Cheney: “I think it would be a mistake for us to moderate”
posted at 7:12 pm on May 7, 2009 by Allahpundit
Courtesy of the Scott Hennen show, 15 minutes on topics as diverse as the economy, waterboarding, and even Scare Force One — although it’s his comments about the future of the GOP that are being headlined. Those come right up front in the first three minutes; if you can’t be bothered, Ben Smith has a full transcript. Between the “listening tour” that Eric Cantor’s organized, the rhetorical self-reproach from leading Republicans like Tom Ridge about how we need to be “less judgmental,” and the fact that a surprisingly high number of GOP Senate candidates next year are very moderate indeed, I think Cheney’s going to lose this battle in the short-term. Politico:
For the National Republican Senatorial Committee’s recruitment list for 2010 reads like a roster of some of the party’s best-known RINOs (Republicans In Name Only) and squishes — the derisive terms applied to centrists by movement conservatives…
“I’m absolutely committed to recruiting candidates around the country that fit their states. Who would have thought we would be looking at states like Delaware, New York, Illinois and Connecticut for Republicans to run — and have a reasonably good shot at winning?” Cornyn told POLITICO. “It really is a recipe for permanent minority status and irrelevance if we don’t pay attention to the arithmetic and get back to a position so we can shape legislation.”…
“Their voting records are more moderate than the party as a whole, but I still think those candidates would hold Obama’s policies to a certain standard,” said Kaiser. “I don’t think they would be coming to Washington to see they make sure Obama got everything done he wants to do.”
Will social cons go along to get along or is there an anti-moderation backlash brewing? Hmmmmm.
Link: 
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 Next »
I don’t know. I don’t think that the GOP needs to moderate all that much, but then again we have to remember that people are not the same all over the country. New York and Oklahoma are very different places. But even if some flexibility is needed, there should be some standards that do not change.
Terrye on May 7, 2009 at 7:16 PM
Well, Cheney has never been wrong before.
And considering his own personal, sky high approval ratings, he’s a clear choice for advice on political matters.
Let’s do what Cheney says! Full steam ahead, guys!
e-pirate on May 7, 2009 at 7:16 PM
e-pirate:
The subject is not really approval ratings, they do vary, as Obama and Biden just might find out.
Terrye on May 7, 2009 at 7:17 PM
Cheney just stated my position perfectly…I think he’s listening to me…it’s creepy.
AUINSC on May 7, 2009 at 7:19 PM
Cheney’s opinion would weigh more than zero if he actually ran for any office at any time at any place that has running water.
radiofreevillage on May 7, 2009 at 7:20 PM
Cheney for keynote in 2012!
SouthernGent on May 7, 2009 at 7:20 PM
I think it would be a mistake to keep voting Republican or Democrat anymore!
They are just 2 different mob families fighting over our private property and freedom. They along with the Central Banks are sending our country to its early grave…
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eAaQNACwaLw
Constitution1st on May 7, 2009 at 7:20 PM
I sure as hell like Cheney better post Bush.
Speakup on May 7, 2009 at 7:21 PM
Aside from the Iraq insurgency being almost finished, (pulls pin, tosses grenade) he`s never been wrong. :)
ThePrez on May 7, 2009 at 7:22 PM
e-pirate on May 7, 2009 at 7:16 PM
What were Churchill’s approval ratings before 1939?
Caper29 on May 7, 2009 at 7:22 PM
Find the most conservative in each state that can win. Anyone to the right of that is irrelevant.
pedestrian on May 7, 2009 at 7:22 PM
We’ve tried using “moderation” several times and failed utterly with all of them. We’re still cleaning up the mess from the only moderate Republican we ever elected (Bush sr.)
We just need to stop sucking at marketing. Take a message of individual freedom, federalism, and keep-the-government-out-of-my-life-at-all-costs-please-thanks and run with it. This issue-by-issue politicking is what gets us in trouble and dilutes our message.
Tacitus_SGL on May 7, 2009 at 7:24 PM
As said before and cannot be repeated enough:
If you can have a typical democrat why vote for dem lite?
It makes no sense
Jamson64 on May 7, 2009 at 7:24 PM
Constitution1st on May 7, 2009 at 7:20 PM
I’ve always been skeptical of the conspiracy stuff. I just got done reading Griff’s book The Creature From Jekyll Island, and it seemed to be pretty well sourced, full of quotes, and considering it was written over a decade ago, and his predictions are now coming true….
bikermailman on May 7, 2009 at 7:24 PM
radiofreeviallage:
Considering what a walking joke Biden is, Cheney looks better all the time. At least he was never a joke.
As for the running water remark..what is that supposed to be? Regional snobbery? Sounds bigoted to me.
Terrye on May 7, 2009 at 7:25 PM
Let’s just stop with the whole “The GOP has moved far to the right” nonsense, please. It’s false, and it automatically puts the GOP on defense.
BadgerHawk on May 7, 2009 at 7:25 PM
The fact is that neither party can form a majority with only doctrinaire liberals or conservatives. Roughly a third of the nation fits either of those descriptions. The other third are part conservative and part liberal in their positions. The only way to get a majority is to select some of the moderates you can work with and invite them to the party.
theGimp on May 7, 2009 at 7:25 PM
Pretty much. I want there to be a difference in the parties. If their major policy positions are the same, and they’re just arguing over the details, we’ve essentially got a one party system. That’s never good, no matter which party is in control.
BadgerHawk on May 7, 2009 at 7:27 PM
Tacitus:
I don’t think either of the Bushes were particularly moderate. In fact Nixon was more moderate than either of them.
Terrye on May 7, 2009 at 7:27 PM
You guys do know that Cheney is about as liberal as Barney Frank when it comes to gay marriage, right?
Speedwagon82 on May 7, 2009 at 7:27 PM
This is true. So your point is?
Well, I am sure you’re pleased with Nancy Pelosi & Harry Reid, whose approval ratings are far lower than Cheney.
Norwegian on May 7, 2009 at 7:28 PM
BadgerHawk:
I think there needs to be a difference too. But you also need to take into account the region or state. For instance, some people think Lugar is moderate, but the truth is the man is a Hoosier. Plain and simple. In fact both he and Bayh voted against Obama’s spending plans in spite of the fact that Bayh is a Democrats. Hoosiers are just plain funny about spending that kind of money.
So the state matters too and local politics matter too.
Terrye on May 7, 2009 at 7:29 PM
Dammit that man has guts. Can we all pitch in and buy Dick Cheney a new heart and run him in ’12?
Cheney/fill in the blank ’12.
portlandon on May 7, 2009 at 7:29 PM
Yeap………
…….. and bute-pirate and radio
freecensoredvillage, why are you so upset?If this is folly, let us go about it………..
…….. you should be cheering.
Seven Percent Solution on May 7, 2009 at 7:30 PM
Completely disagree. That main point that separates conservatives from liberals is their belief on the role and size of govt. The social issues are secondary. Bush’s fiscal and economic policy, even when described in the most positive of words, cannot possibly be called conservative. He was socially conservative and a foreign policy hawk, but that’s it.
BadgerHawk on May 7, 2009 at 7:30 PM
Cheney/Palin 2012!
benny shakar on May 7, 2009 at 7:30 PM
Speedwagon:
I think Republicans are more aware of Cheney’s attitude on gay issues than Democrat are.
Terrye on May 7, 2009 at 7:30 PM
Or Reagan’s in the mid-’70s?
It doesn’t matter what the GOP does or doesn’t do right now. Besides keeping their fingerprints off all these policies that are going to fail disastrously.
Jim Treacher on May 7, 2009 at 7:31 PM
benny:
At the rate Obama and Biden are going that ticket you mentioned just might win.
Terrye on May 7, 2009 at 7:31 PM
First smart thing you`ve written.
ThePrez on May 7, 2009 at 7:32 PM
Gotta love this.
Dems never get told to moderate.
They nominate a far-left empty suit and it’s high praise.
This is a media ploy, they are controlling the topic and discussion.
artist on May 7, 2009 at 7:32 PM
And?
Jim Treacher on May 7, 2009 at 7:32 PM
That’s very true. But the party leadership needs to speak the party platform. Pelosi is effective at her job precisely because she’s a hardcore lib. The Democrat Party would be in shambles if a blue dog were running it. Their base would never turn out.
BadgerHawk on May 7, 2009 at 7:32 PM
I never thought much about RFV’s nickname til this thread. Methinks it could be a dream about no talk radio, considering his (her?) comments? Of course, I could be wrong, it’s happened once before. :P Radio, feel free to correct me if this is in fact a second time…
bikermailman on May 7, 2009 at 7:34 PM
Second Jim here, I don’t see why that’s a big deal.
BadgerHawk on May 7, 2009 at 7:34 PM
The Bush’s fiscal policies were a nightmare. They were government growers. W was a social conservative which has to be counted separate from his economic stances.
He was Reagan on defense & social issues & Johnson on social giveaways and federal growth.
portlandon on May 7, 2009 at 7:34 PM
Uhm, well. This is true, I guess. However, in this case I don’t know what I like more. A real serious failure or a joke.
Is that the only choice though?
radiofreevillage on May 7, 2009 at 7:34 PM
He’s absolutely right and if this “moderation” doesn’t soon stop this nation will morph into a putrid puddle of social mush. If strong people don’t stand up and fight for our traditional values the country will completely collapse.
rplat on May 7, 2009 at 7:35 PM
BadgerHawk:
Nixon was the man who passed the first big environmental issues, he also supported price controls.
Price controls. Think about that.
Bush supported a drug prescription discount program that people actually have to pay to use and that does not provide free meds, but a discounted price..and that is for people whose medical costs are already being paid by medicare.
And the Homeland Security Dept etc came about because of the 9/11 attack, not because Bush ran on creating a new branch of government or something like that.
And Bush sr. was not some liberal either.
Terrye on May 7, 2009 at 7:35 PM
You’re right I forgot how much full throated support the we at Hot Air show to gay rights issues. Its like San Francisco around here! Absolutely no conflict at all!
Speedwagon82 on May 7, 2009 at 7:35 PM
^This.
Daggett on May 7, 2009 at 7:35 PM
LOL< only a Clintonista totally obsessed with polls would give a getalife about Cheney’s “approval ratings” 100+ days after he left office. And since the vast majority of all “polls” these days vastly oversample Democrats (a recent AP poll in fact sampled twice as many Dems as Repubs) they’re all irrelevant.
Del Dolemonte on May 7, 2009 at 7:35 PM
If your expecting a huge reaction, don’t hold your breath.
portlandon on May 7, 2009 at 7:36 PM
radiofreevillage:
Cheney was not a failure. He did what he was supposed to do. The fact that he thought Bill Clinton knew what he was talking about when it came to intel etc, might have been a mistake but then the entire Democratic party thought the same thing.
Terrye on May 7, 2009 at 7:36 PM
Take it easy. I wondered why there were so many Rainbows in here.
portlandon on May 7, 2009 at 7:37 PM
I read some stuff about the Third Way (wiki, I know, but it’s pretty accurate) idea a few years ago, when Bush was doing the social programs and the like. Bush (both) pretty well fit this descriptor, as did Bill Clinton. The problem with it is, it tears down the fundamentals of a Constitutional Government, no matter which side is doing it. Which of course, leaves us open to what is happening today.
bikermailman on May 7, 2009 at 7:40 PM
I don’t think either of the Bush’s were anything close to liberals, but Bush Jr. wasn’t that close to conservative either. He had plenty of good proposals (I’ll always appreciate his effort to reform SS), but overall his economic policy was to the left of center.
I like and admire President Bush, I just don’t consider him to be a fiscal conservative.
BadgerHawk on May 7, 2009 at 7:41 PM
Exactly. “Popularity” is a measure largely engineered by the media, and if you are a slave to it, you are essentially a slave to the media. I can think of few things more useless, other than being an actual Democrat.
drunyan8315 on May 7, 2009 at 7:41 PM
Luckily for you, we elected both.
So by your logic (for lack of a better word), Cheney’s opinion on one issue that affects his own family cancels out his opinion on all other issues? Odd.
Jim Treacher on May 7, 2009 at 7:41 PM
portandon:
Reagan spent as much or more on deficits than Bush ever did when you consider the deficits in relation to over all GDP.
and Reagan grew the government too. In fact government grew with the overall population for years.
And you know what? One of the reasons we are stuck with Obama today is that conservatives do not know a good thing when they had it. If they had backed Bush rather than helping Democrats sabotage him we might not have this crazy man for President today.
Bush had to deal with 9/11, war, recession, and natural disasters…not to mention an adversarial press and a not so loyal opposition.
Terrye on May 7, 2009 at 7:42 PM
A couple of points –
First, I heard on the radio today a short excerpt — I think from DeMint — about how the party needed to stand for minimized government, free enterprise, and personal liberty. It seems to me that this is entirely correct: the party should have core, immutable, uncompromisable values that cannot be whiffled away by candidates giving lip service to the party for campaign cash. That said, where is gay marriage, abortion, or evolution on this list? If these core elements were truly upheld, the Federal government’s reaction to any of these is, “not my concern.” Further hot buttons like immigration or national defense — while certainly within the purview of even the most minimal government imaginable — have space around them for debate, so long as the three pillars listed are maintained intact.
Second, the GOP is something of an artificial construct. Consider this unlikely thought experiment — what if the entire Republican organization did a Specter? The whole kit’n'kaboodle shut the doors of the GOP and joined the Democrats….wouldn’t that make the Blue Dogs the Big Dogs in the caucus? Without the party package, wouldn’t individual conscience have more meaning?
The Democrats stand for nothing except being anti-Republican, and you can’t water down Republican standards enough to combat this so long as the name remains. Maybe the GOP needs to be reborn as the Tea Party, Whigs, or New Reformed Order Of Druids — but the party with minimal government, free markets, and personal liberty is going to be the one where I belong.
cthulhu on May 7, 2009 at 7:42 PM
Badger Hawk:
Left of center? Bush? Please.
My God, look at what is in the White House right now..that is left of center.
When the Republicans lost control of Congress in 2006, the deficit was $160 billion. It is more than that in a month now.
And when Bush tried to reign in Fannie Mae, did he get any help? No. When he tried to reform social security, where were all those conservatives then?
Terrye on May 7, 2009 at 7:45 PM
From a sociological standpoint, being judgmental is beneficial to society. If one drops all moral judgments, then there is nothing to hold society together, since the laws will be meaningless. From an extreme standpoint, if we are accepting of everything, there is nothing wrong with child molestation, sorry, “man/boy love.” Then it becomes completely acceptable. If it becomes perfectly acceptable, there is no reason the jail the perp. Will that help the child? I think not. How about unwed mothers? In the past, this was frowned upon, and children grew up with two parents in (probably) unhappy homes. Today, there is no stigma against unwed mothers, and children are growing up in poverty, supported by the government, with no fathers. Is this beneficial for society? I don’t think so.
I could go on, but there’s no need.
shibumi on May 7, 2009 at 7:46 PM
I don’t think there is a winning side at the moment. Unless the moderates can manage to make a huge sweep (that would be a first), then I don’t see them winning out either…
Upstater85 on May 7, 2009 at 7:46 PM
I don’t care what Clinton thought. I know what he did. He started a single war in a place where there was an on-going ethnic cleansing. Last year my sister went there with her husband for vacation. Clinton’s only war was nothing but a complete success. Note that I was against the war, however, it seems to have worked.
Cheney started a war that resulted in totally predictable geopolitical shifts against the interests of the US, not to mention lots of dead people.
radiofreevillage on May 7, 2009 at 7:47 PM
If Cheney said he was against gay marriage, I’d imagine Speedwagon82 would take him to task for hypocrisy. Whatever works, right?
Jim Treacher on May 7, 2009 at 7:47 PM
You have to admit that on many things Bush was a hair left of center.
Upstater85 on May 7, 2009 at 7:47 PM
What do you call what Saddam did?
Jim Treacher on May 7, 2009 at 7:48 PM
Why are we hearing more from Cheney now that he is out of office than when he was in office?
And why didn’t he run for President instead of McCain?
albill on May 7, 2009 at 7:49 PM
I know what you mean about the Balkans, but why do we still have troops there? (That’s why I am still against it). My understanding is that the Koreans also consider it one of their FAILURES… I guess they didn’t/don’t like the involvement…
Upstater85 on May 7, 2009 at 7:51 PM
RFV: where did your sister go on vacation? i’m not understanding
kelley in virginia on May 7, 2009 at 7:52 PM
Just always remember…..: Keep your standards and they will come…. try to be all-inclusive and they will also come…. TO WHAT????????
PaCadle on May 7, 2009 at 7:52 PM
There’s more than a small difference between having strong fundamental platform positions, and having strongly fundamentalist platform positions. The first will pull MOR democrats over, who now know what fiscal irresponsibility really looks like, and want no part of a social democrat nanny state. The second will drive away MOR republicans, whose idea of personal freedom and liberty means just that, not a piously moral nanny state.
MarkT on May 7, 2009 at 7:52 PM
Cheney gets it.s
Say the GOP runs a bunch of moderates in this environment- what is their plan?
Less of the same, wag their finger at barry?
Just for laughs in 2010 how about a strong conservative slate of candidates in all states and see what happens?
Or is keeping 35 Senators crucial?
jjshaka on May 7, 2009 at 7:53 PM
I will go digging for the link, but there was some report that on average, during Saddam’s roughly 8,000 days in power, between 70 and 125 people were killed each day.
Taking the APs (hardly a pro-war outfit) report of 110,000 civilian deaths since we invaded Iraq and dividing by the number of days we’ve been there you get about 50 deaths per day.
It’s interesting to think about, whether you supported the war or not.
BadgerHawk on May 7, 2009 at 7:55 PM
we are almost at the tilting point in this country where there are more “takers” than “givers”. right now, slightly fewer than 50% receive from the govt. rather than pay to the govt. they vote democrat. so we have to be the party of just about 50% to make a difference.
we can’t be that party whining about social issues. it has to be fiscal & defense. period.
kelley in virginia on May 7, 2009 at 7:58 PM
That’s my take also. The social issues are important. I care about them. I just care about fiscal and defense issues more, and I think moderates (squishy voters who don’t pay attention and change their ideology seemingly every other election cycle) are more receptive to those issues as well.
BadgerHawk on May 7, 2009 at 8:00 PM
And how many of those deaths were caused by the bad guys? No, silly, not us…
bikermailman on May 7, 2009 at 8:05 PM
Tacitus_SGL on May 7, 2009 at 7:24 PM
That was perfect! Tell ‘em what you believe. Tell ‘em what you will do. Then do it! Keep the message simple. So easy.
BetseyRoss on May 7, 2009 at 8:10 PM
Using Politico’s emotionally-laden Leftwing-outrageous copy as substantiation of anything about the GOP is misinformational. Every single voting Republican could participate in a nation-wide group hug tomorrow and Politico would declare something such as, “Republicans Grope in In-Fighting While Straining to Get Along”.
Cheney’s got the right idea and his advice is significant and should be taken very, very seriously.
I am guessing that the “moderate” Republicans going to run in various upcoming elections are doing the wrong thing and won’t be taken too seriously if not considered to be quite irratating by many voters. The RIGHT today wants Republican candidates and electeds to represent the Right, not the so-called “Middle.”
The “Middle” no longer exists today. I doubt it ever did.
Lourdes on May 7, 2009 at 8:13 PM
“Irritating” not “irratating” ^^.
Lourdes on May 7, 2009 at 8:14 PM
And to think that Cheney is able to seamlessly convey his philosophy and an explantion of his administrtion’s policy and its rationale without a teleprompter (Yes, I know that this was a radio interview.) amkes the loss of his leadership all the more acute. I truly admire Dick Cheney and miss him grievously.
onlineanalyst on May 7, 2009 at 8:15 PM
All I’m saying is that if the ‘Rock of Conservatism’ Dick Cheney is in support of gay marriage, maybe we shouldn’t care that other, less conservative, Republicans feel the same way. Like the Spawn of McCain.
Speedwagon82 on May 7, 2009 at 8:15 PM
radiofrevillage:
Have you forgotten that Clinton bombed Iraq and that he was the president who passed the Iraqi Liberation Act?
Terrye on May 7, 2009 at 8:16 PM
dick cheney is kin to john wayne. no doubt.
kelley in virginia on May 7, 2009 at 8:17 PM
GOD BLESS DICK CHENEY!
He’s right!
And by damn … he’s always been right!
HondaV65 on May 7, 2009 at 8:18 PM
EVERYone cares about and votes with consideration or revulsion as to “social issues.” It’s just a case of how readily someone will admit such or how in-touch with their motivations a voter is.
People who make a big deal of decrying “social issues” are, in my experience, playing a deceptive game. They are probably the most concerned with ~certain~ social issues than they’re willing to admit or discuss and tend toward being intolerant — in my experience, again — of the social issues concerns of others (that means, they’re actually quite motivated by their own social issues and intolerant of those of others, along with being intolerant of discussions of such).
Everyone is motivated to support or recoil against and about social issues. It’s just a case of how people are willing to admit that or not, but they/we/all of us vote according to social issues concerns in the “candidate” elections (and even on non-candidate elections, such as on bonds, laws, etc.).
Lourdes on May 7, 2009 at 8:18 PM
onlineanalyst on May 7, 2009 at 8:15 PM
I remember in the 2004 VP debate how he cleaned Edwards’ clock. I knew Cheney was good, but I really thought a trial lawyer would do better than he did.
bikermailman on May 7, 2009 at 8:19 PM
Because, voting for fiscal issues IS AFFECTED BY SOCIAL ISSUES CONCERNS. People just don’t readily discuss what those concerns are, but they ARE, indeed, motivated and concerned about, social issues as to fiscal-issue votes and appeals.
Lourdes on May 7, 2009 at 8:19 PM
everyone: realize that gay marriage in some form is coming. it could be civil unions or the full-blown white dress type wedding.
its gross & some would say a sin, but it is a reality.
move on. we can still defend our purse & our borders & our states.
kelley in virginia on May 7, 2009 at 8:20 PM
Upstater:
No, I do not agree that Bush was left of center. I consider him socially conservative and center right on other issues. Alito and Roberts are not lefties and people will remember that when Obama starts coming up with judges too.
And you know what? I heard a lot of conservatives complain about McCain too, some of them even refused to support him..but on fiscal issues McCain was a conservative. He is also pro life. But that was not good enough for a lot of people.
So while I think it is important that Republicans stick to some core issues, I also think it is important that we remember whoever we support needs to get elected.
Terrye on May 7, 2009 at 8:21 PM
Yeah, agreed. I listen acutely whenever Cheney speaks, same as I do when Karl Rove offers his opinions/advice.
Lourdes on May 7, 2009 at 8:22 PM
Who’s “we”? In any case, I don’t care that Meghan McCain feels that same way.
Jim Treacher on May 7, 2009 at 8:22 PM
Chief among these being the lack of a large scale urban policy apparatus in Oklahoma and in various other “red” states. In the event a truly large city needs to be run, one will always find the need to moderate conservatism to fit the different social mores and financial requirements of large cities.
Republicans can win in these situations. See: Giuliani. You don’t need to let them run the party, but the reality is its tough to govern with southern fried values and a distaste for public services in a big city…its just the reality.
ernesto on May 7, 2009 at 8:23 PM
Moderates are fine as a tactical accomodation in appropriate circumstances.
So long as said moderates understand straight up that they are the exception, not the rule, and don’t get to remake the national party in their own image.
With that understanding in place, the GOP will be just fine.
Nat Hound on May 7, 2009 at 8:24 PM
yeah, i love Karl Rove, too.
and terrye: getting elected is one of those factors that many seem to forget. we can nominate Jesus Christ, but if He can’t get elected, what have we achieved? you are spot on!
kelley in virginia on May 7, 2009 at 8:24 PM
You’re wrong, kelley.
What WILL continue is the Left’s attack on marriage; as in, they’re predictable by now in that they’re going to continue to wage their war as they have and the issue isn’t going to go away as to “‘gay’ marriage”.
But it’s not inevitable and it’s wrong to advise Conservatives to cave or accept the unacceptable just because the Left is messy, cruel and conniving (about that issue and everything else).
The miscarriage of the “Middle” advise as to how the Right should carry itself usually goes like that: give up, it’s taking too long to oppose, it’s too complicated, give in, don’t complain.
The Right, like Cheney advises, needs to maintain it’s values and beliefs and uphold and strengthen them, not be “moderate” or moderated-by-the-Left because they’re loud, insulting and irritating.
Lourdes on May 7, 2009 at 8:27 PM
Most conservatives are able to look at the big picture, IMO. Cheney doesn’t agree with me on gay marriage. He also has a lesbian daughter, and she is the mother of his grandchild. On countless other issues, this long-serving Conservative official has served with firmness, resolve and intelligence. I could go down the list of his significant offices and roles, but I don’t think that’s necessary at this point.
What does McCain bring to the table to offer a similar balance to her thinking on this issue, and encourage Conservatives to agree with her overall stance?
cs89 on May 7, 2009 at 8:27 PM
“Moderation in the pursuit of justice is no virtue.”
exception on May 7, 2009 at 8:27 PM
Neither pushed individualism very much. Both saw/see the government entities such as DHS a not so evil necessity. Spending did balloon under Bush – war or no war. And the bailouts started under him. He didn’t need to do that. It’s not like the left wasn’t going to put his name through more mud if he DID do something about the economy.
We’ve already had this discussion before, but I think conservatives may come to regret No Child Left Behind and maybe even DHS.
Upstater85 on May 7, 2009 at 8:28 PM
You’re absolutely wrong – it WILL NOT come to Mississippi and Louisiana – for that I can say for sure. And the Democrats down here will back us up – as will the Black communities.
Say what you will – it is not going to happen down here for at least a decade and perhaps more.
HondaV65 on May 7, 2009 at 8:30 PM
hey, who said John Wayne,,,, >..< huh??? who??
PaCadle on May 7, 2009 at 8:31 PM
I’m curious, has there ever been a study that shows whether the extremes do more than the middle (vote, donate $, donate time)? I’m guessing that the middle does not care as much. The next question would be how much of a middle there is. If it is the middle of a steep bell curve, then a smaller percentage of middle activist could still overwhelm either extreme. But I get the sense that there is a double hump america, and that if positions were well articulated some moderates would realize they were really conservative. Third, how much of the middle can you capture by one extreme or the other as opposed to a middle position where you might loose the extremes on your side?
AnotherOpinion on May 7, 2009 at 8:32 PM
hey, who said John Wayne,,,, >..< huh??? who??
PaCadle on May 7, 2009 at 8:33 PM
I missed that part wherein Cheney supports “‘gay’ marriage” — in which case, that’s his opinion, undoubtedly affected by his own family history…
But his overall perspective is correct, is what I support (I don’t by any means support nor find credible “‘gay’ marriage” — homosexuals should not have special rights, nor should we establish rights based upon unusual sexual activity, but I don’t see that they are denied any right as Americans at the present time, despite their protests that some rights that don’t exist to everyone are somehow being denied to them).
I don’t mind or find upsetting the fact that others have opinions that I don’t have (this one issue, since someone’s brought it up, as above). What’s important is the strategy that Cheney is advising, which I find the best, to not cower about social issues while some in the RNC today seem to find the entire area of “social issues” to be embarrassing.
The Left hates the values and beliefs held by most on the Right. So what…they’ll never vote for Republicans regardless, so why should Republicans go about being more like Democrats?
Lourdes on May 7, 2009 at 8:33 PM
I’m suggesting that we Republicans stop and stop now before it blossoms, all use of the Pelosi-Garafalo expression, “straight up”.
Don’t let them into yer head…
Lourdes on May 7, 2009 at 8:36 PM
I think that conservatives can win by being clever and taking over issues traditionally favored by Democrats, such as education and the environment. School vouchers, for example, are getting a lot of press lately and could be a key campaign plank for a Republican running in a blue state. Innovative market-based environmental conservation strategies might be winners in other blue states. You can do these things without becoming a Democrat-lite.
joe_doufu on May 7, 2009 at 8:36 PM
Upstater:
Dick Cheney supported the creation of the DHS, most people did shortly after 9/11.
And I disagree to some extent about the spending. The drug plan has worked better and cost less than its opponents said, and it stopped the Democrat plan that was far larger and more costly.
As for the spending, I don’t think we can say war or no war.
If there had not been an attack on 9/11..or if there had not been a recession, I doubt if there would have been anywhere near the spending..and do not forget Katrina, that was the largest storm of its kind in our history. A lot of damage was done. I think people have forgotten all of that.
As for the bailout, Bush allocated some of the TARP money to keep the financial sector from collapse. There is a difference between real and proportional short term spending in an honest to God financial emergence and what we have seen now.
Congress was going to jump in there whatever Bush said or did, the question was how much. Obama has taken it to a whole new level that goes way and beyond proportional.
Terrye on May 7, 2009 at 8:37 PM
Seriously?
ernesto on May 7, 2009 at 8:39 PM
It doesn’t know, it’s just repeating what it heard on Kos.
mr.blacksheep on May 7, 2009 at 8:39 PM
Comment pages: 1 2 Next »