Posted on 04/11/2014 10:01:47 AM PDT by lowbridge
The Tea Party zealots who haven’t learned from their mistakes in 2010 and 2012 are trying their best to screw up the GOP’s chances to win the Senate this fall.
Where does the Tea Party find these people to run in primaries? Most important, why do they offer them up as legitimate Republican candidates?
The Tea Party bosses have been listening to too much talk radio. They seem to think that what makes a good Republican candidate is someone who sounds like a talk radio host.
But talk radio is all about bombast and attracting callers, not about winning elections.
If Republicans are going to win general elections in 2014 and beyond, we’ve got to put up principled conservative candidates who sound like senators, congressmen, and governors — not kooks.
(Excerpt) Read more at westernjournalism.com ...
Akin was opposing the tea party candidates and the tea party is more religious than average republicans, the tea party is naturally and predictably made up of the most conservative Americans, Christians, in fact almost half of the tea party considers themselves part of the “religious right”.
Akin was GOPe. O’Donnell did what? Tell a story from her youth about liking a guy that was into witch crap? So what? Obama confesses to massive drug use. Which is worse?
And hanging out with Goth morons in your youth who “sacrafice” a small animal isn’t that crazy considering Mike Castle was a so-called Republican that beleived in every crazy left wing cause. He was worse than a Dem.
What else made her bad? The statement she made in front of a bunch of stupid, left wing, indocrinated law students who can’t or won’t understand the Constitution like all left wing lawyers? She correctly told them their was nothing about separation of church and state in the document and they laughed. Who are the idiots there?
Giving that seat over to a Dem didn’t make one iota of difference.
So that’s two down. Got any more examples or did you knee just jerk on those?
It is true that the Tea Partiers are on average more Christian than the average population, and there is no doubt a lot of cross over between the religious right and the Tea Party - but the Tea Party was an issue of limited government at its genesis. There is also a major strain of the religious right - the Santuckabee group - that is not Tea Party.
Like McCain and Romney? George Allen 2.0? Chris Christie? Charlie Christ in FL? I'm sure he was your choice Mike. John Boehner? Mitch McConnell? Come on Mike, put up or shut up.
Then shame on WJ for the misleading header: when you run a headline, and then you run the original article, and not a commentary on the original article, then it is very misleading to change the header. Thus, that they ran MR’s article in toto, is the evidence the MR said it. As it turns out, that evidence is misleading.
Shame shame on WJ. This does change the coloring of MR’s remarks, but the damage by WJ’s header is done.
He and his sister Maureen were adopted.
I’ve often looked at Ron and wondered if Mike was really adopted. And now I read what Mike’s saying these days, and I go, “Yep, he’s adopted.”
That Michael Regan likes ‘sounds’ more than substance tells me is an/the idiot That I never thought he was. No more of just ‘sounds’ for me. I have had my fill from guys like Obama. The Bush family is high on my list too.
No. Like Cruz.
I said the tea party is more Christian than the GOP, the GOP is more Christian than the average population.
The majority of the tea party is Evangelical, and of course the tea party was made up of our most conservative Americans, the Christians.
Who do you you think created this nation and kept it with limited government, until the left and libertarians moved us into social liberalism and big government?
Who do you think is the conservative foundation and voters today, opposing big government and libertarianism and the left?
His ADOPTED Mother was Jane Wyman. His birth parents lived in Pennsylvania.
O’Donnell isn’t the poster child for big losses anyway, that honor goes to the incumbent GOPe senator, Rick Santorum, who lost his seat by a bigger margin than O’Donnell lost her race for Biden’s seat.
And also Claire McCaskill's. She remains in the Senate because the Tea Party split its vote between two better candidates, allowing Claire basically to pick her opponent.
Akin was a perfectly decent guy, but he lacked the skill to avoid being trapped into making a remark on a sensitive topic that the 'Rats could twist.
Reagan cites the example of Matt Bevin speaking a pro-cockfighting rally. It seems Mitch McConnell voted for a farm bill that happens to make cockfighting a federal crime. Now, of course, cockfighting should be a matter for the states and is not a proper concern of the concern of the federal government. It happens to be a misdemeanor in Kentucky, which is fine by me, because it is an abomination.
So how did Bevin wind up appearing to be for cockfighting? It seems he thought the event was a states' rights rally. Presumably, he thought it would be an opportunity to make a point about McConnell's lack of a sense of states' rights and of the proper role of the federal government. A valid point. But a point that would be lost as the media promoted the impression that Matt Bevin is pro-cockfighting. He or his handlers should have done the due diligence and had the judgement to keep him away from that scene.
Reagan's point is the Tea Party needs to put up candidates that have the skill to win and the judgement not to lose over trivial stupidity.
Good point. And he’d fit in Mike’s argument since he WAS a Senator.
you just wake up looking for a fight, don’t you……..yes, you are right, the TP is more Christian than the GOP as a whole, and the GOP is more Christian than the GOP is as a whole. Point taken, and I skipped a step in my earlier post.
And yes, I agree, instinctively there is an Evangelical element that is large in the TP - because those do tend to be the people most concerned with limited governance. This only makes sense and I agree with you on that:
But there are two major exceptions to this notion. A: there is also an undeniable strain of non social libertines in the tea party universe….and they were some of the eary ones to it. The Santelli rant, which undeniably really is the spark (that lit what was already a big stack of kindling) has nothing to do with social issues or Christian beliefs.
And B: there are many Evangelicals who decry much of the TP platform as putting “mammon ahead of God - and they will blindly follow Huckabee and others down a very NON TP road.
So you are generally right, but you have to admit my two exceptions are valid.
He was adopted by both Wyman and Ronald Reagan.
You are noty your fathers son...well you are adopted...but
you sound more like your brother Ronnie Reagan Jr...
so long mike.
Good God, how did you manage to find a reason to launch into a personal attack over this?
I said the tea party is more Christian than the GOP, the GOP is more Christian than the average population.
The majority of the tea party is Evangelical, and of course the tea party was made up of our most conservative Americans, the Christians.
I merely pointed out who the tea party is, social conservative Christians mostly, in fact mostly Evangelical Christians, that is why they are to the right of republicans on social issues.
I felt that was needed because of the spin you were posting trying to create a false impression of who tea partiers are.
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.