Posted on 01/15/2010 9:51:31 AM PST by rabscuttle385
Frum sees him as an antidote to the Tea Party madness:
Strong on defense and school choice, opposed to the Obama administration’s signature initiatives, Brown voted in favor of Mitt Romney’s health plan in Massachusetts. He describes himself as pro-choice (subject to reasonable limitations), accepts gay marriage in Massachusetts as a settled fact, and told the Boston Herald editorial board he would have voted to confirm Sonia Sotomayor.
(Excerpt) Read more at andrewsullivan.theatlantic.com ...
I would respond that these issues: abortion (like murder) and gay marriage are issues that belong to the states, which through most of history owned them. Demanding that the federal government resolve these issues through federal power (contrary to the constitution's clear meaning) just opens a Pandora's box and kills the principled arguments against liberal social engineering at the federal level.
Terri Shivo case was another example where most Americans agreed that the federal government was far overreaching it's authority for political purposes. (Looked clearly unconstitutional.)
For every one of these issues there are political arguments on both side but a federal solution always takes away our freedom to ‘walk with our feet’.
While you’re here, check out 121.
I wrote #121....
My bad...I meant 120. The one above yours, the one I just posted.
Cordially,
I am also as anti-RINO as anyone. But there are only two viable candidates in this race. Kennedy is going to get low single digits at best and so a vote for him is meaningless and a total waste (and besides he is not a true Libertarian or tea party candidate). A vote for Brown and a win or close loss will send an earth shattering shockwave across the bow and may very well derail Obamacare. There is a time and a place and the best/most conservative candidate (Jack E Robinson) lost in the primary. If he had won we would have rightly expected the RINO’s to vote for him. He didn’t. Scott won. I don’t know what percent Brown will be but whatever it is, it will be a million times better than CRoakley. Brown is the best Massachusetts could possibly hope for at this point. So we need to seize the opportunity of what’s (barely) possible instead of bashing our heads against the immovable wall. If you want good true conservative candidates for which to vote in 2010 you better get to work and pick some clean, charasmatic ones now and start working and funding them like hell so you won’t come whining here when your only choice is a RINO or a MoonBat.
You are a hoot I must say. Your around to just b!tch and complain. You never provide ANYTHING other than that. It would be nice if you would provide a little information inside that pee brain of yours.
I just saw your page. You are a libertarian. This is a conservative site. I guarantee that there are millions of liberaltarian sites on the internet that you will enjoy. Go give them a chance. I am not trying to be nasty but after seeing you political leanings it explains why conservatives scare the crap out of you. I understand you 100 percent now.
While this isn't absolute proof, the love of so-cons for GWB, the defending of him as a 'misunderstood success', and the frantic support of John McCain by socons in 2008 all are areas of concern.
The perfect shouldn’t be the enemy of the good. You must plow the fields with the oxen God gave you. If Brown wins, there is no doubt that we will be unhappy with some of his votes, but the immediate concern is stopping Obama’s agenda. Even if he doesn’t win, the fact that a Dem is in a tough fight to replace Teddy Kennedy is remarkable and is already sending a very strong message to all Dems regardless of where they are.
ping to #43
Brown defends Romneycare
My guess is that you yourself would wish it wasn’t that way.
With stakes that high, all I can say is, Go Scott Brown!!!
The Democrats have proven how high the stakes are by pouring in three million dollars worth of TV advertising and an 0bama visit
They know that a Scott Brown win can kill off 0bama-care
There is a two-level problem here. First, I will assume that both Titus and rabscuttle385 are genuinely motivated by principle: practicality vs. purity, respectively.
As to purity, is is true that many, MANY, FReepers have inveighed against RINOs in the GOP, and pledged to abstain rather than support them. As for practicality, it should be obvious that a minority can do next to nothing to stop things with which we disagree.
The two levels, then, are strategy and tactics, or long-term vs. short-term goals. Of course we want in the long run to vote only for Conservatives. It is in light of this, and not abstractly, that we should judge the contest in front of us today. Will the present vote (not a theoretical, pie-in-the-sky vote) get us to a more conservative tomorrow? Sometimes, the answer may indeed lead to some RINOs losing to Dems (as should have happened to Arlen Specter, and did happen to Dede Scozzafava).
Conclusion: Practicality gets a bad rap, but losers never prosper. A hold-your-nose vote against Coakley is still a vote for America.
If this is chess not checkers, as someone above has said, then the position of having to sacrifice the Queen of principle to try to escape the mating net of socialist/commie health rationing is a very desperate position indeed. It seems that the commies control all the good squares on the board at the moment.
Cordially,
Whoa, there! I’m not saying that rabscuttle’s not a troll, but that he’s right about Coolidge being conservative. It was Hoover who was the moderate GOP president who so tarnished our brand that FDR got to blame the economy on him for 12 years (Obama’s ‘blame Bush’ strategy should scare us.)
Just don’t throw the baby out with the bathwater.
Yeah, a full-blown Obama-loving Dem would be MUCH better, wouldn't it?
I still can't believe the sheer absurdity on FR sometimes...
A conservative fool loses elections
Anything which reduces the size and scope of government is conservative. Anything which GROWS government is NOT. See how easy that is?
Ok but is he still a better choice then Coakley? I’ll take him over her dumb butt any day.
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.