 |
| Moderated by: Wingie, VT-R, Terry, S., nNeo, mb, Lynne, kC, Heel, Freaks1932, dcbl, D |
|
|
| Author | Post |
|---|
Lynne
S. Moderator
| Joined: | Fri Oct 12th, 2007 |
| Location: | Good Times |
| Posts: | 2044 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Tue Nov 3rd, 2009 02:30 am |
|
tom_in_sac wrote: Lynne wrote: We should all start voting for our leaders based on their own voting records rather than simply the letter behind their name. In this case, there was a liberal and a bigger liberal running against either other, a lose-lose situation.
Go Hoffman (C)
Madness. The number of GOP seats held determine the composition of the various committees and whether the Dems even have to worry about GOP objections at all.
There's absolutely no reason why the GOP can't reassert itself, other than the internecine idiocy of the type we're seeing now. If the scat-for-brains hard religious types take over the GOP, the GOP fails to have any relevance, end of story.
The real madness is voting for someone because of their party affiliation. Scozzafava is liberal fiscally and socially. I don't care what calls herself, I care how she will vote. And from her past record, Obama would have had another yes vote for his extremely liberal agenda. She was pro cap & trade and also supported the big stimulus.
I'll vote for a moderate democrat before I'll vote for someone like McCain again.
|
Big_Mike
Member
|
Posted: Tue Nov 3rd, 2009 02:43 am |
|
Tsalagi1 wrote: AlterEgo wrote: lightoftruth wrote: This should be the first win in the "C" column. Are we watching the birth of a viable national third party???? No NO NO NO NO NO third party.
What we need is a conservative take over of the republican party. We need to exorcise the RINO's from the party, kick out the current leadership, force them to switch to the dem party. because that is where they belong. They have more in common with the dems than they do with us.
Sooo...we moderates must leave a Party because we're not idealogically pure? I am proud to follow in the footsteps of Lincoln, Theodore Roosevelt, and Eisenhower. We're to be ostracized because we believe in that governing our country is more important then falling in lock-step with the goose-stepping far right wing of the GOP?
Moderates don't want to be Democrats, they want to actually do what they are elected to...govern the entire country, and to do that, one must realize we are dealing with a Majority-pretty-much-everything Democratic stranglehold. Politics is the art of negotiation...and right now, we're in the minority..and the Democrats aren't evil demons, they are merely the opposition...and yes..some of their policies want to make me tear my hair out, but they represented 53% of the American public. We can't run away from them...we can't govern without them..so one must exercise our influence to temper the worst of what a Democratic Administration has in store..
Because one day that pendulum may swing back, and I'd rather not have Democrats trying to suckerpunch our legislative agenda when it's their turn to revert back to the minority.
But there wasn't much of a difference between the agenda of the Republicans during the last decade and those of the Democrats during the last, well, half of a century.
I understand what you're saying Tsalagi1, and I respect the ideas that you're putting forth, but I cannot, and will not, vote for a Republican Party that spends like liberals, that bypasses Constitutional freedoms, given to us by our various creators, as part of a massive government power grab, that creates massive new entitlements, and plays identity politics.
To me, personally, I see no difference between the Democrats and the current establishment Republicans. Neither stand for liberty and the freedom of the individual which turned this country into the greatest, most free, wealth producing machine in human history.
America, and Americans, are better than what the Two Main Parties have in mind for us.
But it's just my two cents, and I'mma Libertarian, so take it for what it's worth (probably not much).
|
tom_in_sac
Member
| Joined: | Wed Nov 7th, 2007 |
| Location: | Sacramento, CA |
| Posts: | 2027 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Tue Nov 3rd, 2009 03:44 am |
|
Lynne wrote: I'll vote for a moderate democrat before I'll vote for someone like McCain again.
You might rapidly find that to be your only choice, the way things are going.
I'm aware that Scozzafava was no conservative, and I disagree with her stance on tax-and-tirade and her union sympathies, but those aren't the problem here. I'm not voting in NY23, and neither are most of the teabaggers, neither is Paws-lenty and neither is Play-lin. Scozzafava comes from that district, which has a history of electing Rockefeller Republicans. I say let 'em, it's still leverage for the GOP. And it definitely does us no good if the Dem gets elected over Hoffman.
Fact is, if the Dem does win that district, the thundering stupidity of the interlopers and the incompetence of the GOP (as well as its lack of cohesion) will be largely to blame. The same will be true if thinking of the sort you appear to share leads into a prolonged dark age of radical Dem control.
|
Big_Mike
Member
|
Posted: Tue Nov 3rd, 2009 03:46 am |
|
tom_in_sac wrote: Lynne wrote: I'll vote for a moderate democrat before I'll vote for someone like McCain again.
You might rapidly find that to be your only choice, the way things are going.
I'm aware that Scozzafava was no conservative, and I disagree with her stance on tax-and-tirade and her union sympathies, but those aren't the problem here. I'm not voting in NY23, and neither are most of the teabaggers, neither is Paws-lenty and neither is Play-lin. Scozzafava comes from that district, which has a history of electing Rockefeller Republicans. I say let 'em, it's still leverage for the GOP. And it definitely does us no good if the Dem gets elected over Hoffman.
Fact is, if the Dem does win that district, the thundering stupidity of the interlopers and the incompetence of the GOP (as well as its lack of cohesion) will be largely to blame. The same will be true if thinking of the sort you appear to share leads into a prolonged dark age of radical Dem control.
And if Hoffman wins by a massive margin?
|
tom_in_sac
Member
| Joined: | Wed Nov 7th, 2007 |
| Location: | Sacramento, CA |
| Posts: | 2027 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Tue Nov 3rd, 2009 03:57 am |
|
Big_Mike wrote: And if Hoffman wins by a massive margin?
Wishful thinking. The opposite is more likely. I'll say Owens will win with 55%, give or take 3%. You heard it here first.
|
Slaol_121
Member
|
Posted: Tue Nov 3rd, 2009 04:10 am |
|
tom_in_sac wrote: Big_Mike wrote: You do realize that, with the benefit of hindsight, we now know that McCarthy was right?
No, I'm in possession of no such knowledge, and I'm reasonably, I say reasonably sure nobody is. He made some correct accusations, and he made a few misses that cost people, and in no circumstance should he or any other Senate POS be allowed that kind of kangaroo court. No true Libertarian would be able to stomach that.
Perhaps I don't agree with his methods, but McCarthy was right on target with his accusations.
For more information, run a google search for "Project Venona" or the "Venona Cables". You will be surprised at what you find.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Venona_project
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Americans_in_the_Venona_papers
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Soviet_agents_in_the_United_States
|
Big_Mike
Member
|
Posted: Tue Nov 3rd, 2009 04:10 am |
|
tom_in_sac wrote: Big_Mike wrote: And if Hoffman wins by a massive margin?
Wishful thinking. The opposite is more likely. I'll say Owens will win with 55%, give or take 3%. You heard it here first.
Even after he has failed to take such a margin in any of the polls, through out the race's lifespan? And even though some polls are showing Hoffman up by as much as five points?
Even Scozzafava saw the writing on the wall here... She dropped out to give the Democrat a chance at winning!
Don't be harsh with the Hoffman campaign's appeal to fed up Republicans, especially while the Establishment candidate is trying to scuttle the ship before she abandons it... The two party system is the problem, to them, it's is just a means to an end, not exactly what I would want representing me, were I to live there.
But hey, I guess I'm hearing it here, first. Owens, by a horse length. 
Libertarian 2010 (if you can)
Last edited on Tue Nov 3rd, 2009 04:12 am by Big_Mike
|
Super Cat
Member
| Joined: | Sat Jul 23rd, 2005 |
| Location: | Basilissa Gata, USA |
| Posts: | 27830 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Tue Nov 3rd, 2009 04:51 am |
|
If the scat-for-brains hard religious types take over the GOP, the GOP fails to have any relevance, end of story.
Yes, because we certainly showed them our relevance when we nominated McCain instead of Romney or Huckabee....
I'd take underdog status over sell-out any day. It's a loss either way, but at least one option allows me to retain my principles and ditch the moral ambiguity.
|
IronBob2004
Member
|
Posted: Tue Nov 3rd, 2009 05:46 am |
|
tom_in_sac wrote: I wouldn't have backed the Dem that way, but I can sure understand being sore about the idiot right pulling what they did on her. In fact, I would argue that elements of the GOP, currently controlling elements, first betrayed her.
Blah...blah...blah...insert more liberal crap...blah...blah...blah...good riddance to that liberal pig. The left can have her, she's garbage as well as those who support her.
|
IronBob2004
Member
|
Posted: Tue Nov 3rd, 2009 05:48 am |
|
tom_in_sac wrote: Big_Mike wrote: And if Hoffman wins by a massive margin?
Wishful thinking. The opposite is more likely. I'll say Owens will win with 55%, give or take 3%. You heard it here first.
GOOD! Then NY can continue taking it in the rear from the left. Now what are you going to say when he goes down in flames? Maybe you should move to NY and vote for him. It would be one less Californian on the government dole.
|
IronBob2004
Member
|
Posted: Tue Nov 3rd, 2009 05:52 am |
|
Tsalagi1 wrote:
Sooo...we moderates must leave a Party because we're not idealogically pure?
As you're far from a moderate, don't let the door hit you in the ass on the way out.
|
Tsalagi1
Member
|
Posted: Tue Nov 3rd, 2009 01:14 pm |
|
IronBob2004 wrote: Tsalagi1 wrote:
Sooo...we moderates must leave a Party because we're not idealogically pure?
As you're far from a moderate, don't let the door hit you in the ass on the way out.
You know..not once...in the entire time since you've come back here have you EVER defined for me your labeling process..as to why I'm not a Republican...I've certainly given you my positions on any number of subjects in line with Republican Philosophy, so please..please explain to me why I'm not a Republican?
I also noticed that you didn't answer the question...do moderates have to leave a Party because they're not idealogically pure?
Last edited on Tue Nov 3rd, 2009 01:15 pm by Tsalagi1
|
Tsalagi1
Member
|
Posted: Tue Nov 3rd, 2009 01:16 pm |
|
IronBob2004 wrote: tom_in_sac wrote: I wouldn't have backed the Dem that way, but I can sure understand being sore about the idiot right pulling what they did on her. In fact, I would argue that elements of the GOP, currently controlling elements, first betrayed her.
Blah...blah...blah...insert more liberal crap...blah...blah...blah...good riddance to that liberal pig. The left can have her, she's garbage as well as those who support her.
Ahh...again, calling someone a liberal...without supporting such a statement, tom's on more then once occassion listed his positions that fall in line with GOP philosophy, perhaps now you'll have to give reasoning for both him and me...
|
Tsalagi1
Member
|
Posted: Tue Nov 3rd, 2009 01:17 pm |
|
Big_Mike wrote: Tsalagi1 wrote: AlterEgo wrote: lightoftruth wrote: This should be the first win in the "C" column. Are we watching the birth of a viable national third party???? No NO NO NO NO NO third party.
What we need is a conservative take over of the republican party. We need to exorcise the RINO's from the party, kick out the current leadership, force them to switch to the dem party. because that is where they belong. They have more in common with the dems than they do with us.
Sooo...we moderates must leave a Party because we're not idealogically pure? I am proud to follow in the footsteps of Lincoln, Theodore Roosevelt, and Eisenhower. We're to be ostracized because we believe in that governing our country is more important then falling in lock-step with the goose-stepping far right wing of the GOP?
Moderates don't want to be Democrats, they want to actually do what they are elected to...govern the entire country, and to do that, one must realize we are dealing with a Majority-pretty-much-everything Democratic stranglehold. Politics is the art of negotiation...and right now, we're in the minority..and the Democrats aren't evil demons, they are merely the opposition...and yes..some of their policies want to make me tear my hair out, but they represented 53% of the American public. We can't run away from them...we can't govern without them..so one must exercise our influence to temper the worst of what a Democratic Administration has in store..
Because one day that pendulum may swing back, and I'd rather not have Democrats trying to suckerpunch our legislative agenda when it's their turn to revert back to the minority.
But there wasn't much of a difference between the agenda of the Republicans during the last decade and those of the Democrats during the last, well, half of a century.
I understand what you're saying Tsalagi1, and I respect the ideas that you're putting forth, but I cannot, and will not, vote for a Republican Party that spends like liberals, that bypasses Constitutional freedoms, given to us by our various creators, as part of a massive government power grab, that creates massive new entitlements, and plays identity politics.
To me, personally, I see no difference between the Democrats and the current establishment Republicans. Neither stand for liberty and the freedom of the individual which turned this country into the greatest, most free, wealth producing machine in human history.
America, and Americans, are better than what the Two Main Parties have in mind for us.
But it's just my two cents, and I'mma Libertarian, so take it for what it's worth (probably not much).
I agree with you actually...many of the current GOP politicos in office have strayed much from our core beliefs...and they should either be replaced..or an ass-kicking, I haven't figured out which might have more effect actually.
|
AlterEgo
Member
| Joined: | Sun Aug 23rd, 2009 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 166 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Wed Nov 4th, 2009 12:21 am |
|
Tsalagi1 wrote: AlterEgo wrote: lightoftruth wrote: This should be the first win in the "C" column. Are we watching the birth of a viable national third party???? No NO NO NO NO NO third party.
What we need is a conservative take over of the republican party. We need to exorcise the RINO's from the party, kick out the current leadership, force them to switch to the dem party. because that is where they belong. They have more in common with the dems than they do with us.
Sooo...we moderates must leave a Party because we're not idealogically pure? I am proud to follow in the footsteps of Lincoln, Theodore Roosevelt, and Eisenhower. We're to be ostracized because we believe in that governing our country is more important then falling in lock-step with the goose-stepping far right wing of the GOP?
Moderates don't want to be Democrats, they want to actually do what they are elected to...govern the entire country, and to do that, one must realize we are dealing with a Majority-pretty-much-everything Democratic stranglehold. Politics is the art of negotiation...and right now, we're in the minority..and the Democrats aren't evil demons, they are merely the opposition...and yes..some of their policies want to make me tear my hair out, but they represented 53% of the American public. We can't run away from them...we can't govern without them..so one must exercise our influence to temper the worst of what a Democratic Administration has in store..
Because one day that pendulum may swing back, and I'd rather not have Democrats trying to suckerpunch our legislative agenda when it's their turn to revert back to the minority.
Well "T", I never considered you a moderate. But if you moderates want to start a 3rd party, that's OK by me, just don't mess up the Republican party which is the only viable party in national politics that conservatives can support.
But I would like to ask you just what you are for, and what you believe in?
Are you pro-life?
Are you for personal responsibility?
Are you for limited government?
Are you for lower taxes?
Are you for limited government regulations?
Are you for Cap and Trade?
Are you for Obamacare?
Are you for a strong military?
Are you apologetist for America?
Are you for school vouchers and school choice?
Are you for amnesty for illegals?
Are you for bilingual education?
Are you for government controlling private business(eg. GM and Chrysler)?
Are you for government dictating salaries of business executives?
To be honest "T", more often than not, moderates vote for the democrat party. Moderates like to hold their fingers in the air and vote what they believe to be the most popular opinion at the time, just so they can get their 15 minutes of fame in the news.
Just what firm convictions do moderates have? If you are a moderate as you claimed in your response, what are your convictions? What are you willing to vote for every election? What will you fight and die for "T"?
My opinion of moderates is that they have no real convictions at all. They will change their opinions based on what they think is the most popular sentiment at that moment. They stand for nothing, and vote to enhance what they believe to be their own importance.
Why did DeDe Scazzafava, an alleged moderate republican in New York's 23rd district, endorse her former opponent, democrat Bill Owens, after she dropped out of the race? Even after being nominated by the NY republican party, and receiving the endorsement of Newt Gingrich.
Why do moderates Olympia Snow and Susan Collins of Maine vote as often for democrat legislation as they do against republican legislation? Why did moderate Arlen Spectre switch to the dem party from the republican party? Why did former moderate republican Jim Jeffords of Vermine switch parties in 2001 to become a dem?
Because that's what moderates do!
Because moderates have more in common with the dem party than they do with the republican party.
Finally, in regards to the last election. Since he was supposed to be the consummate republican moderate, willing to cross the isle and vote with dems(lack of principle), why did moderates vote for BHO instead of John McCain? And why did the ideal moderate republican Colin Powell endorse BHO instead of John McCain? Because that's what moderates do!
To be honest with you "T", and to answer your question, we don't need moderates. Moderates need to go where they belong, and that's is back to the dem party.
If moderates want to start a 3rd party, the "Moderate Party", great, please do, and doom yourselves to a lack of political power for eternity. But my statement still stands, "What we need is a conservative take over of the republican party. We need to exorcise the RINO's from the party, kick out the current leadership, force them to switch to the dem party. because that is where they belong. They have more in common with the dems than they do with us". We(conservative republicans) don't need a 3rd party, moderates do!
And if you want to be a moderate, lacking convictions or principles, then please start a 3rd party, but don't sit there and try to split the conservatives off of the republican party so moderates can ruin it further, and doom both the republican party and the split off party to political impotence indefinately.
Or maybe it's time you got off the fence and picked a side, conservative republican or a liberal democrat. Do you have the guts? What do you say?
|
tom_in_sac
Member
| Joined: | Wed Nov 7th, 2007 |
| Location: | Sacramento, CA |
| Posts: | 2027 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Wed Nov 4th, 2009 01:40 am |
|
IronBob2004 wrote: Then NY can continue taking it in the rear from the left.
You kiss your boyfriend with that mouth, Sugarlips?
Now what are you going to say when he goes down in flames?
By gum you do have a homo-erotic thing going, doncha?
If Owens loses (and I think he might), I digest my share of crow. And, I'll be as pleased to see Corzine out as I am to see McDonnell in and the GOP sweep Virginia state elections. It might be just enough of a message to the White House and Pelosi/Reid that they'll be even more careful about being too radical.
Sugarlips.
|
tom_in_sac
Member
| Joined: | Wed Nov 7th, 2007 |
| Location: | Sacramento, CA |
| Posts: | 2027 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Wed Nov 4th, 2009 01:43 am |
|
AlterEgo wrote: And if you want to be a moderate, lacking convictions or principles
Funny, substitute "Republican" for "moderate", and it's the exact same verbal incontinence as one hears from the self-righteous loonie left.
|
AlterEgo
Member
| Joined: | Sun Aug 23rd, 2009 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 166 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Wed Nov 4th, 2009 02:25 am |
|
tom_in_sac wrote: AlterEgo wrote: And if you want to be a moderate, lacking convictions or principles
Funny, substitute "Republican" for "moderate", and it's the exact same verbal incontinence as one hears from the self-righteous loonie left.
That's true, but only because moderates are running the party right now. If the mods were to leave, conservatives would come back to the party, and then there would be a counter view to the democrat lib position.
As it is right now, with the mods running the party, the republican party stands for the same thing the lib/dem party stands for. So there is no difference between the two?
|
AlterEgo
Member
| Joined: | Sun Aug 23rd, 2009 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 166 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Wed Nov 4th, 2009 02:37 am |
|
tom_in_sac wrote: Lynne wrote: I'll vote for a moderate democrat before I'll vote for someone like McCain again.
You might rapidly find that to be your only choice, the way things are going.
I'm aware that Scozzafava was no conservative, and I disagree with her stance on tax-and-tirade and her union sympathies, but those aren't the problem here. I'm not voting in NY23, and neither are most of the teabaggers, neither is Paws-lenty and neither is Play-lin. Scozzafava comes from that district, which has a history of electing Rockefeller Republicans. I say let 'em, it's still leverage for the GOP. And it definitely does us no good if the Dem gets elected over Hoffman.
Fact is, if the Dem does win that district, the thundering stupidity of the interlopers and the incompetence of the GOP (as well as its lack of cohesion) will be largely to blame. The same will be true if thinking of the sort you appear to share leads into a prolonged dark age of radical Dem control.
As of 9:30 pm eastern standard time, Doug Hoffman, Conservative Party, is the new representative from New York's 23rd district.
You were saying something about the incompetence and stupidity of the "interlopers" of the GOP?
I think you have a major claim on "thundering stupidity" T I S, we can review the conservatives "lack of cohesion" tomorrow when the party takes not only all the races in Virginia, but the governorship of NJ also.
It's not about republicanism, but conservatism.
|
tom_in_sac
Member
| Joined: | Wed Nov 7th, 2007 |
| Location: | Sacramento, CA |
| Posts: | 2027 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Wed Nov 4th, 2009 03:29 am |
|
AlterEgo wrote: I think you have a major claim on "thundering stupidity" T I S, we can review the conservatives "lack of cohesion" tomorrow when the party takes not only all the races in Virginia, but the governorship of NJ also.
Then I eat my share of crow. But thundering stupidity would be to think the three races in NY, NJ and VA were clear evidence of a right-wing resurgence in 2010. Oh wait, you do. Sorry.
The theological right will never shove the gays back in the closet, the chuch back in the schools, women back in the closet or abortions back in the alley, and I seriously think that's what some of you people mean to do. And it's worse than just stupid to think it possible, it's deranged.
It's not about republicanism, but conservatism.
The approach you people take, the inquisitional exorcism of what you label RINO, is anything but conservative. In point of fact, it's radicalism, as foaming-at-the-mouth nuts as an Earth Firster or a PeTA girl in a cage.
|
Current time is 07:24 pm | Page:   1 2 3   |
|
|
|
|
