Weird GOP Deathwish?

[Annie]

We agree on the pork. Currently, Dems want to INCREASE the pork and Republicans are trying to stop it. With Dems threatening Republicans on the House floor because they are trying to stop it - does not play well with the voters

Or with Pelosi wanting taxpayers to pay for the kids of members of Congress on trips is a hoot as well

The way the Dems are going Kathy, I think Republicans can make a comeback. But they will have to make a case they have learned their leson and will get back to the principals of reagan conservatism

Pres Bush has been raising money for the GOP - I have not seen the numbers yet

No matter who the Repubicans put up in 08 - Rudy or Fred - I do not want to think Republicnas will stay home and wake up after the election to see Pres elect Hillary on TV

RSR, many 'conservatives' do recognize that the Republicans regarding pork have a problem, they are currently against what they were pushing before. Then there is the Lott problem, not a minor one at that.

Without a substantial number in Congress, whether or not the Presidency is won, really won't matter. Cheering the nonsense is NOT the way to go. Messages have been sent and ignored, the last election was a warning, one that doesn't seemed to have registered.

 

[red states rule]

RSR, many 'conservatives' do recognize that the Republicans regarding pork have a problem, they are currently against what they were pushing before. Then there is the Lott problem, not a minor one at that.

Without a substantial number in Congress, whether or not the Presidency is won, really won't matter. Cheering the nonsense is NOT the way to go. Messages have been sent and ignored, the last election was a warning, one that doesn't seemed to have registered.

If the message does not register, does that not open the door for more conservative candidates for House and Senate seats?

In Pa, the voters tossed out about 19 incumbents over a pay increase. It can be done

I am not cheering the nonsense. I am fed up with Pres Bush, Lott and Lindsey Graham.

If Dems have the House, Senate, and the WH - we are in big trouble Kathy

 

[Annie]

If the message does not register, does that not open the door for more conservative candidates for House and Senate seats?

In Pa, the voters tossed out about 19 incumbents over a pay increase. It can be done

I am not cheering the nonsense. I am fed up with Pres Bush, Lott and Lindsey Graham.

If Dems have the House, Senate, and the WH - we are in big trouble Kathy

Here is something I just came across, it indirectly answers your first question, directly addresses the 'Lott' problem:

http://news.bostonherald.com/editorial/view.bg?articleid=1007151&srvc=home

Lott should just turn himself off
By Michael Graham
Tuesday, June 19, 2007 - Updated: 08:34 AM EST

Sen. Trent Lott has seen the enemy, and he is us.
Well, actually: me.
“Talk radio is running America,” Lott thundered from the floor of the Senate last week. “We have to deal with that problem.”
“That problem” is that the Bush/Kennedy/McCain/Calderon amnesty bill got beaten like a cheap rug on the floor of the Senate last week. “That problem” is that prospects for its revival are dim, at best.
And Lott is blaming what he might have once called “outside agitators” in his Mississippi days, but are better known currently as “voters.”
While the media present the Republican divide as “pro-life vs. pro-choice,” the real battle is between the insider elites and the rank-and-file voters who support the party. One side has the money, the other side has the votes. But neither side is strong enough to land a knockout blow against the other.
And so the battle rages.
To the left, Lott would seem a classic movement conservative, whipping up the talk-radio listening yahoos down South.
But as Michael Barone, editor of the Almanac of American Politics and the “Rainman” of political trivia, points out, Lott has spent more than 40 years in Washington. He’s the only person in either party to serve as whip in both the House and the Senate.
“Trent Lott hears all these ‘talk radio’ Republicans opposing the bill and he says ‘Who are these people?’,” Barone quips.
Lott’s not alone. On ABC’s “This Week,” John McCain complained about the “more conservative, anti-immigrant, anti-legislation group” of senators “backed up by a very vocal group of people who were supporting them.”
The people? Vocally supporting senators and affecting the outcome of legislation? Why it’s an outrage! ...

 

[red states rule]

Here is something I just came across, it indirectly answers your first question, directly addresses the 'Lott' problem:

http://news.bostonherald.com/editorial/view.bg?articleid=1007151&srvc=home

If talk radio is running the country Kathy the borders would be shut tight, the US would have a flat tax, more tax cuts, much less spending, and the troops would had the handcuffs taken off them - all would have been done years ago

 

[Annie]

If the message does not register, does that not open the door for more conservative candidates for House and Senate seats?

In Pa, the voters tossed out about 19 incumbents over a pay increase. It can be done

I am not cheering the nonsense. I am fed up with Pres Bush, Lott and Lindsey Graham.

If Dems have the House, Senate, and the WH - we are in big trouble Kathy

Funny thing, at my income level, whichever party is in doesn't effect me all that much. Because of my own thinking of what's best for the country, I've been more of a supporter of 'conservative' candidates, but when they do not do what is in the best interests, imo, then I can vote differently, certainly will be involved differently. I'm not married to a party and even if we had that sort of system, I tend not to go along with what I see as 'wrong.' The argument that 'others do more bad' just doesn't wash for me.

 

[Annie]

If talk radio is running the country Kathy the borders would be shut tight, the US would have a flat tax, more tax cuts, much less spending, and the troops would had the handcuffs taken off them - all would have been done years ago

Yes and no. Not all 'talk radio' has been against some sort of 'illegals brought out of the shadows'. Many believe there must be some compromises on the 'amnesty' part. Unfortunately, the GOP has ignored them too. It's been 'our way' or the highway, many are choosing a new road.

 

[red states rule]

Funny thing, at my income level, whichever party is in doesn't effect me all that much. Because of my own thinking of what's best for the country, I've been more of a supporter of 'conservative' candidates, but when they do not do what is in the best interests, imo, then I can vote differently, certainly will be involved differently. I'm not married to a party and even if we had that sort of system, I tend not to go along with what I see as 'wrong.' The argument that 'others do more bad' just doesn't wash for me.

Well, we can agree to disagree

I see Dems wanting to raise both our taxes, not wanting to fight terrorism, and wanting to impose liberalism of all of us

I could vote for guy like Joe Lieberman if I had to. While I do not gree on his views ont he social issues, his views on the war on terror would get my vote

 

[red states rule]

Yes and no. Not all 'talk radio' has been against some sort of 'illegals brought out of the shadows'. Many believe there must be some compromises on the 'amnesty' part. Unfortunately, the GOP has ignored them too. It's been 'our way' or the highway, many are choosing a new road.

Which hosts have been for compromise on the amensty part?

 

[Annie]

Which hosts have been for compromise on the amensty part?

Rush was earlier from when I listened to him, but blogs are changing things in talk radio too. Michael Medved certainly has been. Hugh Hewitt most definitely, but certainly not the current version.

 

[red states rule]

Rush was earlier from when I listened to him, but blogs are changing things in talk radio too. Michael Medved certainly has been. Hugh Hewitt most definitely, but certainly not the current version.

I am at work when Rush is on

I here Laura Ingraham in the morning, Sean in the afternoon, and local hosts like Chris Plante on the way home

None of them are for a "compormise"

 

[Annie]

Some silver lining?

http://dyn.politico.com/printstory.cfm?uuid=40D3433B-3048-5C12-00051A3BF2F9403A

Republican candidates begin snubbing Bush
By: David Paul Kuhn and Jonathan Martin
June 19, 2007 06:10 AM EST

...

But some Republicans have lost patience with holding their tongues. The issue of immigration "is symbolic for a lot of Republicans of the crap that (Republicans) have had to swallow," said Fabrizio, who was a strategist for 1996 GOP nominee Bob Dole. He cited the No Child Left Behind education measure and an expensive Medicare prescription drug benefit.

Senior aides to McCain, Romney and Giuliani all sounded familiar tones in explaining how they would deal with the Bush burden. It's what Democratic politicians from Republican-leaning states would say about Bill Clinton in the 1990s and what Republican politicians from Democratic-leaning states say now about Bush: We'll agree with him where we agree him and disagree with him where we disagree with him. It's hardly a ringing endorsement, but even such tepid comments may not be sufficient to escape the Bush drag in 2008.

Brabender believes it's a matter of when -- not if -- the Republican hopefuls begin to more clearly ease away from the incumbent. "Personally, I don't think they have a choice," he added. "2006 was a referendum on the president, and we saw how that worked out. It would be a disaster to have the same question in 2008. …I don't want to call it an exorcism among the party, but at some point there needs to be a firewall put up where (the candidates) partition off the president."

 

[maineman]

Kathianne:

I would imagine that every single republican presidential candidate has had his picture taken grinning and gripping with George Bush and has been on record in the past as supporting the president in one issue or another.

I would bet a lot of money that the American people will see those photographs and those endorsements often in the 2008 campaign.... in democratic campaign ads.

The republican party can try to run away from Bush, but until they break from Bush and end the war in Iraq, they will never be successful in doing so.

 

[JeffWartman]

You really don't seem to understand that many 'conservatives' have had it with the GOP? If you really cared about 'the party' you should perhaps listen a tad more and let up on the cheer leading. If 'the party' doesn't start responding better than it has, it will fall sooner rather than later.

If someone is a real Conservative, they should be fed up with the GOP. The GOP majority has given us bigger government. HUGE government. That is not Conservative...to keep supporting the Republicans means you support big government.

The Libertarian Party is too over the top from what I've been able to see. Ron Paul? Michael Badnarik? Many would agree with libertarian ideas, but they've yet to field a decent national candidate.

I would agree with that. The big problem is that the Libertarian Party itself usually fields very poor candidates...if you watch local races around the country, if a Libertarian is running, the Libertarian is usually a middle aged former hippie with a long pony tail who only wants to talk about legalizing pot.

That's the reason we can't win more races.

The Libertarian Party has the best platform and most accessible ideas, yet we field weird candidates. We need to talk less about marijuana decriminalization while talking more about lower taxes and less government in your life.

 

[JeffWartman]

and waste your vote

If you really are for less government, that means you vote for a party which does not share your beliefs. That's cowardly and just plain unintelligent.

If you don't stand for something you'll fall for anything, RSR. And it seems like you already have. That's really sad.

 

[Truthmatters]

I am seeing some glimmers of hope. Finally, Republicans are going after the pork, some are fighting the insane amnesty bill, and are trying to fight off the Dems surrender bill

Bush is finally bringing out his veto pen - I do wish he would have done it years ago

I am glad he will be gone in 08. But I shudder to think what this country would look like with Hillary and a Dem Congress running things

Rudy is far from a Reagan Conservative - but I also like Thompson. I have to hear more of what Fred has to say. But either of them would be much better then Hillary or Obama

Republicans stayed home last Nov and we have the Dems running Congress. So far no damage has been done - but they are trying their best

ahahahahahahahahahahaa!

oh my god!

they had complete power for six years and spent like drunken pirates, started a worthless war, lined their pockets with lobbist money,investigated NOTHING! and made the entire world hate us(ok maybe not albania)now you think you are seeing hope?

 

[red states rule]

If you really are for less government, that means you vote for a party which does not share your beliefs. That's cowardly and just plain unintelligent.

If you don't stand for something you'll fall for anything, RSR. And it seems like you already have. That's really sad.

Call it what you will. If your guy does not win - what have you accomplished by tossing your vote in the trash can?

 

[red states rule]

ahahahahahahahahahahaa!

oh my god!

they had complete power for six years and spent like drunken pirates, started a worthless war, lined their pockets with lobbist money,investigated NOTHING! and made the entire world hate us(ok maybe not albania)now you think you are seeing hope?

Dems are trying to outdo the Republicans in spending, tax increases, they have their own ethics problems, have broken nearly all promises made - their approval rating of 23% show they are not very popular at all

 

[JeffWartman]

Call it what you will. If your guy does not win - what have you accomplished by tossing your vote in the trash can?

That doesn't make ANY sense. Are you trying to insinuate that everyone who voted for Dole in 1996 wasted their vote also simply because he didn't win?

What a stupid argument!

 

[red states rule]

That doesn't make ANY sense. Are you trying to insinuate that everyone who voted for Dole in 1996 wasted their vote also simply because he didn't win?

What a stupid argument!

No, voting for a third party is a wasted vote

 

[red states rule]

Some silver lining?

http://dyn.politico.com/printstory.cfm?uuid=40D3433B-3048-5C12-00051A3BF2F9403A

Found this gem in the Washington Times. So much for the Washington Times being a conservative newspaper