Who’s Really Getting Purged From the GOP? Conservatives or Moderates?
Over and over again we hear that conservatives want to purge moderates from the Republican Party — all the members of the Republican Party, in every state and district, have to be as conservative as Rush Limbaugh or else they have to go!
How true is it?
A few people say we need to “get rid of all the RINOs” in the GOP. Occasionally a high-profile conservative will even join them, usually after some horrific betrayal on a crucial issue — but it’s far from typical. The vast majority of conservatives understand that in certain states and districts they’re not going to get their ideal candidate and they accept it. So is it true that conservatives want to purge moderates from the GOP?
Actually, the exact opposite is closer to the truth.
Let’s talk about the party’s high-profile “moderates,” the Republicans who love to run to liberal news outlets. They’re the ones incessantly complaining about Rush Limbaugh, Glenn Beck, and Sarah Palin, when they’re not trashing the Republican Party and simultaneously bemoaning the fact that they’re not appreciated by conservatives.
Well, here’s a dose of political reality 101. Unlike the Democratic Party, which is more roughly split between moderates and liberals, the Republican Party is mostly conservative. Conservatives provide most of the money, energy, intellectual firepower, and votes for the party.
That’s not to say moderates aren’t wanted or are unimportant — that’s not the case — but it should be acknowledged that their contributions to the GOP are relatively small compared to those of conservatives in every area.
Yet what do we often hear from self-proclaimed representatives of moderates? They say that the GOP needs to forget about fiscal conservatism or shove social conservatives to the side. Is that not every bit as dumb — and then some — as saying the GOP needs to purge moderates from its ranks? What armies of voters will the GOP be able to tap into to replace the social and fiscal conservatives?
Moreover, on issues of grave importance to conservatives — like illegal immigration and balancing the budget — GOP moderates insist on forcing the party to pursue policies that are unpopular with the general public and anathema to the base. There’s usually not even an attempt made to meet conservatives halfway, perhaps by pushing security first on illegal immigration or freezing spending. Instead, the message to conservatives on these core issues over the past few years has been: “Like it or lump it; we don’t care. Who else are you going to vote for?”
Then there’s the presidential nomination process. The first few contests are open primaries, which means that moderate candidates have a big edge over conservatives. Why should conservatives be asked to put up with a system that puts the candidates who best represent them at a tremendous disadvantage?
The same question could be asked of the Republican National Committee, the National Republican Senatorial Committee, and the National Republican Congressional Committee. How can these organizations build huge war chests on the backs of conservatives, and then turn around and sabotage conservative candidates in primaries without a second thought?
Conservatives have not said: “We’re a conservative party; we want the Republican Party to support conservatives over moderates in primaries.” Instead, we’ve had conservatives candidates cut off at the knees, again and again, in order to help moderates — some of whom have since repaid the favor by changing parties or endorsing liberal Democrats over conservatives.
Yes, the GOP needs both conservatives and moderates to win elections. Moreover, neither conservatives nor moderates can reasonably expect to get what they want all of the time. Additionally, since the GOP has far less seats than the Democrats in D.C., we need to bring in more moderates — not drive them out of power. However, the best way to draw in more independents is not to be a spineless, poll-driven party of men without chests in an attempt to appeal to moderates, but to be a principled party that stands up for honest conservative governance.
We need to stand up for fiscal conservatism, traditional values, law and order, and a strong defense. If we fight corruption and craft conservative free market solutions to the problems the American people are facing today, the GOP can create a coalition of conservatives and moderates that the Democrats can’t match.
Sorry, John. I agree with much of what you are trying to say here, I think…but, it seems a bit muddled to me. Perhaps it’s only me, but your argument seemed to roam around trying to find a place to pitch its tent, and never quite could find anything but a very rocky foundation.
BOTH parties need the GDI’s. It’s that simple. If only they would give up their need to create “steam” for their engines, by pushing nothing but cultural hot buttons while throwing cold water on calm reflection and reason.
Do you like it here at PJM? I sure do. I like Roger Simon, Victor Davis Hanson, Ron Radosh, Glenn Reynolds, Richard Fernandez, Phyllis Chesler. Immensely.
Do want to know something…I don’t see a hardcore conservative in the bunch…again, maybe that’s just me.
Do you like Jonah Goldberg, Charles Krauthammer, Dennis Prager or George Will?
How about Megan McCardle?
If the opinions of these folks…any of them, is too “soft” for the “party”…if they constitute Republicans in name ONLY…(RINO’S)…then maybe, just maybe…they aren’t “Republicans” to all the folks who say they are such in “name only”.
I mean, what IS a RINO, if not a non-Republican posing as one? Isn’t that what the name signifies?
At least the Democrats call the more centered of their party Blue Dog Democrats. They would rather vote for an old blue dog than a Republican, I think is the intent of the appellation.
See the difference. In the Democratic party, the packaging of those who are more center than toward the far reaches of the political spectrum, would rather vote for a dog than the opponent.
In the Republican party, if you are more toward the center…you aren’t even a Republican…only one using the name, as a fraud more or less.
This is part of the larger problem overall. Democrats are much better at framing issues, packaging ideas and selling them. They understand that words have meaning and that putting those words into reflexive usage in society imprints on hearts and minds.
“Mainstream” media. Pro-choice. EVERY scandal ends in “gate”, so Watergate lives on forever as THE seminal scandal, and every scandal after it is tied to a REPUBLICAN scandal.
In contrast, the Republicans go about using the oppositions words, phrases and concepts without giving a moment’s thought to the imprint on society and culture. They ALLOW the people who would be natural followers to be called “teabaggers”…instead of launching an assault on the government’s adoption of a slur against their followers. The people are left to fend for themselves.
And anyone who doesn’t toe the “party line” on ALL issues…is subject to being called a Republican in “name only”. Not very inviting. Not very safe waters for anyone who may see rampant, unchecked, unfettered leftism as the gravest danger to this nation….but is a GDI at heart.
Charles Krauthammer says that American politics is fought between the 40′s. I think he is a brilliant man and a spectacular thinker and writer. But, I think that the people are overwhelmingly between the 40′s and the two party operatives are under opposing goalposts.
The center moves each election because NEITHER party represents the notions, ideals, concepts and worldview of the overwhelming majority of folks who reside between the 40′s. If the Republicans would ever wake up to the key issues, words mean something, packaging ideas is a skill you need to have, and if you call people Republicans in name only…you won’t get them consistently…they would win every national election, in my opinion.
But hey…what do I know? I’m a GDI.
“Additionally, since the GOP has far less seats than the Democrats in D.C., we need to bring in more moderates”
You have the cart in front of the horse.
The reason Democrats have more seats is that to many moderates were put forth for by the RNC. Voters are more sophisticated today then they were a few decades ago. RINO’s don’t fool them anymore. When the choice is between a Democrat and a democrat that claims to be a Republican, then anyone rational will choose the Democrat. The democrat claiming to be a Republican is lying, which means the Democrat claiming to be a Democrat is at least starting off with the truth.
The real issue in Washington is corruption. BOTH sides are crooks. The real reason the RNC doesn’t want conservatives running for office is that a true conservative isn’t going to play their little ‘Let’s loot the taxpayers’ game. A real conservative will upset the apple cart. The RNC doesn’t want that any more then the DNC does.
I couldn’t agree more. Sitting around checking whether every candidate has every boxed checked on the “conservative” score card is killing this country. We need to look at the major issues of limited government and the associated limited spending issue first because unless we fix that problem all the others are useless. We need to control the government and government spending, then we can tackle all those other wonderful issues. Failing to control the government will cause economic collapse that will overshadow any other issue.
Personally, I am more libertarian and pragmatic on the social issues, but first and foremost I am frugal and strict government power limiter. I don’t meet all the “conservative” score card requirements, but that doesn’t mean that I won’t support a frugal candidate from the Republican party. I guarantee I will oppose a big government/big government spender from either party. If the Republican party wants to take back power in 2010 then run frugal candidates that will put an end to runaway government spending and takeovers. We should allow failure and reward success, vice bailing out failures and taxing away success. One final word is don’t just talk the talk to get elected as you have in the past because that is what caused so many to turn against the Republican party to begin with and the reason for the Tea Party movement. If you pull a bait and switch again like 1994 then the Republican party will cease to be relevant in 2012 and beyond because the anger now will be nothing compared to another big government betrayal by the Republicans 2010.
Isn’t if finally time the country realized that it’s not electing a representative government anymore. And hasn’t for decades?
Liberty is hard. This land is an epidemic of useless government education, mindless political correctness, media corruption, the entitlement mentality, and pop entertainment.
Did we really think we’d remain free acting like that? RINO’s abound because the establishment is corrupt, and thereby hellbent on its own influence and power.
Boy, is he right. (sorry, correct). Every time I get a phony “survey” from the Republican Senatorial Committee (or whatever), I answer the survey and send it back sans donation. Give us a conservative candidate Stupid Party. We gotta save what freedom we got left (sorry, remaining) and take back what we stupidly gave away. Can’t let Obama-ayers, Pelosi, Reid, et al make off with any more. We know what/who to vote against. Give us someone to vote for….and, you’ll get our money again.
The Republicans step away from their core values at their own peril. People are sick and tired of all the spending, all the dirty tricks and the blatant corruption. “Conservative” does not necessarily mean “far right”. People are looking for some leadership and some common sense in these people who are supposed to be our public servants and it is not what we are getting. The Democrats have hurt themselves and I would be willing to bet it will take a few years for the voters to forget just how badly they were duped!
John Deere Tractor Company once said in one of their commercials, “We stand behind everything we make. Except the manure spreaders!”
Taking a lesson from that are we advocating that the GOP adopt a modified version of the Deere commercial?
If the horses are fed good quality oats we will even stand behind the manure spreaders because our hearts are more interested in the final crop than worrying about the little things that smell along the way.
Sounds silly? This article is the same old tired, boring and worn out stuff that kept the GOP out of power for 50+ years. Stop trying to pick the fly crap out of the pepper. Figure out what you want, then go after the Democrats with a vengeance, manure spreaders and all until you get it.
The alternative is seven (7) more years of staring into Obama’s upturned nostrils while he talks and talks and talks and talks and talks and ……..
If conservatives are the majority in the Republican Party but instead of voting in primaries prefer staying at home and watching base-ball then they should shut up when a RINO becomes their candidate.
No, it’s not about moderates versus conservatives — it’s about conservatives versus ultra-right conservatives. There is nothing traditionally conservative about being anti-science, anti-Ivy League (especially considering Yale and Dartmouth’s traditional political stances), and anti-journalism (the best right wing sites are inferior as reliable news sources to Huffington, and Huffington is not a reliable source either), systematizing smear and disinformation campaigns (and don’t claim that this is in response to Democratic behavior — the Republicans run unified military operations compared to individual Democrats who might at worse use their aunt’s “Handicap Parking” placard), and just being plain maliciously mean and trying to scare people with ludicrous BS (all prominent right wing pundits, basically, from William “PNAC” Kristol to Ann Coulter to Glenn Beck to Michelle Malkin to Rush Limbaugh….)
I know some *real* conservatives: they a patriotic and genuinely love their country, and only want fiscal responsibility, people to work for their money, a strong military, and as small a government as you can have that gets the basic, needed necessities done. Yes, most of them turn to Drudge (yuck) for their news, don’t have a clue about what Iraq was all about or how the financial meltdown really happened (hint — it wasn’t the Community Reinvestment Act, for one), and are not nearly critical enough in assessing what passes for news these days. They are, though, all decent people who would try to listen to and understand a different viewpoint, and would never, ever resort to nasty cheap shots using “info” originating from right wing blog sites.
any entire article without one example? not saying I don’t agree with much of what was said, but its always nice to back up with a few examples.
It’s admirable to find a Party-of-Granter comin’ clean about PoG priorities for once:
“[Wingnutettes and wingnuts] provide most of the MONEY, energy, intellectual firepower, and votes”
On the other hand, is that sentence true?
From well off the reservation over here, it looks as if the KSM, Kiddie Selfservative Movemement (®), is a good deal less well-to-do than the Regular Republicaniacs, a.k.a. R.I.N.O.’s, country-clubbers, lace-curtain Irish, &c. &c..
There exists the occasional hereditary godzillionaire, no doubt, eaten up by a crank passion for the Foetus Cult, or for Hyperzionism, or for armin’ everybody except maybe goldfish and Democratics to the gills. But so what? The woods are full–have always been full-of flat-out traitors to economic TopPercenterdom, starting from M. le Baron Georges de Soros and working downwards to next June’s St. Grottlesex grads. It is great fun to watch the overprivileged muck about at random in the political sandbox, but they have never yet been a threat to the Republic. Or even to the economic conspiracy at the hard core of the PoG.
Forever cherished by us cultivated despisers will be POTESSA P. Nixon, semi-official concubine to Richard XXXVII, her of the ever-immortal “respectable Republican cloth coat” and Checkers the Magic Spaniel.[*] Like M. de Soros, that little lady and the even littler fourlegged Friend of Family Values made for grand entertainment. Without actually matterin’ politically even as much as M. de Soros marginally matters.
It now appears that wombschoolin’ and downdumbin’ have prevailed to the point of serious (?) schemers for Party ’n’ Ideology wantin’ to give the old Grant-Hoover-Böhner-von Kantor racket a new look, deliberately settin’ up, in effect, to be the Party of Checkers.
This is not necessarily a bad idea, but to avoid disappointment requires more care and attention to detail than Kiddie Selfservatives are likely to possess. The good folks who have (almost) always run the Party of Grant for ends of their own must be reassured that they will continue to do so, that all the ‘tea party’ folderol is only so much hogwash and window-dressin’, and certainly does not mean that the PoG genuinely proposes to dispense with their invaluable contributions[2] to the Party of Big Management.
REALLY tradin’ in Rupert Lord Murdoch (_et al._) for the Nymph of Wasilla would be dumber than human language has means to express. That would be suicide for the PoG, and, though naturally one is all for it, one does not expect to have the pleasure of seeing it.
Pretendin’ to do so might work out well enough, short term, especially if the neocomrades are lucky enough to have an Adlai Stevenson to kick around. In the long run, however, the scheme is probably not viable: sooner or later Lord Mammon’s minions are bound to want to run Party-’n’-Ideology things — and be *seen* to run P&I things. They, after all, are the only credentialled Big Managers that Grantites and Hoovervillains and Atwateroids possess. Murdoch and Scrooge and Warbucks and company may not insist on seein’ their names and their influence ballyhooed by Foxcuckooland every single day of the week, but it would be madness to expect them to behave like religionizin’ ascetics of the former Christojudaeandom.[3]
Healthy days.
____
[1] http://tinyurl.com/yzwhf6l
[2] Cash, check, and credit-card contributions only, please! “Energy, intellectual firepower, and votes” need not apply.
[3] Prof. Veblen thought that the self-lustin’ of economic TopPercenters could be satiated with no more than “conspicuous consumption.” That notion was absurd when he thought of it, and it is even absurder a century later. Plainly Scrooge and Warbucks and Murdoch are not merely out for brandy and cigars! They never were.
Havin’ invested all sorts of time and money in acquirin’ an M.B.A. from the H*rv*rd Victory School (or some lesser seminary of Mammon), the current degeneration of Big Managers very naturally wants to do some serious big-managin’. (Wouldn’t you?)
Their trainin’ puts credentialled neocomrades somewhat at odds with the official system of their holy Homeland, a system encumbered with obsolete institutions like the Legislative and Judiciary branches that are not merely useless, but positively bizarre, from an up-to-date big-managerial perspective. So far as I know, the only Party-of-Granter who has given serious attention to this incongruity was Neocomrade Viceroy R. B. Cheney, who unfortunately cannot be said to have addressed it entirely successfully. ’Tis at least as bizarre as anythin’ that Mr. Madison and the Gang of ’87 ever came up with to attempt to establish an omniexecutivitarian neorégime centered in the Office of the Vice President, of all places.
But Father Zeus knows best.
The “moderate” (ie, left-liberal) Republicans have no fundamental disagreement philosophically with their Democrat brethern; they attended the same elite schools and share the same secular social/cultural values that are prevalent in the political New Class. Their goal is to control and suppress the conservative base of the party, and “keep them in their place”.
Sorry to say, odds are, they’ll succeed.
Very true that we need to solidify under the Republican heading. The Tea Party movement is far more strong than the Drive-by Media are showing us. The major issue is runaway government spending and taxation. If you look at the folk in drive over country as well as throughout blue states they are looking at the Obamanation administration and the bought and paid for Congress and its preposterous spending bills and saying “Enough is too much”! Small and medium size business throughout America are not going to add to overhead by adding staff or even growing their present business by spending when they look at what Obama is saying about more taxes, more regulation, more command and control by government, more forced purchase of medical insurance and less liberty. Why should they? Better to wait it out, keep a low profile, and hope the sanity of a new Republican controlled Congress is elected in ’10.
Nearly all the recent GOP moderates have turned out to be closet liberals. I can’t remember one of them who stood the conservative ground on any important issue. We’ve extended the olive branch and compromised with “progressives”, hoping that the act would be repaid in the future.
Well, the joke’s on us now. Our compromises brought us the destructive policies that threaten our country’s future. The leftists who infest Washington haven’t compromised with us, but have dug in their heels and shut us out of the national debate.
Moderates seemingly have no foundation upon which to build a cohesive political opinion. They are neither fish nor fowl.
It’s becoming plain that reasoned conservative thoughts and ideas can sway these undecided political animals, whose opinions change with the wind. Common sense and strength are the order of the day. “Progressivism” has been shown as the failure that it is, and is far from progress.
Take away the Northeastern and LeftCoast Rino.s and they will have to settle for idealism, which is great, until they continually lose election after election. Hey, Libertarian and Tbag types don’t mind. They have their ideals and their pride.But just screamin jibberish about the left this…and the left that gets old in a hurry when that is all you know about how the world works….And too many Republican I happen to know, want to win and are willing to compromise their purist values and speak to some of the more important issues we face in a realistic and intelligent manner. Look at Arnie, Rudy and Chuck Hagel… Big business money is great, but it is not always good to ignore reality. The Republicans that recognize that are the ones that enjoy winning elections in places other than near west and the south. If ya want to win, ya gotta learn to like something other than chicken….as they say…And good for those that do !!
Remember Rush’s “Great Moderates in History” book… you know, the book that’s never been written because THEY DON”T EXIST!?!??!!?
A moderate, in my view, is someone who is too flexible on his principles. Fiscal conservatism is great, but then those poor people need to be given things and we need to tax people to get the things to give the other people and presto, no more fiscal conservatism.
Freedom of speech is great, but we don’t want any oppressed groups to feel bad, so some speech needs to be limited just cuz we’re decent people, and presto, no more First Amendment.
Gun ownership is a mark of freedom, that’s great, but surely some common sense gun laws are needed just to protect people from the yee haw gun totin’ knucklehead neonazis that are so numerous and dangerous in real life, right? So, presto creep-o, no more second amendment.
Moderates are liberals becoming more liberal, or ‘men of principle’ whose principles fly away like migrating butterflies when reality presses them just a bit.
Sounds like somebody is sour that nobody is backing Kennedy in Massachusetts
The DNC and RNC are both controlled by self-interested Power Seekers. The grassroots (between the 40 yard lines)need to replace all the Power Seekers, starting at the precint level, with men and women who put America FIRST.
“At least the Democrats call the more centered of their party Blue Dog Democrats. They would rather vote for an old blue dog than a Republican, I think is the intent of the appellation.”
The correct phrase is that “..Democrats would rather vote for a YELLOW dog than a Republican…”. “Blue Dog” Democrats are supposedly more moderate, and will occasionally vote along with Republicans. The “Blue Dog” imagery comes from George Rodrigue’s iconic “Blue Dog” art, and because several of the more powerful conservative Democrats hailed from Louisiana.
Peculiar set of comments, incoherent and discursive. Is this typical for this site? Anyway, the real issue is simple:
Conservatives need to vote for the best candidate available, and need to work to get more conservative candidates in position to win the party’s nomination. If the idiot girls from Maine are the best we can expect that benighted state to elect, then we have to accept that– It isn’t about “purging” anybody, until we have a decent, viable alternative–but at the same time it is a travesty that South Carolina, which can elect Jim Demint, can’t rid itself of the despicable Lindsay Graham. Now there is a purge needing to happen.
Meanwhile there are bigger fish to fry. There is no excuse, eg, for letting a Tom Harkin from reddish Iowa continue to foul the country’s nest.
How can we make any headway when the Chairman of the RNC is an incompetent harlequin?
He went on national TV and agree with the black host that the GOP convention looked like a Nazi rally in Hitler’s Germany
After that, he famously declared that many White Republicans are scared of him because he is black
Lately, more and more Republicans are demanding that he shut his mouth, and they’re using words like “fool” to describe him.
And then we have Sarah Palin, who everyone thinks this woman would make a good conservative president.
She’s in favor of trillion dollar bailouts when a Republican president proposes them, but when Obama does it, it’s “reckless spending.”
She favors amnesty for illegal aliens, she just doesn’t want it called amnesty, and she certainly never made a big deal about immigration when she was running for VP. Clearly, doing something about immigration isn’t close to being a priority with her. Her priority is not being called a R-A-C-I-S-T.
And just like George Bush, she’s an unabashed Israel Firster, who has absolutely no qualms about getting us involved in no-win wars on behalf of Israel. She shares Bush’s “end times” views.
We have no real hard ass conservative leaders. Immigration is a huge issue that an overwhelming majority of the people want to have it radically solved, but no conservative wants to touch it.
This article is exhibit A in “why we need a 3rd party”. I think both major parties get in trouble when they press too hard for their own ideologies at the expense of the rights of the individual.
It is indeed a shame that the Libertarian party has such a bad reputation (somewhat deserved) as deconstructionists and anarchists. Sovereignty of the individual has been compromised so badly by both parties in so many ways and the Libertarian party is the only one that seeks to protect against this. But it is always the gun rights, fiat money and no government extremists that get the press.
I personally believe that the Democrats have caused far more destruction of liberty and wealth in our country these days than have the Republicans over the last few decades. However, the Republicans created the recent Dem ascendency by allowing themselves to be dominated by factions obsessed with re-introducing religion into government, escalating the war on drugs, using military action against terrorism, unwilling to see that the abortion question is not so cut and dried, etc. Neither party since Reagan has been interested in personal liberty or fiscally responsibility in any way. Those things just get in the way of ideologically based activism.
I listen to Rush Limbaugh and I am glad he is out there exposing Democratic abuses and talking about our losses of freedoms. However, he can’t go more than ten minutes without bringing up Religion, abortion or law and order. And this will always turn off a large segment of the population who feel that their freedom is at risk with Republicans – perhaps in ways that are scarier than those of the Democrats currently on display.
bc:”anti-science”
one word for you comrade:copehagen.
next.
“I know some *real* conservatives”
“real” ones huh?personally..like in the flesh and blood world?doubtful.
they would have either deprogramed you by now or driven you insane.
“the best right wing sites are inferior as reliable news sources to Huffington, ”
that’s a whopper.
i read hotair daily for my rightwingnuttery(sorry PJM)and i also read everyday…huffpro,dkos,du,firedoglake,and online affairs magazine.
okay…i don’t read the last one everyday,it just sucks too badly.
malkin’s site wins hands down and only an idiot or someone who doesn’t read them would come to such a conclusion.
in your case i would guess the latter.
Maybe. But for myself – I’m done voting for big government ‘republicans’.
The Republican party is a private club that’s only goal is to obtain and keep power. The party does not, has not and never will have the best interests of the voters at heart. What the Republican voters and what the party want are two different things. This is why the party keeps pushing for the moderates to get elected and the people revolt for a more conservative person that better represents their core values. This is why so many are not giving money to the party but directly to candidates.
There really is no such thing as a “moderate voter” at least not the way they are portrayed in politics. I think the only “moderates” are really career politicians who want the enjoy the wealth and power of liberal big government after being elected to office by small-government conservatives.
What there are in the American electorate are conservatives (fiscally and socially conservative), libertarians (fiscally conservative, socially agnostic), populists (fiscally liberal and socially wishy-washy) and liberals (insane). Conservatives are the largest group, but aren’t big enough to make a majority by themselves. They need to find allies in either the Libertarians or the Populists. All the confusion about “moderates” comes from poorly thought-out attempts at doing that.
The most sensible thing to do is build a coalition with libertarians. That’s hard for some conservatives to accept because of the disagreements on social issues, but those dissagreements aren’t necessarily as deep as some people (e.g. Democrats) want you to believe. Most libertarians aren’t socially liberal, in fact they generally share the same bedrock ideas on morality as conserviates. They’re just really unconfortable with government involvement because they think government is inherently corrupting. Libertarians have no problem with private sector enforcement of good morality. No laws against homosexuality, for instance, but also no law saying you can’t fire someone for beeing gay.
Granted, it’s not an easy disagreement to resolve, but it is doable. I believe a great deal of the social rot we’ve experienced has come from liberals using government money and power to undermine traditional values. An alliance between conservatives and libertarians that was committed to a fiscally conservative program of shrinking government and returning moral judgement to the private sector would be a wonderful thing. It would rather quickly fix a bunch of fiscal issues, halt the slide on social issues, and create an environment where progress could be made on restoring cultural values over time (and it will take time – we’re not going to undo two generations of liberal rot overnight).
The secret to a successful and lasting political coalition is not moderating your views. It’s finding the things where you and your allies agree and committing whole-heartidly to those, while moving things you disagree on out of the political arena. Politics doesn’t have to be the end-all be-all of American life. It wasn’t that way before, liberals have msde it so. Conservatives don’t need to fall for that trap.
Most of the time when Republicans label someone a RINO, its because they really are one. Lets look at one as a for instance. Arlen Specter for years claimed to be a Republican. He often campaigned as a conservative. Yet when one looks at his voting record, all we have is, liberal votes. Arlen finally went back to the party he started out belonging to years ago.
Conservative values belong to BOTH parties, not just Republicans. At issue is how we deal with issues & not is it a conservative or a liberal response. One thing is certain. When conservatives are asked to moderate or compromise on their positions, it almost always means, they are expected to move considerably to the left. Lately, many seem to want us to believe the center in America is decidedly left of where Republicans or conservatives stand on any issue. That is far from the truth. The nation is more conservative than liberal. Once again, its how we deal with issues. The media keep selling the nation on liberal ideals. That campaign has been going on for decades now. They seem to think if they keep repeating their mantra, the public will eventually buy into it. That may work w/ kids in school & even college kids whose minds are being shaped by liberal college professors, but with real life Americans, they eventually get sick of some clown telling them how to think & telling them they are (insert any nasty name here if you disagree w/ any liberal position), and their bias’ & prejudices are the real problem. If name calling solved problems, liberal would have a lock of solutions. Obviously, they do not.
On immigration… we are told we are prejudiced & we are racists because we want our nations borders secured. Come on now folks, get real. Its not racist to want us to be secure. Illegal aliens coming into America ARE taking jobs Americans would do. Worse is greedy employers are taking advantage of them & will keep doing so even if we pass ‘another’ amnesty. Once its passed another crop of illegal aliens will be encourage in & they will become the new down trodden. All past amnesties produced exactly this result. If we secured the borders & properly processed those who want to come in legally, we could make sure greedy employers could not pay slave labor rates. Plus we could seriously dent the business of the illegal drug trade, the prostitution trade, the criminal element & we might… might, just stop a terrorist or two or three. Its about securing the nation so we can do a better job at properly processing immigrants & try to truly curtail the illegal drug trade.
BTW… why are we continuing to bring in 140,000 legal immigrants every month when millions of American citizens are unemployed? Most legally coming in are not in specialty fields. In fact many are produce pickers. We could eliminate all produce pickers, pay about $8.00 a month more for all of our produce, and farm workers would no longer be exploited by greedy employers who pay them significantly less than farm workers who come in legally on the farm worker permit system that farm owners do not want to use since they would have to abide by the law!
Moderate republican is the same thing as reverse discrimination. It is an oxymoron.
I double dog dare challenge any of you to dispute that in anyway. You do so at your own disembowelment of political correctness thinking peril.
The foundation of stone upon which reality is based is calling something by its proper name.
Let the tag alongs fall by the wayside. The basic core values upon which AMERICA was founded will be more than enough. Let no liberal or traitor tell you otherwise as it is a lie.
Any one.
ANY ONE.
Deny that truth.
dh
Wait a minute! The GOP really began with the influence of Alexander Hamilton, then Henry Clay long before Abraham Lincoln and Teddy Roosevelt, people that many still admire. Peole like Nelson Rockefeller, Tom Dewey up to John McCain and Lindsay Graham still reflect the beliefs of all these men as it relates to managing the nation. They are the elite few who should rule the many of us, at least in their own minds. Ronald Reagan and Barry Goldwater were departures from the norm, so those of us who supported them are not the mainstream of the GOP. The 19th century libertarian Democrats best reflect the views of most conservatives today, even though the modern Democrat favors Rousseau and Marx instead of Jefferson and Madison, as cited in The Changing Face of Democrats in claysamerica.com. So, conservatives wishing to remain in the GOP need to purge the old Republicans out of the mix first. claysamerica.com
Vote and support the candidate or give to trusted PAC’s like SarahPAC.
You cannot believe the utter frustration in Watertown (New York, NY-23) when the GOP threw away almost a million dollars supporting Scozzafava.
We took her out of the election because that district has no business sending a leftist like Dede to Congress. We also probably eliminated Newt from contention for the POTUS in 2012.
Sorry Newt, we don’t trust you anymore. Epic fail.
Brown is running in MA and is the 41st person to hold the filibuster together. It is an unusual circumstance.
Do not give to the RNC, NRSC, or the NRCC. They cannot be trusted.
A gallon of sewage with a drop of pure water is still sewage. A gallon of pure water with a drop of sewage, however, is 100% sewage. “Moderates” don’t represent the pure water in this analogy – in either party.
And if you are a conservative, become a Precinct Executive:
http://www.nationalprecinctalliance.org/index-old.htm
Do it. Make saving the GOP, the country your hobby for the rest of your lives.
We can do this.
Limbaugh is a con artist, who pretends to be on your side but in reality only cares about one thing, which is getting even more immensely rich than he already is. That is perfectly fine for a business man.
Now, he knows there are tens of millions of angry white people out there, and his job is to make sure the money continues to roll in by keeping them riled up without ever offering any real solutions, or even hinting at the root of the real problems facing this country, which is the massive immigration from third world countries and the consequently balkanization of America. He’s nothing but a cheerleader for the spineless GOP.
29. No, Adams and Hamilton were Federalists. While it’s true that the Federalists were the ancestors of today’s Republican Party, the Republican Party came into being because people rejected the elitism and cowardice of the Whigs, choosing instead to form their own anti-slavery (read: socially conservative) party. If we have to form a new American Conservative Party, consisting of Libertarians, Constitutionalists and disaffected Republicans, so be it.
Personally, I`m tired of the term `RINO`. I prefer calling them Red Dog Republicans.
The kind of muddled nonsense in this article has got to stop. It is not based on reality, and it is not helping to stop the Democrats. To me, the article is whiny for no good reason.
Just who is John Hawkins writing about when he writes about “moderate Republicans”?
Michael Steele? He just had a book published about first principles that are conservative principles.
John McCain? Consider McCain’s voting record in 2009. He voted AGAINST every Obama bailout bill (and even voted against the second release of TARP monies when Bush was still President in late 2008). McCain voted AGAINST every Obama spending bill, denouncing Obama’s multi-trillion dollar deficit spending as “generational theft.” McCain voted AGAINST the confirmations of tax cheat Geithner, radical pro-abortion advocate Sibellius, leftist attorney Kagan and transnational advocate Koh to their respective positions in the Obama Administration. McCain voted AGAINST the confirmation of Sotomayer to the U.S. Supreme Court. McCain voted AGAINST ObamaCare and was attacked by the New York Times for throwing bombs on the subject. McCain has announced that he will vote AGAINST this year’s cap and trade bill. The foregoing is as conservative a voting record as you could ask for.
Snowe and Collins from Maine? They have not squashed any conservative Maine challengers.
The Republican Party needs to be, as Newt Gringrich puts it, the alternative party that provides conservative solutions. Articles like this one don’t do that.
If you analyze the ACU scores of so-called “moderates” (Lugar, Murkowski, Bennett, McCain, Voinovich, Snowe and Collins), you’ll discover that the longer they are in office, the more liberal they become.
Newt Gingrich is another con artist who teamed up with Al Sharpton to declare “education” “the civil rights issue of the 21st century.” In other words, Newt Gingrich thinks the trillion or so we’ve already blown trying to make black and brown kids as smart as white ones is just a drop in the bucket, and now we’ve got to get serious.
Oh, and Newt Gingrich is also on “a mission” from Obama:
“On a mission from the president, these special envoys for education reform know their roles and play them well: swoop into a successful school, watch kids and teachers hard at work, ask encouraging questions, maybe slip in a partisan jab at one another for the television cameras and then marvel at how amazing it is that they have teamed up on what they call the civil rights issue of the 21st century.
The Rev. Al Sharpton, liberal Democrat, and former House speaker Newt Gingrich, conservative Republican, did all that here Friday, as they have in several other cities since September. President Obama met with them at the White House in May and urged them to go on tour to promote school innovation.”
Don’t you love it when “conservative” Republicans team up with Al Sharpton and Barack Obama?
Well, there’s good news, because Gingrich is also helping Michael Steele come up with a Contract With America # 2
The only real solution is SMALL GOVERNMENT. That way – doesn’t matter why kind of crooks they are – their damage is limited.
Lily has it right and while we are at it why not force term limits on these career criminals. I know that we have an opportunity every two years to throw the criminals out, but term limits would protect us from the inch deep voters. There is a vast populous middle that votes like it is high school all over again.
If you want to build a team for long term success, unite the conservatives and the libertarians. This will starve the beast which will shrink the government and eventually taxes. I am aware that there has to be a certain amount of taxes, but wasteful government spending needs to end and when it does lower taxes need to follow.
This is not a hard concept and the Republican hero of all time Reagan understood this and opened his arms to anyone that saw the answer in smaller government. That is the big tent he was promoting, not some crazy liberal anything goes coalition. I said it before, I will vote for a conservative if they are a true conservative, but I will vote against every party hack that promotes big government and big government spending.
I don’t think some delicate debate about conservatives versus moderates is very germane at the moment, given that we’re dealing with an assault on the Constitution and the principles underlying the representative Republic.
The current crowd in “power” in the national government is far more appreciative of Marxist ideas of redistribution than it is of principles underlying our Constitution, which Constitution (at least the Bill of Rights) has been declared a litany of “negative” liberties by this POTUS. He has “positive” liberties in mind, such as a national government becoming the source of all things to all men and women. (not to mention children)
John McCain was sometimes described as the press’ RINO candidate. Even though McCain seemed to have some trouble understanding that the United States has these little things called laws governing illegal immigration and he was always bragging about reaching across the aisle (to idiots ?), there would be no question as to for whom I could vote in November 2008.
This is a really comples issue and we can study what Nacy Pelosi did to see that. She ran a bunch of folks to the right of the Republicans in districts which probably are centrist in nature. Then she governed from the left and hit all of these folks over the head. We need to be concerned right now about overwhelming numbers and in some places that means accepting centrist candidates. I have seen way wtoo many conservatives put their heads where the sun does not shine and in faact they are more responsible for liberal out of control government than the liberals are ba ecasue they do not understnad the importance of control. Let us look at the last Republican Congress. WE had terrible leaders at the end, we failed to continue to field ELECTAB LE candidates, WE protected folks we should not have and the list goes on. We need to recognize that not all districts will elect someone who is conservative in the way the some are. WE need to fit the candidate to the district and we need someone electable. we need continuing grooming of electable candidate so that our elected ones feel the breath on their neck and finally, we do have enough power as conservatives to control the National Party. That is something we should have taught GWB. Now in the position of national chairman we need someone who follows conservative principle but understands that all districts are different and we must tailor our candidates accordning with the exception of one thing, we need a freedom and liberty brigade. That might offend some conservatives but the police power of the state is not for the use of enforcing anyones religous or social beliefs. EVeryone should be welcome to make their own choices but the accept responsibility for their choices. Conservative who favor a heavy handed use of the police power of the state to mold people in their image are no better than the progressives, they are all elitists bent on restoring the feudal system. So I gues I am saying, numbers matter and we had better wake up to that. We have no leaders right now, where are they?
Exactly right.
The most clear-eyed assessment of what’s really been going on I’ve seen. Especially liked the line, “…the party’s high-profile “moderates,” the Republicans who love to run to liberal news outlets.”
That’s why you hear about the “woe of the RINO”. That’s the only time you’ll hear the New York Times sticking up for a Republican: when conservative voters–who get fed up with being sold out and being told ‘sit down, shut up and let us legislate what’s good for you’–revolt against a RINO representative. Mostly in deep-red states.
As I said, excellent piece.
Dude, this is the exact opposite of what conservatism is: “A real conservative will upset the apple cart.” by John “birther” Samford. Maybe you don’t know this but the motto of conservatism is “Standing athwart history shouting stop” Real conservatism is about using the power of the state to prevent other people from upsetting the apple cart. America is not conservative. America is about creating a political-cultural environment within which individuals are free to pursue their own ends, apple cart be damned. Conservatism is unAmerican and anyone who had an accurate understanding of history would know this.
If conservatives had enough power they would dominate the Republican Party, and they don’t. Since the 60s conservatives have only managed to win 2 Republican Party nominations (Goldwater&Reagan) and only one of them got into the White House. Conservatives think they are more significant than they are. But they are nothing more than a temporary blip on the political radar. Americans don’t want a conservative government. What they want is a New Deal/Great Society government that is fiscally responsible and strong on national defense…and they oppose the radical Left’s anti-Americanism. So called “moderates” whether they are Republicans, Democrats or independents represent America’s center of gravity. This center of gravity has a long history: it is the Whig/Republican ideology of an active government and an entrepreneurial market economy updated for the industrial age. Our challenge today is to update it for the 21st century. And conservatism and progressivism are obstacles to this effort. The sooner people realize this the better off we’ll all be.
It’s really pretty simple.
My polling place is about a 19-mile[1] round trip (see URL below).
People want me to get into my care in Nebraska in November, drive to the polling place to vote for them and then drive back. Time, gasoline, wear-and-tear on these old bones.
In order to get me to do that, they have to present to me a credible platform that suits my requirements. I don’t much care what party, or even if party.
What are my requirements? Pretty much all right there in the Federalist Papers.
http://maps.google.com/maps?f=d&source=s_d&saddr=3910+S+225th+Terrace,+Elkhorn,+NE+68022&daddr=6100+Twin+Rivers+Circle,+Valley+NE+to:3910+S+225th+Terrace,+Elkhorn,+NE+68022&geocode=FcD_dAIdVxJD-imh5ejDWvqThzGYan-J5mTQyQ%3BFfBddgIdCBhC-in3_ntog-OThzEREtr4pwdAtw%3B&hl=en&mra=ls&sll=41.299798,-96.31422&sspn=0.025212,0.055747&ie=UTF8&t=h&z=13
[1] I’ve been lying! It is only 19 miles round trip, not 24 as I have been saying.. Mea Culpa.
39. Lily: The solution is small govt.
Yes: all the evasions above are an
attempt to deny the fact that the
coming economic Hard Times will
force us to adopt that solution,
rendering political parties and
elections moot, and demonstrating
that praying to God or Gaia will
not keep modern society running,
though extremist followers of
both will try to bring it down.
To Frank Grimes: you would guess wrong because you obviously don’t know too much: your “one word” answer of “Copenhagen” might as well be a neon blue balloon floating above your head with “Clueless” and a downward pointing arrow printed on it.
Being a global warming denier (or however you want to phrase it) is being anti-science, no if’s or but’s, and worse still if you actually think that it’s been all some sort of hoax. The overall scientific community has already moved on to the “what can we do to fix it” stage and find all the fuss about the CRU hack to be much ado about nothing by science illiterate people and their idiot media enablers.
Hot Air is an obvious watering hole for huffin ‘n’ puffin right wing goofballs, but the Weekly Standard is even worse. At least with Hot Air, you know you are dealing with just a roomful of fact-fuzzy, opinionated hot heads. With the Weekly Standard, though, you have a pretense of seriousness, especially with Bill Kristol being a talk show regular, but pretty much *everything* they publish is rubbish (no rhyme intended).
BC,
What are you talking about? Global warming and cooling come from one source, the sun. All the BS about man-made CO2 is just a bunch of hot air because if you look at the numbers you will clearly see that man-made CO2 emissions is smoke and mirrors. It only makes up less than half of one percent of CO2, but nut-bags want to ruin the world economy trying to put an end to man-made CO2 when it would take a thousand years and every last bit of man-made CO2 to make a single degree change. This is the junk science you are preaching, so lets look to the sun and it’s normal cycles to see the truth that it grows hotter at times and cooler at others, plain and simple. I do think that we should limit pollution, but I think we should do it in a manner that is reasoned and not just to provide the government with another cash cow to put them in an even stronger position to rule every aspect of our lives. This is just another symptom of the crazies running the funny farm, create a crisis only they can solve because they know so much better than the stupid unwashed masses. I am sick and tired of the elitist telling me what is best for me, my family and my planet. If we had reasoned debates with facts actually in hand then I would be the first to sign up, but sitting around blowing hot air and making backroom deals is complete BS and you may keep it and its results.
Hey BC,
2035
Ha, ha, ha, ha, …
Frank Grimes exposed your soft underbelly, didn’t he?
to the one known as…bc:
“you would guess wrong because you obviously don’t know too much”
obviously.
“might as well be a neon blue balloon floating above your head with “Clueless” and a downward pointing arrow printed on it.”
clueless…THAT’S the word i was looking for!thanks.
“illiterate people and their idiot media enablers.”
wow.your side is being thoroughly trounced by stupid people who can’t read.
i have to honest with you bc…the only reason i do not have loathing and contempt for you being such a useful idiot(who enables these malthusian chicken littles’)is because you have LOST the debate.
there will be no cap and trade and no more braying control freaks for a LONG time.
plus,the liberal arm of the gop and democrat party is going down in flames.
HUZZAH!
please don’t get too depressed about it…and if you get real sad,just come back here and post some more BS.
i will leave you with one of my favorite c.s. lewis quotes..
“Of all tyrannies, a tyranny sincerely exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive. It would be better to live under robber barons than under omnipotent moral busybodies. The robber baron’s cruelty may sometimes sleep, his cupidity may at some point be satiated; but those who torment us for our own good will torment us without end for they do so with the approval of their own conscience. ”
cheers,frank.
As long as the Republican Party continues to delude itself into thinking that a “bigger tent” is automatically a stronger tent, it will continue to bounce between temporary power – due to reactions to the sprints in otherwise creeping socialism – and ignominy.
The bottom line is this: conservatives need to stop reacting, and become pro-active forces for the rule of law as defined in the U.S. Constitution. Instead of being ‘purged’, wannabe leftists in the party who want to ‘re-imagine’ the Constitution or ignore its clear specification of a limited government need to be educated.
The best way to do that is to leverage what’s happening right now in the Tea Party movement – whether they realize it or not (sadly, many don’t), constitutional conservatism is at the heart of that movement. In a very united way the members of this movement are finally responding to the abuses and usurpations pursued by the federal government over the past 70+ years – the era of socialism’s rise in America.
This constitutional conservative sense that is driving the Tea Party movement – a sense common to ALL the PJM personalities listed by cfbleachers in #1 – is what brought national attention and support to Scott Brown’s campaign, directly contradicting and ultimately correcting the feckless attitude of the GOP. In effect, the leaderless GOP had to be taught what the People want. In the end, there’s no other way a Republic can work.
Jefferson accurately predicted, “If a nation expects to be ignorant and free, in a state of civilization, it expects what never was and never will be.” We are reaping the whirlwind sown by having ignored that truth. And as Bill Whittle noted some time back, if we’re ever to reverse the decline of our Republic, conservatives must follow Reagan’s example, “we can and must gently educate as well as campaign”.
The adversarial approach – reacting – to the long march of socialism isn’t working. A People trained by their government to believe in entitlement rather than individual liberty/responsibility is destined for the yoke and, ultimately, the fate the Soviet Union. If we’re ever to avoid that fate, conservatives had best set about coming up with pro-active ways to educate the People regarding what the Constitution means.
Social change is inevitable. Rational conservatives welcome this idea, they don’t arbitrarily resist it, as the left likes to pretend. The Founders also recognized this, which is WHY they made the Constitution amendable. But they also set down rules specifying HOW that amendment process was to work. This country desperately needs to re-learn what that process is and also re-familiarize itself with the strictly limited powers the federal government actually has. That should start with the Republican Party. It hasn’t.
Why? Because the members of the Republican Party themselves need to be educated. PJM could be a big part of that. It pains me to see that it isn’t. So-called “Conservatism 2.0” is a dismal failure in that regard. I challenge you folks to do better.
You’re not reading what’s really happening out there. I live in a very large metropolitan area and am quite involved with a very well organized tea party group. The tea parties have taken over the Republican Party here by occupying all new Pricinct Committeemen seats. We outnumber RINO PC’s now by 3-to-1. There was a vote just last weekend to appoint leadership positions within the party. The 5 vetted extremely conservative candidates were elected to those powerful party positions in a landslide. Additionally, party by-laws were amended and reflect much more conservative ideals. This undercurrent is occurring across the land and is equivalent to the talk radio revolution that won the day in ’94 which was ignored by the MSM. This will be the silent wave that sweeps congress in 2010. But keep it down…don’t want Chris Matthews catchin on! Keep fighting America, we’re winning!
Very strange article? Very strange responses, too?
Either you believe in the rule of law, or you don’t. Politics has nothing to do with it. The US Constitution is the rule of law. Today politicians locally, county wide, state wide and federally spend their time undermining the rule of law, that was written to control them. I blame national political party’s with un-American agendas for this disturbing conduct. Representing the people is an easy job if you stay within the parameters of actually “representing them” instead of “controlling them” with countless useless politically correct laws, rules, regulations, etc.
The “Tea Party” movement is the largest peaceful movement in our countries history. It is not political by nature. It only operates within the political environment. I think what this formally silent majority is saying is “give me my constitution, give me common sense, repeal these politically correct chains that are hanging from our necks”. To coin a phrase “Give me liberty, or give me death”. The political party’s had better listen.
One would think that the Declaration of Independence and US Constitution were written in some cryptic lost language that only a elitist statist lawyer could explain their meanings. It’s long past for being nice. If these political party’s continue on their current paths they will soon become expendable.
Here’s what’s wrong with labeling among Conservatives. I am as conservative as it gets with regards to fiscal and security issues. I am pro-choice for the most part. To a great many pundits, I am a moderate, therefore. That’s a bogus description, but the MSM loves to promote “Conservative” == “pro-life.”
Why? Because most Americans are pro-choice at least to some extent. It is just one more way that they try to marginalize Conservatives as religious whackos.
IMHO, there is a problem in language that even Conservatives perpetuate. The religious, social conservative block is in many cases not at all conservative. I’m referring to the religious right who are single-issue voters (abortion) for the most part. To me, the issue has nothing to do with Liberal or Conservative. The day Conservatives decide to stop catering to the religion-motivated social activists is the day that we can emerge from the political wilderness!
Being an adult is contrary to the desires for personal agrandizment that modivates so many office seekers. It is not just in the primaries that the conservative faces attack. Newt Gingrich rose to the top of the Republican Party and organized the most successful political operation of the twentieth century but he still was attacked by Nancy Johnson, supposidly a Republican, who wanted to run her campaigns on delivering pork back home to a few special interests. She entertained eighty-six totaly false charges against Newt as chairman of the house ethics committee.
The corrupt will always try to tear down the conservative.
I am a fiscal AND a social/religious conservative. Given my “druthers”, I would put an amendment on the Constitution that defines human life as beginning with the moment of conception. However, I know that my beliefs will never be enacted into law.
The reality of the situation in modern America is that all of our choices in the ballot box will a choice between the hard Left and someone who doesn’t totally represent our views. In Illinois, I will vote for the candidate for US Senate, on Feb.2, who is the most conservative, in my view. And then, next November, I will hold my nose and vote for Mark Kirk in spite of his 56% lifetime ACU rating.
Why would I “settle” for Kirk, and not vote for a 3rd Party candidate, closer to my own belief-system?
The 3rd Party guy will not win, and my vote will be wasted. And Mark Kirk will be infinitely preferable to anyone who is fielded by the Democrats (in spite of his terrible decision to vote for Cap & Rob).
Being a conservative … whether fiscal or social … in 21st Century America consists of a series of compromises. I want to be hardcore, and consider myself to be so. But I will not cooperate with the DEMs by wasting my one vote on people who cannot possibly win.