Quotes of the day

posted at 11:00 pm on April 30, 2009 by Allahpundit

“The National Council for a New America launched with an open letter that’s notable for what it leaves out: The issues that a large segment of the party’s base are most passionate about. The letter, signed by 14 congressional Republican leaders, makes no mention of same-sex marriage, immigration — legal or otherwise — or abortion…

The council marks a new phase in the Republican Party’s effort to remake itself: A formal acknowledgement by top congressional and national leaders that the GOP needs to change its pitch and its ideas.”

***
“Arlen Specter made his decision to leave the party after years of being attacked by fellow Republicans. I can understand how he felt, but I believe that now, more than ever, it is important for us moderates to stay and work from within. One thing we can be sure of is that we will have no impact on the party’s direction if we leave.

Moderate Republicans should use Senator Specter’s switch as the impetus to force a re-evaluation of where our party is going — a review that can happen only from the inside. Besides, third parties in the United States don’t have a particularly successful history.”

***
“Another way to put the question is: Can the party, having accurately ascertained its position, and recognizing shifting terrain, institute a renewed and highly practical tolerance for the many flavors of Republican? Can it live happily and productively with all its natural if sometimes warring constituent groups?

It must…

But also, the people inside can’t always be kicking people out of the tent. A great party cannot live by constantly subtracting, by removing or shunning those who are not faithful to every aspect of its beliefs, or who don’t accept every pole, or who are just barely fitting under the tent. Room should be made for them.”


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Comment pages: 1 2 3

Cindy Munford on April 30, 2009 at 11:59 PM

The point is that it’s not the issue, & it hasn’t been for too long because too few in DC seem to care. But they might care about noise from the rank-&-file.

jgapinoy on May 1, 2009 at 12:09 AM

I think I just discovered that I’m not a Republican.
PrincipledPilgrim on April 30, 2009 at 11:59 PM

I discovered that when McCain ran.
Upstater85 on May 1, 2009 at 12:00 AM

To both of you: What would make you reconsider?

Loxodonta on May 1, 2009 at 12:09 AM

jgapinoy on May 1, 2009 at 12:03 AM

Well first, you shouldn’t attempt to tell me how I feel because I don’t properly explain it to your satisfaction. Second, all social views aren’t abortion. And last, I don’t demand people agree with me on everything because it is futile. It would obviously impact how I would view a candidate or vote on local legislation, if this portends the death of the party it is too bad.

Cindy Munford on May 1, 2009 at 12:10 AM

You can start with fiscal discipline; all you morons can at least agree on THAT particular bit, can you not?

Bishop on April 30, 2009 at 11:06 PM

Sign me up, and I’ll take strong military and foriegn policy for $200 Alex….

Hog Wild on May 1, 2009 at 12:11 AM

All those who have strong conservative social views should contemplate this. Do you think you will have laws and programs that come closer to reflecting your beliefs with moderate Republicans? Or with liberal Democrats?

That’s more and more the choice. Our nation is not aligned with socially conservative Republicans – at least, not enough to get them elected. So – decide what is best for you. Your ideal is less and less likely to occur.

pbundy on May 1, 2009 at 12:12 AM

My Congressman at the time, a Republican who was elected in the 1994 tidal wave, vowed during his campaign to serve only two terms. He’s still there.

ddrintn on May 1, 2009 at 12:08 AM

And when he made an obvious liar of himself every time he run after his second term, the voters continued to elect him. As someone just pointed out: what is the problem, the politicians or the electorate?

neuquenguy on May 1, 2009 at 12:13 AM

So, in other words, the GOP plans to incorporate RINOism?

Captain America on May 1, 2009 at 12:13 AM

tow sack + cinder block + worthless cat (current RINO leadership) + deep river = better world

saltyrover on April 30, 2009 at 11:52 PM

There are worse things than dying, friend. With my little green ring I can take you apart molecule by molecule and then put you back together again. And maybe I put you back together right and maybe I don’t. But you’ll be alive and conscious for every second of it.

HalJordan on May 1, 2009 at 12:14 AM

…and if this ‘reconsideration’ of what the party stands for swings wildly to the left, leaving it basically left of center, they can expect to need to order the tombstone before the next elections in 2010.

We’ll see what they actually do, but I’m betting the morons win and the RINOs will be twisting themselves into pretzels trying to poke each other in the butt in an effort to become the most ‘socially conservative conservatives’ evah.

Fine. If they do, it’s time for a new party that’s all.

Spiritk9 on May 1, 2009 at 12:14 AM

I am out. Good night everyone, sweet dreams. Hawkdriver, I am thinking about you, looking forward to interesting stories.

Cindy Munford on May 1, 2009 at 12:14 AM

Cindy Munford on May 1, 2009 at 12:10 AM

I’m sorry to misunderstand you when you said you wouldn’t push your social views on anyone.
True, no one will ever agree with anyone else about everything. One has to evaluate what is most important, & with me, the right to life is at the top.

jgapinoy on May 1, 2009 at 12:15 AM

You can start with fiscal discipline; all you morons can at least agree on THAT particular bit, can you not?

Bishop on April 30, 2009 at 11:06 PM

Fiscal discipline used to be a watchword of the GOP.

Under George W. Bush, it became a punchline.

JohnGalt23 on May 1, 2009 at 12:16 AM

Cindy Munford on May 1, 2009

Just read on the other thread what Santa brings you and nearly choked to death. I’m still having trouble breathing. Why do you want me to die?

Loxodonta on May 1, 2009 at 12:16 AM

One has to evaluate what is most important, & with me, the right to life is at the top.

As it was with the Founders, in my opinion.

jgapinoy on May 1, 2009 at 12:17 AM

Sign me up, and I’ll take strong military and foriegn policy for $200 Alex….

Hog Wild on May 1, 2009 at 12:11 AM

A much smarter choice than Porkulus for $ 1+ trillion.

Nobody wins that one.

Loxodonta on May 1, 2009 at 12:18 AM

To both of you: What would make you reconsider?

Loxodonta on May 1, 2009 at 12:09 AM

Honestly Lox, I am still a registered GOPer, but I have no problem voting third party or writing in.

On the local level, I can afford to be picky – I live in a reasonably conservative county.

On the state level, it’s the complete opposite. I realize that any Republican will be better than any “moderate” democrat (from NY)

On the national level, well, my state is a blue state anyway. McCain wouldn’t have won it, so I’d rather put a vote in for someone that I actually could stomach.

OK, so here’s my point. I don’t need a lot of convincing to be a “loyal” republican, but I want someone that’s a little bit more articulate and honest. McCain was far from articulate and he would say things like “I’m a true conservative…” and then scoff at the true conservatives running against him.

Upstater85 on May 1, 2009 at 12:18 AM

Our nation is not aligned with socially conservative Republicans – at least, not enough to get them elected.

Bush was an outspoken social con & was elected twice. Reagan, too.

jgapinoy on May 1, 2009 at 12:19 AM

The council marks a new phase in the Republican Party’s effort to remake itself:

Whipped.

The council marks a new phase in the Republican Party’s effort to remake REPAIR itself:

A very clear absolutely proven road map, unchanged, based on unchanged human nature will work, is the only thing that does work, its perversion is without doubt what has brought the county low, must, has to be, put back in place.

We cannot simply be the party of no

When its appropriate, we simply must be the party of no, every time its appropriate, with out fail, as the sun will rise in the morning reliably Conservative, say unashamedly, no.

No to screwing over America and no to ignoring American Conservatism.

Speakup on May 1, 2009 at 12:19 AM

Exactly how many moderates does the Democrat Party have? Are there any in Washington who aren’t complete prostitutes for the administration?

A moderate Republican has as much value to me as I’d guess a moderate Democrat has to Obama.

sloopy on May 1, 2009 at 12:19 AM

Our nation is not aligned with socially conservative Republicans – at least, not enough to get them elected.

Most polls show USA as slightly tilting pro-life, & strongly pro-traditional marriage.

jgapinoy on May 1, 2009 at 12:20 AM

Cindy Munford on May 1, 2009

Just read on the other thread what Santa brings you and nearly choked to death. I’m still having trouble breathing. Why do you want me to die?

Loxodonta on May 1, 2009 at 12:16 AM

What evil lurks in the hearts of women? The Shadow knows.

KentAllard on May 1, 2009 at 12:20 AM

jgapinoy on May 1, 2009 at 12:15 AM

And my husband also. Right now I feel like we are having the rug pulled out from under us and we are further and further from having the to options of any decisions of our own. To be honest, at this point I feel like I am in over my head, surrounded my life preservers that all being pulled out of my reach.

Cindy Munford on May 1, 2009 at 12:20 AM

Fiscal discipline used to be a watchword of the GOP.

Under George W. Bush, it became a punchline.

JohnGalt23 on May 1, 2009 at 12:16 AM

So sad. It wasn’t just fiscal discipline. It was the growth of government. Do we need DHS? Look who runs it now.

Upstater85 on May 1, 2009 at 12:21 AM

Loxodonta on May 1, 2009 at 12:16 AM

That must mean you relate. I am one of those people who needs their glasses to find their glasses. The only thing that beats getting older is the alternative.

Goodnight everyone. God bless us all.

Cindy Munford on May 1, 2009 at 12:23 AM

Do we need DHS? Look who runs it now.

At least she’s not still trashing my state’s budget.

jgapinoy on May 1, 2009 at 12:23 AM

“We can’t win unless we dump the unborn under the bus & embrace leftist social experiments!”
Tell that to Reagan.

jgapinoy on April 30, 2009 at 11:19 PM

Is that Ronald Reagan you’re talking about?

Is that the same Ronald reagan that signed legislation that signed legislation legalizing abortion in California for the first time in history?

That Reagan?

JohnGalt23 on May 1, 2009 at 12:23 AM

At least she’s not still trashing my state’s budget.

jgapinoy on May 1, 2009 at 12:23 AM

Haha… give her to us, then?

We should send her to Cuba as a good will offering ambassador.

Upstater85 on May 1, 2009 at 12:25 AM

JohnGalt23 on May 1, 2009 at 12:23 AM

If that’s true, he obviously changed his vies.
Again, Bush was an outspoken social con & was elected as POTUS twice. Reagan, too.

jgapinoy on May 1, 2009 at 12:26 AM

ou can start with fiscal discipline; all you morons can at least agree on THAT particular bit, can you not?

Bishop on April 30, 2009 at 11:06 PM

Is calling people names a good way to get people to agree with you? And would you want a bunch of morons in your party?

Johan Klaus on May 1, 2009 at 12:27 AM

We should send her to Cuba as a good will offering ambassador.

Upstater85 on May 1, 2009 at 12:25 AM

To borrow a BHO phrase, “I’ve always said” that until Ah-nold was elected in CA, AZ had the nation’s most macho governor. So I’m sure Janet would enjoy having access to all those fine cigars.

jgapinoy on May 1, 2009 at 12:29 AM

Captain America on May 1, 2009 at 12:13 AM
So, in other words, the GOP plans to incorporate RINOism?

It did when we had majorities that were predominantly conservative. So, it worked before. But it is up to every individual to decide on their own.

I also support this because: I would rather have 3/4 of a loaf with moderate Republicans than no loaf at all with liberal Democrats. And I would rather half have a loaf, plus one crumb, with moderate and liberal Republicans, than no loaf at all with liberal Democrats.

Loxodonta on May 1, 2009 at 12:29 AM

To borrow a BHO phrase, “I’ve always said” that until Ah-nold was elected in CA, AZ had the nation’s most macho governor. So I’m sure Janet would enjoy having access to all those fine cigars.

jgapinoy on May 1, 2009 at 12:29 AM

Napoleon could even borrow one of Fidel’s outfits.

Upstater85 on May 1, 2009 at 12:30 AM

I also support this because: I would rather have 3/4 of a loaf with moderate Republicans than no loaf at all with liberal Democrats. And I would rather half have a loaf, plus one crumb, with moderate and liberal Republicans, than no loaf at all with liberal Democrats.

Loxodonta on May 1, 2009 at 12:29 AM

In the Age of Obama, everyone gets an equal share of the loaf /s

Upstater85 on May 1, 2009 at 12:31 AM

Upstater85 on May 1, 2009 at 12:18 AM

Thanks for your explanation. I think you are going to be a great asset to our country.

Loxodonta on May 1, 2009 at 12:32 AM

Upstater85 on May 1, 2009 at 12:30 AM

Napoleon–I like that better than Nappylitano!

jgapinoy on May 1, 2009 at 12:32 AM

In the Age of Obama, everyone gets an equal share of the loaf

Upstater85 on May 1, 2009 at 12:31 AM
Yes, but it’s no longer parmesan oregano Italian, now it’s day-old white bread.

jgapinoy on May 1, 2009 at 12:34 AM

oops. sure sign it’s time to go to bed.

jgapinoy on May 1, 2009 at 12:34 AM

Speakup on May 1, 2009 at 12:19 AM

If we unite around conservative fiscal and defense policies, and agree to disagree amicably over the cultural and social (moral) issues, this is not ignoring conservatism. Instead, it is more likely that Republicans will regain Congress more quickly, as well as the White House. And a majority of our party will be cultural and social conservatives, in a better position to block legislation that we find too liberal, or make compromises which are more acceptable to us. Where is the downside?

Loxodonta on May 1, 2009 at 12:36 AM

Cindy Munford on May 1, 2009 at 12:23 AM

Thanks. May glasses be with you, so that you can find your way too and out of bed.

Loxodonta on May 1, 2009 at 12:38 AM

KentAllard on May 1, 2009 at 12:20 AM

FYI: I may be old, but I’m still a man.

Loxodonta on May 1, 2009 at 12:40 AM

But also, the people inside can’t always be kicking people out of the tent. A great party cannot live by constantly subtracting, by removing or shunning those who are not faithful to every aspect of its beliefs

Still don’t quite get what we are talking about here. Specter?
Any body else has been kicked out? on the contrary, we just finished nominating a moderate Republican for the presidency, and a fairly moderate chairman of the GOP, and I wouldn’t say the current crop of GOP representatives is the most conservative ever.

neuquenguy on May 1, 2009 at 12:41 AM

Goldman Sachs just hired Barney Frank

MB4 on May 1, 2009 at 12:38 AM

Heck, he and most of the others have been working for GS for a long time. Now they just have a more direct line to give him instructions. More efficient.

KentAllard on May 1, 2009 at 12:43 AM

Johan Klaus on May 1, 2009 at 12:27 AM

Is calling people names a good way to get people to agree with you? And would you want a bunch of morons in your party?

Explanation from up-thread:

Yes. Who are you calling a moron? /
Cindy Munford on April 30, 2009 at 11:13 PM

The politicians and professional pundits who are telling everyone that the GOP needs to reevaluate, realign, reinvent, reenlist, reenergize, reconstitute and reform.

You would think they could find one issue to use as their base and work up from there.

Bishop on April 30, 2009 at 11:22 PM

Loxodonta on May 1, 2009 at 12:44 AM

MB4 on May 1, 2009 at 12:38 AM
Goldman Sachs just hired Barney Frank

Do you think they know where their bread gets butterred?

(Watch your language!)

Loxodonta on May 1, 2009 at 12:46 AM

FYI: I may be old, but I’m still a man.

Loxodonta on May 1, 2009 at 12:40 AM

Yes, a man grows older but his soul remains alive
All those tremulous stars still glitter
And I will survive!
Let my heart grow colder and as bitter as a falcon in the dive
There was a dream, a dying ember
There was a dream, I don’t remember
But I will resurrect that dream
Though rivers stream and hills grow steeper
For here in hell where life gets cheaper
Oh, here in hell the blood runs deeper
And when the final duel is near
I’ll lift my spear and fly
Piercing into the sky and higher
And the strong will thrive
Yes, the weak will cower while the fittest will survive
If we wait for the darkest hour
Till we spring alive
Then with claws of fire, we willdevour like a falcon in the dive

PercyB on May 1, 2009 at 12:46 AM

Why on Earth are we thinking of dropping the pro-life stand? Why? Has there been a major shift in public opinion I’ve missed?

I forgot who said it, but those who support their side more adamantly than their opponents tend to win. I know there are a lot of dogmatic pro-choicers, but their counterparts greatly outnumber them. I think the rest largely have no strong opinion on the subject and don’t vote based on that issue.

Free Constitution on May 1, 2009 at 12:54 AM

I can’t quite work myself up to feeling bad that someone’s abortion stance is a litmus test for me. Unless and until we stop killing our babies, I don’t expect this country to be blessed by God.

Feel free to take a piss on my vote if you don’t need it. It won’t change my mind.

TexasDan on April 30, 2009 at 11:37 PM

I couldn’t agree with you more. I am a right wing extremist, a one issue voter. If you cannot support life, I cannot support you. Period.

If that means that this country falls apart, then so be it. For me it’s God then Country. One day I will die and I will stand before the Creator and Lover of Life and the cares of this world will be behind me. But when I face my Creator, it will be with the knowledge that I did not abandon babies for money and prosperity.

Jvette on May 1, 2009 at 12:59 AM

Why on Earth are we thinking of dropping the pro-life stand? Why? Has there been a major shift in public opinion I’ve missed?

I forgot who said it, but those who support their side more adamantly than their opponents tend to win. I know there are a lot of dogmatic pro-choicers, but their counterparts greatly outnumber them. I think the rest largely have no strong opinion on the subject and don’t vote based on that issue.

Free Constitution on May 1, 2009 at 12:54 AM

Exactly. We are raising a generation of pro-life kids who will raise their kids the same way. One day, abortion will be looked back upon just as slavery is now.

We want our prosperity back. I get that, but at what price?

Seek ye first the kingdom of God, and His righteousness, and all these things will be added unto you. Trust in the Lord.

Jvette on May 1, 2009 at 1:02 AM

Didn’t our listening to these losers lead us down the road of defeat. Noonan showed no tolerance or loyalty to Palin. Noonan, Whitman, et al have been solid progressives for some time…

aigle on May 1, 2009 at 1:03 AM

Loxodonta on May 1, 2009 at 12:36 AM

We don’t need to be afraid to step up and swing hard.

The ability of one good candidate can turn the direction of the entire world.

Obama is a surfer, Conservatives can promote game changing leadership.

Speakup on May 1, 2009 at 1:03 AM

PercyB on May 1, 2009 at 12:46 AM

Ah. You seem to be another member of the Hot Air Center for the Performing Arts. Though I am not listener of musicals, I appreciate your words. However, I confess there are days when I feel little fighting spirit.

When the heart grows weary, all things seem dreary;
When the burden grows heavy, the way seems long.
Thank God for sending kind death as an ending,
Like a grand Amen to a minor song.

– Ella Wheeler Wilcox

But then again, I hear the sounds of nature or the cheerful voices of young people and I realize that I’m not quite dead yet.

Thanks for reminding me.

Loxodonta on May 1, 2009 at 1:03 AM

Big tent = acceptance of moral relativism. Which is why we are where we are.

Connie on May 1, 2009 at 1:05 AM

Have you never met someone who disagrees with you on abortion who was otherwise a good, honorable and reliable person? . . . Is this not possible for you?
Loxodonta on May 1, 2009 at 12:05 AM

Lox,

You skipped right past the fifth amendment and went straight to my last sentence for a question/challenge. Is it safe for me to assume that you agree with me re the fifth? That we should be defending life for all as a Constitutional issue, not just as a moral issue?

Yes, it is possible for me to agree with other people on many other issues. Agreeing is not the same as trusting. I have found it to be accurate among the many people I have met that if they are willing to sacrifice a life then it’s not much of a stretch for them to sacrifice other things as well, including their principles, fiscal or otherwise (even though they thought of themselves to be good, honorable, and reliable).

nwnelson on May 1, 2009 at 1:06 AM

TexasDan on April 30, 2009 at 11:37 PM
Free Constitution on May 1, 2009 at 12:54 AM
Jvette on May 1, 2009 at 12:59 AM

Vote as your conscience dictates. I will. All I am suggesting is that a Republican Party that includes moderates and liberals who either don’t agree partially or entirely about abortion, may well result in fewer abortions.

Loxodonta on May 1, 2009 at 1:13 AM

I can’t go to bed until I’ve said this:
It may look bleak on the pro-life front with the GOP “leaders” forgetting to mention abortion & the retirement of Souter. But I think of William Wilberforce, the outspoken Christian statesman who worked tirelessly in Britain’s Parliament for most of his adult life on a cause that seemed just as hopeless–the slave trade. In the end, he prevailed, & today we recoil at the thought that slavery–particularly the kind of brutal, cruel slavery of that era–was so accepted. My hope is that one day, humanity will recoil at the thought that abortion was so common & accepted.

jgapinoy on May 1, 2009 at 1:21 AM

nwnelson on May 1, 2009 at 1:06 AM

I apologize for skipping that point. I believe life starts at conception and has a right to live. However, that is no longer the law, and the Constitution states that life cannot be taken without due process of law.

If it were up to me, there would be no abortions in our country. However, I don’t see that happening in the foreseeable future through democratic means.

I don’t have a litmus test for trusting someone. I have met far too many people who appeared very devout in word and deed, but were simply very good at concealing their evils. I have met others with whom I disagree on certain moral issues who have never betrayed me on anything. People can be quite puzzling.

Loxodonta on May 1, 2009 at 1:24 AM

jgapinoy on May 1, 2009 at 1:21 AM

Good night and thanks for the discussion.

Loxodonta on May 1, 2009 at 1:27 AM

Vote as your conscience dictates. I will. All I am suggesting is that a Republican Party that includes moderates and liberals who either don’t agree partially or entirely about abortion, may well result in fewer abortions.

Loxodonta on May 1, 2009 at 1:13 AM

I do not expect one party or the other to end abortion. It will be the people who end it, just as it was the people who ended slavery.

The problem is that we have no trust in God. We think this is a task we can do ourselves. We can do nothing without God, but with Him all things are possible.

What will result in fewer abortions will be when it is against the law. Until then, the liberals have hijacked our culture and sex is now a national past time instead of a sacred union between husband and wife. As long as we devalue the act that creates life, we will devalue the life that it creates.

I do not tell anyone how to vote. I spoke only for myself.

Jvette on May 1, 2009 at 1:29 AM

I guess the M. McCain strategy didn’t work so they are repackaging the bunkum with a newly invented committee elected by themselves.

Gingrich was not invited because he runs a partisan group, as if J. Amnesty McCain is not. Cantor is there, as to be expected, searching for enchantment. The self elected committee will be run from Cantor’s office, same-o, same-o.

J. Amnesty McCain says of Palin ‘ we’ve reached out to her”.

J. Amnesty McCain could have said “I’ve reached out to her” but why get personal.

They are attempting to replicate a committee of wise self elected elders from another era that went around asking party members people what they wanted

It helped reinforce the notion that the GOP was not only the party of ideas, but a party that listened to the American people,” Zickar said.

I would have looked to the platform debates at the last convention for that information but the last convention was unanimous in everything before it opened or so we were led to believe.

That fairy tale fell apart when a big bunch of party members didn’t want to vote for the J. Amnesty McCain and the lettuce pickers remembered they were democrats

The real test will be whether this group is willing to challenge party orthodoxy and take a fresh look at how to solve problems,” Reed said.

This group is the party orthodoxy and that is the problem. They seeded the primary, triangulated the conservatives, set up the convention as a ‘unanimous’ cheering session to avoid discussing the unpleasnat platform needs of the non RINOs.

They have not caught on it is they who were rejected for not meeting the needs of the base

If moderates are the new desirables in politics, their offices should be flooded with donations and volunteers. And they wouldn’t need townhalls to figure it out.

entagor on May 1, 2009 at 1:32 AM

jgapinoy on May 1, 2009 at 1:21 AM

Thank you for making the comparison between abortion and slavery. Definitely an applicable discussion.

Loxodonta on May 1, 2009 at 1:24 AM

True, people can be puzzling. Which is why so many people are justified in being cynical (at all levels).

nwnelson on May 1, 2009 at 1:34 AM

on most issues, the public is in general agreement with the GOP.
ddrintn on April 30, 2009 at 11:32 PM

I think someone slept through the 2006 and 2008 elections, and this week’s poll showing a mere 21% of Americans consider themselves republicans.

benny shakar on May 1, 2009 at 1:44 AM

I think someone slept through the 2006 and 2008 elections, and this week’s poll showing a mere 21% of Americans consider themselves republicans.

benny shakar on May 1, 2009 at 1:44 AM

And how many considered themselves to be fascists or any other brand of socialist? If I were in your place I would not count on Barackito Obamalini’s being able to keep a majority of folks from seeing through his make-up forever.

MB4 on May 1, 2009 at 1:50 AM

I know a lot of people who refused to vote for McCain because of his lack of conservativism. This week’s poll? Rasmussen? Pew? Zogby? ABC?

2006 and 2008 were Republican losses because there was no clear conservative on the tickets. A large portion of conservatives won’t vote for someone just because they have an R next to their name, as evidenced in the those elections.

Put up a true well-spoken conservative and see what happens “internal tracking polls showed the President’s tiny lead turning into a major Reagan landslide”

nwnelson on May 1, 2009 at 1:52 AM

STOP!!! This is KILLING me. DO moderate republicans really believe that we limited government and fiscally responsible types do not have a place? Kicking people out of the tent and many flavors of republican??? Do republicans forget their history? REPUBLICANS were the result of a successful third party effort?

I am sick and tired of republicans that have grown so ate up with their bad selves that they don’t feel obligated to really stay in touch with the home electorate? I am sick and tired of republicans that have become so deluded they are reliant on cult of personality.

Jeffords, and Spector, Chaffee, Snow, Collins and perhaps McCain feel that they can continue to win on the their own brand name? I am sick and tired of republicans that think they can win by out democrating deomcrats?

There is NO way the republicans should have shown their a$$3$$ in the last two elections, but they did. WHY? They abandoned principle and sold out to percieved expediency. US eletorate will always choose the genuine democrat instead of the pretender republican. What part of this simple equation doesn’t the republican party get?

lpierson on May 1, 2009 at 1:54 AM

The trolls just don’t understand. They can’t grasp that the Dem/Rep war is over. No more BlueDogs vs RedDogs cartoons on the hill. The fight has changed from Queensberry Rules to brass knuckles. The Democraps didn’t win, they just set themselves up for holding the bag. These Republicans are nothing more then bunker dwellers while the rest of the party is forming a line of advance. They’ll get left behind as sure as the AmericaFirsters got left behind on Dec 8, 1941.

Limerick on May 1, 2009 at 2:01 AM

MB4 on May 1, 2009 at 1:50 AM

If you wish to do so, I would like to read your opinions on the issues associated with the quotes selected by AP for this thread. Frankly, I don’t even know whether you are a Republican, although you seem to express conservative views on fiscal and conservative issues.

Whether you respond or not I hope I haven’t been too irritating to you in expressing my own views and humor, and hope all goes well with you.

Loxodonta on May 1, 2009 at 2:04 AM

I know a lot of people who refused to vote for McCain because of his lack of conservativism.

-nwnelson

Be sure and thank them for Obama…

There is no “conservative” reason to elect a socialist… If these people you know sat on the couch in the face of an Obama presidency they are not conservatives, they are complete morons.

Boxy_Brown on May 1, 2009 at 2:06 AM

Excellent point lpierson.

Benny,
I and many other conservatives call ourselves independents because we are sick and tired of too many republicans-in-name-only. We give to and support republicans a majority of the time but with the necessary and due-diligent strings attached (i.e. they are and will continue to be conservative). The RCP poll shows B.O. at 61.6.
Did he really get that percentage of the vote? What would the Republican candidate have gotten if he had been a true R conservative? Refer again to the 1980 LANDSLIDE.

nwnelson on May 1, 2009 at 2:07 AM

So now the new brand is “moderation”? Wasn’t that just tried and failed miserably in the last 2 election cycles? *sigh*

echosyst on May 1, 2009 at 2:11 AM

Bwahahahahahahaha…

flu scare at the WH….take two aspirin and call your National Health Care official until you are blue in the face.

Limerick on May 1, 2009 at 2:12 AM

So now the new brand is “moderation”? Wasn’t that just tried and failed miserably in the last 2 election cycles? *sigh*

echosyst on May 1, 2009 at 2:11 AM

Honestly, if an R can win on “moderation,” why not let them? BUT… it seems that all of the moderates are getting pushed out of the party not by the party but by their electorate… HMMM

Upstater85 on May 1, 2009 at 2:14 AM

Upstater85 on May 1, 2009

But many more Republicans got ousted by the electorate and replaced with Democrats. We are at one of our lowest points in the Congress.

Also, what are you doing up at this hour?

Loxodonta on May 1, 2009 at 2:18 AM

Boxy,

Refusing to vote for McCain was not an automatic vote for Obama, no matter how hard you try to twist around that logic. Obama = two giant leaps for socialism, McCain = one and half steps toward socialism (a la McCain Supports Bailout).

It may seem moronic to one person but equally principled to another. Would we be having Tea Parties with McCain? Would we have talk of Texas secession? Would more states have signed the 10th amendment bills? Would people have stood up and said enough is enough? Would we blindly be tagging along with a closet liberal or ferociously defending our God-granted rights?

If ye love wealth greater than liberty,
the tranquility of servitude greater than the animating contest for freedom,
go home from us in peace.

We seek not your counsel nor your arms.
Crouch down and lick the hand that feeds you;
and may posterity forget that ye were our countrymen.
Samuel Adams

nwnelson on May 1, 2009 at 2:29 AM

But many more Republicans got ousted by the electorate and replaced with Democrats. We are at one of our lowest points in the Congress.

Also, what are you doing up at this hour?

Loxodonta on May 1, 2009 at 2:18 AM

I’m barely up… actually, I need to go to bed. I could ask the same of you. You are usually on pretty late though. I will respond with this and then I go.

Yeah, the GOP is at one of its lowest points. Maybe we need our second Goldwater – and then in several decades we will get our Reagan (shudder). I hope it all happens quicker than that.

Upstater85 on May 1, 2009 at 2:37 AM

Upstater85 on May 1, 2009 at 2:37 AM

Sleep well and have a productive Friday. Be good.

(Old men don’t need as much sleep because we take … little… naps … throughout… the… zzzzzzzzzz)

Loxodonta on May 1, 2009 at 2:44 AM

“same-sex marriage, immigration — legal or otherwise — or abortion”

I don’t see any of these as “Republican” issues.

Issues I see as “Republican” are things like:

School choice
Fiscal responsibility
Personal responsibility
Free enterprise vs. government control
Card check
War on terror

Even with issues such as health care, there are ways to provide better care without having government take over the role as provider. Mitt Romney had a great idea in Mass.

You make health insurance mandatory, like car insurance, and make private health insurers do things such as pool smaller employers together into larger risk pools so that small employers and the self-employed can obtain insurance at reasonable rates for their employees. You preserve competition and choice in the marketplace yet there is no longer any excuse for not having medical insurance.

The main issues to my mind have to do with the basic notion of personal responsibility vs. communal responsibility. That is the main difference between the Democrats and Republicans. Democrats want government to be your mommy, Republicans want government to be your partner.

There are plenty of pro-life Democrats. There are plenty of Democrats who are against gay marriage. And there are plenty of Democrats who are against illegal immigration. Those are not issues that define Democrat or Republican. Those are issues that define Liberal or Conservative which really have nothing to do with Democrat or Republican. You can have Republicans that are more liberal than others, and Democrats that are more conservative than others.

People seem to be confusing social values with political values.

crosspatch on May 1, 2009 at 2:44 AM

instead of wasting their time on this Hillary-esque publicity stunt, which simply implicates us conservatives as the problem, and not themselves, these dummies would be better off staying at their desks and start beating that smarmy goat turd in the White House over the head for his socialist coup d’etat.

The American public have not yet been handed the bill for Obamanomics, and the UAW kickback scheme is as great a scandal as anything seen in this generation. They should spend their time banging that drum instead of wringing their hands that a senile lunatic like Arlen Specter has jumped ship to the same party that he was a loyal member of for the first 20 years of his adult life. Good riddance.

TexasJew on May 1, 2009 at 2:56 AM

Third parties are just another way of electing Democrats.
Of course, the Green Party in 2000 did a very nice favor for us Republicans. Well, sort of nice, considering the atomic crater that became GWB’s Presidency and pathetic party leadership.
But we still have nice warm feelings for Ralph Nader.

TexasJew on May 1, 2009 at 3:02 AM

tow sack + cinder block + worthless cat (current RINO leadership) + deep river = better world

saltyrover on April 30, 2009 at 11:52 PM

There are worse things than dying, friend. With my little green ring I can take you apart molecule by molecule and then put you back together again. And maybe I put you back together right and maybe I don’t. But you’ll be alive and conscious for every second of it.

HalJordan on May 1, 2009 at 12:14 AM

WTF!!! Dude step away from the pipe.

I’m friggin’ stumped by the stupid sh!t coming out of the Repug party. our Founding Fathers WANTED us to govern ourselves at the local and state level NOT at the Fed/Royal level but that is where we at now at…..we have a ruling class of Ivy league grads that look upon all of us middle class tax payers as tools and wage earners who should STFU and pay our taxes so the political machine can continue to stay n power.

saltyrover on May 1, 2009 at 3:11 AM

There are plenty of pro-life Democrats. There are plenty of Democrats who are against gay marriage. And there are plenty of Democrats who are against illegal immigration

`
`
Perhaps, but they aren’t allowed to say so unless it is mere lip service as they vote the Party Line.
`
I’m all for a “big tent,” including pro-abortion and pro-gay marriage folks in the party who believe in smaller government, a strong foreign policy, and lower taxes. That doesn’t mean we change the fundamental views of the party platform to accommodate their apostasies, but rather that we ignore those to work together on the issues of agreement.
`
The day the Republican Party abandons the pro-life and pro-traditional marriage positions, however, is the day I’m out the door. I will not modify or mute my views on those issues. It is better to be a persecuted and ridiculed minority which stands for what is right than a “winning” political force which abandons basic principles for worldly gains.
`
“Bringing in the libertarians” is a fool’s errand. The libertarians already HAVE a party – one which has run candidates for President since 1972, only once gaining as much as 1% of the popular vote and never exceeding 0.5% thereafter, never winning a single electoral vote, never electing a single Representative, Senator, or Governor under their party banner, despite constantly claiming to be a “rapidly growing” party. After nearly 40 years of trying, they have precious little to show.

We’ve tried being “Democrat Lites” already under Bush, at least in domestic spending. The abandonment of principle has led us to where we are today: in the wilderness. And some insist the solution is MORE abandonment of principle?
`
Thanks for the unsolicited advice and warm wishes, but no thanks, just the same . . .
`

Adjoran on May 1, 2009 at 3:14 AM

crosspatch,

“make” and “mandatory” – seems like they fit into that gov control category.

“Pay as you go” sounds like a personal responsibility, fiscal responsibility, and a free enterprise category (three for the price of one).

Card Check? As in open ballots? That is a union/liberal issue.

“People seem to be confusing social values with political values”.

I’ve already pointed out that the Fifth Amend states that no person shall be deprived of life, liberty, or property without due process. Roe vs Wade wasn’t exactly due process nor was it good constitutional law. Thus for me and many others abortion is both a political and a moral issue. Trying to separate your morals from your life is a bad thing. Just ask John Adams – We have no government armed with power capable of contending with passions unbridled by morality and religion. Avarice, ambition, revenge, or gallantry, would break the strongest cords of our Constitution as a whale goes through a net. Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate for the government of any other.
Either we acknowledge a core set of beliefs and stick with them or we end up sticking it to each other (proverbially speaking).

To educate a man in mind and not in morals is to educate a menace to society.

Theodore Roosevelt

Good luck with that “get your morals out of my government” thing. Seems like we are already there and the Dems/Progressives have the lead. Would McCain have made a difference? At least he was prolife, right? Oops, and oops, and oops.

nwnelson on May 1, 2009 at 3:28 AM

You fiscal cons are in quite a fix. You can’t win with us and you can’t win without us. I feel your pain.

DFCtomm on May 1, 2009 at 4:21 AM

It’s not that we are looking for every candidate to adhere to every conservative principal. It’s just that we are frustrated that the elected don’t even seem to have one principal that guides them. One day you are voting for your own bail out, then you are voting against a dem bail out. I think most would agree that right under Liberty, fiscal responsibility is a key conservative principal we would like represented. And when you turn your back on that, how can you expect us to support you.

lwssdd on May 1, 2009 at 4:33 AM

Following the advice given by ones enemy, generally leads to your enemy’s victory.

darktood on May 1, 2009 at 4:33 AM

All those who have strong conservative social views should contemplate this. Do you think you will have laws and programs that come closer to reflecting your beliefs with moderate Republicans? Or with liberal Democrats?

That’s more and more the choice. Our nation is not aligned with socially conservative Republicans – at least, not enough to get them elected. So – decide what is best for you. Your ideal is less and less likely to occur.

pbundy on May 1, 2009 at 12:12 AM

There is a third choice. Let the liberal programs proceed to their natural, logical conclusion. Let the system fall under it’s own weight, and then salvage whatever is left, poorer but wiser.

DFCtomm on May 1, 2009 at 4:34 AM

I have an idea on how to easily become a “big ticket” party.

Have Harry Reid give us some liberal Democrats to make the switch to OUR party.

No really – it’ll be great and he’ll be happy to do it. We simply agree that these new “liberal Republicans” can vote with the Democrats on all issues (kinda like Spector did). So he can still rely on them to pass the liberal agenda.

And we’ll agree never to run anyone against them and if anyone of us “right wing extremists” attempts to – we’ll fund the re-election campaign the RINO.

IN THIS WAY … we will have DIVERSITY of opinion. IN THIS WAY … we’ll have REPUBLICANS from every corner of the nation (Like Gramnesty wants!).

What? This sounds stupid?

Naaaawwwww.

HondaV65 on May 1, 2009 at 6:03 AM

“The National Council for a New America launched with an open letter that’s notable for what it leaves out: The issues that a large segment of the party’s base are most passionate about. The letter, signed by 14 congressional Republican leaders, makes no mention of same-sex marriage, immigration — legal or otherwise — or abortion…

The council marks a new phase in the Republican Party’s effort to remake itself: A formal acknowledgement by top congressional and national leaders that the GOP needs to change its pitch and its ideas.”

So, basically, all these guy/gals are saying they are pulling a Specter. Neat. They officially made themselves democrats and have alienated the very constituents who vote ON moral issues.

Watch me sit multiple elections out. WATCH ME NOT BE THE ONLY ONE.

Mommypundit on May 1, 2009 at 6:41 AM

YOU CANNOT HAVE OUR SYSTEM OF GOVERNMENT WITHOUT A CONSERVATIVE BASE.

YOU CANNOT SUPPORT OUR SYSTEM WITHOUT A MORAL PEOPLE.

They think fiscal issues arise in a vacuum? Idiots. You cannot divorce our cultural concerns from the monetary concerns…and libertarianism breaks down when freedom becomes licentiousness and society is devalued…we WILL be ruled by something.

The only way to AVOID intrusive government is more MORAL restraint.

When our elected officials leave this, you allow the church to disengage. YOU DO NOT WANT THAT TO HAPPEN. You cannot privatize the single BEST thing that supports this nation.

If this happens, I will not vote ever again. NEVER AGAIN.

Mommypundit on May 1, 2009 at 6:46 AM

Ok. I just read it. I’ll admit, I reacted.

They need to have a CLEARLY DEFINED fiscal coalition. Seriously. This can even cross party lines. But, the GOP platform cannot, CANNOT abandon the social sphere. The left NEVER DOES…and it consistently gets it’s way because it is on the side of human nature. Does no one in the DC area understand PRINCIPLE?

And, why the hell are we doing A.N.Y.T.H.I.N.G with John McCain?!?!?!?!?!

These people do not want to be scorned by the mocking liberal media about social positions which makes them WIMPS. The population would be LED by them on these issues if they tried…but they do not. All they are doing is picking a popular sentiment (spending) and trying to act like these jokers even stood for that the past 8 years. They make me want to vomit.

Pragmatism stinks…and I lose all respect for anyone who tests waters and avoids difficulty in order to “win.” Isn’t this EXACTLY what Specter did?!!?!?!?

Oh, I am so mad.

Mommypundit on May 1, 2009 at 6:54 AM

What the folks who want to “reshape” the GOP fail to understand is, that if you want a big tent, you’re going to need some rather large, sturdy, and intractible poles to support it.

So basically, you have to find some core issues that can be agreed upon by everyone who wants into the tent, that is to say: These are the core prinicples of this party, they are INFLEXIBLE. If you cannot support these simple principles, go vote for the other guys. Otherwise, come on in and we’ll discuss the other stuff. You make your case, others will make theirs and we’ll meet somewhere in the middle.

My suggestions for the “poles” to prop up the “big tent”:

1. Strong national defense, and not just “bases/contracts for my district and more troops” either. Uh-uh. Strong national defense means security: Borders and ports of entry that are tougher to crack than the vaults of Vegas. It’s the cornerstone of the very idea of strong national defense.
Foreign policy: “Talk softly and carry a big stick.” Example: Iran says “We’re building the bomb and you can’t do anything about it!” We reply: “You’re NOT getting the bomb and we CAN so something about it.” Iran: “Screw you, Great Satan! Habib, activate the centrifuges!” We reply: “Okay, you were warned. Admiral, you may launch your birds and fire when ready.” There’s more to it than that, obviously, but you get the picture.

2. Limited government: American businesses shouldn’t be the guys downsizing. The federal government should be the ones downsizing. If you believe that keeping this bloating hulk of a federal apparatus chugging along to ever increasing national debts and higher and higher taxation is a BAD thing, come on in. If you believe the federal government should only pay attention to the things it’s allowed to by The Constitution, come on in. If you believe that this is the way your state government should be run, come on in.

3. Defense of our second ammendment rights: feel free to argue as to whether or not private ownership of fully automatic weapons is a right or not, but recognize that ownership of handguns and semi-automatic rifles of lethal caliber and large capacity magazines is our God given right and NON-NEGOTIABLE. If you can accept that principle, come on in.

4. If it’s not specifically in The Constitution, it’s a matter for the individual states to sort out for themselves. It’s called federalism. You want abortion on demand, fine, live in a state where a majority of the people of that state accept it as a right, but leave the people in states where the majority of the people DON’T see it as such ALONE. Same goes for civil unions and gay marriage. Those things are matters for the states, NOT the federal government. If you can accept that principle, come on in.

5. The judiciary of this nation was established to enforce and, in some cases interperate, the laws of the land, NOT TO CREATE LAWS. You want strict constructionist judges who enforce the law and don’t over-reach when interpreting the law? Come on in.

6. The government works for the people, NOT THE OTHER WAY AROUND. Really simple principle here: we want the citizens of this country to keep as much of their hard earned money as possible. The other guys want to TAKE as much of it away in “the interest of fairness” or “social justice”. WE don’t believe it’s fair OR just to take money from the people who earned it and give it to people who DIDN’T. As such, we’re not to fond of taxes so we’ll keep the ones we do need simple and low and totally eliminate the ones that are regressive and blatant punishments for success. If you agree with this policy, come on in.

That’s a good start. Maybe all we really need to draw a majority of the electorate. Like I said, this stuff should be core. All else is negotiable and is open to compromise.

Something folks need to understand: you can’t get EVERYTHING that you want out of a political party. The Donks have been promising saps that pipe dream for decades and they’ll never deliver. All WE have to do is deliver on those core principles and attempt to find a middle ground on the other stuff that is agreeable to the most people and we’ll be able to offer something that the Donks can’t deliver: results.

SuperCool on May 1, 2009 at 6:58 AM

Do we need DHS? Look who runs it now.

Upstater85 on May 1, 2009 at 12:21 AM

Never did. Establishing a newer top heavy version of bureaucrats paid to stay in power was never the way to require the enabled personal professional responsibility of each federal agency to COMMUNICATE with each other. It sold as frosting on a rotten cake; didn’t make either the cake itself or the frosted cake any more reliable to uphold each institution’s Constitutional obligation to protect the NATION, not simply themselves.

maverick muse on May 1, 2009 at 7:03 AM

. A great party cannot live by constantly subtracting, by removing or shunning those who are not faithful to every aspect of its beliefs, or who don’t accept every pole, or who are just barely fitting under the tent. Room should be made for them.”

The Republicans these days seem to want to move left, but more slowly than the Dems. If I were a Republican I’d probably become a Dem. too. Maybe the difference between the two is the Republicans are older and slower. You hear that Peggy and Johnny Mac? LOL

JiangxiDad on May 1, 2009 at 7:10 AM

Y’know, somebody should point out to these geniuses trying to should moderation down our throats that on the eve of the Civil War, a lot of people tried to be moderates on the slavery issue by just not talking about it and hoping that the issue, if not the institution, would just go away. Well, we see how well that worked out, don’t we? As long as we are going to have extremists on the left shoving things like gay marriage and the false religion of “green” in our faces, we need to respond with an equal degree of extremity to defeat them. Moderation? Bah!

bulgaroctonus on May 1, 2009 at 7:10 AM

Y’know, somebody should point out to these geniuses trying to should shove moderation down our throats that on the eve of the Civil War, a lot of people tried to be moderates on the slavery issue by just not talking about it and hoping that the issue, if not the institution, would just go away. Well, we see how well that worked out, don’t we? As long as we are going to have extremists on the left shoving things like gay marriage and the false religion of “green” in our faces, we need to respond with an equal degree of extremity to defeat them. Moderation? Bah!

bulgaroctonus on May 1, 2009 at 7:10 AM

bulgaroctonus on May 1, 2009 at 7:11 AM

What in the world does McCain know about a winning strategy??? He tried-and FAILED-to win the presidency on the very strategy he and Cantor are purporting will save Republicans. How blind can the so-called leaders of this party be? All they need to do is look at the ratings of conservative radio and Fox News to get their “blueprint”. I am completely fed up with these mopes who try to work with and compromise with Democrats. What is the compromise on abortion? Just one example of many that shows principle and conviction must trump compromise. When do Democrats compromise on their beliefs? NEVER. Republican leadership? Constantly. Who is in the minority?

varnson on May 1, 2009 at 7:15 AM

I just love the smell of a gop civil war. That fresh aroma of a smaller and smaller gop tent. Hey goopers, your self destructing. Maybe purging the party isn’t such a great idea afterall. But keep on listening to rushbo, he wants the moderates pushed out, and we all know whatever rush wants, he gets. So your choice is do we want Rush and a smaller tent, or should we kick rush out and grow the party? I believe you yahoos will choose King Rush over expanding the party. Get Rove back in there too, that’ll help with the moderates….not.

athensboy on May 1, 2009 at 7:22 AM

These guys just don,t get it.Anything that has McCain part of it will fail big time.The Consev. base will hot go along with this never again.Hello new party.This will take longer but it will be better in the long run.

thmcbb on May 1, 2009 at 7:39 AM

I’m not sure why it is that the R tent needs to be so big when the D tent is very small. I didn’t say their ranks were small, but the idea part is extremely narrow.

How do the Ds get union workers to side with them all the time, even when they work to shut down their industries? They promise them free stuff.

How do the Ds get unproductive bums to put the bottle down long enough to cast a vote? They promise them free stuff.

How do the Ds get seemingly normal thinking people to vote for the most liberal, non executive office holder ever? They run him as a moderate conservative even though they know it’s a lie. So even that’s like promising free stuff.

If you are running against the kings of promise, you will never be able to out-promise them. The only way to ever hope to gain back any of the non-moonbats voting D is to have R leaders educate them every time they are in front of a microphone. And moderate Rs are never going to do that. They are too busy trying to be “cool” like the Ds.

TugboatPhil on May 1, 2009 at 7:41 AM

The ‘Gang of 14′ nonsense worked so well the last time McCain tried it. Somebody needs to give this old fool a run for his seat. Its time for him to be put out to pasture. We have been running the ‘Moderate’ line for how many election cycles now? When are these fools goona wake up and realize its not what we want? And I know I’m not going to find someone who agrees with 100% of the time but I would certainly settle for 75-80% of the time…..The more I hear Eric Cantor speak, the more I think he needs to shut up. I realize that he comes from an increasingly bluer state but the Northeast is not where our future lies. He can say what he needs to keep his seat but he does not lead the party. And Athensboy, you little troll, pretty soon Rush will have more listeners (20+million) than will be watching the obamatron and his teleprompter. 100 days and people are tuning him out. Maybe you should look at the polls. independents are leaning to the Republican brand more and more.

red131 on May 1, 2009 at 7:53 AM

Comment pages: 1 2 3