Comments on: GOP Way Forward

By: A Conservative Civil War Against the GOP – You Better Believe It! : The Pink Flamingo

Sun, 22 Nov 2009 12:10:07 +0000

[...] ARE NOT Republicans.Â They are Third Party Conservative Losers, but they are NOT Republicans.Â AJ Strata is right.Â If these people could decently align themselves with the GOP they could help us win.Â [...]

By: Frogg1

Frogg1 — Fri, 06 Nov 2009 17:32:52 +0000

Libertarians win 8 victories in Pennsylvania elections
http://libertarianrepublican.blogspot.com/2009/11/libertarian-rino-wins-county-council.html

I said it over a month ago, and I still think it so……it will be the Libertarians and Conservatives who save the GOP. It may a pendulum swing that overcorrects Obamanomics; but, eventually things will swing back and forth until they settle center-right again.

By: stevevvs

stevevvs — Fri, 06 Nov 2009 14:17:38 +0000

I’m probubly done here. AJ hat’s FACTS I guess.

By: stevevvs

stevevvs — Fri, 06 Nov 2009 14:16:34 +0000

What is Spam? FACTS?

Here is a tough one. How would we catagorize these people?

Thomas Jefferson [R]
James Madison [R]
James Monroe [R]
Andrew Jackson [D]
John Tyler [R]
James K. Polk [D]
Franklin Pierce [D]
James Buchanan [D]

What Do They All Have In Common?

They all Vetoed “Interior Improvement” projects passed by Congress. Such as Roads, Canals, etc. WHY?

Well you see, if something isn’t listed in the Constitution under Article 1 Section 8, then Congress has no authority to do it, without ammending the Constitution.

My, how times have changed. Now, we do anything we want without the slightest thought as to the Constitutionality of what is proposed.

So, what are they, Far Right, Far Left, Conservative Moderates, or just people who respect the Constitutional Limits placed upon them? Tough one isn’t it!

I read this today in my newest book.

By: AJStrata

AJStrata — Fri, 06 Nov 2009 12:17:53 +0000

Stevevvs,

No more spam comments or you are outta here.

By: Frogg1

Frogg1 — Fri, 06 Nov 2009 03:23:57 +0000

A Republican Civil War? Not Likely

http://corner.nationalreview.com/post/?q=NTBhMTc2Y2U4NzU3MjY4ZTEyZmNiMzExMmY0YjMzMWM=

Exactly!!

By: Redteam

Redteam — Fri, 06 Nov 2009 02:49:40 +0000

trent:

Byrd did his level best to console Biden

was the compassionate Byrd wearing his white sheet at the time?

By: MarkN

MarkN — Thu, 05 Nov 2009 22:37:55 +0000

Trent:

More journalistic malpractice. Hoffman did go to see Dede, hat in hand for her endorsement. That is when he got the non-endorsement pledge from her. Then Schumer calls and she stabs Hoffman in the back. Maybe because no Republican leaders called or that the RNC went over to Hoffman so quickly without calling her. Either way Hoffman was talking to her all Saturday. I would blame this again on the local republican leaders, state republican leaders, as well as the NRCC and RNC.

By: crosspatch

crosspatch — Thu, 05 Nov 2009 17:23:43 +0000

Another part of any “way forward” is to pay attention to your state legislature in 2010. Many states will be up for redistricting after the census. US House districts for the various states are generally drawn by the legislature. The majority legislature party has the say in how those are drawn in most states.

2010 will be a very important year in state legislature elections. Keep that in mind.

By: Trent_Telenko

Trent_Telenko — Thu, 05 Nov 2009 17:13:54 +0000

AJ,

You are wrong in your analysis.

NY-23 is a classic example of the fact that politics starts with people and relationships, and never stops being about people and relationships.

Idealogues forget that.

Real politicians donâ€™t, and they win because of it.

The GOP as a group â€” left, moderate center, or the various flavors of right wing â€” are unclear on this concept.

I read on several political web sites that no GOP official called Dede Scozzafava to console her after she withdrew.

No GOP national figure.

No GOP NY state figure.

None of the 11 GOP county chairmen who nominated her.

Not conservitive party candidate Doug Hoffman (Which marked him as not ready for prime time as a congressional candidate).

_NOT_A_SINGLE_ONE_.

Senator Shumer, the senior Democrat from New York, did, plus a number of other Democrats.

Dede Scozzafava endorsed Owenâ€™s as a result and late deciders in the NY-23rd broke 3-to-1 for Owens and another 6% of local Republicans voted for Scozzafava in protest.

The story that comes to mind here is how Senator Harry Byrd of West Virginia personally flew to see then 29 year-old Senator-elect Joe Biden, immediately after Bidenâ€™s wife was killed in a horrible traffic accident after he was elected Senator but before he turned 30 and was sworn in. Biden was seriously considering resigning his seat before swearing in to take care of his kids.

Byrd did his level best to console Biden and convince him to stay in politics.

The GOP lacks such people.

It showed in the NY-23rd.

You would do well to reflect on this in your attacks on what you consider “the Republican Fringe.”

By: stevevvs

stevevvs — Thu, 05 Nov 2009 13:13:34 +0000

http://www.vdare.com/pb/091104_ny23.htm

By: gwood

gwood — Thu, 05 Nov 2009 12:14:26 +0000

I’m not sure that the “way forward” requires any conscious effort on the part of Republicans. Liberalism and the Democratic party are both self-immolating. A discussion of the “far right”, “center left”, etc. etc., seems to me now to be so irrelevant, so…..day before yesterday.

If yesterday revealed anything, it revealed that the mushy middle is no longer so mushy. Virginia and New Jersey elected pro-life, anti gay-marriage pols, and their election had nothing to do with those issues. Voters essentially said-”give us our freedom back, and you can have intimate relations with farm animals if that’s what you want to do-we don’t care about anything but getting our freedom back.”

By: crosspatch

crosspatch — Thu, 05 Nov 2009 06:39:26 +0000

I agree with a lot of the talk going around that the candidate selection process needs to involve the population of the jurisdiction, not just the political elite. Had there been a primary in the district, things might have turned out differently. Even a system like California used in the CA-10 special election was better. We had a preliminary election with several candidates of a bunch of different parties running. If one got 50% of the vote they won but if not, the top two would face off in November and that is what we had.

This would eliminate the problem in NY-23 where the party honchos “decided” the candidate. Let the people pick the candidate. Have a primary or a preliminary.

By: Joe

Joe — Thu, 05 Nov 2009 05:27:55 +0000

The activist courts have created the issue for both policital parties. They gave us Roe vs Wade and the Democrats went for full support of the right to kill babies and the Republican went for pro life. The courts thrust gay marriage on us and the Democrats think that is great and the Republicans want laws set up to block this. The issue has been thrust onto the American people by courts who refuse to follow the constitution and believe they can legislate from the bench and the Democrats support this and the Republican do not. How you solve that issue is why the parties are now forced into issues beyond those of bigger government, higher taxes, and the normal issues that would allow the left or the right from really uniting with the middle. You can build a big tent without the social issues. However, you cannot solve critical issues that involve social issues thrust on the people by activist courts. Many in the middle are uncomfortalbe with government legislators getting involved in social issues, but seem to not understand that the courts are the issue. Many fail to see how far out the courts have gone and how they create laws out of thin air. In all of history, I am not sure I see how the courts doing this have created a better end result. In civil rights, if you remove the civil rights act under LBJ which was supported strongly by the republican party, the rulings of the court to force integration in schools as an example was blowing the country apart. Yes it is wrong to have social ills, but the right way to fix things is with a populace that grows to understand and agree and to push legislation to resolve or to have leaders who can drive public and congressional agreement. I propose that when the court has force any issue, it is created problems because our country was formed to solve these issues only when they have strong backing or if rights clearly in the constitution are violated. We also have a constitution that severly limited the role of the federal government and this has also been butchered. This means that issues that are in many ways driven by the belief in a local area can be resolved in those states. If you are a minority, and feel you cannot agree or live there, you can move to one of the other states that agrees more with your beliefs. When the federal comes down, it forces areas of the country with many different beliefs to come under one law.

That is what makes this arguement for the conservatives who believe we are living in a holocaust of 50 million dead infants to comprimise and support a pro baby killer. That vote can have consequences where that senator for example may vote to put a judge on that continues this holocaust. Does it matter if they agree with you on spending or size of government? Would it have mattered in germany if a person was pro killing jews but right on the issues of federal spending? When on party pushes abortion in healthcare reform, and the middle goes along with it, can one simply support those political folks who do not have an issue with baby killing? Until 1973 Roe, this would not have been an issue and they got that law from out of the air.

By: lurker9876

lurker9876 — Thu, 05 Nov 2009 03:40:17 +0000

I can add more to Barbara’s list, such as fiscally conservative principles and so on.

Religion: the original intent versus the last 100 years’ intent on separation of church and state is probably one of the most misunderstaindings we have today.

The growing secularism and its efforts should be a significant issue to all Americans, especially when Obama tells the world that our nation was not founded as a Christian nation.

Anytime I mention the Founding Fathers with anyone that came out of our public schools, they are so indoctrinated into believing the revision history of the American Founding.

I agree that religion is fine.

I was asked if I would have a problem voting for a Muslim as our US President.

Guess what my answer is:

If the Muslim believes in our US Constitution, Declaration of Independence, and the Bill of Rights, is a strong US citizens with minimal foreign influence, believes that all men created equal and are granted inherent and inalienable rights, among which include life, liberty, and pursuit of happiness, endowed by our Creator.

If Keith Ellison was running for US President, Hell no!

This guy does not believe in our US Constitution at all. He swore using Thomas Jefferson’s book of Koran.

This country was not founded based on the book of Koran.