Posted on 04/10/2015 8:06:17 AM PDT by SoConPubbie
We endorsed Chuck DeVore in the GOP California Senate primary over Carly Fiorina. We did so because of DeVore’s proven record of staunch conservatism — which he continues fighting for now, having just helped kill a California open-carry ban — but also because we didn’t really trust or know anything about Fiorina. Carly’s conservative record was thin to nonexistent, and there were many troubling signs that she held liberal views. From her praise of Jesse Jackson, to her playing the race and gender cards against DeVore, to her support for the Wall Street bailouts, to her qualified support for the Obama stimulus, to her past support for taxation of sales on the Internet, to her waffling on immigration, to her support for Sonia Sotomayor, to her Master’s thesis advocating greater federal control of local education, to her past support for weakening California’s Proposition 13, to her statement to the San Francisco Chronicle editorial board that Roe v. Wade is “a decided issue,” Carly Fiorina’s oft-repeated claim to be a “lifelong conservative” was only plausible in the universe of NRSC staffers who recruited her in the first place.During the primary, Fiorina aggressively positioned herself to the right, aided by millions in self-funding and the support of a DC-based network more interested in her money and her connections than in any conservative principles. In addition to the NRSC’s unashamed support, Fiorina received the endorsement of major DC “pro-life” groups like the Susan B. Anthony List and the National Right to Life Committee — and got the backing of Gov. Sarah Palin and a host of DC Republicans, from Lindsey Graham to John McCain.All these groups, and our supposed betters in the party establishment, fed us several lines on Carly: that no matter what her actual record said she was “one of us”; that she would hold to her conservatism in the general election and in the Senate; that she had a better chance of beating Barbara Boxer than Chuck Devore; and that even if she wasn’t conservative, she was still better than Barbara Boxer.Whether the latter two are true or not, and I think for certain that Carly Fiorinia will be demonstrably better than Barbara Boxer, everything is hypothetical now except that those of us who knew better understood that in the general election, the great lurch left of center would begin.Let’s not abandon Carly Fiorina, but lest you be under some impression that she’ll be solidly and forthrightly with us in the Senate, understand what you are getting.The moment the great lurch left began came this past Wednesday, September 1st, in the televised debate between Carly Fiorina and Barbara Boxer.In the debate, which was dominated — as I told you repeatedly during the primary that it would be — by Boxer going on offense over Fiorina’s time as CEO of Hewlett-Packard, Carly Fiorina let loose three bombshells on conservatives:
On that last, Barbara Boxer was swift to respond: “If you can’t take a stand on Proposition 23, I don’t know what you will take a stand on.” Which brings us to the only time in the history of RedState we’ll agree with her. On September 3rd, her campaign sent out an e-mail saying she supports Prop 23 — not quite 48 hours after refusing to take a position in the televised debate with Boxer.To restate all this, Carly Fiorina abandoned pro-lifers, immigration conservatives, and every Californian who can’t find work because of their state’s eco-radical legislation (she did try about 48 hours later to get that group back). Here’s the kicker: none of this is a surprise. At least, none of it is a surprise if you paid attention to Carly’s actual record, instead of her campaign claims.So what now? Do we abandon Carly Fiorina? Polls show that she’s got an even shot at becoming the next Senator from California, which is better than any Boxer opponent has managed since 1992. Now that she’s shed any pretense of being a full-on conservative — and now that she’s apparently decided she doesn’t need her own party’s base — where does that leave us? Sure, she’s still better than Boxer. So is my dog, at least my hypothetical dog I intend to get and name Max once I have a house and yard big enough to accommodate a Chesapeake Bay Retriever.Here’s what we need to understand from this:
If you’re in California, absolutely and willingly vote for Carly Fiorina. But do so understanding who Carly Fiorina actually is. The mask is off, and there’s a squishy moderate underneath. In the Golden State, the sad truth is that our best hope is to replace a radical with a RINO. Considering the choice we could have had, that’s a shame.
AMEN!
No, she hasn’t won an election and I believe never will. Nevertheless, she does have some good one-liners.
Thank you for posting this. I’ve been using it on the other Fiorina threads that have been popping up around here over the past few days to remind folks what a RINO loser she really is.
No.
Nobody's going to believe that you want to bring jobs back to America, when you were one of the big CEOs who were pushing them offshore in the first place.
No, it's all self-serving and designed to first get her into the VP slot, and then eventually into the Oval Office.
With "conservatives" (let alone REPUBLICANS!) like Fiorina, who needs liberal Democrats?
The GOP had better understand that I will only vote for what I want to WIN. If Fiorina won and started being her leftist big government self, the Republicans/conservatives who voted "against" the other guy by voting for Fiorina, would be 100 percent responsible because they voted for her and put her in office.
RULE OF THUMB IN THE BALLOT BOX: If you know you would end up complaining and fighting most of the things the person you're voting for would do once in office ... VOTE FOR SOMEONE ELSE OR STAY HOME because there is no such thing as voting "against." You only get to vote "for."
Pal, I've never once met anyone seeking a perfect candidate, and I will bet hard cold cash that you haven't, either.
YOU can vote for Republicans who grow government if you want. You can tell yourself that you're voting "against" more government. But if your vote puts into office an agent of the very things you despise, you will be responsible for the crap that happens when you get what you voted for.
Find someone who has the cajones or ovaries to win and back ‘em 100 percent with all you have. Otherwise prepare to live in a Marxist hell for the foreseeable future. JMHO!!
As it happens, that is why I am 100 percent behind Cruz, which means I'm AGAINST Republicans like Fiorina and Santorum and even Walker -- if conservatives want to nail this 2016 presidential primary, they need to reject all other candidates than Cruz NOW. Now that Cruz has officially entered the race, all others are aids to the Marxist hell because they are obstructions to Cruz's success.
Yep. Ignorance is bliss. Go ahead and encourage her, she might mean it this time! LOL!!
She has to be running for Bush’s VP. Need to see if she talks bad about him to prove me otherwise
EXACTLY.
I had bought three HP laptops over a series of a handful of years and everyone of them was crap for what I was paying. Don’t get me started on the Indian call centers .
For four months I had this going on.
Hi My name is Steve how can I help you.
I have a problem
No problem , no problem no problem
For four frigging months, of course there is a problem, just give me the address to get it sent off too while under warranty. Oh and your name is not Steve, Mark, Mike, or Jim either .
Is she not also socially liberal like Paul, Bush ?
Believe me, your experiences with HP is shared by thousands.
Bingo! Boxer gave her several opportunities to hit a few out of the park, and Fiorina was either too timid, too liberal, or too dense to swing. One glaring example comes to mind: Boxer, the malignant midget from Marin (thanks to Jeff Katz) said Fiorina outsourced 30, 000 CA jobs. Fiorina had the chance to blame boxer’s liberal war on business but passed.
What's not to like about it?
The downside is her progressive streak... that would embolden others in the GOP to jump on board such a bandwagon. I wouldn’t get too charmed, too quick.
The more RINO candidates the better. My concern is the spate of early big-buck open primaries all bunched together in this nomination cycle, a plan dedicated to nominating Bush. Hence, anything to keep diluting that RINO vote is important at this stage. If we can get a conservative past that early hurdle I have little doubt that Carly Fiorina will not get far beyond that point.
Do you really think the Republican primary vote is so ill-informed? Our biggest weakness as a party re our tendency to nominate RINOs is that conservatives fall for the "he can win," meme, having NOTHING to do with what the candidate says. Effectively, the conservative electorate is just as cowardly about media noise as are our GOP representatives. The fear mongering you are selling feeds into 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.