Return of the Northeastern RINOs
Now that the tidal wave/tsunami/earthquake of Nov. 2 has finished rolling across the political landscape, we find ourselves with the opportunity to focus in on the aftermath, particularly in my favorite area, the Northeast. The Grand Old Party made some truly historic gains in seizing control of the House and picked up some impressive real estate in the Senate as well, but I can assure you that it didn’t happen entirely on backs of hard-core, “three legs of the stool” conservatives.
In February of this year, in this very space, I took a look ahead at what November might hold for Republicans in this part of the country and whether or not a significant rebound could take place for the GOP without letting go of that whole “purge the RINOs” mentality. With a couple of glaring exceptions, I didn’t do too badly at prognosticating.
On the Senate side, we assumed that the GOP would hang on to Judd Gregg’s old seat in New Hampshire, and Kelly Ayotte did so with a nearly two to one margin. Richard Blumenthal was probably never in any serious danger of losing in Connecticut, and as predicted he defeated Linda McMahon in double digits, despite her running a very spirited campaign and spending a hefty chunk of her considerable fortune. Other Senate seats, such as both in New York, were never really in play after the state party failed to coax any of the big ticket names off the bench.
The one shocker — and great news for Republicans — came in Pennsylvania, where I had predicted that the moderate swing voters would find Pat Toomey too conservative for their tastes, but he’s on his way to the upper chamber now. Of course, he may have been aided a bit by the turmoil surrounding Joe Sestak having to win a primary against Arlen Specter, who was a Republican, a Democrat, and for all I know had briefly filed on the Rent is Too Damn High Party line. Even so, Toomey squeaked out a 51-49 nail biter, telling me that Pennsylvania is still far more purple than either red or blue and will bear watching in the future.
The races in the House of Representatives were far more intriguing to me. As foretold, Republicans snapped up both of the seats in New Hampshire and did a fine job of retaking four spots in Pennsylvania. New York was the real story for me, though, and not just because I call the Empire State home. As I wrote here back in May of 2009, the herd of New York Republicans had been thinned down to a scant three seats out of our 29 districts, and African white rhinos were laughing at the GOP’s survival chances here. By October, New York Chairman Ed Cox was predicting that his party could claim as many as ten wins here to be seated in the 112th Congress. We wound up getting four. So what happened?
Well, New York is still a predominantly Democratic state, gerrymandered to keep it that way, and even with rising unemployment and a disastrous budget situation in Albany, wins by Republicans are still hard to come by. The four GOP takeovers all came in the upstate region, with candidates who will probably not fit the ideal mold for some textbook conservatives in other parts of the nation.
In the 19th District, Nan Hayworth managed to unseat Representative John Hall, but her conservative bona fides had been challenged by more than a few activists, particularly among the tea party. My friend Raquel Okyay made a point of highlighting some of these complaints, including the fact that the candidate’s husband is a physician who practices at facilities which provide, shall we say, “women’s services.” This doesn’t mean that Nan won’t be a great addition to the Republican caucus, but she might not be pleasing to the entire rank and file at a conservative convention.
In your rush to support RINO’s you failed to mention Mike Grimm in NY’s 13th district and Randy Altshuler in the 1st district. Both men are solid conservatives who knocked off liberal to moderate Democrat’s.
Thank you! I can understand why people forget Altschuler: his race wasn’t won on Nov 2nd, and I don’t even know if it’s decided yet. But Michael Grimm won big on election night, for keeps, and everyone forgets him. Why is that? And he is a conservative.
Amazing. You still do not get it. You have to throw out the faux-Republicans. If you don’t, the Dems use them for fig leaves… the illusion of bi-partisan support. They will sell you out. These are the enablers of the Dem machinations.
Ny-23 was lost, because the Conservative Party candidate, Hoffman, carried 6% of the vote. Yes, that means we got another Dem. It also means we did not get another turncoat Republican. No more sell-outs. No more Specters. No more Castles.
These are the kinds of folks people are tired of. They voter for big government every time. They are the reason for voter apathy, because there is no real difference between them. They are the ones, these so-called “Moderates”, who give the Republicans a bad name. They are the ones who make the Dems a viable option.
We have the House without the Democrats in Republican Clothes (DIRC’s). Now Republicans can get back to being actual Republicans again. You are with us 90+% of the time, or stay home.
Btw, this also happened in IN-2 and MO-1. Libertarian and Constitution Party carried enough of the vote to allow the Pub to lose.
RINOs, huh, yeah
What are they good for
Absolutely nothing
Say it again, y’all
The purge of Northeat RINOs will continue, of that you can be assured, although it might primarily be in the form of redistricting.
New York is slated to lose 2 seats, Massachusetts 1, New Jersey 1 and Pennyslvania 1. These seats will be lost to states in the south and west which are primarily controled by conservatives.
So long little RINO, your day in the sun is now ending and a new dawn beckons the faithful.
“If that didn’t teach you anything, there is little more to say. It’s time to welcome the RINOs back and open up the tent a bit. Ideologically purist attitudes may feel good, but they can leave everyone else paying a heavy price.”
As long as they vote for Conservative issues 100% of the time. It’s no good having a RINO in Congress if they’re going to let you down on key issues like taxes, reducing the budget deficit, ending bailouts, and repealing Obamacare. If they vote with the Democrats on any of those issues, then they’re useless to us and are no better than Democrats. An “R” after your name means little if you’re not willing to stand with the party on ALL of the major issues. Forget the “Big Tent.” I’d rather have a smaller tent with people I can count on to actually CHANGE things in Washington and hot have a lot of RINOs who will simply increase the size of an already bloated Federal Government.
Always remember this: When it counted, the supposedly “conservative” Blue Dog Democrats always voted with Pelosi and Reid. So who cares if they were “conservative?” They still helped Pelosi and Reid on the major votes (especially those supposedly “conservative” Democratic Senators like Blanche Lincoln and Ben Nelson). The time for “conpromising” with these people is over. The time for real change is NOW. If that means losing the RINOs, that’s fine with me.
I support all conservative issues except I’m open ended on abortion. Does that make me a faux conservative? Is a conservative Republican who is not ant-abortion a RINO?
No Jarmo,That Just makes you An Enemy of God,Enemy Of Human Life,An Enemy Of Human Liberty,An Enemy Of Life,Liberty,An Equal Justice,For All Humanity.ThatJust says In Anoyher time in histoty You Would Have Supported KING HEROD’S massive Genocide.In Order to Find,Joseph,And Mary So King Herod’s Version Of
No Jarmo;That Just Makes you An Enemy Of God,And An Advocate For Genocide,And Pedophilia;In Another Time In History.You Would Probably Not Have Found Nothing Wrong With King Herod’s,Reasoning To Murder Every First Born Child,To Control the population,And Any Possible threat,Of Losing his Rein,And Influence,Over the Populace.To seek out the mother of jesus christ,And Abort Jesus Because he might be a threat to his livelyhood,Agenda,Or Percieved Kingdom.”Deny Me And mine before man,And I’ll Deny you before my father in heaven;”What you do to the least of mine you do As well to me;No you are not A All for One,One for All,Life,Liberty,Opportunity,And Justice For All Constitutional Conservative.Your God Is the worship of money.A fiscal conservative Maybe,But,”For What Good Is It To Gain the World,To Only Lose your Soul.When life is all about you,And the love of money,And not protecting those who cannot defend themselves.When their is not A Higher Purpose,Than Self,Nor A Society of Expected Standards Of Personal Conduct.That is not A Society At All,That Is Hell on Earth;
Oh, goody. The illiterate whackjobs have found pjmedia.
My thinking is identical to Jarmo’s, but I always anticipate that as soon as the numbers grow solid enough suddenly there will be no more room in the tent for inconvenient me.
Incidentally, I’m in the NY 20th and I’m delighted with Chris Gibson’s election. (Big tenters please note that Victor Davis Hanson who helped Gibson on his book is also a Gibson supporter.)
“They are all still Republicans” is a meaningless statement. If they vote like democrats, what good is it having them in there? They’re worse than useless, because it’s the GOP, not the dems, who will take the blame for their statist votes.
An interesting point on the map: if your district crossed either the Alleghany or Appalachians, you are in a red district. Only at the Adirondacks does that disappear and that was the district where Scozy was run by the Republicans in the seat-filler election. NY-19 is interesting going from the Appalachians to the upper Pallisades along the Hudson which has a north-south red area ending, again, in the Adirondacks. Hinchey’s is the district that doesn’t cross any mountain group or go from one to another, and is gerrymandered to include the most liberal environs in that region. If NY loses seats due to the census, any seats, then it will become nearly impossible to make any coherent district via gerrymandering to keep ‘safe’ districts outside of NYC, Albany and WNY (which would probably see the N-S districts combine to continue that affiliation).
Note that this general trend continues down the Appalachians all the way into GA, SC and NC. This intersects the old ‘Bible Belt’ region in the mid-South in the eastern KY, western VA, Western NC, eastern TN region and heads west from there.
These are districts Hillary Clinton did well in against Obama, who had problems winning away from major cities in the rural and small town areas of the Nation. What came out via that view, this last election, is a cultural difference between those in rural, mountain and encompassed lowland districts between same. It will be interesting to see how the upper Adirondacks and Appalachia go the next two years, as there is more affiliation by culture save for the commuters to NYC, and even those may not be in the best of financial health by then.
“may only vote with you ¾ of the time”
That’s the key. There’s no single over-arching platform, but there are some general principles. If they are willing to side with individual liberty/property rights and fiscal conservatism, letting them in the tent is fine.
It’s the guy who votes “with you” 1/2 the time (or less) who needs to be handed his hat and shown the door.
Nobody’s going to be perfect, and you can’t please everyone. That said, even if you’re not “perfect,” you can still be “really good” when the chips are down.
Patrick gets the gold ring on this issue. Excellent set of parameters with which to judge RINOs and issue walking papers. Maybe now more true conservatives will be willing to jump into the political arena for the good of the country. Voters are a fickle bunch and need to be kept up to date on what’s going on in D.C., which is a nuisance but is necessary. Republicans have been remiss in doing that, especially Bush, what with his denying that anything was going on about a North American Union.
I still am not confident that the Republican Party leaders are all on board with the new political truths, but they will have to adapt – or go elsewhere.
By gawd we whumped thar asses good..
Now its time we show folks that yorin, me and us-ins can ack like hummin beins and be friends with all of them..
Just change half of the oil Bubba..
She stills runs like the day she rolled off the assembly line.
Check out the trunk on that hood ornament Dude..
Will it ever end?
did a fine job of retaking four spots in Pennsylvania.
Pa flipped 5 the 3rd, 7th, 8th, 10th and 11th and came very close to flipping the 4th & the 12th where the Dems ran very conservative (pro gun, pro life, anti-0Care)
and as predicted he defeated Linda McMahon in double digits,
I don’t know if I’d call Linda grassroots, tea-party gal-of-the-people
There is always a trade off. By “widening the tent” you give the Left the opportunity to place a “bipartisan” stamp on their agenda, which taints both parties and reinforces the idea that there is no difference between the two.
Jeff, you’re right about NY-13, but that is a basically conservative district where the election of a liberal/moderate is an anomaly. Staten Island votes as if it’s somewhere else in the country.
THe NE voted for Blumenthal-he lied about his service in Vietnam (RINO’s love them liars).
The NE voted for master-of-HUD-disaster Cuomo- another among the multitude of pro-abortion pro-gay marriage “stiffed-necked” Catholics who helped turn that one fine Church into a meaningless joke full of protected pedophiles, liars and creeps.
The NE voted for Schumer-he’ll die in office a petrified fossil however his greatest legacy will be known as the ‘suicidal-Jew’ who helped to bring about the destruction of Israel.
The NE voted for Rangel-corrupt, corrupt, corrupt, corrupt and a tax cheater.
And Chris Christie is cutting a whopping 1,200 state employee jobs in a obesely-bankrupted state- Christie cut 3 calories out of his 6000 calorie per day diet while RINOs praise how ‘fiscally’ swelte he appears.
At the end of the day though, the NE is screwed like California.
WHen the misery comes-and it will-Do not not ask for a bailout.
Thank the mighty hostitle media that Rove or Krauthammer had no idea Tea Party member Ron Johnson up in Michigan existed otherwise THe Ruling Class would have kept Russ Feingold in their royal seat of power.
Ann Marie Buerkle is poised to unseat “Dim” Dan Maffei in NY – 25.
The Northeast has too many smart people for much movement towards the dark side (aka Republican maliciousness and right wing idiotology). Even Scott Brown, who is not exactly a hard core right winger, fared extremely poor in the urban and academic areas of Massachusetts, and only won thanks to a terrible campaign by Coakley and support in the suburbs, which tend to be conservative. And it really is just the brain-atrophying suburbs, which nobody really talks about much in regards to the Northeast, that will vote Republican these days unless the Democratic opponent gets caught on video stomping on kittens or such.
Are liberals smarter?
Yeah BC
Our smartest President ever, Barack Hussein Obama, Magna Cum Laude or so we’re told from the “prestigious” Harvard Law school, pronounced corpsman as CORPSE MAN three times in a speech.
You guys are indeed brilliant…real legends.
I personally can’t have a serious political conversation with a conservative: there isn’t even a common ground for what actually constitutes “fact” as opposed to widely circulated but utterly BS rumors and utter nonsense, from health care to the economic crisis, from what happened prior to January 20th, 2009, to what these last election results really mean. I know this all-female research place that uses a number of young research assistants, and having lunch there is like having lunch with talking research papers: no assertion or opinion is expressed without citing authoritative sources to justify it, and random blog sites don’t quite make the cut. Contrast that to visiting some older friends out in the ‘burbs, in conservative territory, for a party or a BBQ with their conservative neighbors — it’s like “Okaaayyyy, well that’s some point you have there…ummm, I have to go now to put more mustard on my hot dog.”
I personally can’t have a serious political conversation with a conservative:
I think, BC, that’s mostly because conservatives have trouble taking you seriously.
“…authoritative sources…” Modern Liberals with Mustard Cracks?
“…and having lunch there is like…”
Wow BitChie, quite a gig. Did you major in bicycle seat sniffing in college too?
And this –
“I have to go now to put more mustard on my hot dog.”
A little clue for BitChie But Crack. This person was just being polite. “Put more mustard on my hot dog” is “conservative” “dark side” code talk for “strange that you have a vertical orifice on your shoulders that looks a lot like a Butt Crack, speaks in tongues and replicates burping with flatulence”.
Goldstein is a “dark(ie)” and he is inside you head eating a hotdog.
How smart are these liberals?
http://www.hootervillegazette.com/dumbdemocrats.html
Fortunately, the tsunami created by the Tea Parties swept enough fiscally conservative members in from other areas that will nullify most of votes from these Northeastern RINO’s when they run true to form and cast votes in favor of their Dem cousins for the sake of bipartisanship.
Oh goody goody, more stealth socialists.
Oh, it’s worse than you even know. I heard that the RINOs elected Tuesday are actually biogenetic plants made by the Democratic party to usurp the energy of the Tea Party by using money and other resources to water down the conservative agenda. Yep, al true. The liberal left is spending $200 million per day on this evil science. Stop them! Stop the libs and the RINOs from their $200 million per day madness! And don’t tell ME it’s not true.
Jazz, it bears mentioning that even before the primary, Raquel Okyay became one of Nan Hayworth’s most vocal backers.
Raquel was an initial backer of Dave McFadden, an honorable and dedicated gentleman who went on to lose the GOP convention vote by a mile (true to form, he immediately dropped his bid in a show of unity and shifted his proxies to Dr. Hayworth). Soon after the convention, and after in-depth conversations with Dr. Hayworth — which most definitely touched on the subject of her husband’s career as an OB/GYN — Raquel chose to throw her public support to her rather than the one remaining Republican in the primary race, Neil Di Carlo, who ran a single-issue pro-life campaign. Instead of subscribing to the ill-advised write-in campaign Di Carlo mounted as a spoiler in November, Raquel campaigned and voted for Hayworth. Is Raquel a RINO now?
Seriously, Jazz. There is such a thing as a pro-choice conservative, and Dr. (now Congresswoman-elect) Hayworth has shown herself to be every bit as staunch an anti-tax, anti-spending, small-government constitutionalist Republican as any mainstream pro-lifer. Playing the RINO card this cavalierly will only make us a rump party again.
CORRECTION: My apologies, Raquel did not actually vote for Hayworth, as she does not live in the 19th District. All else (including my point) stands.
I don’t equate being conservative to being Republican. Although if you’re going to find a conservative politician, he’s most likely to be a Republican. I’m a registered Independent (but a conservative), so I vote for Republicans.
But no more the lesser of 2 evils for me. I don’t feel that I’m throwing my vote away on a sure loser. I think that the future of conservatism means getting rid of the RINOs, however painful it may be to lose an election to a Democrat. Eventually, we can weed the RINOs out but it can be a slow process that many conservative voters are unwilling to accept.
Listening to Chris Wallace yesterday with Cantor and Ryan, I got the sense that the good old boy network is still in play. I can only hope that the newly elected conservative members will stand up to them. Time will tell.
“Know them by their fruit”The Difference Of True Constitutional Conservatives,And Selective Constitutionalist Republicans,Is;Social Issues.Selective Constitutionalist Like All Progressive Liberals,Are Anti-Christ,Anti-Human Life,Anti-Equality,And Anti- Human Liberty,By their very natures.To Continue Putting,Social Conservative Issues,On the Back Burner,Is To Contine Putting Liberal Social Issues On The Front Burner.The LIE Is;That Social Conservatives,Want to force Their Christian Beliefs,On Others.Nothing could be further from the truth.We Are Sick,And tired,Of Liberals Forcing their Godless,Lawless,Perverse,Immoral,Pedophile,And Genocidal,beliefs,And Acts,On Others Against their Will,And Beliefs.Especially Brainwashing,And Forcing their Sic-o-phant,Pedophile,Rape,Murderous,Economic,physical,And,Mental.Satanic Indoctrination,And Death Camps,Against The Rights,And Beliefs,Of Each Individual,Every Parent,And Their Children.At the Cost,And Suffering of not only Whatever Moral Fabric Left,In this Once;”One nation under God,Indivisible,With Liberty,And Justice For ALL”But If God Isn’t the Ultimate Atthority,Over Our Lives,Liberties,Rights,Then Who Among You,Has That Atthority,Or Right?Who Among you,Believe You Have the Right to give That Atthority to another?But Ignoring Social Conservative Issues.Is to say there is no need for standards,In Society.Which Is the Number One Reason,America Is Spirialing Out of control on every other Issue.”AS THE FAMILY GOES SO GOES THE NATION”And The Only Arbitor Of Those Standards Qualified Is;The God Of Our Founding Principals.Jimmy Joe/”The Liarfryer”
I think Jimmy Joe has proven that if you put an infinite number of monkeys with typewriters in a room for an infinite amount of time, they will eventually produce an unhinged right-wing rant.
Way to go Jimmy Joe!
P.S. If I’m wrong about the monkey/infinity experiment, and you actually wrote the post above, you might find this enlightening:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comma
Sorry Aron,Its not me that believes you Are Decendendents,Of Pondscum,And Monkeys,That Would be You.
There are dozens of political issues to consider, but we have a two-party system. Two. Sorry, but you don’t get to make a list of all the issues you care about and then insist that every member of your party toe every line. That’s a recipe for keeping as much power in the hands of the other party as possible.
Pretend otherwise and enjoy your ideological purity while the other side controls the government, or accept reality and work for as much as you can get.
I don’t think there is such a thing as a real RINO. It’s just an insult, like “Uncle Tom,” or “Oreo,” to throw at someone you want to boot out of the group.
As long as someone will agree that the urgent need is to cut spending, reduce entitlements and reduce the size of government, he’s preferable to a Democrat, even a Blue Dog. What I don’t want is a “maverick,” somebody who will desert you when you need his vote, because he wants to show how much more he is than a mere partisan, or he’s “reaching out,” or he’s just an attention hog.
I believe in social conservatism because I think it’s the way to keep a healthy society, based on independence and self-government. Freedom is a by-product of those two things. Big government is its enemy. Libertarianism is a legal argument, not a philosophy for making society better.
If Republicans are in the majority, I don’t care if some are RINOs. When Dems are the majority, RINOs are useless, but it’s a good thing to remember that in nature, elephants often kill rhinos.
There is this generalization about our opposition to RINO’s. We are not demanding 100%.
Consider, though, McCain’s record is very clear. He votes Conservative only 80% of the time, unless it is an election year, in which case he votes Conservative 90% of the time. (American Conservative Union)
At 80%, what does he support and oppose?
Opposed the Bush tax cuts, because the “people in his wife’s income bracket do not need these cuts”. Class-warfare adherent.
Opposed drilling in ANWR.
Opposes free speech via campaign-finance reform. This favors Dems, because, in order to get heard, you have to join some special-interest group. The biog money in campaigns now comes from their like, such as unions.
Supports amnesty. Although he denies it, he supported allowing them to stay… after paying a fine, etc….
Global-Warming Believer, although now he acts as if he never did believe. But he was a supporter of some kind of Cap-n-trade Nonsense.
Does he oppose spending? Yes. He opposes abortion, too. He is strong on foreign affairs. This part is great, but he supports the Dems in the politically game-changing issues: Campaign finance, immigration, environmentalism.
That’s what 80% gets you. Yuck!
Missed mentioning one thing on CFR- the media then becomes the biggest single influence on a campaign-witness Obama in 2008 to see the consequences of that. Without CFR, Obama doesnt become president. Some advocacy group would have nailed him over ACORN,Ayers , Wright etc.
Hot Air, National Review and Powerline are all in danger of being deleted from my list of daily blog reads. To paraphrase another commenter here:
YOU JUST DON’T GET IT, DO YOU?
RINOs are the reason we have Obama in the White House. RINOs are the reason the borders are wide open. RINOs are the reason NPR is still being funded by taxpayers. RINOs are the reason we started to get out of control spending and deficits again. RINOs running the New York Republican leadership put Rick Lazio up to run for governor and couldn’t put up a fight against Gillibrand, Schumer or a host of other terrible Liberals. RINOs are ever for reaching across the aisle. RINOS WILL LEAD US TO A SLOW DEATH AS OPPOSED TO LIBERALS WHO LEAD US TO A FAST ONE. EITHER CASE IS UNACCEPTABLE.
No retreat.
No compromise.
No surrender.
Not now.
Not ever.
You are CORRECT. RINOS are no different than the commie libs, just a slower death. I prefer to live, so therefore I have no respect for RINOS or for there fellow travelers, the commie dems.
Ah, but what is the difference on “no retreat, no compromise, no surrender, not now, not ever for Repubs and Dems who have the exact same philosophy. Has anyone ever met anyone who has lived their lives without some compromise? Many times you have to give a little to get a lot. I don’t like this rigid idealology and Rinos are not the problem. I guess its like the five year old who won’t play unless it is his way.
Well stated!
Now the Dems are stuck with ideological purity, as a minority. It works both ways.
NY had TWO Republicans out of 27, not three. It was the Tea Party anti-abortion candidates who failed, not least by giving the Dems the opening to make ‘preserving abortion rights’ a major GOTV issue.
For the author to ignore what Mike Grimm accomplished in NY13 with very low turnout, and to also ignore how the NY GOP failed to make the most of strong challenges to Hinchey and McCarthy (NY4), and even Turner against Weiner in NY9 (only 80,000 voters bothered to vote), is a troubling sign that no one really understands the potential for fiscal conservative Republicans everywhere in New York State except Nadler, Rangel, and the four gerrymandered minority CDs.
Someone should ask why more than half the registered voters in NYC’s 13 CDs do not bother to vote.
CORRECTION: NY GOP had TWO out of 29. I was already thinking about 2012 when it will be 27. May Hinchey’s CD be one that is lost.
and fingers crossed that Altschuler keeps his win in NY1 to make it 9 out of 29.
Ok, so we’re talking about people with us “3/4 of the time”?
Checking ACU ratings… Murkowski of AK (70) Shelby of AL (75)? Where is this “northeast” you’re referring to? Or who is this “us” they’re voting with 3/4 of the time?
Oh, you meant Castle. trending down in the ACU, past 5 years average a 36.8 and 3 of those years were 20, 28, and 28…
So we could predict maybe 25% of the time for the future when he’s not up for reelection every other year… 25% is the same as 3/4 of the time?
Want to try again? I realize the math can be tricky so maybe use a calculator, or get some assistance with the fractions.
I try for a target 5 year running average that beat a fair coin toss as a low target. I really prefer candidates who attack the other side more than they inflict friendly-fire damage.
If you prefer people who hurt you more than help you… well masochism is becoming mainstream again I guess.
Well, that was well said
Of Uteri and Privacy
Leftist pro-abortionists, an admitted redundancy, are all verklempt over last Tuesday’s election results.
It seems that along with the coming influx of fiscal conservatives in the new Republican House of Representatives in January, America will be blessed with far too many of that “ilk” who are social conservatives as well, meaning that most take deep personal, moral, and national offense at the liberal sacrament of abortion, the all-too-popular practice of murdering the pre-born.
Lori Ziganto addresses that issue in her article, “Pro-Aborts Screech Stay Out Of My Uterus! Unless They Want To Brag About Abortions On Twitter” which appears on Monday’s pages of IOwntheWorld.com.
Ms. Ziganto focuses on the Constitution’s alleged provision for a woman’s “right to privacy,” a right non-existent in our Constitution which was discovered and incorporated into that document by the United States Supreme Court in 1973 with its decision on Roe v. Wade.
There was, of course, precedent for that incorporation, that re-writing of the Constitution, in another SCOTUS decision in 1857 when Chief Justice Roger B. Taney’s court determined that Dred Scott and all African Americans “had no rights which the white man was bound to respect; and that the negro might justly and lawfully be reduced to slavery for his benefit. He was bought and sold and treated as an ordinary article of merchandise and traffic, whenever profit could be made by it.”
In brief, SCOTUS had made grievous errors in the past and therefore was entitled to make another one in 1973 and so-called feminists rejoiced in their new-found right to privacy.
Apparently, 37 years later, they feel so strongly in their right to privacy that many of them are now proudly advertising their abortions by twittering on Twitter.com. . .
(Read more at http://www.genelalor.com/blog1/?p=2570)
C+Ping this from HA as well, since I think it is vitally important.
We had a RINO in Charlie Baker get skunked because he ran a stupidly feeble campaign and spent most of his time attacking the spoiler Tim Cahill.
Resultingly Massachusetts Republicans only made modest gains in the state legislature and none at the congressional level.
Sorry Jazz, Northeastern RINOs still suck because they don’t seem capable of recognizing the real threats even as they sit in an incumbent office, and they are content to drag everyone else down-ticket with them in their failure to capture the imagination. This is what happens when you run people who are ostensibly fiscally conservative but who cannot articulate a social message to counter Mr. Smiles (Deval Patrick).
Democrats never avoid the social issues Jazz. They always back abortion and they always back gay marriage and they always back every other form of societal cancer and debauchery that ensures a more government-dependent future. Why don’t you ever ask them to change?
Well,
I’ll tell you, there are more and more of us who would rather have an honest enemy face us than a treacherous friend supposedly at our sides.
Thought that about McCain, and thing that about a lot of the RINO’s
Bubba-Trust me-McShame ran as the BIGGEST CONSERVATIVE for the Senate this year. He supported SB1070. He supported(on the stump) the entire Tea Party agenda(which is why JD Heyworth didnt beat him in the primary). Knowing McShame as I do, He will return to his RINO ways if convienent.
Seems the author ALSO chooses to conviently forget that Doug Hoffman and his 9200 votes costed Bill Doheny in NY23. Owens(again) ran as a “conservative” even though he voted the entire dim marxist agenda. Isaid before it will take the Tea Party candidates 2-3 election cycles AND taking back the media and acadmia before there influence will truly begin to manifest itself.
RINO SHMINO!!
Like it or not these people are the Republicans. They might not fit “your definition” of what a Republican should be, but they are not all RINOS just casue you say so. They are Republicans!!
The Real RINOS, the REAL Republicans In Name Only, are the Libertarians and most of the Tea People that go around calling everyone they dislike the RINOS.
So will the REAL RINOS please stand up (or sit down or shut) or something because this is getting ridiculous. We have RINOS (Libertarians) saying that Republicans aren’t Republicans and that they (the Libertarians) are the only Real Republicans when in fact they are the REAL RINOS.
I would rather have a Rino in place who votes with Republicans most of the time than a liberal Democrat who will NEVER vote with Republicans. Besides, unlike a conservative or Tea Party candidate, a Rino has a much better chance of getting elected in a Blue or Purple State. Which is just plain common sense.
That was the HUGE mistake that some Republicans and Independents, but mostly Tea Partiers made in Delaware, Nevada, California and Connecticut; incredibly stupid blunders that prevented Republicans from regaining control of the U.S. Senate. Democrat Party Leaders must have been elated when they saw the incredibly poor judgment that was exercised by Tea Partiers in those four states, and in Alaska, too.
Check Castle’s previous 5 years of ACU ratings.
2009 – 56, 2008 – 28, 2007 – 20, 2006 – 52, 2005 – 28. Average for past 5 years? 36.8.
So he voted conservative 36.8% for the past 5 years; and this is “most of the time”?
He was trending pretty rapidly downward; and really had a good chance if he continued the trend to hit an average of 25-30 in short order. Is 25% also “most of the time”?
Source for Castle’s (or any candidate’s) ratings:
http://www.votesmart.org/issue_rating_category.php?can_id=26792&type=category&category=17&go.x=14&go.y=9
And what was your problem with Alaska? If only we’d let Senator Murkowski win uncontested we’d have Senator Murkowski instead of… Senator Murkowski. Can you explain the difference?
But yes, Castle was great. if we had 100 of him in the Senate we’d have 100 seats, and 37 votes for the conservative side of things; so not quite enough to even manage a filibuster against a liberal bill, much less a majority of votes.
Why is this a good thing again? Are we trying to get liberal votes passed?