PDA

View Full Version : "The Conservatives Need to Delouse the Party Of RINO'S ."



megimoo
05-17-2009, 03:05 PM
The Republican Party certainly does require a "Big Tent" -- the kind of tent we sometimes see covering a house infested with termites. Unless conservatives can rid the GOP of Democrats hiding out in their midst, the Republican Party can never recover. Liberals are sapping the GOP's strength from within.

It now seems that a looming divorce within the GOP has grown inevitable. Unless the Republican Party returns to its conservative principles, a number of conservatives will go on strike. They feel it is no longer acceptable for conservatives to do most of the hard work of winning elections, while the Party leaders promote mainly liberal policies. A new Party could even be the result.

Liberals in the Republican Party (affectionately known as "Moderates") severely threaten the existence of the Republican party in four fundamental ways:


(1) "Moderates" lose elections by their failure to understand politics or how to lead a party. Political success requires persuading and inspiring. Conservatives believe that the opinions of the public and the votes of the electorate are fluid and dynamic. A candidate wins votes by persuading the voters that he or she offers a better plan and better leadership. The heart and soul of politics is convincing people that your party's ideas are best.

Yet one of the fundamental errors of "Moderate" Republicans is that they view the electorate as frozen in place. Voters never change their minds. Therefore, "Moderates" approach elections by trying to patch together already-existing, static blocs of opinion. They want to pander to various interest groups in order to cobble together a majority. "Moderates" cannot understand elections in terms of changing minds. Therefore, they do not try to persuade the electorate. And they can't understand anyone else doing so, either. Moderates want to count noses, while conservatives want to change hearts.

Conservatives strongly believe that voters respond to leadership. They believe that voters actually decide in each election who is the better candidate, based on the policies, records, and qualities a candidate offers. Therefore, conservatives believe that they can win a majority by offering better ideas, plans, and proposals for the country. By contrast, if the GOP fields an awful candidate and runs an awful campaign, people will vote for the Democrat. This does not signal a permanent shift in the nation's politics requiring the Party to abandon its principles. This simply means the GOP nominated a terrible candidate.

Conservatives believe it is a severe threat to allow confusion about what the Party stands for or fail to present clearly why their policies are better. Trying to water down the Party's message to pander to different groups is the path to certain defeat. The voters must be able to understand the difference between the parties. The voters must see why conservative policies are better. If we don't show the voters why our plans are better, no one else will.


http://www.shaleoilnow.com/GOPBigTent.html

megimoo
05-17-2009, 03:12 PM
"Here's a Good Example Of A Festering Liberal Louse In disguise as a Conservative !"

The Last Straw--Sen. Lindsey Graham's Betrayal of Gun Owners

It is time for conservatives in South Carolina to begin seriously asking themselves whether or not we can continue to tolerate Senator Lindsey Graham's increasing betrayal of our values. The Senator is now an accomplice to an anti-gun bill gaining steam in the Congress. Senate bill S.391 would vastly expand the role of the government in our private lives and place our most personal medical information into a central, anti-gun database, preventing certain citizens from purchasing firearms based solely on their medical history. Thus, when your pediatrician asks your child about the firearms you keep in your home, beware if...


http://www.examiner.com/x-3704-Columbia-Conservative-Examiner~y2009m5d17-Senator-Graham-an-accomplice-to-antigun-onslaught

FlaGator
05-17-2009, 03:14 PM
Too bad that we can't get two conservatives to agree on every point what conservates actually stand for.

megimoo
05-17-2009, 03:17 PM
Too bad that we can't get two conservatives to agree on every point what conservates actually stand for.Read Ronald Reagan and Newt Gingrich!

lacarnut
05-17-2009, 05:06 PM
I'm afraid it's far too late to start voting out the liberal Republicans. Too late, and too many of them.

Look at all the millions upon millions of voters who love the Republican party more than they love America. Can you even imagine trying to convince the average Republican voter to vote third party? If that was even within the realm of possibility, then Arlen Specter would have voted out of office a long time ago.

Give up on this idea of voting the "RINOs" out. Now. Let me save you the trouble and tell you the three ways this can turn out.

1. The remaining Republicans in Congress flail around in a vain effort to "reconnect" with "'their base", and make extravagant promises of what they "want" to do. They'll sucker enough people into helping them take back Congress and/or the White House, break every promise, and be voted out again in a few years.

2. The remaining Republicans in Congress flail around in a vain effort to "reconnect" with "their base", and make extravagant promises of what they "want" to do. They won't sucker enough people into helping them take back Congress and/or the White House, and the party eventually goes the way of the Whigs.

The following is a possibility, but you'd be better off betting on a three-legged horse:

3. The Republican voters of the country sit down and have a good, long look at their principles. They withhold their money and votes from the liberal Republicans and start backing candidates who reflect their principles instead, regardless of party affiliation. Third party candidates begin to replace the liberal Republicans in Congress.

The 4th possibility although a long shot would be for real conservatives to run against incumbent RINO's. That has more of a chance than 3rd party candidates in my opinion. Democrats will win an election if you split up Repubs just like Ross Perot did handing Clinton the election over Bush Sr.

Water Closet
05-17-2009, 05:09 PM
Graham, Snowe, Collins... If one were to "purge" all of the impure conservatives from the existing Rs in the Senate, would anyone care to take a shot at how many Rs would be left?

megimoo
05-17-2009, 05:29 PM
I'm afraid it's far too late to start voting out the liberal Republicans. Too late, and too many of them.

Look at all the millions upon millions of voters who love the Republican party more than they love America. Can you even imagine trying to convince the average Republican voter to vote third party? If that was even within the realm of possibility, then Arlen Specter would have been voted out of office a long time ago.

Give up on this idea of voting the "RINOs" out. Now. Let me save you the trouble and tell you the three ways this can turn out.

1. The remaining Republicans in Congress flail around in a vain effort to "reconnect" with "'their base", and make extravagant promises of what they "want" to do. They'll sucker enough people into helping them take back Congress and/or the White House, break every promise, and be voted out again in a few years.

2. The remaining Republicans in Congress flail around in a vain effort to "reconnect" with "their base", and make extravagant promises of what they "want" to do. They won't sucker enough people into helping them take back Congress and/or the White House, and the party eventually goes the way of the Whigs.

The following is a possibility, but you'd be better off betting on a three-legged horse:

3. The Republican voters of the country sit down and have a good, long look at their principles. They withhold their money and votes from the liberal Republicans and start backing candidates who reflect their principles instead, regardless of party affiliation. Third party candidates begin to replace the liberal Republicans in Congress.
You may be surprised just how many people hate the way America is being governed by these Progressive Communists .Pelosi is among the most hated people in America along with Kennedy, Reid and Schumer.

The Party Of Reagan and Gingrich is a shambles and needs to be remade.The first thing is to jettison the Progressive Republicans and third column Democrats.Reagan was able to lead from the Conservative base and stabilize the party long enough to destroy our primary enemy without a war !The Quizlings will advise us to move to the center if we are to win in the future but that's a ploy to lead us to defeat .That's where our traitors come from now !Lilly Livered Progressives have seeped into the party and corrupted it .Graham,MC Cain, Spector, you name the rest are far from the party's conservative base and will destroy us .

Bush started out well but spent too much money trying to avoid a battle with the Communists in Congress and compromised the party .The progressive Soros owned crowd have just destroyed our financial system and now dictates how much money Wall Street can pay their CEO'S and top producers . Now Obama, the Arab sleeper,has isolated Israel and is about to give control of America to the U.N.!When will America wake up to the facts right in front of them ?

Water Closet
05-17-2009, 06:11 PM
My point exactly. If they're all RINO's, then it's not 'in name only', that's just what the party is.

The issue is ideological "purity" vs being a viable party. No pure conservative will win a senate seat in New England (12 seats), NY, NJ, PA, DE, MD, VA (12 more seats), CA, OR, WA,lor IL (8 more seats). So, going that route, a party would concede 1/3 of the seats out of the chute.

megimoo
05-17-2009, 06:29 PM
The issue is ideological "purity" vs being a viable party. No pure conservative will win a senate seat in New England (12 seats), NY, NJ, PA, DE, MD, VA (12 more seats), CA, OR, WA,lor IL (8 more seats). So, going that route, a party would concede 1/3 of the seats out of the chute.Tell me then just how did Reagan do it ?

Water Closet
05-17-2009, 06:33 PM
Tell me then just how did Reagan do it ?

First, Reagan was never in the Senate, of which I was speaking. Presidential elections are of a different nature, reflecting the different requirements of the office. However, the world changes in 30 years, as do the demographics of the US. That time is past.

lacarnut
05-17-2009, 07:16 PM
Graham, Snowe, Collins... If one were to "purge" all of the impure conservatives from the existing Rs in the Senate, would anyone care to take a shot at how many Rs would be left?

I did not say anything about purging Repub; I said lets oppose RINO's and run conservative against those incumbents in the primaries. BTW, numerically speaking there are more red states than blue state. Point being that the Repub party is not dead which this bald headed coonass (J.C.) thinks. My bet still stands that there will be more than 40 Repubs Senators after the 2012 election.

I find it odd that you bash the idiot child and Repubs but have little or no criticism of the O and the Democratic Party. It appears that a socialist that is going to raise the shit out of your taxes, reduce military spending, make us more vulneralble to terrorism, hell bent on wealth distribution, welfare for all, nationalization of every industry is more acceptable to you than a fiscal/social conservative. Well, enjoy your higher taxes and a screwed up economy because help is on the way for you.:rolleyes:

Water Closet
05-17-2009, 07:28 PM
I did not say anything about purging Repub; I said lets oppose RINO's and run conservative against them in the primaries. BTW, numerically speaking there are more red states than blue state. Point being that the Repub party is not dead which this bald headed coonass (J.C.) thinks. My bet still stands that there will be more than 40 Repubs Senators after the 2012 election.

Perhaps there are (more Red states) from the presidential election and/or from a black/white perspective, but what percentage of those Red states are pure conservative. Take MO, for example, where McCain won. Will a "pure" conservative candidate be able to win there? I doubt it. The so-called Purple states are purple because they don't like the extemes.

Additionally, I listed 32 senate seats that a pure conservative hasn't got a snowball's chance in hell of winning. So, run a pure conservative against Snowe, for example, and see if the winner is a D or an R.

Plus, it's a pretty pathetic position to say that after four years of the supposedly horrible administration, you're confident that the Rs will have more than 40 seats.


I find it odd that you bash the idiot child and Repubs but have little or no criticism of the O and the Democratic Party. It appears that a socialist that is going to raise the shit out of your taxes, reduce military spending, make us more vulneralble to terrorism, hell bent on wealth distribution, welfare for all, nationalization of every industry is more acceptable to you than a fiscal/social conservative. Well, enjoy your higher taxes and a screwed up economy because help is on the way for you.:rolleyes:

Not particularly odd. I joined this board in May 2005 and for at least the first year said nothing bad about Georgie-Porgie. I wanted to give him the benefit of the doubt and did so for at least his first five years. However, his ineptitude became so sublimely ridiculous that it was a position I could no longer support. I'm willing to give Obama the same.

Jfor
05-17-2009, 07:29 PM
The issue is ideological "purity" vs being a viable party. No pure conservative will win a senate seat in New England (12 seats), NY, NJ, PA, DE, MD, VA (12 more seats), CA, OR, WA,lor IL (8 more seats). So, going that route, a party would concede 1/3 of the seats out of the chute.

So conservatives should be listening to the moderates? That is what got us with a democrat congress and a democrat in the white house.

Water Closet
05-17-2009, 07:34 PM
So conservatives should be listening to the moderates? That is what got us with a democrat congress and a democrat in the white house.

No, as lacarnut has rightly pointed out, it was the economy. When the Rs demonstrated that they were as fiscally irresponsible as the Ds (moreso in fact) then the fiscal conservatives who put up with the whacky-whacky social conservativism of the Rs, gladly bailed. The centrists are much more comfortable with Democratic social positions, including abortion, gays, etc., than with those of the extreme right (and dominate) wing of the Republican party. The only reason they stuck around was for low taxes and a good economy.

hazlnut
05-17-2009, 08:11 PM
I did not say anything about purging Repub; I said lets oppose RINO's and run conservative against those incumbents in the primaries. BTW, numerically speaking there are more red states than blue state. Point being that the Repub party is not dead which this bald headed coonass (J.C.) thinks. My bet still stands that there will be more than 40 Repubs Senators after the 2012 election.

2010 Republican Primary races are going to start to add up $$. They're expensive--and where you're talking about ousting a RINO, the GOP can spend the money, and end up further dividing the base/moderates in individual districts and in entire states.

When people see 'their guy' ousted in a primary--they could flip to the left and support the challenger.

It's a risky proposition all around.

lacarnut
05-17-2009, 08:39 PM
Perhaps there are (more Red states) from the presidential election and/or from a black/white perspective, but what percentage of those Red states are pure conservative. Take MO, for example, where McCain won. Will a "pure" conservative candidate be able to win there? I doubt it. The so-called Purple states are purple because they don't like the extemes.

Additionally, I listed 32 senate seats that a pure conservative hasn't got a snowball's chance in hell of winning. So, run a pure conservative against Snowe, for example, and see if the winner is a D or an R.

Plus, it's a pretty pathetic position to say that after four years of the supposedly horrible administration, you're confident that the Rs will have more than 40 seats.



Not particularly odd. I joined this board in May 2005 and for at least the first year said nothing bad about Georgie-Porgie. I wanted to give him the benefit of the doubt and did so for at least his first five years. However, his ineptitude became so sublimely ridiculous that it was a position I could no longer support. I'm willing to give Obama the same.

I would not concede all of the 32 Senate seats that you mentioned. You don't think Rudy would not win a senate seat if he ran?. If the economy goes in the toliet, things might change. In politics, many things can happen in the period of a short periof of time. Ask daddy Bush after the war. His approval rating was thru the roof. Then Greenspan raised rates, the economy took a dive and Clinton won. Even if the D keep a stranglehold on those seats that still leaves 68 seats on the table. FYI, 3 times as many Democ. seats are up for grabs in 2012 than Repubs.

You are wrong. I am not hoping that the O is going to do a horrible job. I think it is going to happen though. Inflation is a given. You can not flood the market with dollars and not expect it to not have any effect. The adminstration better worry about their AAA rating. Our debt is getting out of control and if a downgrade happens to AA, you will see gold rise dramatically and the dollar plunge. I am loading up on gold because in the next 5 years I think gold will hit the 2k mark.

Uncle Ben bragged in his book on how to get a country out of a recession. Lower interest rate, flood the market with money, when the economy picks up raise interest rates and make money tight again. Only problem with this is that it creates inflation, devalues the dollar resulting the net worth of your assets and decreases the amount to those holding out debt. Pretty neat, Huh. That is the plan.

The Democ. tax plan will allow me to take off several thousand dollars off my AGI on my Fed. Inc. Tax return because of the sales tax I paid on a new car I bought this year and installing Pella windows in my house. Since I am retired and most of my assets have already been taxed, those high taxes will not effect me. The Democ. screw with health care where I don't have a choice of going to the best facility in the US, I am outta here.

Water Closet
05-17-2009, 09:01 PM
I would not concede all of the 32 Senate seats that you mentioned. You don't think Rudy would not win a senate seat if he ran?. If the economy goes in the toliet, things might change. In politics, many things can happen in the period of a short periof of time. Ask daddy Bush after the war. His approval rating was thru the roof. Then Greenspan raised rates, the economy took a dive and Clinton won. Even if the D keep a stranglehold on those seats that still leaves 68 seats on the table. FYI, 3 times as many Democ. seats are up for grabs in 2012 than Repubs.

You are wrong. I am not hoping that the O is going to do a horrible job. I think it is going to happen though. Inflation is a given. You can not flood the market with dollars and not expect it to not have any effect. The adminstration better worry about their AAA rating. Our debt is getting out of control and if a downgrade happens to AA, you will see gold rise dramatically and the dollar plunge. I am loading up on gold because in the next 5 years I think gold will hit the 2k mark.

Uncle Ben bragged in his book on how to get a country out of a recession. Lower interest rate, flood the market with money, when the economy picks up raise interest rates and make money tight again. Only problem with this is that it creates inflation, devalues the dollar resulting the net worth of your assets and decreases the amount to those holding out debt. Pretty neat, Huh. That is the plan.

The Democ. tax plan will allow me to take off several thousand dollars off my AGI on my Fed. Inc. Tax return because of the sales tax I paid on a new car I bought this year and installing Pella windows in my house. Since I am retired and most of my assets have already been taxed, those high taxes will not effect me. The Democ. screw with health care where I don't have a choice of going to the best facility in the US, I am outta here.

Rudy was getting the s**t kicked out of him the last time he tried. I know, I know. He withdrew because of the cancer, but look at the polls prior to his withdrawal. He didn't stand a chance against Clinton.

Clearly, over the decades, things can change in the political makeup of states. However, the states I mentioned will not elect a "pure conservative" in the next decade or so (perhaps no conservative). And the trend in the demographics are actually working against that in the future.

lacarnut
05-17-2009, 09:12 PM
2010 Republican Primary races are going to start to add up $$. They're expensive--and where you're talking about ousting a RINO, the GOP can spend the money, and end up further dividing the base/moderates in individual districts and in entire states.

When people see 'their guy' ousted in a primary--they could flip to the left and support the challenger.

It's a risky proposition all around.

A recent poll stated that less than 20% claim Repubs as their party of preference. So, a lot of pissed off people are not happy because of the big spenders in DC along with a sour economy. Many people 401k's became 201k's. If the economy goes further in the toliet and their investments become 101k's, you will see a revolt and a bunch of Democrats will be in big trouble also. Jobs and the economy trumph all this other bs.

There is not much difference between a RINO and a Democrat. I mean, take CA. Would Davis have made as big a mess of the state as a RINO like Arnuld. That is what is wrong with the Repub. party. A me too Repub. is not going to cut it. Conservatives need to differentiate themselves from Democrats on taxes, big government and social issues.

lacarnut
05-17-2009, 09:25 PM
Rudy was getting the s**t kicked out of him the last time he tried. I know, I know. He withdrew because of the cancer, but look at the polls prior to his withdrawal. He didn't stand a chance against Clinton.

Clearly, over the decades, things can change in the political makeup of states. However, the states I mentioned will not elect a "pure conservative" in the next decade or so (perhaps no conservative). And the trend in the demographics are actually working against that in the future.

Clinton is not running is she? I doubt anyone could have beaten Clinton. She had the money and the organization. Anyway, that is a moot point. If he decides to run, he will kick the shit out of any Democrat.

There are very few places where a true conservative could win in that 1/3 you mentioned. However, the lack of jobs, poor economy, tax hikes, bankruptcy in states like NY, CA, NJ could change many voters minds.

Camaraderie
05-20-2009, 06:21 PM
You may be surprised just how many people hate the way America is being governed by these Progressive Communists. Pelosi is among the most hated people in America along with Kennedy, Reid and Schumer.

Yes, but Gingrich isn't the answer. He failed to deliver when he had the chance. And he'll do the same thing again -- fail to deliver.

Camaraderie
05-20-2009, 06:28 PM
the Repub party is not dead which this bald headed coonass (J.C.) thinks.

If the Dems and Neocons can take a complete unknown, and make him a senator and then president in just a few years, then anything is possible. 18 months ago 99% of Americans never heard of Obama, and now he's the man. Amazing.

megimoo
05-20-2009, 09:49 PM
If the Dems and Neocons can take a complete unknown, and make him a senator and then president in just a few years, then anything is possible. 18 months ago 99% of Americans never heard of Obama, and now he's the man. Amazing.
If you had as much Foreign money and Soros backing you could/would be president now.

Well maybe not but if you were a far left,first tern senator from a corrupt state administration,Black,Maoist,Anti American disciple of Saul Alinsky,and had a track record for election fraud by defending and training ACORN on how to multiple regester the dead and street walking wine soaked zombies you would be a contender .

The top money men in the Progressive/Maoist cabal decided that Hilliary wasn't the right choice to bring down America and so they dumped her .This one,Obama,is their choice for destroying our country and the great liberal/progressive herd wallows mindlessly along in his wake.Day by day he destroys an American institution and pulls it into Commune.He has weakened the country's capitol system to forstall any chance of a natural cyclic recovery .He has looted the treasury devalued the currency by printing reams of worthless paper money.

It has become obvious that some states have corrupt officials that control the state polls.And the voter registration files in some states are filled with either fraudulent voters,dead former voters or multiple registration by the same voters.We cannot even have a fair national election that will count our military votes because the Progressives control the polls and they hate the military and block the military ballots and refuse to count them.They know they will vote conservative and so they hide them and ignore them .