“Big Tenters” Destroyed the GOP

2009 June 9
by bc3b

Paul Ibraham of the North Star Writers Group maintains “Big Tenters” had their opportunity to consolidate the GOP majority during the Bush years, but charted a path that put the party where it is today.

At the height of its 21st Century power, the GOP had comfortable control of both elected branches of the federal government, and it was due in no small part to promises of adopting conservative policies. However, the 2000s also saw Washington change too many of those who had gone there to change it.

 What did they change to? Why, they became big-tenters! They took control of party leadership, and fervently supported genuine liberals such as Lincoln Chafee and Arlen Specter against conservatives who challenged them in Republican primaries. They “moderated” their views and became a party of deficits, pork and amnesty. In other words, at the very height of its power, the GOP was precisely what the big-tenters claim it should become now.

They had their chance, and they failed.

Think the “big tent” philosophy deserves a second chance?

A “big tent” didn’t work so well for the Dallas Cowboys either

 

92 Responses leave one →
  1. 2009 June 9 12:10 pm
    [1]

  2. 2009 June 9 12:12 pm
    [2]
    bc3b permalink

    At least Lucy Graham is doing something useful for a change (instead of bashing Republicans).

  3. 2009 June 9 12:21 pm
    [3]
    janzam permalink

    I think the term “Big Tenters” is open for interpretation.

    What was discussed in the thread’s article was a softening of conservative tenets relative to fiscal responsiblitity, enlarging government and so forth.

    But, other GOPers might look at having a “big Tent” as accepting people in the party who might differ in their social leanings — gays, choice etc. — but, don’t try to mold the party to these social proclivities, because they are in agreement with so many other values.

    A party that can accept a certain amount of diversity in it’s members, as long as that diversity doesn’t taint the overarching character and message of the party, usually has a larger membership.

  4. 2009 June 9 12:46 pm
    [4]
    bc3b permalink

    Jan –

    Many of those who support a “big tent” philosophy (e.g. Davis Frum and David Brooks) are not conservatives, but rather people who are trying to turn the GOP into “Dem Lite.”

    Just as the British Conservative Party won by appealing to the middle class, I believe that is the route the Republican Party should take. I honestly believe there is a constituency out there that agrees with many of our values (and we don’t have to change them).

    As Lew Brown, manager of the Cleveland Indians in the movie Major League, said: “All we need is something to bring it all together.” For the Tribe, it was Rachael Phelps. For conservatives, it may be Barack Obama.

    http://www.collider.com/uploads/imageGallery/Major_League/major_league_charlie_sheen_image__1_.jpg

  5. 2009 June 9 1:14 pm
    [5]
    janzam permalink

    Maybe it’s just a matter of sematics, because I basically agree with you, bc3b.

    But, I also like an open door policy for those who want to walk in, join up, but may not be totally in sync with all the social values that strick conservatism adhers to and espouses.

    I wouldn’t call these folks “dem lite,” either. Their beliefs, though, are more varigated in certain areas. As long as people don’t try “changing” platforms to suit their own purposes, and join the GOP ranks because most of their values are met, then so be it.

  6. 2009 June 9 1:17 pm
    [6]
    janzam permalink

    Another case of the media sticking their head in the sand!

    Geither brings the laughs in China

    ….although, you wouldn’t know this by the reporting of the MSM about Geithner’s trip over there. The press is the real enemy of the people!

  7. 2009 June 9 1:32 pm
    [7]
    beej permalink

    About time someone said it out loud. The Big Tenters destroyed the party. I remember feeling sick to my stomach as this phrase was used during the 2000 convention. Who did we end up with???? Ahnold. And folks like him. Too many like him, who did their level best to make the party more like the Dem party. Sadly, they’ve succeeded in this one thing.

    Jan, I don’t understand your comment. The BIG TENT people came in and changed the workings of the party without even discussing it with anyone, basically.
    There was ZERO working together, ZERO communication…I was shocked by their treatment. This wasn’t the recipe that so many had struggled and worked with under Reagan. It changed slowly with the thousand points of light with Bush One, I don’t even remember what happened when Dole was running, until we ended up with the Big Tent party. The big tenters p*****d all over the conservatives, even though it was us dumb clucks that came out in DROVES in 2000 to elect Bush. Some were precient and saw what was going to happen, what was happening…but this dumb cluck didn’t. I have been angry and shut out since 2002-2003. Nothing to do with the war…it was my bump on the head, so to speak…woke me up, slowly…

    Bush’s big mistake was to not dance with ‘the one that brung him.’ He did quite a bit right, but often times not without us fighting and kicking all the way with him.

    I don’t care one whit if there are gays or purple people or who ever in the party, as long as the CORE agenda is one that advances the Constitution, and the best agenda for the US and her people. We are supposed to be the conservative party, and not a poor shadow of the Dems. Conservative. Not Dem Light.

    I am sick and tired of hearing ‘across the aisle’ lingo. It doesn’t mean we’ve compromised with the left. It means we’ve compromised our PRINCIPLES and are doing exactly what the left want.

    Congress has 90 days to decide whether or not to declare war. But we had less than what, a month? to pass a stimulus package and a bailout deal that NO ONE EVEN READ. BILLIONS of dollars, and it was so urgent, we weren’t even allowed to read the fine print. And our big tent leaders ALLOWED this.

    Sorry, but I’m mad, and I’ve had enough of it. The big tenters let this happen, over and above the mighty protests of the conservatives in the party…and then turn around and blame us for the results of their stupidity.

    /rant

  8. 2009 June 9 1:57 pm
    [8]
    drdog09 permalink

    Come now. Big Tent is the problem? Then explain why 2004 and 2006 elections saw such a sea change shift in voter patterns. Also funny that the NE Sisters win there seats with hefty margains. No, Big Tent is not the core issue. (Though it is a problem.)

    The core issue were things like – Cunnigham and Abarhmof.(sic). Little issues like earmarks. Sell outs in Congress to the likes of the ‘K’ Street crowd. Finishing touches on things like funding irregularities during elections.

    Oh I can hear the — “But the Dims do this TOO!”. That’s true. But lets lay it out in some common parallelism. A hooker and a Methodist minister are on the Jerry Springer show. Both admit to ‘cheating’ on their significant other. Which are you more shocked about? (If you say the hooker, we have to talk.) The point is YOU know the hooker or the Democrat are prone to ‘cheat’. So when the Reps don’t walk the talk, the disappointment is doubled. (If it had just been the hooker, she would never have been booked.) The Reps bill themselves as the ‘small government party’.

    Failure to measure up to your stated goals is the problem. Test. If Snowe, Collins and Specter disappeared tomorrow would the Republican party win the next election? I think not.

    Solution: Walk the Talk and be prepared to prove it everyday.

  9. 2009 June 9 2:03 pm
    [9]
    bc3b permalink

    “Congress has 90 days to decide whether or not to declare war. But we had less than what, a month? to pass a stimulus package and a bailout deal that NO ONE EVEN READ. BILLIONS of dollars, and it was so urgent, we weren’t even allowed to read the fine print. And our big tent leaders ALLOWED this.”

    Good point Beej. I remember it because Feb. 13 is my daughter’s birthday. The stimulus had to be passed that day or the world would have ended. Yet, the vast majority of the money hasn’t been spent yet and unemployment is going up.

  10. 2009 June 9 2:04 pm
    [10]
    chekote permalink

    George W. Bush won in 2000 not by revealing what turned out to be his agenda of merely slower government growth, but on promises to rely on conservative principles.

    This is not exactly true. George Bush campaigned as a compassionate conservative. He campaigned as a uniter. He campaigned on bipartisanship and constantly pointed to his working relationship with Democrats like Bob Bullock in Texas. This is why I did not support GWB in the primaries. I was a Forbes person. I also did not vote for GWB in the general election. I voted for Harry Brown the libertarian. I did not support Bush until 9/11. I believed his response to terrorism was appropriate. But GWB was NEVER a Reagan conservative. He was a big government Republican like his father.

  11. 2009 June 9 2:08 pm
    [11]
    chekote permalink

    Let’s face it. The easiest way for politicians to get votes is to create a constituency through government progams. That’s why we get an ever growing federal government. Both party do it. People are sick of it and that is way the number of self-identified “independents” is growing. Nothing to do with big or small tent.

  12. 2009 June 9 2:12 pm
    [12]
    drdog09 permalink

    Chek —

    Sadly you are correct. Ole George was an oil patch come along to get along Texas Pol. There are a lot of things I am thankful for that he was our President on 9/11. But his domestic spending policies left much to be desired.

  13. 2009 June 9 2:12 pm
    [13]
    beej permalink

    Chekote-Yep. I wasn’t clear on compassionate conservative…and had I been following better, with my eyes open wider, I wouldn’t have been surprised.

    My fault and the many who, like me, voted because he was the ‘R.’

  14. 2009 June 9 2:12 pm
    [14]
    chekote permalink

    We need to find somebody like this:

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z1E3OFbCpqE

  15. 2009 June 9 2:17 pm
    [15]
    phineas gage permalink

    Some people are sick of it.

    Other people are enthusiastic members of the dependent constituencies you mention.

    The question is whether there are more of the former or the latter.

    You are absolutely correct on Bush. For whatever reasons, he was committed to being kind to the opposition and got his head handed to him routinely as a result. Reagan could and did use smashmouth political techniques if necessary, but he always did so with a velvet fist and a smile. Big difference. Reagan persevered with a Democrat Congress. Bush had a GOP Congress and screwed it up.

  16. 2009 June 9 2:21 pm
    [16]
    drdog09 permalink

    beej,

    Don’t fault yourself for voting ‘R’ in hindsight. Votes are cast in context of options available at the time the vote is cast. And who were our choices on the other side? Kerry and Gore. Gag.

    Our primary system is broken. Choices are being predicated on who can gather funds, not who is the best candidate. Exhibit the Florida preference by the RNC.

  17. 2009 June 9 2:23 pm
    [17]
    chekote permalink

    beej

    As soon as I heard the term “compassionate conservatism” I recoiled. Using the ajective compassionate to me implied that conservatism was NOT compassionate by nature. What nonsense! I found it offensive and had to turn off Rush Limbaugh who pushed GWB nonstop. Bush started this bipartisan crap right off the bat when he let Ted Kennedy write his “education” bill. To blame Specter, Chaffee and others is unjustified. Bush presented himself as a conservative. He was sold as a conservative. Bush started pushing for bigger government within the first months of his administration. He was the leader of the party. Not Specter. Not Frum. Not Snowe.

  18. 2009 June 9 2:27 pm
    [18]
    bc3b permalink

    drdog09 –

    A couple of points:

    One of the reasons Snowe and Collins do so well is because the Dems only put up tokin opposition against they because the ladies vote as though they are Democrats. Olympia Snowe had a 12% ACU rating for 2008. Barack Obama had a 17%, Hillary Clinton had 11% and Harry Reid had 16%. Collins had 20%. Why waste money on Dem senate candidates in Maine? Save it for Texas or Ohio or North Carolina. Would you run serious opposition to Zell Miller if he were the Democratic U.S. senator from your state?

    The problem is that the GOP turned its back on the Contract with America. They did exactly what they promised to do, yes by becoming “big tenters” and trying to be all things to all people (in addition to the corruption you mentioned). I won’t get into the House, but in 2008 in the Senate the following Republicans had ACU ratings under 70%:
    – Stevens: 50
    – Murkowski: 58
    – McCain: 63
    – Martinez: 60
    – Lugar: 63
    – Snowe: 12
    – Collins: 20
    – Coleman: 48
    – Cochran: 68
    – Domenici: 64
    – Dole: 54
    – Voinovich: 52
    – Smith: 33
    – Specter: 42
    – Bennett: 64
    – Warner: 52

    30% of the GOP senators did not vote conservative at least 70% of the time. How many Democratic senators had ACU voting scores of 30% or higher – one Mary Landrieu at 32%.

    My daughter goes to Catholic school so in our house anything below 70% is failing.

  19. 2009 June 9 2:33 pm
    [19]
    janzam permalink

    My comment, beej, was misunderstood, or perhaps I didn’t explain it well. I am not turned off by the “big tent” concept because all it means to me is having more room for more people.

    I thought I stated in my comment that I don’t want to necessarily shun people for their social stances. But, if they do join the GOP it is not for reasons to come in and change the GOP platform, but rather to join in because the platform offers more to their liking than not to their liking.

    I don’t care one whit if there are gays or purple people or who ever in the party, as long as the CORE agenda is one that advances the Constitution, and the best agenda for the US and her people

    Isn’t that what you are saying too? That you don’t care about their color, gender perference, just “advancing the Constitution.” That’s all I meant to say to.

    I agree, Chekote, that an American Daniel Hannan would be a wonderful addition to the GOP line-up!

  20. 2009 June 9 2:39 pm
    [20]
    chekote permalink

    that an American Daniel Hannan would be a wonderful addition to the GOP line-up!

    Addition? We have NOBODY like Hannan. Newt has flashes but then they are quickly followed up but dumb stunts.

  21. 2009 June 9 2:41 pm
    [21]
    bc3b permalink

    Chekote wrote:

    “He (Bush) was sold as a conservative. Bush started pushing for bigger government within the first months of his administration. He was the leader of the party.”

    Hope you are sitting down because I couldn’t agree more on that.

    I think Ibraham’s points are that: 1) many so-called conservatives started voting with people like Chaffee and Specter (in an attempt to get votes for favors in future elections) and turned their back on the “Contract with America” and 2) the party wasted a lot of resources and money promoting “luke warm” Republicans like Chaffee and Specter. Why support Snowe when she is a better Democrat that Harry Reid?

  22. 2009 June 9 2:44 pm
    [22]
    bc3b permalink

    Phineas –

    Also Reagan was charismatic and likeable. By the end of his second term, not even many Republicans still liked George Bush.

  23. 2009 June 9 2:45 pm
    [23]
    janzam permalink

    Chekote, I am not a fan-club type person, Hannan is a direct-talker, conservative in Briton. How his style would transcend the American culture, who knows? But, it certainly would be a plus to have someone with his wit and fire added to the mixture of conservatives (whether you like them or not) we already have.

  24. 2009 June 9 2:46 pm
    [24]
    chekote permalink

    BC

    Going on and on about Snowe, Collins and Specter is nonproductive. The reason the GOP finds itself in dire straights is: GEORGE BUSH. He followed the strategy developed by Rove to create a governing Republican majority. Rove decided to achieve his goals through government expansion. A Rx program for seniors to lock that vote for generations to come. Faith based intiatives to lock the religious vote. No child left behind to get some minority vote. Amnesty to get the Latino vote. This was a conscious electoral strategy developed by Bush and his aides. You can’t blame others for it. Yes, Snowe, Collins and Specter voted for Obama’s stimulus but the election was over by them. The damage was done.

  25. 2009 June 9 2:47 pm
    [25]
    bc3b permalink

    I gave up on Newt long ago. He is a good strategist but doesn’t have a clue as to how to use power once he gains it.

  26. 2009 June 9 2:50 pm
    [26]
    chekote permalink

    Jan

    What I like about Hannan is his use of imagery. In the “devalued prime minister” speech he used the analogy of a ship to contrast how other countries prepared for rough economic times while Brown just made no preparations. In the speech I posted above, he used the Terminator imagery masterfully. That’s what we need to use to illustrate pernicious socialist policies – which has FAILED wherever tried – that just keep coming back.

  27. 2009 June 9 2:51 pm
    [27]
    janzam permalink

    many so-called conservatives started voting with people like Chaffee and Specter (in an attempt to get votes for favors in future elections)…..

    This is where politicians lose their way, by changing themselves, their convictions, in order to “get votes.” There’s a big difference in accepting other people’s stances and positions, from trying to reconstruct yourself to fit in with their stances and positions.

    This personal mutation of values, in order to be liked (or get votes), can be applied to other situations beyond just the political realm. A person has to know who they are before they can hope to affect others with their ideas and visions.

  28. 2009 June 9 2:55 pm
    [28]
    janzam permalink

    Chekote — agree with your comments on Hannan. People can relate to his speeches by how he uses common-place analogies to put across his ideas. But, again, the American public can be fickle and unreasonable. It remains to be seen how effective he would be over here, on a daily basis.

  29. 2009 June 9 2:56 pm
    [29]
    chekote permalink

    their back on the “Contract with America

    Contract with America was a good one time program to win elections. Once welfare was reformed. Once the child credit was put in place. There was no follow up plan. So how can you turn your back on NOTHING? Look, Bush was a big government guy. The signs were all there. He got nominated because of his money advantage and the backing of the “establishment”. Bernie Goldberg made a very good point a few weeks ago. How many GOP POTUSES have we had after WWII? Seven. How many were conservatives? One. So the GOP is by and large a big government party. The RINOs, if there are any, are the conservatives.

  30. 2009 June 9 2:57 pm
    [30]
    bc3b permalink

    Chekote –

    My comments were to suggest that we not waste money on “Republicans” who more often than not vote with Democrats.

    For that very reason, I refuse to support the RNC or the congressional PACs. My donations go to specific politicians that I feel are deserving. I believe my judgement is far superior to that of John Cornyn, Pete Sessions or Michael Steele. And, before you jump on me, I am not trashing Michael Steele (at least today), just bragging about my great judgement (but anyone who follows BJG is aware of that).

  31. 2009 June 9 2:58 pm
    [31]
    janzam permalink

    bc3b – That’s all Newt will ever be, again, is an off-court commentator and strategist.

    Even though he mulls over running in 2012, it is nothing but whimsy.

  32. 2009 June 9 3:00 pm
    [32]
    janzam permalink

    bc3b — Didn’t Collins and Snowe vote Obama’s budget?

  33. 2009 June 9 3:00 pm
    [33]
    bc3b permalink

    “Contract with America was a good one time program to win elections. Once welfare was reformed. Once the child credit was put in place. There was no follow up plan.”

    Again, we agree. And, as much as anything, that was Newt’s fault. Probably for two reasons: 1) I am not sure he is capable of really leading and 2) he decided to revive his high school years in the mid-1990s.

  34. 2009 June 9 3:00 pm
    [34]
    janzam permalink

    against

  35. 2009 June 9 3:07 pm
    [35]
    bc3b permalink

    janzam –

    “bc3b — Didn’t Collins and Snowe vote Obama’s budget?”

    Yes, they along with Specter cast the deciding votes on the Stimulus. I can’t find who voted on the Omnibus Appropriations Bill, but it passed 62-35 (so one must presume the Dingbat Sisters voted for it).

  36. 2009 June 9 3:12 pm
    [36]
    chekote permalink

    Honestly, I don’t see the point of the column that inspired this thread. There is no point on going on and on about the over-used, tiresome “big tent” analogy. It is time to put forth a legislative program rooted in limited government and start winning votes. This whole discussion about RINOs is just a waste of time.

  37. 2009 June 9 3:51 pm
    [37]
    gnqanq permalink

    Most Conservatives actually believe in Limited Government. Chekote raises a good point about what does the Republican Party need to go after welfare reform and other issues brought about by the Contract with America.

    Have we ever really rolled back any Liberal policies once in place? How many times have we talked about getting rid of the Dept of Education – lets actually do it. Same with Amtrak and other issues. Like the Contract with America, we need an agenda of rolling back Departments and policies brought on by the Liberals. School choice is an example.

    We should set as our agenda the dismantling of DC one brick at a time with the goal of giving power back to the states and local governments with the optimum being the individual.

    The real problem with the Contract with America was how limited it is was. We need a long term agenda – that can be achieved with a roll back plan. It is long term and it gives us short term objectives and measurements.

  38. 2009 June 9 4:07 pm
    [38]
    chekote permalink

    We should set as our agenda the dismantling of DC one brick at a time with the goal of giving power back to the states and local governments with the optimum being the individual.

    Exactly on point. I think developing such a plan would unite people who believe in a limited federal government. It would “out” those who do not. Much more constructive that going RINO hunting.

  39. 2009 June 9 4:09 pm
    [39]
    BCL permalink

    They “moderated” their views and became a party of deficits, pork and amnesty.

    Yep

  40. 2009 June 9 4:10 pm
    [40]
    bc3b permalink

    Off-topic but this evening I drove past a beautiful Chrysler-Jeep dealership with an empty showroom (obviously one that is belin closed). A few miles away is a Dodge dealership that is staying open. It is a far worse facility, worse loocation and spent far less on marketing and advertising. It makes one wonder.

  41. 2009 June 9 4:32 pm
    [41]
    bc3b permalink

    The author’s message is really quite clear. The only time the GOP has won control of Congress in 50 years was when it ran as conservatives. Once they got to Washington, many of those elected “drank the water” and did exactly what they said they wouldn’t do. They became “big tenters” or moderates. The GOP didn’t fail because it was too conservative, but because it stopped being conservative.

    While much of the blame goes to Bush (and I got banned from FR from bashing Bush before it came into vogue, so I’m no Bushbot), the blame must be shared by GOP’s congressional leadership (or lack thereof). Gingrich, Livingstone (who never served as House Speaker although he was in line for the job), Hastert, Frist.

  42. 2009 June 9 4:50 pm
    [42]
    gnqanq permalink

    bc3b – whether the President or the Republican congress, they did not have to follow the other into this madness. Either one should have stood up to the other to limit the expansion of government. Instead they both went along to get along and in the process abandon conservative principles.

    In reality, neither party really had conservative values or they would not have left their core values so easily.

  43. 2009 June 9 4:50 pm
    [43]
    chekote permalink

    The GOP didn’t fail because it was too conservative, but because it stopped being conservative.

    It seems to me that when people say that the GOP was too conservative, it has to do with social issues. I don’t know anybody who says the GOP should spend more than the Dems. I don’t know anybody who says that the GOP should grow government MORE than then the Dems. You know, I am really getting tired of Rush, Levin and others who have been on this ranting rage, paranoid range about the GOP wanting to kick the conservatives out. It is completely unfounded. Forget Powell who is an opportunist and belongs to no party really. Who has said that the GOP should spend more than the Dems?

    Even Frum – your favorite target – has never said that the GOP needs to spend more. He wants to tweak a couple of positions and Rush and others got all in an uproar and started this crap that the GOP wants to kick the conservatives out. Others has said that the GOP needs to moderate the tone. Again, Rush and gang fly off the handle. Look what we are doing ain’t working. Something needs to change. The question is what.

  44. 2009 June 9 4:52 pm
    [44]
    chekote permalink

    In reality, neither party really had conservative values or they would not have left their core values so easily.

    Thank you GN!

  45. 2009 June 9 5:00 pm
    [45]
    chekote permalink

    If Rush and others are REALLY interested in promoting conservatism, they need to take some action. Levin did contribute by writing Liberty and Tyranny. What has Rush done? He has muddled the waters with his inarticulate statement about wanting Obama to fail. Yes, it was inarticulate. He has had to explain that statement now for months. Sorry but we it takes you months to explain what you meant, it was a dumb thing to say.

    So what can Rush and others do? First, encourage the GOP to make a huge, public apology for squandering their turn at the wheel. Second, start promoting a program whereby faith based initiatives are repealed. Same with No Child Left Behind. Same with Medicare Rx. The Dems ran around complaining about said programs so it should be no problem as far as repealing them. Same with TARP. I mean the Dems for the entire 2008 went on and on about the Bush failed policies. Fine. Let’s start repealing those failed policies. Something like this would be much more productive than going on and on about “country club Republicans”, RINOs, elites or whatever else they rant about.

  46. 2009 June 9 5:09 pm
    [46]
    drdog09 permalink

    Mark this day down. SCOTUS has vacated its stay on the Chrysler deal, failing to hear the State of Indiana appeal.

    Today is the day the 5th Amendment died.

  47. 2009 June 9 5:11 pm
    [47]
    chekote permalink

    Dr. Dog,

    Who cares? It is going to fail anyway.

  48. 2009 June 9 5:24 pm
    [48]
    drdog09 permalink

    Would you run serious opposition to Zell Miller if he were the Democratic U.S. senator from your state? — bc3b

    If I have a candidate wishing to oppose Zell, yes. A party is worthless if it is not willing to commit its brand to the collection of a seat. The fact that you ask is part and parcel the reason the Reps are losing. They are fighting a political war like its a gentlemen’s game. Their opponent is not.

    Should the RNC waste resources in a match up they can’t win? No. But the RNC could certainly tell the budding candidate that they will have to garner their own funds for the effort. I will remind you that many years ago Lawton Chiles (D FL) lacking little money, no national party support, did a door to door campaign. He won the Senate seat. So it is not impossible for someone to topple an incumbent. Fact I would hazard that as the % of people registering unaffiliated, the possibility of a dark horse to win grows.

    Lets put it this way. Elections are like the easiest test you will ever take. At best its a 2 way race, in some cases maybe a 3 way. That means at worse its a 1:3 chance of placing. Anything you do to garner votes increases your chances. But you are guaranteed to lose if your name/brand is not on the ballot.

  49. 2009 June 9 5:26 pm
    [49]
    drdog09 permalink

    Dr. Dog,

    Who cares? It is going to fail anyway.

    Just a signpost on the way to Armageddon.

  50. 2009 June 9 5:27 pm
    [50]
    BCL permalink

    Yes, it was inarticulate. He has had to explain that statement now for months. Sorry but we it takes you months to explain what you meant, it was a dumb thing to say.

    That’s strange. I’m no wiz kid, but I understood it the first time as did anyone who has half a brain and was listening.

    Problem is he was misquoted and taken out of context purposely in an attempt to marginalize him. The GOP moderates jumped on the bandwagon and are still fanning the flames, duped into becoming useful idiots for the left.

  51. 2009 June 9 5:28 pm
    [51]
    gnqanq permalink

    Chekote – it is not a matter if it (Chrysler and/or GM) fails, it is the fact that the rule of law died. The fact the 5th amendment does not mean shit. We are getting closer and closer to the edge. We are getting closer and closer to anarchy.

    The next few days should be interesting in the bond market. The Supreme Court screwed up big time. They have sent a message to investors (foreign & domestic) that the rule of law no longer applies. Their investments are not as secure as they once thought as the rules can change without rhyme or reason.

  52. 2009 June 9 5:30 pm
    [52]
    drdog09 permalink

    Second, start promoting a program whereby faith based initiatives are repealed. — Chek

    How does repealing the above assist one iota in winning elections?

  53. 2009 June 9 5:34 pm
    [53]
    drdog09 permalink

    Thank you GN. Understanding cause and effect separates the ‘mover-shaker’ from the ‘what the hell happened?’.

  54. 2009 June 9 5:48 pm
    [54]
    bc3b permalink

    Chekote –

    Name one time since 1932 when “big tent” Republicans have gained control on Congress. I view 1994 – 2004 as people voting for conservatives even though the people elected didn’t end up voting or acting like conservatives.

  55. 2009 June 9 5:54 pm
    [55]
    bc3b permalink

    Like David Frum, Chekote sees millions of moderates out there just waiting to jump aboard the GOP bandwagon if it wasn’t “too conservative.”

    Like David Frum, Chekote is wrong.

    Take a look at my post dated 2:27 PM. Take a look at those senators and tell me how many of them are “too conservative.”

  56. 2009 June 9 6:10 pm
    [56]
    conservativetony permalink

    Excellent comments, everybody.

    I don’t have a problem with having a big tent of voters, as long as they realize I won’t shitcan my beliefs to be liked by them. Big tent votes are what I will affectionately call ‘vote prostitutes’. They will vote for the any candidate regardless of ideology, instead of being principled.

    McCain tried to be a big tent prostitute and look what it got him. Even if he had been successful and won the presidency, basing a lasting relationship on prostitution is always difficult at best.

    Prostitutes are always looking for the next John.

  57. 2009 June 9 6:20 pm
    [57]
    Brandon permalink

    Republicans are leading a special state senate election in Alabama. It was a Democratic district.

    http://www.waff.com/global/story.asp?s=10506031

  58. 2009 June 9 6:28 pm
    [58]
    justrand permalink

    just got home…I see we have a lively bunch of BJG’ers tonight!! Excellent!

    gotta peruse the thread…more to follow 🙂

  59. 2009 June 9 6:33 pm
    [59]
    justrand permalink

    okay…I didn’t get any further than dr.dog pointing out that “SCOTUS has vacated its stay on the Chrysler deal

    the 8-cylinder United States economic engine just lost 4 of its clyinders!

    And we just took a MASSIVE step towards Marxism.

    NO fund-manager in the U.S. is going to invest their portfolio dollars in bonds such as those just pissed on by the Obama regime. NO ONE!

    we are sooooooooooooooooooo F**KED!

  60. 2009 June 9 6:36 pm
    [60]
    sindalin44 permalink

    Agree with BCL re Limbaugh and wanting Obama to fail.

    There’s no criticism the left and their media familiars can’t spin into something unrecognizable. The only way to avoid distortion is to remain silent. But then, silence would be interpreted as assent.

  61. 2009 June 9 6:36 pm
    [61]
    chekote permalink

    How does repealing the above assist one iota in winning elections?

    It sends a signal that the GOP recognizes that it made a mistake in expanding federal programs and it is serious about LIMITING the size of the federal government. What are they doing now? They rail against pork barrel spending and yet 40% of the earmarks in the omnibus bill belonged to Republicans. They said they made a mistake in overspending while in power then they turn around and propose a ridiculous amount of cuts in discretionary spending. How about starting with eliminating HUD? Most people don’t even know what HUD does. When I say I made a mistake, I try to undo it. If the GOP made a mistake with TARP – which they did – they need to start moving towards undoing it. Going around saying you made a mistake and then doing nothing to rectify it is pure BS.

  62. 2009 June 9 6:36 pm
    [62]
    justrand permalink

    sorry folks, I know the thread is “Big Tent”…but the SCOTUS just told Obama he could have his way with us, so the size of our tent no longer matters!

    I need a LOT more wine!

  63. 2009 June 9 6:38 pm
    [63]
    chekote permalink

    Name one time since 1932 when “big tent” Republicans have gained control on Congress.

    During the Eisenhower administration. He was a moderate.

  64. 2009 June 9 6:38 pm
    [64]
    justrand permalink

    sindalin44…I thought you had an ACTUAL gravatar…not the “gravatar” of Gravatar! (unless it’s irony totally lost on me 🙂 )

  65. 2009 June 9 6:40 pm
    [65]
    chekote permalink

    Take a look at my post dated 2:27 PM. Take a look at those senators and tell me how many of them are “too conservative.”

    I don’t buy into this “rating” groups. The select the votes they like. Most are procedural and tells you nothing. Heck, I would have a 98% pro-life record going by their bills selection.

  66. 2009 June 9 6:40 pm
    [66]
    justrand permalink

    chekote, I really DO appreciate you lobbying for a “Big Tent”

    but we REALLY need is just a Party that says: “If you respect the Constitution…WELCOME! Otherwise get the F**K lost!!

    clear enough!

    p.s. I’m in a FOUL mood over the SCOTUS bullshit!

  67. 2009 June 9 6:43 pm
    [67]
    chekote permalink

    McCain tried to be a big tent prostitute and look what it got him.

    McCain ran to stop pork barrel spending and earmarks. At least that seemed the most important issue to him domestically. Obama undid the rationale of Mac’s campaign by pointing out that pork barrel spending is just a few percentages of the total budget. I still have no idea why Mac wanted to be POTUS. Kinda like Dole.

  68. 2009 June 9 6:43 pm
    [68]
    drdog09 permalink

    JR, GN hit it on the head about the bond market. Its is either Thurs/Friday this week or next that the Fed offers up a very large bundle of 10yr notes. I lay even odds that rates go up another 100 basis points just to sell them.

    You have as much security now with bonds as you would on a 90 day corporate on-demand note.

  69. 2009 June 9 6:45 pm
    [69]
    chekote permalink

    Rush said it to be controversial and get attention. Ann Coulter does the same. He didn’t have to say “I want Obama to fail”. How many times has he had to explain his statements? It has been months. A sure sign that it was inarticulate.

  70. 2009 June 9 6:49 pm
    [70]
    drdog09 permalink

    It sends a signal that the GOP recognizes that it made a mistake in expanding federal programs and it is serious about LIMITING the size of the federal government. — Chek

    I could agree with that. But in the scheme of things along those lines I could think of a few others at the head of the line. Omnibus bills out to be outlawed. That would tend to weed out the next one, ear marks. Fact I would put cutting off ACORN ahead of faith based charities. I would hazard organizations like Catholic Charities manage their resources better.

  71. 2009 June 9 6:50 pm
    [71]
    chekote permalink

    but the SCOTUS just told Obama he could have his way with us, so the size of our tent no longer matters!

    I am at the point that I don’t care if the markets crash. It is the only way to get the American people to remove their heads from their asses. Same with Gitmo. I say let the ACLU file frivoulous lawsuit on behalf of Gitmo detainees moved to US soil. Let the terrorists get welfare checks after the ACLU sets them free over technicalities. Maybe then the American people will wake up. The GOP is not capable of putting together a program, strategy, whatever to win. So we have to basically sit around and wait the American people to get a taste of the “Change” they voted for.

  72. 2009 June 9 6:53 pm
    [72]
    drdog09 permalink

    Heh. I would go one better. I would house the detainees in the Wash offices of the ACLU. A little chain link fence. Roach coach for meals.

  73. 2009 June 9 6:53 pm
    [73]
    chekote permalink

    I would hazard organizations like Catholic Charities manage their resources better.

    Well, I would disagree since the Catholic Church has actively promoted illegal immigration in an effort to fill their pews. Also, the Catholic Church is very left leaning. Did you happen to catch the warm welcome Obama got at ND?

    Sure get rid of ACORN funding. Omnibus bills. BTW, why didn’t the GOP push for the elimination of ACORN funding while in power? They only seemed to “discover” ACORN after they lost control of Congress. Weird.

  74. 2009 June 9 6:56 pm
    [74]
    drdog09 permalink

    Well, I would disagree since the Catholic Church has actively promoted illegal immigration in an effort to fill their pews. — Chek

    Don’t confuse mission with effectiveness. The two are not the same. CC can be very effective in how they spend $$ even if it is on the wrong thing. Besides, adroitly, the Church has the recipient come to them; no transport costs.

  75. 2009 June 9 6:57 pm
    [75]
    Brandon permalink

    Deeds won the VA primary. Looks like a harder fight for McDonnell in the general. Deeds is pretty damn conservative(the NRA endorsed him in previous races), so it won’t be a terrible loss even if he does pull it off.

  76. 2009 June 9 6:59 pm
    [76]
    RepublicanPundit permalink

    For the world has gone crazy and I am could be apathetic, but I don’t care enough anymore to even be that

    👿

  77. 2009 June 9 7:05 pm
    [77]
    chekote permalink

    Why have faith base intitiatives in the first place? Churches are tax exempt. Contributions are tax deductible. How much more government assistance do they need? Also, we these programs get started you never know who will get the money down the line. Under Obama, I am sure the Holy Land Foundation will get some funding. It was a bad idea and should have been opposed from the start. Oh well….

  78. 2009 June 9 7:08 pm
    [78]
    sindalin44 permalink

    Justrand…

    I’m not sure what you mean re gravatars.

    Oh, I picked Twain because he had gravitas, and it’s good to have a gravatar with gravitas.

  79. 2009 June 9 7:14 pm
    [80]
    justrand permalink

    sindalin44…my bad…my “cache” needed cleaning! 🙂

    nice avatar!!

  80. 2009 June 9 7:16 pm
    [81]
    bc3b permalink

    You’re right Chekote. The GOP controlled both houses of the 83rd Congress during Eisenhower’s first two years. The Democrats then took control of both Houses of the 84th, 85th and 86th Congresses.

    Those moderate Republicans are really winners.

    By the way, the folks at Ace of Spades are really having fun with David Letterman and his wife after his remarks about Sarah and Willow Palin. Let’s just say Mrs. L is not exactly a beauty queen (and yes, I checked it out. It’s really her.)

    Normally, I don’t approve of making fun on people’s families, but in Letterman’s case …. Check it out at

    http://ace.mu.nu/

  81. 2009 June 9 7:16 pm
    [82]
    RepublicanPundit permalink

    Chek,

    That was a real comedy act. Is that what it was supposed to be?

    Also, now, after breaking the bank, he wants pay as you go!!!

    What a laugher what is. Is the Annointed one trying to be a stand up comic?

  82. 2009 June 9 7:23 pm
    [83]
    chekote permalink

    Those moderate Republicans are really winners.

    Well, Bush, Lott and others were considered conservatives and they lost too. My point is that you are wasting your time with yout RINO hunts. Time to put a program together to start dismantling the federal government program by program. Like GN suggested. Those who agree with this will join forces. Those who do not, will leave. Talking about this RINO or that RINO ain’t going to do it.

  83. 2009 June 9 7:25 pm
    [84]
    chekote permalink

    Let’s just say Mrs. L is not exactly a beauty queen (and yes, I checked it out. It’s really her.)

    You are obsessed with looks. That’s the only reason you support Sarah even though you claim it has to do with her record. I am sure that you also claim you read Playboy for the articles. 🙂

  84. 2009 June 9 7:34 pm
    [85]
    bc3b permalink

    chekote wrote:

    “I don’t buy into this “rating” groups.”

    Chekote –

    You don’t “buy into” anything that doesn’t agree with your viewpoint.

    Glad you’re back. this is fun.

    If you haven’t yet, check out Letterman’s wife (arf, arf)

    http://ace.mu.nu/

  85. 2009 June 9 7:48 pm
    [86]
    RepublicanPundit permalink

    Maybe the picture of letterman’s wife explains it all. Compared with our beauty queen cndidate, i would have to say letterman’s wife is a 1.

  86. 2009 June 9 7:49 pm
    [87]
    RepublicanPundit permalink

    Good catch, B3

  87. 2009 June 9 7:53 pm
    [88]
    gnqanq permalink

    bc3b – great one from iowahawk.

    Come on, Ace. Was it really necessary to rape all of us in the eyeballs? Holy sweet jeebus, I’ve seen more pleasant views from the inside of a leper colony latrine. I mean for crissakes, do you really have to be that vindictive? The poor creature obviously suffered through some sort of horribly painful facial fire, and which was only extinguished after repeated beatings with a track shoe.

    Posted by: iowahawk

  88. 2009 June 9 9:04 pm
    [89]
    BCL permalink

    It has been months. A sure sign that it was inarticulate.

    Seems to confirm what I said. Same ol’ same ol’.

  89. 2009 June 9 9:09 pm
    [90]
    BCL permalink

    It has been months. A sure sign that it was inarticulate.

    If you heard his statement first hand and honestly believe that there my be something wrong with your comprehension of basic English. I know it’s your second language, but you seem to be very fluent, probably more so than myself. Therefore, I think you are just miffed and want to destroy Conservatism at all cost, even if it means enabling the left.

  90. 2009 June 9 9:13 pm
    [91]
    conservativetony permalink

    So far from Chek on this thread:

    “Rush said it because he wants attention.”

    “Coulter too”

    “BC likes Sarah only because of her looks”

    Welcome back, Chek, nice to see you haven’t changed a bit.

  91. 2009 June 9 10:55 pm
    [92]
    BCL permalink

    “Rush said it because he wants attention.”

    Rush has plenty of attention.

    It’s someone else who wants it and I am weak. God give me strength.

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.