November 2014.

With only 3% of the public viewing the immigration as important, one wonders why Boehner would bring up such an incendiary issue prior to the midterms. The public is not demanding an immediate solution--only the GOP's corporate paymasters are and therein lies the problem.

You sound as though you are congenial to the Rule or Ruin mindset...

I favor the Rule of Law and adherence to the Constitution and I am prepared to ruin those who are subverting it regardless if they have a "D" or "R" after their name.

President Obama has told Senate Democrats he expects Speaker John Boehner (R-Ohio) to pass immigration reform this year, defying predictions the issue is dead for 2014.

Obama wasn't given much of a chance even closer to the election. The point is that the pundits don't always get things right. A consensus doesn't always reach the right conclusion, e.g., man-made global warming. And unforeseen developments can change things in a hurry, witness the impact of the disastrous Obamacare roll-out on the generic ballot. A GOP supported amnesty will have a major electoral impact. And it could be the final straw that leads to a third party for conservatives. Boehner is playing with fire.
With only 3% of the public viewing the immigration as important, one wonders why Boehner would bring up such an incendiary issue prior to the midterms. The public is not demanding an immediate solution--only the GOP's corporate paymasters are and therein lies the problem. ...

I favor the Rule of Law and adherence to the Constitution and I am prepared to ruin those who are subverting it regardless if they have a "D" or "R" after their name.

It appears that your wet dream is that the American people will (a) abandon the Republican Party en masse; and (b) establish a new (more conservative) party to replace it; and that you are quite willing--even eager--to participate in the destruction of the GOP, in the (quite fatuous) hope of seeing it replaced with something more to your liking.

As for myself, I am in favor of the so-called "Buckley Rule," as established by the late William F. Buckley Jr.: One would do well to vote for the rightmost candidate who has a serious chance of winning.

I would prefer not to waste my time (or my vote) tilting at windmills...

It appears that your wet dream is that the American people will (a) abandon the Republican Party en masse; and (b) establish a new (more conservative) party to replace it; and that you are quite willing--even eager--to participate in the destruction of the GOP, in the (quite fatuous) hope of seeing it replaced with something more to your liking.

Wet dream? Leaving aside your offensive, crude characterization, yes, when a party that I have been a member of for over 50 years abandons its principles and no longer stands for what I do, then I want out. The GOP left me, not the other way around. What is going on now is a battle for the heart and soul of the GOP. If we (conservatives) cannot gain control over the party, then we will leave it. The so-called RINOs are waging war against conservatives and have been for a long time. It is time for us to stop holding our noses and voting for the lesser of two evils.

Political parties are not forever. The current GOP leadership is moving away from the traditional conservative base. I am not trying to destroy the GOP, just gain control of it. Failing that, then it is time for another party just like the GOP replaced the Whigs.

As for myself, I am in favor of the so-called "Buckley Rule," as established by the late William F. Buckley Jr.: One would do well to vote for the rightmost candidate who has a serious chance of winning. ?

If "winning" means electing people like Susan Collins, Arlen Spector, John McCain, et. al., then these are indeed Pyrrhic victories.

Ronald Reagan, in his famous 1975 speech at CPAC, said,

"Americans are hungry to feel once again a sense of mission and greatness. I don 't know about you, but I am impatient with those Republicans who after the last election rushed into print saying, "We must broaden the base of our party"-- when what they meant was to fuzz up and blur even more the differences between ourselves and our opponents.

It was a feeling that there was not a sufficient difference now between the parties that kept a majority of the voters away from the polls. When have we ever advocated a closed-door policy? Who has ever been barred from participating?

Our people look for a cause to believe in. Is it a third party we need, or is it a new and revitalized second party, raising a banner of no pale pastels, but bold colors which make it unmistakably clear where we stand on all of the issues troubling the people?"

I would prefer not to waste my time (or my vote) tilting at windmills...

Are you happy with Lamar Alexander and Bob Corker? Can we do better in TN?

The Democrats are well are their way to becoming the permanent majority party. Unless the GOP changes course and starts addressing the concerns of the voters in a meaningful way, then we really will have no real choice, but rather an echo.

Unknown voice: "We need to change congress"

Milton Friedman: No, we don't need to change congress, excuse me. You know, people have a great misunderstanding about this.

People in congress are in the business, they're trying to buy votes. They're in the business of competing with one another to get elected. The same congressman will vote for a different thing if he thinks that's politically profitable. You don't have to change congress. People have a great misconception in this way they think the way you solve things is by electing the right people.

It's nice to elect the right people but that isn't the way you solve things.

The way you solve things is by making it politically profitable for the wrong people to do the right thing.

If we (conservatives) cannot gain control over the party, then we will leave it. The so-called RINOs are waging war against conservatives and have been for a long time. It is time for us to stop holding our noses and voting for the lesser of two evils.
Political parties are not forever. The current GOP leadership is moving away from the traditional conservative base. I am not trying to destroy the GOP, just gain control of it. Failing that, then it is time for another party just like the GOP replaced the Whigs. ...
If "winning" means electing people like Susan Collins, Arlen Spector, John McCain, et. al., then these are indeed Pyrrhic victories. ...

Are you happy with Lamar Alexander and Bob Corker?

Susan Collins is, indeed, a RINO; though she is probably the best that could be expected to emerge from a New England state. (Actually, she is the last GOP senator remaining from New England.) Johns McCain is right on some issues and wrong on others, in my opinion; but I would not characterize him as a RINO. Arlen Specter was precisely that--before he became a Democrat (again), that is; he is now deceased.

And yes, I am generally happy with Lamar Alexander and Bob Corker. That is not to say that I agree with every vote they take; but they are both generally conservative. And, to paraphrase the late Ronald Reagan, someone who votes in accordance with one's own will 80 percent of the time should not be considered a 20 percent enemy.

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.