Posted on 05/30/2004 8:54:37 PM PDT by Badray
Why?
Well excuse me, self-proclaimed all knowing omnipotent one for having an opinion.
The party whose 'big tent' is big enough to embrace every philosophy isn't interested in principle, only power.
You may be right, but if I don't hold out hope for a conservative Congress, I'd have to resort to the 4th Box of Liberty.
Unfortunately, the leadership of Frist and Santorum et.al. that supported Specter's campaign will never have the stones to block his ascension to the chairmanship of the committee that he has dreamed about for so long. This is where he wants to make his mark in history and it ain't gonna be one that we'll like.
The Republicans did fight harder for principle when they were in the minority and when there was a Dem president. I don't want to cede the majority, but I agree, it won't be the end of the world if we do.
The party that stands purely on principle will have no power! I don't like it, but conservatives have to play politics, too. That means they might have to compromise on some issues in order to achieve other, bigger goals.
Realistically, there aren't enough conservative votes in the US to win all of the battles.
Apology, if it was one, accepted.
Specter moves to the right in the lead up to an election because he needs conservative votes. The more conservative the challenge, the better his voting record. He's never faced a conservative like Pat before.
I do not, and will, not trust Bush or Santorum to make my voting decisions. They both claim to be conservative, but endorsed and campaigned for a man that represents almost the exact opposite of their professed beliefs. Bush was afraid of backlash from the other RINOs. Santorum didn't want to lose his leadership position. It was more important to him than any principle that we thought that he stood for. I believe that he liked the idea of being 'the conservative senator' from PA. Toomey was a threat to that status.
I'm no doubt among millions who are really, truly tired of hearing that we "must" keep reelecting and reelecting piles of crap like Specter.
When does it stop? Are piles of crap like Specter always going to be "good enough", do we just have to wait for them to die of old age in office after squandering hundreds of billions more, or do Big Stupid Government Republicans plan on drawing the line somewhere, someday?
Thanks. I couldn't think of the name of the Specter's new 'blockee'. I'm sure that they will try to tap dance there way around that.
Let me jump in on that question.
The dems voted along party lines to acquit and they deserve our scorn. But it was the Republicans who failed to take the proceedings seriously that gave the dems the political cover that they needed to hold fast for clinton. Perhaps, just perhaps, if they did, the outcome would have been different. Can you imagine if they actually listened to witnesses and looked at evidence?
Thank you, Trent Lott and Rick Santorum.
Don't be afraid to pester the RNC, Senate Campaign Committee, Bush/Cheney Election Committee, etc...
If Bush really wants Specter relected he might strongly suggest that he compromise a little.
I would contact the prolife organizations in your state about Spectpr's intent to block the appointment of a prolife Arkansas district judge even though Arkansas' two Democrat senators support him. http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1144839/posts
GREAT post! BRAVO! (BRAVA?)
I'm confused. When I say that we will gain seats this year, I'm told that we won't. When I say that it will take 2 elections to get to 60, you tell me that it won't.
Which is it?
I understand being wary about this, but if the dems can still block what we want when we're in the majority, why can't we block the dems if (in the slim-to-none-chance that) they do?
Or alternatively, if we can't get anything done when we're in control, why is the world going to end if they have a slim majority and any legislation has to get past Bush's (still missing) veto pen?
I don't want to see the dems have the control that they had for 5 decades either, but I think that you may be assuming an outcome far worse than possible.
Of course, this all assumes that the remaining RINOs remain as faithful to the GOP as so many here suggest they will.
My turn to apologize, but I jumped on your comment as quickly as you jumped on mine. I hope that my apology was a quick as yours.
Signed,
The Omnipotent One (And Only)
I think that you have bought into the liberal/RINO lie that we must compromise principle to get elected. There are prominent examples to the contrary. Reagan. Toomey. Ron Paul. Rick Santorum. Daryl Metcalfe. (Who?)
The problem isn't when a pubbie pol stands on principle that his election is jeopardized. It's when he waffles and compromises. When the pubbie acts, campaigns, and votes like a democrat, the voters are turned off and drop out. They don't see a difference in the politicians or that their vote matters in the outcome that they want.
Reagan took the country by storm. Then he really kicked butt in the second race. Bush I won because people were expecting Reagan term III. When Bush I folded, he was abandoned.
Toomey is in a predominately dem district, but he has consistently promoted conservative values and won with respectable margins. Even the dem voters appreciated and supported him because he was consistent and honest. He didn't pander. He didn't promise what he had to intention of doing just to get votes. If Bush and Santorum had the courage of their (stated) beliefs or even just stayed neutral, Toomey would have won the race against Specter.
Ron Paul is the same. He tells his voters (mostly dems), not what they want to hear, but the truth. Do you know that his biggest opposition is from the GOP? They want him replaced because he votes based on the Constitutionality of every issue and not on who proposed it or how popular it is. If we had more men of principle like Ron Paul, we wouldn't have the mess that we have in Congress now.
Locally, a state rep Daryl Metcalfe is the most conservative rep in PA house. He clobbers any dem challenger, but the state GOP constantly tries to find someone to challenge him because he holds true to the Consitution and doesn't waver.
Now I know that in some areas of the country, these men would have a hard time winning, but that doesn't mean that principle doesn't matter. Above all, people, including dem people, want honestly even if it conflicts with personal political beliefs.
If more Republicans were like these men, they win more often, not less and with bigger margins, not smaller. There are lots of people who would gladly vote again if their vote meant that they'd get a man (or woman) like any of the above.
If Bill Clinton had been convicted by the Senate, we would have Al Gore as President today, and that is fact pure nonsense and ridiculous speculation. There, that's better.
The rest of your post is even worse. Maybe you can start your recovery by eliminating the sugar from the koolaid. Just a suggestion.
First, Specter distanced himself from Bush within 12 hours of winning the primary and he wouldn't have won without Bush. In his vitory speech, he reminded everyone that he was an independent voice and (using Bush's campaign ad wording) rubbed Bush's face in it.
Then days later Specter sided with the dems and voted against Bush's overtime pay bill.
Now, as you point out, he's standing in the way of one of his judicial nominees (Holmes).
Specter is not liked because he is so nasty, arrogant, and so hard to pin down. He has more weasel words than clinton. Any you deal that you make with him today will be broken tomorrow and he'll have you thinking that it was your fault.
He plays to his crowd. Everyone thinks that he is their best friend when he's pandering, er, I mean campaigning. And he is in perpetual campaign mode.
The only pressure that Specter feels is that which comes during an election from a conservative candidate. Now that he is facing a socialist, he beliefs that we don't have a choice but to vote for him. The most that we'll get from him now is lip service.
Good luck.
PING!
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.