Redstate

I'm sorry that YOU think my attitude shows bitterness. I'm sorry that YOU think it is unproductive. I'm sorry that YOU think I have a nasty attitude. I am sorry that YOU think there is anything in the post that is NOT either conservative or Republican. Did you read it?

Strangely enough, I don't see it that way. Drop me an email if you want to discuss it.

Or at the very least make him take this stupid and offensive sticker thing off his sig?

"I ain't never votin' fo another Democrat so long as I can draw breath! I'll vote for a dog first!" - Leola Thomas

pot meet kettle.

Riggghhhttt.

I'm not saying everybody agrees with my opinions. I have not equated the nominee of my party that this site with a common anti-American gesture.

If I offend jerks like yourself, I consider that to be a good thing.

"I ain't never votin' fo another Democrat so long as I can draw breath! I'll vote for a dog first!" - Leola Thomas

And why do you find Dave's idea silly? I think it's brilliant.

Just ignore him and any who uses the banner. Trolls only do what they do for attention.

BigGator5.net

Please agree to disagree. I'm sorry, but David Hinz is anything but a troll. He's a long time and skilled contributor, well-liked and well-read, just like Neil.

They're having a difference of opinion and that's all, but it's born in mutual respect. Something they've BOTH earned.

You may disagree with David's bumper sticker, I don't care for it myself. But Hinz is about as far from troll as it gets.

And I'm not snapping at you, just filling in the blanks is all.

absentee
Also now available at Political Machine.

Freedom of Religion not Freedom from Religion

Long-time and well-read I won't argue with.

Skilled and well liked? That's something else.

"I ain't never votin' fo another Democrat so long as I can draw breath! I'll vote for a dog first!" - Leola Thomas

Besides, there is nothing wrong with being a maverick.

Freedom of Religion not Freedom from Religion

it should say....goodness ;-)

Freedom of Religion not Freedom from Religion

Mike DeVine’s Charlotte Observer columns
http://thehinzsightreport.com
www.theminorityreportblog.com
www.race42008.com
"One man with courage makes a majority." - Andrew Jackson

I took it to email as he asked and we're fine.

HTML Help for Red Staters
"If we want to take this party back, and I think we can someday, let’s get to work." – Barry Goldwater

Conform or be cast out...it's the way of the tyrant!

Don't talk like a Kossack. Nobody has any right to be here and we are here for a purpose. If you become destructive to that purpose you can and should be swept aside.

"I ain't never votin' fo another Democrat so long as I can draw breath! I'll vote for a dog first!" - Leola Thomas

Except that it always comes across as not being able to make a decent arguement so let's just ban the guy...It makes you look small minded and petty!

As for me being a Kossack, Why don't you just call me a fascist, or a NAZI,

I'm a Republican the same as you...You are in no position to call me any less of one than you and you are out of line calling names when I've never done so.

I'll turn your arguement on you...is this constructive?

Don't talk like a Kossack.

Is that constructive or destructive?

Nobody has any right to be here and we are here for a purpose. If you become destructive to that purpose you can and should be swept aside.

Think as I think or you'll be banned and sent to the outer reaches of hell!? Is that constructive or destructive?

Can we ban this guy? Or at the very least make him take this stupid and offensive sticker thing off his sig?

I don't know if you are a moderator or not but get this, If you aren't you shouldn't imply you have power that you don't have.

Calling someone or their ideas stupid is bad form, you should grow up and show some maturity!

Having the power to ban or not ban comes with a great responsibility and should be handled with great care, professionalism and judgment. Just throwing it out there as a threat or suggestion
every time you run into someone you disagree with or a post you find offensive reeks of pettiness and bullying.

For your convenience, I've pasted a copy of the site rules: I point you to Number 2 for which you can be banned...I'm not a Kos anything and if you think otherwise that's your right but it's bad form to name call...I'll leave it up to the moderators to rule on it from there.

The posting rules for redstate.com are as follows:

# No profanity.
# No personal attacks.
# No harassment or demonization of a particular individual.
# No disruptive behavior or off-topic remarks for their own sake.

The purpose of this site is promote conservative and Republican ideals. This is our home, and we ask you kindly not to track mud into it. Revocation of posting privileges (banning) will take place after a warning of behavior which violates the intent and spirit of these rules.

I think I did say McCain was an ass yesterday so I was slightly mistaken in my rant about banning...I should have said I haven't called any Red Staters names!

A** is also considered by the Moderators of this site to be profanity...unless of course you happen to be agreeing with their viewpoint.

Maybe we can show him the respect he's shown us? or does that offend you hyper sensitive sense of going along to get along?

But than he's not been the worst on the site either.

The greatest single cause of Atheism today is Christians who profess Jesus with their lips & then go and deny him by their lifestyle. That's what an unbelieving world simply finds..unbelievable -Brennan Manning

Free market economics?
Limited government?
The sanctity of life?
The need for a safe and secure nation?

Is moderation a style of communication or is it a triangulation between two other points? Or is it something different alltogether.

Please explain how this question has relevance.

Or do you have difficulty counting to 50%+1?

"I ain't never votin' fo another Democrat so long as I can draw breath! I'll vote for a dog first!" - Leola Thomas

When properly explained, there have been many elections (and 2008 is no exception) where free market economics has attracted 50+% of the vote.

A leader explains, educates, etc. to move the electorate. A triangulator puts his finger in the wind and carves a third path. Nixon and Clinton were triangulators. We don't need Republicans to be triangulators.

Why not at least try to move the electorate instead of treating the election like public opinion is static?

Right.

And the U.S. once partnered up with Joseph Stalin.

Lesson: Just because something can happen under some circumstances doesn't mean it'll happen again, or that all involved liked it and wish to repeat it.

"I ain't never votin' fo another Democrat so long as I can draw breath! I'll vote for a dog first!" - Leola Thomas

And the U.S. once partnered up with Joseph Stalin.

Lesson: Just because something can happen under some circumstances doesn't mean it'll happen again, or that all involved liked it and wish to repeat it.

I'm assuming you had a point with that?

Think about it.

"I ain't never votin' fo another Democrat so long as I can draw breath! I'll vote for a dog first!" - Leola Thomas

principles you support in moderation?

FYI-The US made itself vulnerable to the USSR in a way that took decades to undo. A few strong words at the right point in time and the entire Cold War could have been avoided.

FDR was so uncritical of Joseph Stalin, and so many people in the US said he was was better than Hitler (which he wasn't), that we needlessly created another situation in which the world itself was at risk.

So I do not find your Stalin reference persuasive in any way.

The lessons of the '44 Warsaw Uprising are far more applicable.

Uhh, "strong words" would have done absolutely nothing. We could have invaded in 1945 like Patton wanted to. Anything short of that and nothing changes.

Anyhow, you got the analogy all wrong, and aren't really thinking about it.

It's painfully obvious what I was saying. It wasn't about Stalin, it was about the fact that people sometimes ally with people that they disagree with on some if not most things. That doesn't mean they will if they don't have to, it doesn't mean they will again in another situation.

Reagan was Reagan. He happened in a particular time and place. He was running against particular people under specific circumstances. You can't merely say "Reagan won, therefore, anybody who takes his positions will also win."

Surprise, surprise.

And if you think I'm being condescending, it's you're fault.

"I ain't never votin' fo another Democrat so long as I can draw breath! I'll vote for a dog first!" - Leola Thomas

Stalin (like Hitler) kept waiting for England and the US to give him a lecture, but they never did.

The USSR was desperate for a second front and for military equipment, etc. We had all the leverage on our side until 1944. Many things happened before 1944 that emboldened Stalin.

That set of a series of events, beginning with the USSR's cutting off relations with the Polish government in exile and ending at Munich (where the US and England granted the USSR its zone of influence).

The Stalin example is a good one, but is illustrates how sometimes compromise is simply fatal. But only "right wing ideologues" were willing to complain about the Stalin relationship at the time. The government purposefully restrained the free press with regards to anti-USSR information.

A shameful part of our history.

Stalin.

Is that your way of saying you don't have any principles?

My questions to you were about what princinples you embrace only in moderation. Your "answers" are a litany of straw men on the march.

I am trying to engage in you on the issue of principles.

Do you support a moderate view of the First Amendment?
What about other constitutional rights?

Is moderation defined in relative terms by the non-moderate positions (i.e. triangulation) or is it defined in absolute terms independent of the outlying non-moderate positions?

These are honest questions. I never mentioned Reagan, and he was not relevant to my inquiry. The mention of Stalin was relevant since a triangulation approach is what led to the alliance with the USSR in WWII and the emboldening of the Soviet Union's ambition in Eastern Europe while we had lots of leverage over them in 1942, 43, and 44.

By 45 it was too late---and would have required military force.

In 44, strong words would have sufficed.

No, it's my way of saying that lots of people ally with people that they don't agree with on much.

A lot of people voted for Reagan just because they liked him, or just because they hated Carter or Mondale, or that they just didn't want to rock the boat because things were going well, or just because they agreed with him on one or two important issues that were of vital importance to them at that particular time.

I hate to say it, but 60% of America is nowhere near as conservative as Ronald Reagan was. I wish that weren't the case, but that's the way it is.

I think you know this. I think you're just using Ronald Reagan's good memory to try to bash your silly point down people's throats without any real thought. Merely saying "Ronald Reagan won, therefore, anybody who advocates for anybody to the left of Ronald Reagan is obviously just silly/a coward/a leftist/whatever, because such a person would obviously win," is stupid. Reagan himself would have laughed at such a suggestion.

"I ain't never votin' fo another Democrat so long as I can draw breath! I'll vote for a dog first!" - Leola Thomas

Who are you replying to?

Why not respond to what I actually wrote instead of making up quotes about I what I said?

Can you answer the question of what principles you are moderate about?

1. You.
2. Did no such thing.
3. No, it's a stupid question for reasons I've already explained.

"I ain't never votin' fo another Democrat so long as I can draw breath! I'll vote for a dog first!" - Leola Thomas

Who keeps mentioning Reagan? You. Not me. You.

Its not a stupid question if you want to persuade people. Principles matter. Principles are not stupid. Principles are not determined by whatever 50% +1 say, believe, decide, etc.

I realize you are not trying to be persuasive, but why try to be the opposite of persuasive?

that conservatives get nervous.

.

The greatest single cause of Atheism today is Christians who profess Jesus with their lips & then go and deny him by their lifestyle. That's what an unbelieving world simply finds..unbelievable -Brennan Manning

I have a Conservative view on Law & Government (less taxes and less government), a Libertarian view on Economics (government should keep their bloody hands off businesses and economics altogether), and a Moderate view of Social issues (I understand both sides and I think we can have a happy medium).

I refuse to believe your stance on the strength of the military and foreign policy has a politcal ideology (see: Joe Lieberman), however my views falls in-line the current Conservative view. In fact, there is a girl who is currently in the Army who I want to get together with her once she gets back from South Korea. So my respect and support for the military has become personal.

As you can see, I am right of center.

To answer your question, we Moderates agree with you more than we disagree. This is why we are Republicans and not Democrats. During the 2004 Convention, Conservatives reached out to Moderates and said we are all Republicans. Now that a Moderate is running for President, Conservatives are asking: "What now?"

I think this is a little disingenuous, don't you?

BigGator5.net

During the 2004 Convention, Conservatives reached out to Moderates and said we are all Republicans. Now that a Moderate is running for President, Conservatives are asking: "What now?"

I've seen you post this remark in a couple of places and I am completely missing your point. Wasn't it clear to everybody by the time 2004 rolled around that President Bush was no conservative?

But we still saw what we wanted to see. Love is blind, buyer's remorse, etc.

The greatest single cause of Atheism today is Christians who profess Jesus with their lips & then go and deny him by their lifestyle. That's what an unbelieving world simply finds..unbelievable -Brennan Manning

This brings up an excellent point - what is a moderate?

"Moderate" is a particularly useless term, as it is often applied to virtually any Republican who deviates from the official GOP line on any issue.
# John McCain is called a moderate, even though he is actually socially conservative, hawkish on defense/foreign policy, and economically conservative. He seems to be called a moderate because of his deviations on certain isolated issues, like campaign finance reform and waterboarding, and also because of his tendency to agree to compromises with the Dems on certain issues.
# Rudy Giuliani is labelled a moderate, largely because he is generally pro-choice on abortion. However, on most other social issues, he is conservative, and he is strongly conservative on economics and hawkish on defense/foreign policy.
# Arlen Specter is considered a moderate. He is usually liberal on social issues, dovish on defense/foreign policy (although supportive of the war), and very mixed on economics.
# Mike Bloomberg is labeled a moderate, even though he is liberal on social issues, at best mixed on economic issues, and dovish on defense/foreign policy.
# Even Henry Hyde was called a moderate, largely because he was opposed to term limits, and because he was willing to compromise on certain issues with the Democrats.

We really need to learn to distinguish between the different kinds of moderates. And sometimes, I think we should clarify just who really is a moderate. (And guys, if McCain is a moderate, than Bush is a moderate, if not a liberal).

The fight isn't about right vs. left, it's about right vs. wrong. Conservatives have rock solid principles and are not guided to action by a popularity contest. What the conservative movement lacks is a sufficient number of vocal elected leaders that can effectively convey our message. A strong leader who speaks and acts with a principled stand is a very, very powerful force. A leader who takes a strong stand based on the cause du jour such as "bi-partisanship", "global warming", "political correctness", or the "new tone" is a feather in the wind. I'm voting and encouraging those I know to vote for Senator McCain not because I support him. I'm doing so because I don't want this country to be taken over by socialists and marxists like HillBama. In essence, I am voting for McCain to vote against whichever one takes the donkey crown. David Hinz is attempting to send a powerful message to Senator McCain that we want a rock and not a feather. He is doing this for the BENEFIT of Senator McCain and us. I support his actions whole-heartedly.
Tim Schieferecke

Let's say that I believe in a small government.

One small enough that it not have its tendrils in, say, a Doctor's Office.

Does that make me immoderate on the issue of "The sanctity of life?"

Let's say that part of me thinks that part of having "a safe and secure nation" is having, and maintaining, the manufacturing capacity to build tanks on the levels that we were able to in the 30's and 40's... and having and maintaining a manufacturing workforce skilled enough and capable enough to do such a thing.

If I thought that tariffs (let's say 10%, across the board) would do that... would that mean that I am immoderate when it comes to the question regarding Free market economics?

You only needed another pairing of, perhaps, "Federalism" and "Keeping our Children off of drugs" to really get this question chock full of bromides that, at the end of the day, have competition when it comes to implementation.

Man is free at the moment he wishes to be. --Voltaire

blockquote>You keep forgetting that Moderates are a big part of the Republican Party. You keep throwing us under the bus, well, we are already leaving the party (see: Bloomberg).

Who's accusing who of being divisive? If you want to leave the party...by all means! There's this funny thing in America and it's called majority rule, the majority of the Republican Party is Conservative so it follows the party and it's nominee should act like conservatives. You have a right to you opinions and to fight for what you believe as do I!

If McCain loses because of the foolish nonsense, I will blame Conservatives since they want to hijack this race.

It's the nominee's job as our candidate to put together a winning coalition. McCain is making the calculation that he can pander to so called "Moderates" and independents and he's betting he can retain enough Conservative support to put him over the top in November. It's a gamble he might be able to pull off...only time will tell!

The thing is, it's a dangerous game he's playing, he's basically giving us the heave ho. You can believe it'll be Conservatives fault because they wouldn't play along, and I'll believe it's his fault for telling us to hit the road...either way...we all lose with Barry in the White House.

David and I and many others here want him to win so as to defeat the Dems. We think he's going about it wrong and if he goes to far in alienating his base we're all in trouble.

That leaves us with the only option aside from sitting on our hands and not voting for him, namely sending a message that he's wrong if he thinks he's united his base behind him when we all know he hasn't.

1. It makes him look more moderate. For example, my criticism of him with some friends has made them more likely to vote for him since he is not as "far right" as me. On a grander scale, when people like Rush criticize McCain, it probably helps McCain retain his "maverick" status. Triangulator moderates (not all moderates are triangulators) see dems criticize McCain and the right criticize McCain and conclude "he must be right"

2. He may move rightward in response on issues that he is flexible on. Nobody has entrenched positions on everything, so a little of pressure may do some good.

It is my patriotic and maverick-like duty to do what I can in the ways that I am best suited.

but I've got to wonder if you consider Bloomberg a moderate. The guy is a liberal who chose to run as a Republican. There is nothing approaching even moderate status about him. Since he supports none of our views, I can't see any advantage to having him in the party. Why water our remaining principles down?

Heck he can run as an I, and I'd vote for him. Lieberman is better than Lamont and Bloomberg is better than the Spitzer/Clinton/Schumer NY Democrat wing.

It is New York, after all.

______________________________________
Donate to the Rs in Close Senate Races through Slatecard

instead of a Republican and I could support him on that end. I have no particular hate for Bloomberg(except on RKBA where I can't stand him), but I see no reason that we should consider him any important part of the party since he agrees with us on almost nothing and with the Democrats on much.

And he'd probably prefer GOV to SEN is my guess. But if Arnold (R) runs in CA, Lieberman (I) in CT, and Bloomberg (I) in NY... we could have 3 "non-partisan" SENs from blue states.

Sure they are all left-of-center, but they would be free of partisan restrictions and could break rank on issues like the War, confirming judges, etc.

It would almost be like a left-of-center third party if the SEN was close enough.

______________________________________
Donate to the Rs in Close Senate Races through Slatecard

to run as an R. That was in reference to BigGator5's comment above that we are losing moderates giving Bloomberg as an example. I agree that he would be slightly better than Schumer or Hillary, though, if it comes to that.

I'd probably vote for Bloomberg over Clinton or Schumer or Cuomo, probably, but I don't think it's as clear-cut as you seem to think.

Bloomberg is basically only conservative in the sense that he's not a reflexively ideological liberal. I can't think of a single issue I'd actually call him "conservative" on, with the possible exception of law and order, and even at that he's only kinda-sorta conservative.

I'd vote for him because he's a good administrator and wouldn't spend his entire time in office trying to tear down Republicans. But I'm not sure we'd get anything but that from him.

"I ain't never votin' fo another Democrat so long as I can draw breath! I'll vote for a dog first!" - Leola Thomas

You're a persistent cuss, pilgrim. John Wayne to James Stewart in The Man Who Shot Liberty Valance.

about someone picking a fight with an R instead of a D.

The hypocrisy of that is so blatant and obvious it's painful.

"I ain't never votin' fo another Democrat so long as I can draw breath! I'll vote for a dog first!" - Leola Thomas

about this.

Perhaps.

But last time I checked, McCain isn't blogging here.

"I ain't never votin' fo another Democrat so long as I can draw breath! I'll vote for a dog first!" - Leola Thomas

anything. Better just to address the substance, don't you think? Labelling people hypocritical is not a way to facilitate discussion.

We are led by a maverick, so we should expect to be a party of mavericks. So long as people will vote for McCain, they should have the right to vent/argue what they want.

Right. I agree that this blog is a waste of time.

So what's your problem exactly?

"I ain't never votin' fo another Democrat so long as I can draw breath! I'll vote for a dog first!" - Leola Thomas

If it's a waste of time...why are you posting to it?

Because I get a perverse pleasure out of pointing out the foolishness of fools, similar to how Judge Scalia does.

I'm nowhere near as good as him, but I enjoy it when I can.

Crap like this is the proverbial sitting duck.

"I ain't never votin' fo another Democrat so long as I can draw breath! I'll vote for a dog first!" - Leola Thomas

Calling people fools, jerks and saying the things they write are "Crap" is a fantastic way to lose respect of just about everyone around here.

Having said that, I fully agree you have a right to say what you will about anyone here.

your signature is more offensive and will lose you more respect, or at least should, then any possible insult I could hurl at you personally.

So I'd appreciate it if you'd shut up and take the log out of your own eye before the spec in your own.

That said, everybody can be a fool on any given day, myself included. Some are fools more often then others, true, but I wasn't necessarily saying that about anybody in particular.

Pointing out foolishness is an important part of debate. If we can't do that, I mine as well pack it in. And things such as your signature is foolishness in the first order. If you want to take offense at that, perhaps you should.

"I ain't never votin' fo another Democrat so long as I can draw breath! I'll vote for a dog first!" - Leola Thomas

Excuse me, I should have said "The log out of your own eye before the speck out of mine."

"I ain't never votin' fo another Democrat so long as I can draw breath! I'll vote for a dog first!" - Leola Thomas

Mike DeVine’s Charlotte Observer columns
http://thehinzsightreport.com
www.theminorityreportblog.com
www.race42008.com
"One man with courage makes a majority." - Andrew Jackson

then you should be more understanding about people just blowing off steam. A lot of the anti-McCain talk is a way to get it out our collective systems so that we can go on being non-maverick R's in the future.

______________________________________
Donate to the Rs in Close Senate Races through Slatecard

I took the survey for John McCain's campaign the other day and I told him what I thought was important, and my answers were very conservative, almost across the board. And I hope fights whoever the Democratic nominee is very shrewdly and with a lot of vigor. But I'm going to cut him a lot of slack personally because I know he's up against a bad array of political circumstances. He's not going to say what everyone strident in this party wants to hear, in my opinion.

And he couldn't credibly do it anyway: he's always been a moderate. If he turns into a fire-breathing Conservative in Jeckyll and Hyde fashion at this point, the media will chew him up and spit him out with the help of the DNC. He's going to run as a Moderate Republican and occasionally throw some bones to the "big C" conservatives. He's not going to flipflop on himself or try to reinvent himself. He cannot afford to do so -- he'll get creamed.

He already is getting blasted unfairly by the Ds, and he responds nicely to their accusations. When an R group campaigns in some manner that he disagrees with he lashes out and says they are out of touch with reality. Why just why must he always appear to come down harder on the Rs than on the Ds? I want him to fight for the job. I don't want a replay of '96.

You're a persistent cuss, pilgrim. John Wayne to James Stewart in The Man Who Shot Liberty Valance.

but the handwriting is already on the wall. The MSM has begun their "TOO old" "Bad Temper" and judging by the trolls, "Ties to Special Interests" memes, and at some time before November, he will need us. I'd LIKE for him to acknowledge the base before that time...before it is too late.

'96 VP debate. Remember when Gore insulted "the extra chromosome right wing" and Kemp (one of the most articulate spokespeople for supply side economics) said thanks for being excluded from the category rather than standing up for those whom Gore was not being civil?

Well, that is exactly what McCain intends to do. Be so "nice" that he appears to be of untouchable character. Of course, the MSM will not let him get away with it.

The problem with that strategy is that Kemp came off looking like a fool.

I can't for the life of me understand why Republican's would want to emulate the losing Dole 96 Campaign...but there you have it!

Your ability to knock down straw men is truly second to none.

"I ain't never votin' fo another Democrat so long as I can draw breath! I'll vote for a dog first!" - Leola Thomas

I was and still am a big Jack Kemp fan, but his debate performance was TERRIBLE. Instead of sticking up for his supporters, he let Gore insult them without any response in a desire to be civil and above the fray.

You have to admit that McCain seems guided by a similar principle in denouncing the NC ad.

Right.

And what's that have to do with McCain exactly?

I do not admit at all that it's similar, because it's not.

"I ain't never votin' fo another Democrat so long as I can draw breath! I'll vote for a dog first!" - Leola Thomas

McCain's condemnationn of the NC ad is analogous in certain respects to Kemp's acqiesence to Gore's comment about the right in the VP debate.

Both McCain and Kemp were willing to let their teammates take a hit in order to make themselves look good. Both wanted to seem to be above the fray, and in their conduct, let their supporters be insulted (in McCain's case, McCain did the insulting in Kemp's case he simply refrained from refuting the allegation).

No, it's not, it's totally different. Only the most strained analogy would find them similar.

If I were going to strain analogies as bad as you, I could just as easily that it's McCain's Sister Soljah (SP?) moment when Clinton took on his party. It went OK for him (It's not the same, even close, that's my point.)

But fortunately for us, neither analogy fits. It's something else entirely.

"I ain't never votin' fo another Democrat so long as I can draw breath! I'll vote for a dog first!" - Leola Thomas

at the expense of your supporters.

The Clinton analogy could be applicable but for where the public stands on the issues.

The majority of the country agreed with Clinton.
The majority of country disagrees that Wright should be off limits.

Forgetting the analogy issue for a second, do you think triangulation is a good strategy? Nixon and Clinton were both triangulators, and it was TERRIBLE FOR THE COUNTRY. Both Presidencies wounded the nation in significant ways.

What principles are you moderate on?

I am a big Kemp fan as well. Whether it was him...or the Dole campaign that was responsible for his performance...it was a sad day for me because is brand has been damaged ever since.

the VP is supposed to be the pitbull. Instead, Kemp just kept accepting compliments from Gore while Gore insulted everyone else---including Dole.

Very disappointed that night. Very disappointed.

He answered every question with "a rising tide lifts all boats" line too...That got pretty annoying!

The problem isn't only that he won't give us red meat!

What got this started over the weekend his McCain's attack on the NC GOP and his slur of the Republican Administration that they were responsible for the mess in New Orleans as if the Democrat administrations there on the state and local level didn't bear any responsibility for embezzling the funds sent to build up the levees and for not preparing for the category five hurricane that they were given fair warning was coming!

You may think it's a good idea to attack people you need to vote for you and you can rationalize it any way you want but it's the way to defeat to strangle your own and McCain will bear the responsibility for a Democrat Administration if it comes about!

I agree that we need an anti-liberal coalitionbut it complicates matters when the Republican nominee takes liberal positions himself.

We do not prefer purity to a majority. We prefer a majority that is as conservative as possible. Or as an alternative, someone who is at least as respectful of people to his right as those to his left.

McCain is a fine man. His instincts for triangulation are troubling.

Mcain is also hampered by an inability to express the positive side of limited government. He has Dole-like quality in talking about limited government---it comes off as either green eye-shade stuff or simply rationing. He does not understand supply side economics, which is the only realistic way to sell limited government to moderates.

When the economy is in trouble, people want someone who understands how to make it grow. They are not looking for someone necessarily to clean up the balance sheet at the U.S. Treasury Dept.

all it earned him was a stump where his hand used to be. McCain, if he is elected, can expect the same treatment.

Bush turned the other cheek. McCain, I believe, is more of an eye for an eye guy.

HTML Help for Red Staters
"If we want to take this party back, and I think we can someday, let’s get to work." – Barry Goldwater

I haven't seen it. Even on Iraq, his most passionate issue, I have not seen it.

If McCain would just lose his temper with a democrat like Kennedy--just once---to show what you say, we would all be the happier for it.

You're a persistent cuss, pilgrim. John Wayne to James Stewart in The Man Who Shot Liberty Valance.

They've never come after him, but they will in the runup to November. He'll feel betrayed, then he'll strike them down and take his place at our side. It is his destiny. I have foreseen it.

HTML Help for Red Staters
"If we want to take this party back, and I think we can someday, let’s get to work." – Barry Goldwater

you and I just said almost exactly the same thing, from opposite sides of the same coin. The MSM and the Dems WILL turn on him. If he waits too long, the base will not come to his defense.

I think he wins whether conservatives unify with him or not, thanks in part to the Ds having two very weak options to run against him.

I'm more concerned about what happens after he gets elected. I think conservatives should look at that, realize it, and support him without reservation.

HTML Help for Red Staters
"If we want to take this party back, and I think we can someday, let’s get to work." – Barry Goldwater

I will always have some reservations about any politician running for an office. I am not looking for any politician to save me. I do think any disagreements should be civil instead of rude. You and the other site moderators are doing a good job of policing rude abusive language etc.

You're a persistent cuss, pilgrim. John Wayne to James Stewart in The Man Who Shot Liberty Valance.

I think we should have no doubts, questions, or regrets about getting him elected. He's far and away the clear choice in November. No other candidate will be better, among national candidates that have a mathematical shot at election by being on the ballot in enough states.

Once he's in office, though, all bets are off.

HTML Help for Red Staters
"If we want to take this party back, and I think we can someday, let’s get to work." – Barry Goldwater

well, of course, all of us except the closet HHSNBN supporters.

Please forgive my ignorance oh highly exhalted and enlightned one...but what pray tell is HHSNBN?

He Who Shall Not Be Named

"I ain't never votin' fo another Democrat so long as I can draw breath! I'll vote for a dog first!" - Leola Thomas

Ohh...you mean Ron P...?

sorry...almost slipped

:>)

deserve to lose their place at the table. We have issues about which we are passionate. To expect that we will pretend those issues don't exist is asinine.

Also, to ditto another commenter: thanks, Neil and other mods for maintaining civility in this discussion.

Fred Thompson, 2008

HTML Help for Red Staters
"If we want to take this party back, and I think we can someday, let’s get to work." – Barry Goldwater

I wish to second the sentiments about keeping things civil and apologize where I've gone over the line.

I'll just say that I think the insulting graphics in the signature lines of several posters are definitely bringing down the "civility" of the site. And they are bound to continue poking at supporters of the Republican nominee.

But being insulting and offensive is the whole point, right? That's how you get more attention. And being insulting will talk McCain into listening to you more? That's the impression I've gotten from these diaries.

______________________________________
Donate to the Rs in Close Senate Races through Slatecard

"I ain't never votin' fo another Democrat so long as I can draw breath! I'll vote for a dog first!" - Leola Thomas

I'll just say that I think the insulting graphics in the signature lines of several posters are definitely bringing down the "civility" of the site.

Are you saying that you find the whole concept of upside-down McCain banners 'insulting'?

What's curious about that is that the reason people are putting those kinds of banners there in the first place is that they feel that their conservative beliefs and ideals have been insulted by Sen. McCain.

So, pray tell, what exactly is the moderator-approved method for those of us tired of being insulted by Sen. McCain to express our opinions? It sounds like you're telling us to sit down and shut up.

---
Finrod's First Law of Bandwidth:
A picture may be worth a thousand words, but it takes the bandwidth of ten thousand.

I'd find it insulting if you put McCain's name in a swastika too.

Strangely, making a thinly veiled illusion to typical Anti-Americanism insults Patriotic Americans.

(and please, don't do this 'But I just meant...blah blah blah', nobody cares. There are some things that are offensive just because they are. This one isn't even a close call.)

"I ain't never votin' fo another Democrat so long as I can draw breath! I'll vote for a dog first!" - Leola Thomas

Every post I see from you on this site lately is attacking other posters and making lame analogies that don't even pass the giggle test.

Comparing a McCain banner that's upside down to a swastika? What are you smoking?

---
Finrod's First Law of Bandwidth:
A picture may be worth a thousand words, but it takes the bandwidth of ten thousand.

Are you capable of figuring anything out that isn't explicitly explained to you?

Question 2:

Which are you personally more offended by, this:

Or this:

Because I'm personally more offended by the 2nd one.

And don't give me this crap about it not being based on that, because he even explicitly says it is, even as he has a lame a$$ excuse for why it's OK.

"I ain't never votin' fo another Democrat so long as I can draw breath! I'll vote for a dog first!" - Leola Thomas

If you can't see the difference between an upside-down McCain ad and an upside-down American flag, then you've got some serious identity issues, if you think McCain's banner requires the same equal respect that the American flag does.

---
Finrod's First Law of Bandwidth:
A picture may be worth a thousand words, but it takes the bandwidth of ten thousand.

b/c some people seemed to think it wasn't.

______________________________________
Donate to the Rs in Close Senate Races through Slatecard

So you're now arguing that when someone turns a sign upside down while explicitly stating that they intend it to invoke the image on an upside down American flag, its out of line to think of it like an upside down American flag?

If this is the reasoning you're resorting to, I will consider myself the easy victor of this debate.

Allow me to taunt you further, just for fun.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ae-hCUDZ1ZQ

"I ain't never votin' fo another Democrat so long as I can draw breath! I'll vote for a dog first!" - Leola Thomas

Because A is like to B, does not mean that A is equivalent to B. Analogies are not equivalencies.

You tried to claim that McCain's banner deserves the same respect as the American flag, but can't even defend your own position. You remind me of a silly feminist I ran across in an unrelated forum recently that tried to claim that someone lightly touching her on the arm was equivalent to them raping her.

No sense of proportion or logical argument at all.

---
Finrod's First Law of Bandwidth:
A picture may be worth a thousand words, but it takes the bandwidth of ten thousand.

I'm trying to figure out something to say to highlight you're pure idiocy here, but you're doing such a good job yourself I can't think of a way to state it better then you already have.

"I ain't never votin' fo another Democrat so long as I can draw breath! I'll vote for a dog first!" - Leola Thomas

The reasons and proceedures for posting a flag upside down are written in the law.

It's a signal of distress, a request for aid. it's used by military units to signal danger when the have no other means to communicate. It's not about patriotism or a lack thereof.

As for the Flag...we discussed the flag being on the original bumper sticker David used and decided not to use it since it had a flag on it so as not to dishonor it.

Please do me a favor and keep the mention of Nazis out of this

Right.

And the Swastika was merely a Buddhist symbol used in China and Tibet.

See?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Swastika

Obviously, thus, it's not offensive.

/sarc

"I ain't never votin' fo another Democrat so long as I can draw breath! I'll vote for a dog first!" - Leola Thomas

I wasn't the one applauding the civility of this whole conversation. My point was that if people are going to pat themselves on the back for being "civil," then they should drop the insulting icons.

______________________________________
Donate to the Rs in Close Senate Races through Slatecard

What's curious about that is that the reason people are putting those kinds of banners there in the first place is that they feel that their conservative beliefs and ideals have been insulted by Sen. McCain.

That is partly true...morso for some of us than others.

It's a way to say Johny Mac, you have our support, we want to elect you and stop Barry, but we think you are going about it in the wrong way. We don't think it's a good idea to use your more conservative brethren as door mats to ingratiate yourself to the MSM.

In short, as with our flag it says we are a patriot, (read McCain Supporter where the sign is concerned) but we are ink distress.

It's a plea to our leader for help and support!

It is his destiny. I have foreseen it.

I can't help but note that you sound like the dark Lord of the Sith when you say that. Are we to assume McCain is supposed to be Luke Skywalker with David playing the part of Darth Vader?

:>)

HTML Help for Red Staters
"If we want to take this party back, and I think we can someday, let’s get to work." – Barry Goldwater

"Operation Manchurian Conservative"

"Land of the Free and Home of da Whopper" Peter Griffin...Family Guy

conform and celebrate diversity....or else!!!

HTML Help for Red Staters
"If we want to take this party back, and I think we can someday, let’s get to work." – Barry Goldwater

"Operation Manchurian Conservative"

"Land of the Free and Home of da Whopper" Peter Griffin...Family Guy

conform and celebrate diversity....or else!!!

I believe that SOME of the positions he has taken over the past 8 years have been a certain eye-for-an-eye back at Bush for the 2000 primary. I know, I cannot prove it, but I am not the only one who suspects that.

OTOH, when the Dems suddenly turn on him, if he retaliates in kind, HE will become the "bad tempered" OLD guy...

And therein lies the problem. He needs friends. And his friends are in the base. The moderates will blow whichever way the wind blows -- and when the MSM wind blows left...

HTML Help for Red Staters
"If we want to take this party back, and I think we can someday, let’s get to work." – Barry Goldwater

If he's an eye for an eye guy I haven't seen it when it comes to the Dems...He's more likely to say here, take this guy's eye to if a Dem is on the other side of him!

"Mcain (sic) is also hampered by an inability to express the positive side of limited government."

If you believe that, then you haven't listened to him on the campaign trail at all. In fact, his general instinct for limited government is why I supported him in the primary. His opposition to Medicare D was big (against the R leadership no less). His instinct on bailing out banks due to the mortgage "crisis" was small government.

It's the general theme of most of his talks and it was very prominent during the primary campaign.

No one said he's perfect. But the amount of time spent attacking the R nominee compared to the amount of time conservative bloggers spend on electing conservatives seems rather sad.

______________________________________
Donate to the Rs in Close Senate Races through Slatecard

he is typically focused on eliminating waste, avoiding deficits, etc. He is not a spokesperson for supply side economics. He personally has never worked in the private sector, and it shows in how he talks about economic issues.

I am not saying this stuff on neutral sites. It is an attempt to identify weaknesses so that they can be remedied by the team.

His opposition to the prescription drug benefit was something I liked, but Republicans who are perceived to be "Mr. No" on economic issues tend not be well liked (i.e. Bob Dole, Newt, etc). The message needs to be pro-growth. McCain is getting better at it, but it is not his instinctive focus.

His opposition to Medicare D was big (against the R leadership no less). His instinct on bailing out banks due to the mortgage "crisis" was small government.

It's the general theme of most of his talks and it was very prominent during the primary campaign.

I agree with you here and give McCain credit where credit is due.

FWIW, I've never said nor thought the man was perfect. He's well above average though. And that makes this election clear to me (and clearer than usual).

IMHO, it was time for someone committed to fighting earmarking and the growing bipartisan acceptance of pork corruption. He was the only one with a record of fighting both parties on that issue.

______________________________________
Donate to the Rs in Close Senate Races through Slatecard

it was time for someone committed to fighting earmarking and the growing bipartisan acceptance of pork corruption

We agree there!

Especially those you mention. McCain's always been in favor of cutting spending, and that will be a fresh change from the past eight years.

That doesn't mean I don't have serious concerns. I can't see how he'll reduce spending and support cap-n-trade. His position illegal immigration concerns me greatly.

This conservative is supporting McCain to the end. That doesn't mean I can't still send a message.

"After two years in Washington, I often long for the realism and sincerity of Hollywood." -Fred Dalton Thompson

I understand the concerns. That's why we have a primary. People fight for their guy. But the only way the system works, is if the losers stay inside the coalition. Moderate Rs support Bush enough to help him win. Now it's conservatives turn to support an ally who is imperfect in their view.

What I find disturbing is the amount of time spent attacking the Republican instead of working on winning other seats. There is a front page story on a LA seat where a very conservative R is running. Have people complaining here donated to Jenkins? Wrote about him? Raised awareness? Volunteered?

How about in AL-05 (another Bush 60+% district) where there should be a conservative R who can win. I wrote a diary about the district today, but most people spent their time whining on another anti-McCain thread.

If conservatives want to ignore the Presidential race and just vote for McCain, I understand that. But focus the time and effort on getting conservatives elected. If (and it's still a big if) McCain wins in November, there will be plenty of time to help influence the direction of the administration.

______________________________________
Donate to the Rs in Close Senate Races through Slatecard

this approach would be welcome. Yes, those of us with the upside down stickers, will vote for John McCain. But we are, at the same time, expressing our dissatisfaction. Don't ask us to quietly step in line and shut up about our opinions. You wouldn't. Neither will I.

Fred Thompson, 2008

This post has been altered from the original. The title is VERY different, and the tone set was pretty different.

Some of the comments in thread predate the title change, and are no longer operative.

HTML Help for Red Staters
"If we want to take this party back, and I think we can someday, let’s get to work." – Barry Goldwater

Fred Thompson, 2008

"Don't ask us to quietly step in line and shut up about our opinions. You wouldn't. Neither will I."

I just wish you'd spend half the time y'all spend complaining in an effort to get other conservatives elected. Every minutes and comment spent on another "wah, my guy lost" diary is a minute not spent helping conservatives.

We spent massive numbers of hours and days during the primaries having this fight. We're now in the "how do we win" phase. After that comes the "what do we do now" phase which is always more fun if we win than if we lose... and it would be especially harsh if Rs lose the Presidency along with the Senate and House (which are both far worse for Rs in terms of odds of winning).

But if putting an insulting bumper sticker* on your car and posts is what gets Jenkins elected in LA-06, so be it.

*which is how it will be seen by anyone not in the "in" crowd.
______________________________________
Donate to the Rs in Close Senate Races through Slatecard

Its done, enough already.

really only see us on RedState, would it be fair to say you don't -know- what we spend the rest of our time doing?

This is a conservative site; so our efforts toward getting other Rs elected wouldn't necessarily be concentrated here, correct?

Fred Thompson, 2008

Freedom of Religion not Freedom from Religion

This site is expressly partisan. See posting rules for details.

HTML Help for Red Staters
"If we want to take this party back, and I think we can someday, let’s get to work." – Barry Goldwater

the point is that using what we say on RedState as an indication that we're not doing enough to get Rs elected is silly.

Fred Thompson, 2008

We need more on the ground reports about efforts to elect local congressmen, state level officials, even state congressmen.

Please take the time to write on that so we know where efforts are going on and how successful they are.

Or just keep using your time to whine about something we fought about for 3 months already during the primary.

______________________________________
Donate to the Rs in Close Senate Races through Slatecard

this comment might be considered "Chickenhawking."

Mike DeVine’s Charlotte Observer columns
http://thehinzsightreport.com
www.theminorityreportblog.com
www.race42008.com
"One man with courage makes a majority." - Andrew Jackson

but I don't see how that responded to my point that multiple diaries complaining about McCain and creating insulting graphics is not getting conservatives elected.

So I repeat, how does putting an insulting graphic on your car help get Jenkins elected next month? Or the MS-01? Or AL-05?

How does it help Republicans win the Presidency this year?

We fought during the primary. We will fight after the election. Right now is the time to win. If you can't help McCain win the Presidency, help other conservatives win their races.

______________________________________
Donate to the Rs in Close Senate Races through Slatecard

It's not intended to be insulting...and I can only apologize if you find it so...the intent is to say we won't be taken for granted and we won't be whipping boys so the Party cdan play to the MSM and the Dems.

Right. The Dick Durbin excuse. "I'm not offensive for comparing out troops to Nazis, but I'm sorry if you were offended."

Remember this next time a D does something like this. You better not complain.

"I ain't never votin' fo another Democrat so long as I can draw breath! I'll vote for a dog first!" - Leola Thomas

There is another graphic down there that isn't as insulting.

I can see how y'all might not see it as insulting, but if I saw that on a care I'd assume you were voting for Keyes/Barr/Buchanan or whoever loses the duck duck goose game to be the Nader of the Right.

But I've never been part of the group who thought yelling loudest or being disrespectful were the way to win people over.

How about a simple Conservatives for McCain sticker. Or a Reagan > McCain >>> Obama sticker. Something, I dunno... that actually supports him.

Because I can't say this sticker does anything to allay my fear that conservatives want to dislike him and fight against him instead of work with and work for him.

There is work to be done to make sure the Ds don't win the White House and both houses of Congress. Conservatives need to be won over. And an icon that helps in that process would show respect and assistance. Maybe it's me, but I listen to the guy who shows up willing to work and help... not the one who whines the loudest about being "hijacked" and acting "under duress."

______________________________________
Donate to the Rs in Close Senate Races through Slatecard

How about a simple Conservatives for McCain sticker. Or a Reagan > McCain >>> Obama sticker. Something, I dunno... that actually supports him.

What needs saying is Hey John...wake up....things aren't all daisies and roses over here. The spin is that everything is fine and McCain has solidified his base and is free to go after Mods, and Indies. The reality is something different.

Those of us making noise here are just the tip of the spear...I can tell you where I am on the ground, McCain hasn't rallied Conservatives and every time he opens his mouth and attacks us he is making the spear bigger.

I want him to win...I want him to help me help him win. I want him to make me feel good about helping him win...not resent him for the next 4-8 years for all the insults and slaps at us .

Mike DeVine’s Charlotte Observer columns
http://thehinzsightreport.com
www.theminorityreportblog.com
www.race42008.com
"One man with courage makes a majority." - Andrew Jackson

I just wish you'd spend half the time y'all spend complaining in an effort to get other conservatives elected.

Many of us are angry with last weeks events and are venting to be sure...I'll support McCain when I think him right and I'll criticize him when I think him wrong.

I and those like me here will settle down for a while and things will get back to where it was last week...it would help if our nominee would try to keep it that way and stop provoking us...only time will tell.

Please take this in the spirit it was intended because it could be read either way but I really do hope we can settle in and walk happily to victory!

I just wish you'd spend half the time y'all spend complaining in an effort to get other conservatives elected.

But that's what the Party leaders in NC were trying to do when McCain decided to "go maverick" on them.

The problem with McCain is because he has no discernable guiding principles that any of the rest of us can count on, we can never tell just what is going to set him off. Sometimes he acts like one of us and sometimes he doesn't and there is absolutely no predicting which it is going to be because if he has principles, nobody knows what they are.

Things were settling down in Republican ranks here at Redstate and elsewhere pretty nicely until McCain decided to attack the NC GOP and President Bush over Katrina. These episodes of McCain go'n maverick are totally unpredictable. The only thing consistent is that it is always a conservtive who ends up with a knife in the back.

If McCain is going to keep go'n maverick on conservatives he can expect the favor to be returned in kind.

I've pretty much avoided the presidential race since right after Fred got out. You can look at my posts here and see that. My last blog on the Presidential race was on Feburary 9th, and it was in support of McCain. About the only time I even say anything is in response to your weekly complaint about how Fred isn't doing enough.

Personally, I am concerning myself with the local races in Colorado. We've got a big fight on our hands. I've blogged about it a few times here, but frankly it gets little interest. That's why I've taken to blogging these local issues on my own personal blog.

I'm still going to have my say about the areas where I disagree with McCain. It'll be on blogs by others, because I'm not going to bring it up. I think there's still room for that. If not, I don't have a problem staying away until after the election if that's what the Directors prefer.

"After two years in Washington, I often long for the realism and sincerity of Hollywood." -Fred Dalton Thompson

Come on Adam...We've gone over and over this!

It's not about purity....if it were Bush wouldn't have had our support because we knew about his "Compassionate Conservatism" going in. I've never liked that label either because the whole movement in the Republican Party was started by none other that Arriana Huffington before she went off the deep end and I've always believed it implied that those willing to use government to accomplish conservative ends are "compassionate" while those that believed in limited government are knuckle dragging Neanderthals....(but I digress).

It's not about purity...it's about agreeing with your enemies about the vile things Democrats say and believe we represent! It's about openly attacking your supporters and leaping at every opportunity to pander to the media at the expense of your base!

But as long as people continue reliving the primary instead of focusing on getting Rs elected, we're going to keep going "over and over" this.

______________________________________
Donate to the Rs in Close Senate Races through Slatecard

we are raising concerns regarding the campaign that McCain will wage in the general election. This is the election of self-inflicted wounds on all sides. McCain seemed to be doing great, until he started stepping into things this week. We just want him to get on the right track and focus not on attacking Bush in New Orleans or an ad by a state Republican party, and instead focus on his opponents.

Besides, complaints from the right probably helpd McCain with moderate voters anyway.

are not about "getting him on the right track." They are self-centered. If someone wants to get him on the right track, then the effort should be winning over voters, not putting up slogans like "voting McCain under duress" or "help, liberals took over my party."

That's not a good faith effort to help out the campaign or get McCain elected.

On the other hand (and whether we like it or not), criticizing the government's response to Katrina is likely to help out the campaign and get the Republican elected.

______________________________________
Donate to the Rs in Close Senate Races through Slatecard

Again, it's not about the primary and who won or lost in the primaries! It's about current events and the behavior of out nominee.

I'm trying to get my head around this and see it from your perspective. I think you have a point about looking back to the primaries longingly about what could have been...(I'm looking back at my support for Huck after he defended Wright and wondering what I was thinking...LOL). There's a Bible verse that speaks of looking to the past not being a good thing...but it escapes me at the moment.

Look at it this way. We want McCain to stop Barry even if we don't agree with McCain on everything. Let's start with that as a premise and work from there.

We don't think it's a good tactic to say the things he said last week and think it's destructive to our mutual goal to attack Republicans fighting against a common enemy. It's provocative and demoralizing to us.

We see a problem that some of you don't see or don't want to acknowledge. We've devised this tag to point out the problem as one that needs to be addressed because it serves no constructive purpose to pretend the problem doesn't exist.

Maybe we're framing the arguement wrong and focusing more on what we're outraged about instead of being constructive about our criticisms. When passions are up, that will happen.

So please take this for what it is. If McCain can frame his message in a way that doesn't insult and demean us he'd go a long way toward keeping down the outbursts that's occurred over the weekend and help us feel a lot better about his prospects and earn our respect going forward!

"Look at it this way. We want McCain to stop Barry even if we don't agree with McCain on everything. Let's start with that as a premise and work from there."

I see diaries about staying home or even "voting for Hillary" from "conservatives." I see these little icons that talk about being hijacked, duress, and put the Republican nominee's name upside down.

If I put a little icon that said "Fred sleeps too much" it wouldn't be taken as "trying to help him out," it'd be seen as insulting and disrespectful.

Where's the diary on how to beat Sen. Obama instead of the slew of diaries on how mad people are about supporting Sen. McCain?

Bottom line: I don't think I can accept the assertion that this is all in the interest of winning. It seems to have a lot more to do with people wanting their perfect nominee instead of the one we have.

McCain's the nominee, the goal is now to win. Then we get to argue about what to do.

______________________________________
Donate to the Rs in Close Senate Races through Slatecard

I see diaries about staying home or even "voting for Hillary" from "conservatives." I see these little icons that talk about being hijacked, duress, and put the Republican nominee's name upside down.

You have a point about my tag and the duress comment...I'll chew on that and likely change it. I put it there to explain why the sign was upside down...I didn't think it would be taken the way you took it.

If I put a little icon that said "Fred sleeps too much" it wouldn't be taken as "trying to help him out," it'd be seen as insulting and disrespectful.

I think it would be seen as funny as all get out...LOL (I'm fighting the urge to say it's true just to be funny but I won't).

I don't think it's insulting is the short answer!

---

My Party's been hijacked,
I'm voting for McCain under duress!!

Hope it doesn't mess up the thread

It looks funny but didn't mess anything up.

______________________________________
Donate to the Rs in Close Senate Races through Slatecard

Because right now we have 2 diaries on actual races with Democrats involved on the rec list (LA-06 and AL-05). I wish we'd get more of those on the list.

______________________________________
Donate to the Rs in Close Senate Races through Slatecard

RS 3 will fix that though, heh. I finished the state sections myself.

HTML Help for Red Staters
"If we want to take this party back, and I think we can someday, let’s get to work." – Barry Goldwater

Just look at the recommended blogs at any given time. Look at the my blogs that have 1 or 2 recommends (if that) and few if any comments that are specifically related to the open CO Senate race. I even asked via the contact form if I could post a blog about Schaffer needing donations at the end of the last quarter, yet I never received a response. It rings rather hollow when people keep saying they want to see more of these but ignore many of the ones that are done.

I'm spending my efforts for State & local races on my own blog where it gets more local visibility, and hopefully will make some impact. Just because you don't see any efforts here doesn't mean they aren't happening.

"After two years in Washington, I often long for the realism and sincerity of Hollywood." -Fred Dalton Thompson

"Land of the Free and Home of da Whopper" Peter Griffin...Family Guy

conform and celebrate diversity....or else!!!

Here's the link:

http://nighttwister.blogivists.com

Check out my "Colorado Blogger" blogroll in the left column. There's enough good stuff there to keep you busy for days.

Also, in the upper right I keep a "Hot Links" list of the latest important articles (mostly Colorado-related).

Thanks for asking.

"After two years in Washington, I often long for the realism and sincerity of Hollywood." -Fred Dalton Thompson

Sorry, I meant to make that link clickable.

http://nighttwister.blogivists.com

"After two years in Washington, I often long for the realism and sincerity of Hollywood." -Fred Dalton Thompson

I've thought on this some since you posted it last night...I see your point about local races...but it's not what interests me. I'm more focussed on issues and a wide view of the battlefield where you are more interested in the view from the soldier's point of view.

I'm a student of history so let me put what I'm saying in a historical context.

During the Civil War, the Union was ill prepared for the war as it kicked off because a large swath of the professional military defected to the South. There was a pressing need for someone to build a large and effective army, to relentlessly drill the troops and train them until they could fight in their sleep. to build up a supply and procurement system so as to equip and feed and supply the army. That General was George McClellan. He was the best man for the job and the eastern army he trained and equipped was second to none. He was a detail person and he oversaw the details of building the army like no other could as a result.

One problem, as a battlefield Commander he was incompetent. Lee ran circles around him and confounded his every move when he would sally forth to do battle. He couldn't see the battlefield because he was more focussed on getting things the way he wanted it instead of seeing what was going on and fixing it on the fly.

Another General was needed to press home the victory, US Grant. He wasn't a drill and drum guy and could care less about the details. He was more of a big picture guy and reveled in using the strengths McClellan built into the army and using his logistical superiority to defeat Lee. As a tactician, he could see Lee's weakness was manpower and the only way to defeat him was through attrition. his strategy was to grab lee by the collar and lock him in a death grip to bring him to his knees. He won battles and lost battles but he never let Lee breath till the end.

I believe most Red Staters are like Grant...their passion is the whole battlefield. It's finding the enemy's weakness and picking at it till he's defeated, not just in one battle but defeated utterly and completely, never to rise again. Most of us are focussed on dealing with the weaknesses we see and dealing with the immediate battle not the details.

You seem to be more interested in the small game...the details on the ground...as McClellan, you are second to none at focusing on it.

I said all that to say...we need both to ultimately win. Most people are like Grant, they want to oversee the battle. The McClellans are fewer in number.

I'm from Texas and I'm interested in what happens in Texas and Nationally because those are the areas that affect me. California and Main are a world away from me. It's hard for me to focus on what happens in Manchester NH, or San Jose CA because what happens there doesn't affect me direstly. I know it matters which candidate is elected from those areas...but I don't have time to follow races for 435 members of Congress and to a lesser extent 33± Senators.

I know it's long winded but that's the way I see it and it's the best explanation why there aren't more reports on individual districts on Red State.

I do agree with you. That's why I come here for the "general stuff", and I stay on my blog (and other local blogs) for the local stuff.

I was responding to Adam's complaint that those of us that have a problem with McCain should shut up about it and concentrate on local issues. I'm already doing that. I'm just not doing it here, primarily for the reasons you've stated above. Most people here are not interested unless it's near them. I'll even admit I'm not as interested in local issues away from me as I am my own local issues and national issues (in that order), but I do try to follow major issues such as what's happening in LA.

I'm hardly McCain's greatest detractor. I probably like him more than most Fredheads. There's only a few things that really get me fired up about him. I also agree there's going to be a time when we do need to hold back anything negative and give him 100% support.

I disagree with Adam that this time has already come.

"After two years in Washington, I often long for the realism and sincerity of Hollywood." -Fred Dalton Thompson

I also agree there's going to be a time when we do need to hold back anything negative and give him 100% support.

We differ here...I don't think any leader is ever well served by yes men. In fact I don't think their is any single person that can do as much damage to a leader than a well placed and influential yes man.

In fact, I think an influential yes man can do far more damage to a candidate than his enemies.

The candidate needs to hear the truth, if he doesn't know the truth he can't fix the problem. He is not well served to be deluded into believing everything is going great until it's to late to fix an issue that will destroy him.

I want to lessen the chilling effect McCain's denunciation of NC's ad on other states' future plans. Ads that highlight the extremism of the dems work. We can't be afraid of the pc race speech police.

Mike DeVine’s Charlotte Observer columns
http://thehinzsightreport.com
www.theminorityreportblog.com
www.race42008.com
"One man with courage makes a majority." - Andrew Jackson

Kowalski...if you are going to chew on it...let's make sure you're starting from the correct premise from the perspective of those of us in the movement.
It's not about forcing McCain to accept big C Conservatives. It's not about forcing McCain to do anythin...He's proven over and over that you are tilting at windmills if you think he's gonna change, (I mean that in a good way for the most part BTW)!

It's about getting his attention and letting him know he's got a problem that won't go away. He needs to understand that it's fine to reach out and bring new people in but don't spit in the faces of your natural allies. It's about getting him to work with us while he's reaching out to others so we can win instead of giving us the back of the hand.

It wouldn't be taken as insulting like the other one.

______________________________________
Donate to the Rs in Close Senate Races through Slatecard

I think McCain is due some insults, in return for the ones he heaped on me during the "comprehensive" immigration reform debate. Supposedly, I'm a xenophobe and a racist, because I opposed St. John's policy prescriptions -- but now he, or his supporters, are too delicate to handle a little bumper-sticker nose-tweaking?

McCain claims that he "gets it" now, but I don't think he realizes just how injurious his continual backstabbing -- in word and in deed -- have been to his sainted reputation, and to his "support" among core Republican voters. He needs to receive that message. I guarantee that the following statement:

"I support McCain for President, but I have serious concerns about some of his policy proposals, including his attitude towards border security, anthropogenic global warming, judicial nominations, among others"

will be heard as

"I support McCain for President, mumble mumble mumble"

that last part especially.

Kill the terrorists
Protect the borders
Punch the hippies -- Frank J

I similarly have no problem with such a sticker. It isn't classless, stupid, or offensive like the upside down ones.

"I ain't never votin' fo another Democrat so long as I can draw breath! I'll vote for a dog first!" - Leola Thomas

right now. But thankfully most of you haven't.

Let me be clear...I repudiate the idea of voting for a Democrat! I understand the temptation and flirted with it for a while.

It serves no useful purpose...in fact it would inflate the Dem vote and allow them to say they had a mandate because of all the votes they got.

If you have to do anything leave it blank but know you have nothing to complain about when Barry wins.

And we need to have as conservative a Congress as possible. We don't want McCain with a democratic super-majority in Congress.

"I repudiate the idea of voting for a Democrat"

My worry is that the more activist conservatives here focus on the 20% negative instead of the 80% positive, the more it encourages less activists conservatives to stay home or vote D (see Haley's diary).

I think we're still in "Get the R elected" phase. And this year that is not going to be easy. So it bums me out to see people putting their creative talents into making insulting icons instead of using those efforts to get McCain (or other conservative Rs) elected.

______________________________________
Donate to the Rs in Close Senate Races through Slatecard

Adam...this is pretty specifically dedicated to a narrow message...It's the proverbial "Grabbing your guy by the collar and shaking him"!

It's saying stop bighting the hand that feeds you! it's demoralizing to those who would support you wholeheartedly if you'd stop agreeing with their enemies about who and what they are!

It sounds like an Obama'ism because he spends so much time repudiating stuff.

But you are right, it is a good bumper sticker. I added it to my signature.

ACE, let me know if you are upset that I stole your line and I'll take it off.

"I repudiate the idea of voting for a Democrat

Adam convinced me I need to change my current one to something with a similar twist that isn't as provocative. I wasn't planning on using the one you added so have at it!

:>)

Right.

And I'll stop referring to my black friends as "Watermelon and Fried Chicken Eaters" when he goes 90 days without doing something I personally disapprove of.

/sarc

"I ain't never votin' fo another Democrat so long as I can draw breath! I'll vote for a dog first!" - Leola Thomas

I don't think remarks like that have any place on Redstate, sarcasm or no.

---
Finrod's First Law of Bandwidth:
A picture may be worth a thousand words, but it takes the bandwidth of ten thousand.

Yah? Well I'm not the one that tried to defend his (essentially incomprehensible) position on immigration by saying "Mexicans are drunk drivers."

I think I'll sleep OK tonight, strangely.

"I ain't never votin' fo another Democrat so long as I can draw breath! I'll vote for a dog first!" - Leola Thomas

When posters start dragging in items from other unrelated threads, to me that says "I've lost the argument, so I have to try to bring back up arguments from other threads so I can look like I'm winning".

For some reason, you found me quoting facts to be racist. Earth to Major Tom, facts are not racist, they are simply facts. You seem to be finding racism in places it can't exist, which to me says that you are in fact the racist.

---
Finrod's First Law of Bandwidth:
A picture may be worth a thousand words, but it takes the bandwidth of ten thousand.

A. If you could read words in context, you'd know that I'm actually doing the opposite.

B. Thanks for actually admitting you said it, I thought you'd deny it.

C. As for you actually trying to come off looking like anything but the racist jerk you are?

"I ain't never votin' fo another Democrat so long as I can draw breath! I'll vote for a dog first!" - Leola Thomas

Who said anything racist besides you...Your posts are the only ones that include racial stereotypes. I've read every single post to this thread and all I hear everyone else talking about is McCain and the message we're trying to send him...you're the one pullin g race in from left field and you go to far calling people racists without backing it up!

where Finrod made a point about Hispanics being more likely to be drunk drivers.

Actually, he was saying that he opposed illegal immigration, in Tennessee, no less, because a survey in North Carolina said Hispanics were more likely to be drunk drivers.

I'm not kidding. He actually said that. And he actually seems to think that's OK and that his logic was sound.

Keep in mind, I wasn't even necessarily disagreeing with his overall position on immigration, we never even got to that level.

But I cannot help but wonder what reasons he thinks were used back in the 50's and 60's against allowing blacks to move into white neighborhoods. I've got a hint for him: It wasn't that they didn't like them because they were black.

"I ain't never votin' fo another Democrat so long as I can draw breath! I'll vote for a dog first!" - Leola Thomas

But you have been over the top throughout this whole thread

On the contrary, it's your idiotic and offensive signature that is over the top, not my criticism of it. There is no way to talk about such over-the-top nonsense without making outlandish sounding comparisons, because your behavior is so outlandish from the beginning.

"I ain't never votin' fo another Democrat so long as I can draw breath! I'll vote for a dog first!" - Leola Thomas

I point you to your childish name calling!

It's over the top!

If you honestly think turning someone's sign upside-down in a fashion explicitly linked to turning the American Flag upside down is less "over the top" then referring to someone's logic as "Idiotic," I think you need to have your head examined.

"I ain't never votin' fo another Democrat so long as I can draw breath! I'll vote for a dog first!" - Leola Thomas

You got your panties all in a wad because of people not liking illegal immigrants because of higher rates of drunk driving amongst them, which you tried to claim were mythological.

I pulled out an actual scientific survey from North Carolina that concluded that Hispanics were arrested for drunk driving at about 3 times the rates of other ethnicities, and I thus concluded that since the vast majority of illegals are in fact Hispanic, and that since the rates of various ethnicities' convictions for DWI isn't likely to vary all that widely from state to state, that these folks in Tennessee probably had facts on their side, and that you once again were full of bunk.

Then you started whining like a stuck pig saying that my facts were racist.

News flash: people can dislike things that don't have anything to do with racism. Here in Atlanta, expansion of MARTA into Cobb and Gwinnett Counties has been blocked for years not because people don't want those uppity minorities taking MARTA into their neighborhoods (the usual motive imputed to them), but because there is a documented drastic increase in crime (I don't have the documentation at hand, but it was on the range of 25 to 40 percent) when a new MARTA station opens in the neighborhood.

You are very quick to accuse others of racism, when you need to be looking in the mirror.

---
Finrod's First Law of Bandwidth:
A picture may be worth a thousand words, but it takes the bandwidth of ten thousand.

Just keep talking.

It boggles the mind how completely unable you are to see the logical fallacies in your own arguments when they are so transparent.

Anyhow, thanks for making my job of ridiculing you so much easier. I don't even really have to say anything, just let you talk.

"I ain't never votin' fo another Democrat so long as I can draw breath! I'll vote for a dog first!" - Leola Thomas

out of touch with reality.

McCain's lie was insulting.

Most of the insulted that will not vote for Mccain are silent today.

The members of the upside-down bumper sticker movement are going to vote for McCain.

Do you prefer voters or silent home stays?

A truly insulting yet true bumper sticker could say, eg

McCain says he will build the God damned fence if they want it

or

Vote for McCain even if you are out of touch with reality

RG, we must not be cowed into silence from treating Obama just as we would any radical leftist, just because he is black.

McCain has probably caused a lot of state parties to refrain from legitimate and needed attacks against Obama that voters need to see.

Obama is dangerous.

We need to communicate that fact and the fact that the dem party is not to be trusted if they approve of this kook.

Mike DeVine’s Charlotte Observer columns
http://thehinzsightreport.com
www.theminorityreportblog.com
www.race42008.com
"One man with courage makes a majority." - Andrew Jackson

It sure sounds like a racist comment to me; I'd appreciate a moderator's input on the subject.

---
Finrod's First Law of Bandwidth:
A picture may be worth a thousand words, but it takes the bandwidth of ten thousand.

Fine with me, so long as he also rules on your "Mexicans are drunk drivers," comment.

"I ain't never votin' fo another Democrat so long as I can draw breath! I'll vote for a dog first!" - Leola Thomas

to illustrate the absurd (I didn't agree wth the analogy). And I don't think it was a banable offense by a long shot.

and I only randomly find this guy palatable

smile

Mike DeVine’s Charlotte Observer columns
http://thehinzsightreport.com
www.theminorityreportblog.com
www.race42008.com
"One man with courage makes a majority." - Andrew Jackson

The only appropriate response to RandomBoy is to ignore him.

In Vino Veritas

I've decided to do just that! Good advice Achance!

It's just too bad that Redstate doesn't have features like my TinyMUD client does, like the ability to gag individual users so you never see anything from them ever again.

---
Finrod's First Law of Bandwidth:
A picture may be worth a thousand words, but it takes the bandwidth of ten thousand.

HTML Help for Red Staters
"If we want to take this party back, and I think we can someday, let’s get to work." – Barry Goldwater

and I'll send the site another donation toward building it!

asking for donations. That was a while back. 3.0 has got to be getting pretty darn close...

We being Red State and Eagle Publishing. We needed them when were getting some outside people to set up the foundation of the new site software.

They're gone now, and so far all of the coding since has been done by me (though I'm getting FANTASTIC support by a highly skilled man in Eagle, without whom I coudln't be anywhere near as productive), so really, donations wouldn't help us.

Becuase for some reason I'm a volunteer. I even committed to doing it during that pledge drive :-)

HTML Help for Red Staters
"If we want to take this party back, and I think we can someday, let’s get to work." – Barry Goldwater

for obvious reasons which I am pledged not to divulge. :-)

Need I say stop blogging and get your work done Neil?

:>)

Just kidding!

Yeah...Engaging an unarmed man in a battle of wits come to mind!

...but this is not David's fault, per se, so let's try this again.

I - or any other moderator - am not here to be the Hammer of Doom to end intra-reader grudge matches online. You want to slice each other into ribbons, exchange emails. You think somebody is breaking the rules? Contact us.

There's some wildly inappropriate language going on in this thread, and if I see any more of it, it will be closed. The ambiguity of that warning is both intentional, and will not be corrected.

The Fuzzy Puppy of the VRWC. I've been usurped!

Seeing McCain diss Obama recently was a big surprise to me; I can't remember the last time I'd seen him criticize any Democrat with that kind of language.

---
Finrod's First Law of Bandwidth:
A picture may be worth a thousand words, but it takes the bandwidth of ten thousand.

Did you miss the whole episode where McCain blew up at Obama for backing out of a bipartisan ethics bill?

Here's a retrospective:

Instead, what began as a promising collaboration between two men bent on burnishing their reformist credentials collapsed after barely a week. The McCain-Obama relationship came undone amid charges and countercharges, all aired publicly two years ago in an exchange of stark and angry letters. Obama questioned whether McCain sided with GOP leaders rather than searching for a bipartisan solution; McCain accused Obama of "typical rhetorical gloss" and "self interested partisan posturing" by a newcomer seeking to ingratiate himself with party leaders.

"Please be assured I won't make the same mistake again," McCain wrote Obama on Feb. 6, 2006.

It was the first, and only, time the two ever tried extensively working together.

Of course, those looking to dislike McCain probably convenient forgot this episode or didn't notice it at the time.

______________________________________
Donate to the Rs in Close Senate Races through Slatecard

ALL his outreach has gotten low notice here at RS. I'd chalk it up do that. After all, our front page declared him dead late last year, heh.

HTML Help for Red Staters
"If we want to take this party back, and I think we can someday, let’s get to work." – Barry Goldwater

OK Neil...I'll bight...I'm not aware of any outreach since McCain's ACU speech...I'm not saying there hasn't been any but I haven't seen any outreach unless there was a collection plate attached...

Can you give examples of this out reach...I'm willing to be proven wrong!

HTML Help for Red Staters
"If we want to take this party back, and I think we can someday, let’s get to work." – Barry Goldwater

Adam?

affirmed...

more to come

from dave tonight

Mike DeVine’s Charlotte Observer columns
http://thehinzsightreport.com
www.theminorityreportblog.com
www.race42008.com
"One man with courage makes a majority." - Andrew Jackson

What's the news from Rush?

coy till "dawn"

then the rooster will crow!

lots of hen service last night...and a matinee

Mike DeVine’s Charlotte Observer columns
http://thehinzsightreport.com
www.theminorityreportblog.com
www.race42008.com
"One man with courage makes a majority." - Andrew Jackson

that it is best not to ask. Just let your imagination run wild -- then multiply by Pi.

LOL..you could email it to me at least...since I was one of the first to grab onto your idea.

;>)

Oh wait...you were referring to Hen service...I don't want to know about that...(shuddering)

I thought you were being coy about the Rush thing...LOL

Mike DeVine’s Charlotte Observer columns
http://thehinzsightreport.com
www.theminorityreportblog.com
www.race42008.com
"One man with courage makes a majority." - Andrew Jackson

Freedom of Religion not Freedom from Religion

Romney/Pace 2008