Posted on 03/04/2007 4:15:07 PM PST by Sub-Driver
Anger on Display Among Conservative PAC Audience
Sunday , March 04, 2007 By Kelley Beaucar Vlahos
WASHINGTON — America's conservatives are mad and they're not going to take it anymore.
That was the message the movement's leaders delivered throughout the annual Conservative Political Action Conference in Washington, D.C. last week.
One after another, conservatives told FOXNews.com that they are angry, irritated, frustrated and in some cases depressed. And the target of their angst and ire is none other than the Republican Party, which wants and needs their support to win the 2008 presidential election and avoid losing more seats in the Senate and House next election.
Many of these conservatives, whose national stars began to rise with the presidential election of Ronald Reagan in 1980, described the GOP's state of affairs in Washington with words like "failed," defeated" and "in the grave."
"The Republican Party apparently has a death wish, but that doesn't mean we conservatives have to go along with it," Richard Viguerie, a movement veteran who helped elect Reagan, said during his wildly-received speech delivered Thursday. "Let's focus on the conservative movement, not the GOP."
"We've got to stop being lackeys of the Republican Party. We've got to be a third force," said Bill Greene, head of RightMarch.com, an online activist network. He is running as a Republican in the June special election to replace the late Rep. Charlie Norwood, R-Ga., who died of cancer on Feb. 13.
Several candidates vying for the GOP nomination appeared at the conference. But one — Arizona Sen. John McCain — was notably absent, and the frontrunner in generic opinion polls — former New York City Mayor Rudy Giuliani — acknowledged to the crowd that he has differences with his audience on social issues.
(Excerpt) Read more at foxnews.com ...
They show no interest in us because they don't need us. This "vote Rudy or get Hillary" strategy is nothing new. The whole Republican shtick for years has been to take for granted that we will vote for them because everyone knows the Demons are even worse. Once they are in office they pay off the special interest groups whose bribes (oops..campaign contributions) paid their campaign costs. This is why Rove focuses on "getting out the vote," not on issues. The only "issues" the Pubbie leaders have is getting elected, then passing out appointments to the Party hacks: the same people they bus around to vote in straw polls here and there. Government is simply the biggest racket in the world. I'm afraid we do need a 3rd party which is strong enough to force the others to listen, but conditions (the war and SCOTUS) don't allow time for that. It's a desperate situation; we're over a barrel.
"The Republican Party apparently has a death wish, but that doesn't mean we conservatives have to go along with it," Richard Viguerie, a movement veteran who helped elect Reagan"
Reagan made Viguerie. Viguerie didn't make Reagan.
But to hear these arrogant people squawk, you'd never know the truth.
Without Reagan, most would be nobodies. Talk of 3rd parties confirms the idiocy underlying many of their rantings.
It wasn't the socons who became the biggest porkers. I think you are misled because W sounds like a socon and turned out to be a big-govt. guy. But the Congressional leadership who wallowed in the trough weren't the hard-core socons. They were careerist Party hacks like Hastert & Frist. They exercised no discipline and had no vision, as did Gingrich.
If you stick with the Hunter threads - you won't have any trouble from the Rudy folks. They don't go on Hunter threads to bash as far as I know. That was my original point. Do you understand what I am saying?
Selecting Guiliani.... I just don't know if I can hold my nose and pull the lever for him. That makes things extremely hard for a large group of us, with whom the GOP leadership has lost touch. What's so terrible about being pro-life?
You said it! (sigh)
Would that include Sandra Day O'connor?
I hope that you can find someone that you can get excited about and support them.
Take a look at Wayne LaPierre's statement. It isn't the socons who screwed the Party. The Party screwed them AND the libertarian fiscal conservatives. Bush and the hacks running the Party reneged on the Contract With America, which contained planks for both fiscal & social conservatives. For example, do you really think it's socons who wanted "public broadcasting" and the Dept. of Education saved? Was it socons who wanted Sandy Burglar let off the hook, and hobnobbed with the Clintons?
I hope you can find someone you can get excited about and support.
Actually, the same could be said about Rudy boosters posting all the Giuliani campaign propaganda here on a conservative website. If you read Jim Robinson's posts, you know what I mean. So in all fairness, that pendulum swings both ways.
What is a "Hunter thread" and a "Rudy thread?" Any thread on someone's candidacy is going to attract people from every side. Otherwise, it's just a mutual admiration society. Besides, I've seen plenty of savage bashing of Hunter and his supporters by Rudycrats.
The one person no one on FR seems to like is McCain. So how does he end up winning some straw polls, and coming in strong on others? Because the Party hacks show up and bias the results. It's hard to imagine any rank-and-file conservative who really wants McInsane.
Well, I suppose that's fair. But, given that the social conservative has gotten a lot of their agenda accomplished, and given the at least perception that the GOP was a socially conservative party, one shouldn't be surprised if a lot of people think "we let them have their way, and look what they did".
Some may do so, but you have to understand that for many, this is a case of religious and moral principles. You do realize that, right?
That's a good one. You should try stand-up some time.
Because we don't trust the Rino's on that. Look at what they did to Ollie's senate campaign, Brett Shundler's gov race, and others. When the RINO's lose they get worried that their neighbors will look down at them for supporting a non-elitist, so they cross over in order to be "responsible".
I disagree. The Rudy people have asked the owner if he does not want them to post and he has not stopped them. If it was not ok to post Rudy articles - they would not be here.
But my point is this. I see no reason for the anti-Rudy folks to try to change the minds of or attack the pro-Rudy folks and vice versa.
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.