Jon Huntsman makes it offical

RINO Jon Huntsman was in my neck of the woods today (sorry no pictures I had to be in New York today). Huntsman chose Liberty State Park in Jersey City in order to conjure up fond memories of Ronald Reagan by using the Statue of Liberty as a back drop. Like that could possibly remove the stench of RINO from this guy.

CNN: Liberty State Park, New Jersey (CNN) - Not known for throwing out red meat to conservative audiences, former Utah Governor Jon Huntsman warned voters the country is facing an "un-American" future in his campaign kick-off speech Tuesday.

Huntsman took aim at the sluggish economy and mounting national debt in his remarks.

"We are about to pass down to the next generation a country that is less powerful, less compassionate, less competitive and less confident than the one we got. This is totally unacceptable and totally un-American," Huntsman said.

And Jon Huntsman would certainly add to the unacceptable and un-American downward spiral.

2012 is a serious as a heart attack. It is no time for posers, the self indulgent or small bore closet liberals. Huntsman needs to teach his staff how to spell his name and then close up shop for 2012, because this guy is going to go no where and fast.

Via: Memeorandum
Via: CNN
Via: Verum Serum
Via: ABC News

Strike Three! Romney won't sign abortion pledge

Politico: Five Republican presidential candidates have signed a pledge to advance the anti-abortion movement if elected to the White House, but the current front runner for the 2012 GOP nomination — Mitt Romney — isn’t one of them.

Michele Bachmann, Newt Gingrich, Ron Paul, Tim Pawlenty and Rick Santorum each signed the pledge, sponsored by Susan B. Anthony List, vowing to nominate judges and appoint executive branch officials who are opposed to abortion. The pledge also commit signers to push legislation to end all taxpayer funding of abortion and to sign a law to “protect unborn children who are capable of feeling pain from abortion.”

Mitt Romney, who’s leading in national and early state opinion polls, declined to sign.

“Governor Romney pledged in the last campaign that he would be a pro-life president and of course he pledges it today,” said spokeswoman Andrea Saul in a statement. “However, this well-intentioned effort has some potentially unforeseen consequences and he does not feel he could in good conscience sign it. Gov. Romney has been a strong supporter of the SBA List in the past and he looks forward to continue working with them to promote a culture of life.” [MORE]

First RomneyCare, then global warming and now this.  Mittens is working overtime not be a flip flopper this time around. Unfortunately, he is picking the wrong side of each issue. This tells me that Romney is confident about a few things.

• He doesn't believe that conservatives will rally around a single candidate.
• He believes that the right is so desperate to get Obama out of office they will turn a blind eye to everything.

I just don't understand how this guy is the front runner right now. Mitt has always been an integrity free guy. Making him our nominee because we think he can beat Obama is basically a crap shoot (I for one have little faith Romney could beat Obama when push comes to shove). If by chance he becomes president, there is really no telling where he will go. From his record, it is pretty clear that Romney will seek the path of least resistance. That my friends simply will not do in 2012.

Obama and the Dems passed nightmare legislation because they were willing to politically die for their convictions. Reversing their legislation and turning the ship of state around will require no less from the Republicans. This is why a wishy washy flip flopper like Romney might as well be another term of Obama.

Conservatives had better get their game plan together or watch everything accomplished by the TEA Party get railroaded by a weak Republican president named Romney.

Via: Memeorandum
Via: Politico

Right On Cue: RINO Susan Collins won't support Paul Ryan's budget proposal

The Hill: "I don't happen to support Congressman Ryan's plan but at least he had the courage to put forth a plan to significantly reduce the debt," Collins said on "In the Arena" a program on WCSH 6, a local NBC affiliate in Portland, Maine.

Collins is the first Republican senator to state publicly that she will not support the Ryan budget. [...]

Collins, who is one of several centrists in the Senate Republican Caucus, did not say specifically what she opposed in the House GOP plan, but she did say that she would like to begin moving the government towards solvency by eliminating ethanol and farm subsidies as well as funding for an extra engine for the F-35 fighter jet.

"There are lots of opportunities to consolidate and save money," Collins said.

Wonderful, she rejects a serious plan to cut spending in favor of chasing pennies.

You can always count on RINOs to gum up the works when you need their vote the most. I firmly believe that it would be far better to lose an election to a Democrat than to continue electing these unprincipled and unreliable so called "Republicans". From 2012 forward, conservatives should make it their business to primary each and every RINO until we are finally rid of the scourge!

Via: Memeorandum
Via: The Hill

Lisa Murkowski opposes defunding Planned Parenthood

Lisa Murkowski has come out against defunding Planned Parenthood. Here reasoning sound like it came straight from Democratic talking points.

Politico: “I believe Planned Parenthood provides vital services to those in need and disagree with their funding cuts in the bill,” Murkowski wrote in a letter to Senate Appropriations Committee Chairman Daniel Inouye (D-Hawaii) and Vice Chairman Thad Cochran (R-Miss.). “I ask you to consider these programs going forward to determine if there is room for allowing continued funding.” [...]

In an e-mail to a constituent, Murkowski expanded on her position, also taking shots at the House Republicans’ attempts to end Title X funding. “I do believe that Planned Parenthood provides vital services to those in need and disagree with its funding cuts contained in the H.R. 1 package,” she wrote in a Friday e-mail, obtained by POLITICO. “From 2002-2008, Planned Parenthood received $342 million in federal taxpayer money through Title X funding alone. With these funds, Planned Parenthood has provided women throughout the U.S. with important family planning and contraceptive services as well as screening for breast and cervical cancers for low-income women. I believe it is important that Title X organizations continue to receive funding. In Alaska, this includes five centers — two health department clinics, two Planned Parenthood clinics in Sitka and Soldotna and one independent clinic.”

I am reminded how the GOP establishment chastised TEA Party conservatives for loosing the Senate by supporting strong conservative candidates in blue states. Christine O'Donnell immediately comes to mind. However, Lisa Murkowski is a perfect example of what happens when conservatives go along with supporting RINOs just for the sake of adding numbers. Simply packing the Senate with any old Republican, means that you end up with some folks wondering off the reservation.

In 2012 there are 23 Democrats up for reelection and Republicans only need five or six seats to control the Senate. Needless to say, we can very well afford to be extremely picky.

Via: Memeorandum
Via: Politico

The NRSC courting Joe Scarborough?

From The Hill, we learn today that John Cornyn (R-TX) head of the NRSC is actively recruiting faux conservative and uber RINO Joe Scarborough to run for the Senate against Democrat Bill Nelson in Florida.

The Hill: Sen. John Cornyn (Texas), who heads the National Republican Senatorial Committee (NRSC), told The Hill on Thursday that he has talked to Scarborough a couple times about a Senate bid. And he indicated he’s still working on persuading the MSNBC host to run for the upper chamber.

“I’d be delighted to talk to him a third time,” Cornyn said.

Now that the story has broken and the rage ensued, denials are flying. Starting with Politico quoting an unnamed source at the NRSC:

A National Republican Senatorial Committee source shot down a story inferring that the NRSC was actively recruiting Joe Scarborough to run against Florida Sen. Bill Nelson. “This is what happens when a publication in this 24-hour media cycle tries to create news and not report the news. The story is not true,” the source said.

Cornyn now says he was considering Scarborough for New York not Florida:

Cornyn also wrote: "Rumor control: Last cycle, Joe and I talked about his interest in NY, not FL Senate race, so this story is wrong."

I certainly hope this isn't true. If it is, John Cornyn would have shown that he has learned diddly squat from the midterm elections. Back then Cornyn rushed to support RINO Charlie Crist over Marco Rubio and we all now how that turned out. Scarborough is just the type of Republican you can never count on when the going gets tough. Makes no difference whether he is recruited for New York or Florida, the result is the same, we get screwed.

Florida has given us two of the best TEA Party candidates in the new Congress, so why take two steps back by even considering a phony conservative like Scarborough? The GOP establishment really and truly must get over this form over substance BS. Didn't the sinking of establishment RINOs in the last election cycle make it abundantly clear the base is finished supporting RINOs? Geez, some folks never learn.

Legal Insurrection offers a much better choice to run against Bill Nelson, if I were Cornyn, I start working on that!

Via: Memeorandum
Via: The Hill
Via: Politico
Via: Legal Insurrection

RINO Alert!: Wisconsin RINOs preparing a compromise?

Just as we are about to take one giant step forward, here comes the RINOs to take two steps back.

Wall Street Journal: With Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker maintaining a hard line on his budget bill and Democratic senators refusing to return to Madison to vote, attention is turning to a group of moderate Republican senators to negotiate a compromise to the stalemate that has drawn thousands of protesters to the state capital for a sixth straight day.

The proposal, written by Sen. Dale Schultz and first floated in the Republican caucus early last week, calls for most collective bargaining rights of public employee unions to be eliminated – per Mr. Walker's bill – but then reinstated in 2013, said Mr. Schultzs's chief of staff Todd Allbaugh.

"Dale is committed to find a way to preserve collective bargaining in the future," said Mr. Allbaugh in a telephone interview.[...]

Mr. Schultz was first elected to the state senate in 1991 and was the Republican majority leader in 2005 and 2006. He earned a reputation for working across party lines and was endorsed in his 2010 re-election bid by the state's largest teacher's employee. He won with nearly 65 percent of the vote. [MORE]

Of course Sen. Dale Schultz is committed to finding a way to preserve collective bargaining rights, because he has been bought and paid for with union cash. 

Thankfully, it appears that Schultz's efforts won't go far enough to satisfy the unions.  Ed Morrissey from Hot Air explains why:

I doubt that unions will agree to such a compromise, even if Walker was willing to go along with it. Once they give up comprehensive collective bargaining, the genie will have escaped the bottle. It would act as an admission that unions have helped create insurmountable budget problems, an admission that will encourage other states to pass similar restrictions on public-sector unions.

Besides, the biggest problem for Democrats in this bill isn’t the collective bargaining but the open shop law. If Wisconsin makes union dues voluntary and forces the union to collect them instead of having the payroll deduction from the state, organized labor will lose most of its political clout in the state. The unions need that money to donate to Democrats in elections, and they know full well that most workers won’t enthusiastically contribute those dues on their own. Once they have the money, workers will want to keep it, and unions will have to scratch just to gather operating funds.

The Democrats who fled the state didn’t do so to protect workers. They did it to protect their campaign fundraising. If Republicans back down while the public gives them this much support, they won’t get another chance to free workers from forced dues payments and involuntary union membership as a prerequisite for public service.

Mr. Schultz is clearly looking out for his campaign contribution for the next go around. Disgusting!

Via: Memeorandum

Via: The Wall Street Journal

Via: Hot Air

Frustration! Republican's mixed messages on spending cuts

It looks like some Republicans are finding it hard to kick some of the old bad habits as they go about spending cuts.  On one hand they effectively voted to cut funds to the IRS for the implementation of the ObamaCare mandates. They also succeeded in voting to defunding Planned Parenthood.  On the other hand, Republicans voted to continue funding NASCAR and establishment Republicans totally caved on an additional $22 billion more in cuts.


I think these actions so conflicting.  First, the NASCAR funding.  Why not cut it?  The Army is spending millions to sponsor a car saying it helps in recruiting. Seriously? I am pretty sure the Army can set up booths at NASCAR events for a lot less money.  These are hard times and the NASCAR funds seems like a luxury we can no longer afford.  It is also the type of spending that we routinely blast Democrats for.  


The GOP establishment not wanting to go along with the additional $22 billion in cuts is unforgivable.  The Republicans promised the American people $100 billion in cuts, so give it to them.  It isn't like $100 billion out of a $3.5 trillion budget will even be noticed. Furthermore, once the House voted to defund ObamaCare and Planned Parenthood, they must realize that the Senate Democrats will have no choice but to block the bill.  So why be so damn timid? This is just old establishment Republicans being afraid of liberals demonizing them.  Memo to establishment Republicans: you will be demonized no matter what you do, so just do the right thing.


I find it very frustrating to see some Republicans still clinging to the old ways of doing business.  America sent Republicans a very clear mandate, cut the spending.  There is little need to tread softly on the issue.  It seems like conservatives and TEA Partiers are going to have to do a lot more pruning with the establishment Republicans in 2012.


Via: Memeorandum
Via: Politico
Via: USA Today
Via: MY Fox Atlanta
Via: The Hill

A RINO Roars. Richard Lugar to Tea Party: "Get Real"

Lugar to Tea Party: "Get real.": wane.com

 

WANE-TV: [...] Lugar has been a Member of Congress for almost 12,500 days, the longest in Indiana history. Some members of the Tea Party movement say that's long enough.

They [The Tea Party] want a more conservative candidate, and met in central Indiana last month to start the process of uniting behind a single opponent for Lugar in the 2012 Republican primary.

"[We're saying to Lugar] thank you for what you've done. We respect you greatly as a person and for what you've done in the past. But to go forward, we feel it's going to need to be a different candidate," Tea Party activist Pat Miller told NewsChannel 15 in January.

Among other criticisms, Tea Party activists have taken Lugar to task for supporting the new START nuclear arms treaty with Russia, claiming the U.S. is giving up too much and Russia is not giving up enough.

"I've been working systematically for 20 years going to Russia trying to help direct a situation in which we're taking warheads off of missiles every day, destroying missiles that were aimed at us; destroying submarines that carried misslies up and down our coast," said Lugar. "I've got to say 'Get real'. I hear Tea Party or other people talking about they were against START. I said 'Well, now, hang on here.'"

Lugar continued, "If you want to get into START, let's talk about it, but realistically as Americans, not as some Republican renegade. [I'm] trying to take warheads of Russia [out of circulation] so they won't hit Indiana." 

RINO attributes aside, I wonder if it ever dawned on Lugar that being in the Senate since 1977 might make him a wee bit out of touch with the real world.  Even if Lugar was a stanch conservative, this concept of life long careers in Congress really has to start coming to an end.  I find that these long stays in Washington creates a very stale group think.  It also gives these Congress Critters an overblown sense of entitlement.

Allahpundit at Hot Air points out that challenging Lugar could risking turning a safe Red seat Blue.  I say, so what.  The thing about keeping RINOs because they can win, is that you end up losing in the end when they choose to go rogue on important issues.  

We are going to have only one shot at legislatively repealing ObamaCare after 2012.  It will be in our best interest to make sure that the Senate is populated with as few RINOs as possible.  There are 23 Democrats up for reelection in 2012, Republicans only need four seats to gain a majority, therefore we can afford to be picky.

Via: Memeorandum

Via: WANE-TV

Via: Hot Air

Lindsey Graham uses the “Golden Rule” to vote for Kagan

CNSNews: “It is divine in its orientation, and it is probably something that would serve us all well if we thought about it at moments such as this,” Sen. Graham said on the Senate floor, as he pointed his colleagues to the Golden Rule and counseled them to look to the wisdom of “somebody far wiser than I am” as they cast their votes on Kagan.

“But at the end of the day, those of us in the Senate have to understand that every branch of government includes human beings and there is a rule that stood the test of time,” said Sen. Graham in an August 3 Senate floor speech. “I didn't make this one up. It was somebody far wiser than I am, somebody far more gifted than I ever hope to be, somebody I put a lot of trust in. 

“It is called the Golden Rule,” said Graham. “‘Do unto others as you would have them do unto you.’ That is probably one of the most powerful statements ever made. It is divine in its orientation, and it is probably something that would serve us all well if we thought about it at moments such as this. "

This is gall on a magnitude I have never seen before. Imagine, a conservative confirming a pro-abortion justice because he believes that liberals will someday return the favor. Was this idiot playing footsie under the men’s room stall during the Bork confirmation process?

The next time Graham wants to use the Lord’s teachings to decide upon judicial confirmations, he might want to try this one:

“Render unto Caesar the things which are Caesar’s, and unto God the things that are God’s”  (Matthew 22:21)

In other words Mr. Graham, you can horse trade away certain ideological principles but when it comes to life, “someone far wiser” has already told you what to do.

I hope in 2014 when Mr. Graham is up for re-election the conservative voters of South Carolina will follow The Golden Rule and screw over Lindsey Graham just as he has repeatedly screwed over conservative.

Via: Memeorandum

Via: CNSNews

Via: Cassy Fiano

Are horny RINOs blowing it for 2010?

Coming right on the heels of bondage nightclub debacle, the RNC now has a fundraising letter out with the phone number of a sex line on it. 

Politico: [...]The Republican National Committee sent a fundraising mail piece earlier this month with a return number that leads to a phone-sex line offering "live, one-on-one talk with a nasty girl who will do anything you want for just  $2.99 per minute."

At the bottom of a piece designed to resemble a census form, a toll-free number is listed next to the national party's address.[...] 

If ever the RNC needed to bring their A-Game now is the time. The Democrats have come out the closet as wild-eyed big government control freaks and independents cannot run away fast enough. The RNC seems like it just wants to sitting back and waiting to reap the rewards, rather than offering these fleeing independents a better choice.

This is unacceptable. Conservatives did not strongly stand against the Democrats to see their efforts dashed by the incompetent horny RINOs that make up the RNC leadership. After 2012 I think it will be time to consider scuttling the GOP and bring about an actual TEA Party.  

Via: Memeorandum

Via: Politico

Via: The Other McCain

About Time: South Carolina Voters Sour on Lindsey Graham

Finally RINO Lindsey Graham is feeling the heat. After some of his leftward follies and coming right on the heels of South Carolinian Republican s censure, voters are getting ready to kick his sorry butt to the curb!

From Commentary Magazine: 

U.S. Sen. Lindsey Graham’s public support is collapsing in South Carolina — driven by a wholesale revolt among the GOP electorate and a steady erosion of his support amongst independents.

Already consistently loathed by a solid third of GOP voters, Graham’s recent leftward bent — including his co-authoring of a controversial “Cap & Tax” proposal supported by President Barack Obama and liberal Sen. John Kerry (D-Mass.) — has him locked in a “terminal free fall,” according one prominent Republican consultant.

“A chunk of the GOP has always detested him, but in the last month a damn has broken,” said the consultant, who was granted anonymity to discuss the impact of two recent polls that were conducted in South Carolina (one allegedly by Graham’s own advisors). “More Republicans now oppose Sen. Graham than support him. Independents are also deserting him in huge numbers.” 

Sadly Graham does not come up for re-election until 2014. Commentary thinks that might give him time to recover.  Methinks not. Thanks to Obama the conservative base has fundamentally changed.  People in the base are activists now and are very wise to the RINO game. Something tells me that RINOs like Graham are going to be out of vogue with the electorate for a very long time to come.

Via: Memeorandum

Via: Commentary Magazine

Via: Associated Press

Fred Thompson To Newt: We’re Not Deaf, Dumb and Blind

In response to Newt’s nonsense about conservatives purging RINOs from the GOP, Fred Thompson had a few choice words for Newt on his radio show.

From Politico: 

During his radio show Tuesday, Thompson said he was “sad” to hear “when a good Republican friend of mine says that I, and the other good, conservative Republicans who have endorsed Hoffman, are ‘misguided.’ And that’d be my friend, Newt Gingrich.”

“I respect Newt. He’s a friend. Done a lot of good, I think. But he endorsed Scozzafava early on. So, we have an honest disagreement in the family,” Thompson said.

But, he added, “Newt said that our support for Hoffman was a ‘purge,’ was ‘misguided,’ was—we were applying a litmus test that said if you’re not 100 percent with us than you're not with us at all. And that Scozzafava was more in step with her district and therefore we shouldn't substitute our judgment for the party elders of the district.”

Thompson, a 2008 GOP presidential candidate, then asked of Gingrich: “Who’s applying the litmus test here?”

“Are we saying that as Americans you’ve got to have an ‘R’ by your name before you vote for them? Where do you draw the line?” he continued. “If somebody with a record like this gets our seal of approval, regardless, only because she’s got an ‘R’ by the name… You know, just because we’re Republicans doesn’t mean that we’re deaf, dumb, and blind.”

Thompson is right, if any old body can have any old ideology and still be Republican, then what the heck does the party stand for?  I had pretty much stated the same thing back in May. What the GOP needs is quality Republicans that adhere to principles. The Party does not need tons and tons of “mavericks” voting willy nilly for more big government spending or liberty robbing legislation.

Via: Memeorandum

Via: Politico

More Nonsense From Newt

On Greta Van Susteren, Newt again dug deeper into his political grave. Again using the phony argument about State’s rights as a reason for support super RINO Dede Scozzafava.

From Ben Smith Politico: 

VAN SUSTEREN: All right, the 23rd congressional district in New York -- you're getting heat from Glenn Beck and others because you have endorsed the Republican candidate, and many Republicans, like Tim Pawlenty, former governor Sarah Palin -- Governor Pawlenty, former governor Sarah Palin, Steve Forbes, Dick Armey -- they've all endorsed the independent, and you're getting heat.

GINGRICH: Sure.

VAN SUSTEREN: And?

GINGRICH: Well, I just find it fascinating that my many friends who claim to be against Washington having too much power, they claim to be in favor of the 10th Amendment giving states back their rights, they claim to favor local control and local authority, now they suddenly get local control and local authority in upstate New York, they don't like the outcome.

There were four Republican meetings. In all four meetings, State Representative Dede Scozzafava came in first. In all four meetings, Mr. Hoffman, the independent, came in either last or certainly not in the top three. He doesn't live in the district. Dede Scozzafava...

Newt is being so intellectually dishonest with the 10^th Amendment jazz. How is this states rights when these congressmen get to cast votes that affect the entire nation?  If Scozzafava were running for a local position, yeah I would agree with Newt. But she is not. She would be headed to US House of Representatives. There she would and could easily flip liberal and start to caucus with the Democrats.  Sorry but we have been there and done that.

Notice too how Newt uses the “he doesn’t live in the district” line. RS McCain has the lowdown on this: 

I was disgusted just now to see Newt Gingrich's appearance on Greta Van Susteren's Fox News show tonight, when he hit Doug Hoffman with a cheap shot, saying Hoffman "doesn't live in the [23rd] District. (Hey, ask some Georgians if Newt has any room to talk about carpetbagging!)

OK, this is a non-issue, and has been explained several times. Doug Hoffman's hometown, Saranac Lake, is in the 23rd District. Hoffman's current residence is about a 15-minute drive away in Lake Placid, which was also in the 23rd District -- until the (then) GOP-controlled New York legislature gerrymandered the district!  MORE 

Now watch how Newt tries to scare conservative into believing that if we don’t load up on RINOs Obama is a shoe in: 

GINGRICH: On such as abortion, gay marriage, which means that she's about where Rudy Giuliani was when he became mayor. And yet Rudy Giuliani was a great mayor.And so this idea that we're suddenly going to establish litmus tests, and all across the country, we're going to purge the party of anybody who doesn't agree with us 100 percent -- that guarantees Obama's reelection. That guarantees Pelosi is Speaker for life. I mean, I think that is a very destructive model for the Republican Party.

I call bullshit on Newt! We need not load up on RINOs, just the other day Gallup again release a poll showing that 40% of Americans consider themselves conservatives. Gallup even shows that moderates are trending conservative even on social issues. 

Furthermore about Rudy being a RINO. Yeah he is, but unlike Scozzafava Rudy and his RINO ways stayed in NYC were his liberal ways were quite welcome.  He did not carry them to Congress to add them to the other lefties.

I can understand the NRSC and NRCC digging in on Scozzafava and other RINOs.  Both committees have already sunk a ton of money into those losers. But Newt, has not. So why is he pissing off conservatives and destroying his political future by sticking like glue to Scozzafava?

Via: Memeorandum

Via: Politco

Via: The Other McCain

Via: Gallup

David Frum misses the point

David Frum The Week Magazine: 

What lessons will Republicans draw? You might think that the impending defeats in New York and New Jersey would drive home the need to broaden the Republican coalition. A candidate like Hoffman would have been the better candidate for New York's 23rd CD; a candidate like Daggett the better candidate for suburban New Jersey. Republicans have to find ways to accommodate both types of candidates and both kinds of constituencies. 

But the risk is that the party will draw a very different conclusion. From the New York experience, Republicans will be tempted to draw the lesson: Always nominate the more conservative candidate. From New Jersey: We need to drive pro-environmental fiscal moderates out of our party and into the Democratic Party where they belong! 

The point that Frum misses as he calls for more moderation is the aftermath of electing these so called moderates. Sure by lowering the standards of conservatism, we can have all kinds of people running around with the letter R after their names. But when the votes are needed to bring about conservative reform or to stop disastrous liberal legislation, these so called moderates have time and time again failed to deliver.

The moderates Colins, Snow and Specter all folded like a house of cards and thus caused America to throw away $800 billion dollars on a failed stimulus package. Perhaps if either of these moderates held a fiscally conservative belief, we would not be looking at a $1.4 trillion deficit for 2009.

Many in the base, myself included, are sick and tired of such fair weather friends. We are tired of so called moderate Republicans running as conservatives and then legislating as full on liberals. It isn’t just a question of ideological purity; it is a question of integrity. Say what you mean and mean what you say. Sadly, many conservatives are hard pressed to find such integrity among the so called moderate Republicans.

If loosing New York and New Jersey to the Democrats mean we get a better class of Republicans, then so be it. What is the point in winning all three races only to find out that you ended up with two liberals anyway?

In the end, the quantity of Republicans should not trump the quality of Republicans.

Via: Memeorandum

Via: The Week Magazine

Newt Gingrich “Shrugs Off” Conservatives' Concerns And Endorses RINO Dede Scozzafava

Back in June, Politico had asked Newt how to deal with “conservative purists”. Newt’s answer was "You shrug them off."

Well I guess you could say Newt is being a man of his word. He is endorsing Dede Scozzafava, who Michelle Malkin describes as an ACORN-friendly, union-pandering, tax-and-spend radical Republican.

The GOP is clearly banking on people electing their crummy candidates just to get away from the crummier Democrats currently infesting Washington.  This is where conservatives must give the GOP a very hard bitch slap and reject their awful RINO candidates in every primary.

If we want people who will truly represent us, then we have to support our own kind.  In the very New York race for the seat that Scozzafava is running for a true conservative is running too. Doug Hoffman is running as well. Hoffman is actually starting to come on strong.  Visit his site and give some support.  Defeating these awful RINOs in the primaries is a must!

Via: Memeorandum

Via: Michelle Malkin

Tea Partiers Set To Go Rogue On GOP’s RINO Candidates

From Politico: 

While the energy of the anti-tax and anti-Big Government tea party movement may yet haunt Democrats in 2010, the first order of business appears to be remaking the Republican Party.

Whether it’s the loose confederation of Washington-oriented groups that have played an organizational role or the state-level activists who are channeling grass-roots anger into action back home, tea party forces are confronting the Republican establishment by backing insurgent conservatives and generating their own candidates — even if it means taking on GOP incumbents. 

No surprise here. The GOP has had a long time love affair with RINO candidates that just don’t follow conservative principles. We now that much of the conservative base is becoming activist, many of them are going against the party and supporting candidates that they feel best support their principles.

The GOP’s RINO problem has forever been a thorn in the base’s side. Just yesterday, squishy Lindsey Graham came out the ideological closet and said he will support Cap and Tax!  Could someone please explain to me where there is a single conservative principle in Cap and Tax?

Earlier this year, the NRSC had the gall to back mega RINO Charlie Christ over a true conservative Mario Rubio.  Never mind that Christ would be considered box-office poison to much of the GOP base.

From Politico: 

In Florida, where the national party has signaled its preference for centrist Gov. Charlie Crist in the GOP Senate primary, tea party activists are lining up behind former state House Speaker Marco Rubio in reaction to Crist’s public backing for President Barack Obama’s stimulus package. 

“We were very disappointed with Gov. Charlie Crist when he supported the stimulus, the bailout, and he appeared publicly with President Obama,” said Everett Wilkinson, a South Florida-based organizer for Tea Party Patriots. “The opposition comes from Crist’s support for the largest spending plan ever and the environmental policies he’s pushing on the American people.” 

Back in May, I said what the GOP base needs to do is stop playing the numbers game and go for quality candidates.  What good is having control of both houses if you cannot count on their support on the issues?  It appears that some Democrats are waking up to this fact too.

Via: Memeorandum

Via: Politico

Via: Michelle Malkin

Newt to GOP: 'Shrug...off' conservative purists

Via Politico:

Newt to GOP: 'Shrug...off' conservative purists

Asked Sunday how the Republican Party should deal with conservatives who advocate "ideological purity," former House Speaker Newt Gingrich had simple advice: "You shrug them off."
"Reagan shrugged them off," Gingrich told host Harry Smith on CBS's "Face the Nation," noting that the former president was regularly criticized for his "deviance from the conservative purity."

"My advice is that Colin Powell is a great American, I am proud he is a Republican," Gingrich went on. "And Dick Cheney is a great American. I am proud he is a Republican. I am glad both of them are Republicans.

Shurg off conservative purists? BITE ME, Newt! I am getting beyond sick and tired of the RINO infestation in the Republican party. They think they can grow the party by appealing to a bunch of fickle moderates. Moderates change like the wind. They flock to whomever they perceive as the winner. That is why it takes them forever and a day to make up their minds on a candidate. They are just checking which way the political winds blow, so that they can jump on the winning horse at the last possible minute. There is no retaining people like that.

Never the less, the mental midgets in the leadership of the Republican party expects the base to throw away their principles and beliefs to chase after these fickle and elusive "moderate voters".

The very next time I get a piece of mail with Newt Gingrich's name on it, I am breaking out my red Sharpie and I am going to write in big block letters "SHRUG OFF, NEWT!" and mail it right back to wherever the hell it came from! Maybe then they will get the message. Meanwhile, I will be proudly funding real conservative candidates like Palin, Bachmann and Rubio.

Oh, and another thing, about that Reagan nonsense Gingrich spewed. It was people like Newt, Reagan was talking about in his classic 1975 CPAC speech, Let Them Go Their Way. The speech is almost 35 years old and is even more true today. Why? Because it was built on solid conservative principles not the issue of the day. Here are the killer lines of that speech, they were true then and even more so today.

Americans are hungry to feel once again a sense of mission and greatness.

I don't know about you, but I am impatient with those Republicans who after the last election rushed into print saying, "We must broaden the base of our party" -- when what they meant was to fuzz up and blur even more the differences between ourselves and our opponents.

It was a feeling that there was not a sufficient difference now between the parties that kept a majority of the voters away from the polls. When have we ever advocated a closed-door policy? Who has ever been barred from participating?

Our people look for a cause to believe in. Is it a third party we need, or is it a new and revitalized second party, raising a banner of no pale pastels, but bold colors which make it unmistakably clear where we stand on all of the issues troubling the people?

Let us show that we stand for fiscal integrity and sound money and above all for an end to deficit spending, with ultimate retirement of the national debt.

Let us also include a permanent limit on the percentage of the people's earnings government can take without their consent.
Let our banner proclaim a genuine tax reform that will begin by simplifying the income tax so that workers can compute their obligation without having to employ legal help.

And let it provide indexing -- adjusting the brackets to the cost of living -- so that an increase in salary merely to keep pace with inflation does not move the taxpayer into a surtax bracket. Failure to provide this means an increase in government's share and would make the worker worse off than he was before he got the raise.

Let our banner proclaim our belief in a free market as the greatest provider for the people. Let us also call for an end to the nit-picking, the harassment and over-regulation of business and industry which restricts expansion and our ability to compete in world markets.

Let us explore ways to ward off socialism, not by increasing government’s coercive power, but by increasing participation by the people in the ownership of our industrial machine.

Our banner must recognize the responsibility of government to protect the law-abiding, holding those who commit misdeeds personally accountable.

And we must make it plain to international adventurers that our love of peace stops short of "peace at any price."

We will maintain whatever level of strength is necessary to preserve our free way of life.

A political party cannot be all things to all people. It must represent certain fundamental beliefs which must not be compromised to political expediency, or simply to swell its numbers.

I do not believe I have proposed anything that is contrary to what has been considered Republican principle. It is at the same time the very basis of conservatism. It is time to reassert that principle and raise it to full view. And if there are those who cannot subscribe to these principles, then let them go their way.

Ronald Reagan,
CPAC 1975

Time to take Colin Powell off my logo!

Today on Face The Nation, Colin Powell tells us he is still a Republican but;

• He voted for Barak Obama and Jimmy Carter.
• He listens to statistics quoted by Arlen Specter.
• He knocks Rush Limbaugh.
• He knocks Dick Cheney.
• Believes Jack Kemp was for “spreading the wealth”.
• Believes Gitmo should be closed to please other nations.
• Favors bringing Gitmo prisoners to the US.
• Believes the American people want bigger government.

Yeah, sure Colin, you’re a Republican, just like I am a white guy! Sorry Colin, but you are coming off my logo, because you’re wrong! Wrong about how to rebuild the party, wrong about Rush Limbaugh, wrong about Gitmo, wrong about Obama and wrong about everything a conservative believes in.

OK faithful readers, which black conservative would you like to see replace Powell in my logo?

Colin Powell: Transformation Complete

Colin Powell has come a long way from the days when he gave authoritative presentations of Desert Storm. Back then Powell was a no nonsense, facts and figures, black conservative general. He was the type of black conservative that liberals would have had a very hard time smearing. He could have easily grabbed the GOP nomination and perhaps became the first Black president almost 20 years before Obama. He could have inspired a generation of young black conservatives. My how things have changed.

Today Colin Powell is parroting empty leftwing talking points to the GOP on how to make themselves into the Democrat Lite Party. He hits on all the standard "problems" that the Democrats keep telling the GOP they have to change; Rush and Coulter are mean and nasty, McCain and Palin are too polarizing, people want big government, and of course the GOP needs to move to the center. Never mind that the GOP really did move to the left with the nomination of John McCain and Powell still voted for Obama!

I don't really fault Powell for voting for Obama. I imagine that any black man at Powell's age (conservative or not) must have had a real and understandable yearning to see the first black president of the United States in their lifetime. What I do fault Powell for is not having the balls to be up front about it. Back in 2003 Powell said he remained "a strong proponent of affirmative action." Yet, we are to believe that a strong proponent of affirmative action, would pass up voting for the first black president if all things were equal. Methinks not!

I think Powell's move to the left has more to do with his own personal desire to be included, than the GOP needing to be more inclusive. Being a black conservative is not an easy thing to do. I know all too well how the party of "tolerance & inclusiveness" morphs into hyper bigots when dealing with black conservatives. I also know how fellow blacks are even more vitriolic to brothers or sisters who dares to wonder off the liberal plantation. As bad as that is for someone like me, it is exponentially worse for those black conservatives living in the public eye. For black conservatives who are public figures, they need skin like tank armor. Perhaps, after all these years, Powell's armor has just gotten a little too heavy to carry.