Sen. Jim DeMint (R-SC) talks about the Spector defection and the Republican party

[RightIsWrong]

I was watching this live the other day but couldn't get around to posting it until this morning. The only links I could find to the video are rabid lefties lapping it up....but I thought it was post-worthy anyway.

Enjoy Sen. DeMint's "Big tent of freedom".

 

[Genx87]

So he called him out and acted unprofessionally and the Demint gave him an answer and this is news?

His answer isnt controversial at all. He admits republicans have gone too far and as a party needs to get back to small govt ideals. People around the country republican and democrat are getting fed up with the size and scope of our govt.

I happen to agree with many who say the Republicans must be more inclusive and not crawl into a far right wing shell. But I havent got a damned answer on how to do that. Moderate republicans suffered the most in the last two election cycles. How do you go moderate when you lose over and over to moderate democrats and your base is up in arms?

 

[sandorski]

Daily show had a good bit on that.

Todays buzzword is "Freedom". Write it down, stick it on your fridge.

 

[Starbuck1975]

I happen to agree with many who say the Republicans must be more inclusive and not crawl into a far right wing shell. But I havent got a damned answer on how to do that. Moderate republicans suffered the most in the last two election cycles. How do you go moderate when you lose over and over to moderate democrats and your base is up in arms?

Quite simple really. The Democrat majority will ultimately make a mistake, or a series of mistakes, that will taint the moderate members of their own party...thereby opening the door for moderate Republicans to challenge them. It is a cycle that repeats itself every 8 to 10 years.

 

[CADsortaGUY]

Originally posted by: Genx87
So he called him out and acted unprofessionally and the Demint gave him an answer and this is news?

His answer isnt controversial at all. He admits republicans have gone too far and as a party needs to get back to small govt ideals. People around the country republican and democrat are getting fed up with the size and scope of our govt.

I happen to agree with many who say the Republicans must be more inclusive and not crawl into a far right wing shell. But I havent got a damned answer on how to do that. Moderate republicans suffered the most in the last two election cycles. How do you go moderate when you lose over and over to moderate democrats and your base is up in arms?

Yep, people don't want a milk-toast Republican. They want real leaders who will do what they say and have a track record of solid ideals. The idea that the GOP should water itself down more than it has over the last decade or so and become more D-lite is absurd.

 

[heyheybooboo]

No offense, CAD. But I'd say your unwillingness to compromise is a microcosm of the problems with the GOP.

Enjoy life as the party of James Dobson and Rush Limpballs.

 

[RightIsWrong]

Originally posted by: CADsortaGUY

Originally posted by: Genx87
So he called him out and acted unprofessionally and the Demint gave him an answer and this is news?

His answer isnt controversial at all. He admits republicans have gone too far and as a party needs to get back to small govt ideals. People around the country republican and democrat are getting fed up with the size and scope of our govt.

I happen to agree with many who say the Republicans must be more inclusive and not crawl into a far right wing shell. But I havent got a damned answer on how to do that. Moderate republicans suffered the most in the last two election cycles. How do you go moderate when you lose over and over to moderate democrats and your base is up in arms?

Yep, people don't want a milk-toast Republican. They want real leaders who will do what they say and have a track record of solid ideals. The idea that the GOP should water itself down more than it has over the last decade or so and become more D-lite is absurd.

I'll respond to both of you at the same time for convenience.

GenX, where did I say that this is in any way controversial? Also, the GOP hasn't been the party of "small govt ideals" in a few decades. Reagan increased the size of govt more than any president before him and the Bushes continued that track record. The GOP reps and sens were along for the ride all along. They pay good lip service to the ideal, but they sure as shit don't walk the walk.

I agree with your second paragraph though.

CAD, people demand their leaders to do what they say which is in direct contradiction with what the true leaders of the country (those pumping in hundreds of millions of dollars into campaign coffers) what. They have the pols get up there and make promise after promise and then make them look silly when they start pulling the strings to get them to do the opposite.

As for the "track record of solid ideals", you'll have to clarify that before I can truly comment. If you are talking about the ideals that include mandated discrimination, forcing religion on others and dictating how people should live their personal lives....I'll pass. But you can correct me if I'm wrong.

 

[CADsortaGUY]

Originally posted by: heyheybooboo
No offense, CAD. But I'd say your unwillingness to compromise is a microcosm of the problems with the GOP.

Enjoy life as the party of James Dobson and Rush Limpballs.

compromise on what? and with whom?

Oh wait... I see that straw...

 

[CADsortaGUY]

Originally posted by: RightIsWrong

Originally posted by: CADsortaGUY

Originally posted by: Genx87
So he called him out and acted unprofessionally and the Demint gave him an answer and this is news?

His answer isnt controversial at all. He admits republicans have gone too far and as a party needs to get back to small govt ideals. People around the country republican and democrat are getting fed up with the size and scope of our govt.

I happen to agree with many who say the Republicans must be more inclusive and not crawl into a far right wing shell. But I havent got a damned answer on how to do that. Moderate republicans suffered the most in the last two election cycles. How do you go moderate when you lose over and over to moderate democrats and your base is up in arms?

Yep, people don't want a milk-toast Republican. They want real leaders who will do what they say and have a track record of solid ideals. The idea that the GOP should water itself down more than it has over the last decade or so and become more D-lite is absurd.

I'll respond to both of you at the same time for convenience.

GenX, where did I say that this is in any way controversial? Also, the GOP hasn't been the party of "small govt ideals" in a few decades. Reagan increased the size of govt more than any president before him and the Bushes continued that track record. The GOP reps and sens were along for the ride all along. They pay good lip service to the ideal, but they sure as shit don't walk the walk.

I agree with your second paragraph though.

CAD, people demand their leaders to do what they say which is in direct contradiction with what the true leaders of the country (those pumping in hundreds of millions of dollars into campaign coffers) what. They have the pols get up there and make promise after promise and then make them look silly when they start pulling the strings to get them to do the opposite.

As for the "track record of solid ideals", you'll have to clarify that before I can truly comment. If you are talking about the ideals that include mandated discrimination, forcing religion on others and dictating how people should live their personal lives....I'll pass. But you can correct me if I'm wrong.

<sigh> same old same old crap...

It doesn't matter WHAT the ideals are - just that people can see what the person says and weigh it against what they have done. THAT will show you what you need to know about the person and voters can accept it or pass. It has nothing to do with your little whining about those nasty religious people... - it has to do with ideological consistency.

Case in point - Romney. For whatever reason a large contingent of the GOP liked the guy but he's no different than BHO - a slippery snake oil salesman who says what he thinks people want to hear and is vague enough that most will fall for the BS. THOSE people are not leaders and should not be in positions of leadership as there is no trust that they won't change and do exactly the opposite of what they promised.

 

[heyheybooboo]

Originally posted by: CADsortaGUY

Originally posted by: heyheybooboo
No offense, CAD. But I'd say your unwillingness to compromise is a microcosm of the problems with the GOP.

Enjoy life as the party of James Dobson and Rush Limpballs.

compromise on what? and with whom?

Oh wait... I see that straw...

Thanks for (as usual) nothing ....

There are many peoples prepared to embrace certain ideals of conservatism but with folks like you 'Who needs enemas?'

 

[CADsortaGUY]

Originally posted by: heyheybooboo

Originally posted by: CADsortaGUY

Originally posted by: heyheybooboo
No offense, CAD. But I'd say your unwillingness to compromise is a microcosm of the problems with the GOP.

Enjoy life as the party of James Dobson and Rush Limpballs.

compromise on what? and with whom?

Oh wait... I see that straw...

Thanks for (as usual) nothing ....

There are many peoples prepared to embrace certain ideals of conservatism but with folks like you 'Who needs enemas?'

Figures you won't answer the questions...

 

[Robor]

Originally posted by: CADsortaGUY

Originally posted by: RightIsWrong

Originally posted by: CADsortaGUY

Originally posted by: Genx87
So he called him out and acted unprofessionally and the Demint gave him an answer and this is news?

His answer isnt controversial at all. He admits republicans have gone too far and as a party needs to get back to small govt ideals. People around the country republican and democrat are getting fed up with the size and scope of our govt.

I happen to agree with many who say the Republicans must be more inclusive and not crawl into a far right wing shell. But I havent got a damned answer on how to do that. Moderate republicans suffered the most in the last two election cycles. How do you go moderate when you lose over and over to moderate democrats and your base is up in arms?

Yep, people don't want a milk-toast Republican. They want real leaders who will do what they say and have a track record of solid ideals. The idea that the GOP should water itself down more than it has over the last decade or so and become more D-lite is absurd.

I'll respond to both of you at the same time for convenience.

GenX, where did I say that this is in any way controversial? Also, the GOP hasn't been the party of "small govt ideals" in a few decades. Reagan increased the size of govt more than any president before him and the Bushes continued that track record. The GOP reps and sens were along for the ride all along. They pay good lip service to the ideal, but they sure as shit don't walk the walk.

I agree with your second paragraph though.

CAD, people demand their leaders to do what they say which is in direct contradiction with what the true leaders of the country (those pumping in hundreds of millions of dollars into campaign coffers) what. They have the pols get up there and make promise after promise and then make them look silly when they start pulling the strings to get them to do the opposite.

As for the "track record of solid ideals", you'll have to clarify that before I can truly comment. If you are talking about the ideals that include mandated discrimination, forcing religion on others and dictating how people should live their personal lives....I'll pass. But you can correct me if I'm wrong.

<sigh> same old same old crap...

It doesn't matter WHAT the ideals are - just that people can see what the person says and weigh it against what they have done. THAT will show you what you need to know about the person and voters can accept it or pass. It has nothing to do with your little whining about those nasty religious people... - it has to do with ideological consistency.

Case in point - Romney. For whatever reason a large contingent of the GOP liked the guy but he's no different than BHO - a slippery snake oil salesman who says what he thinks people want to hear and is vague enough that most will fall for the BS. THOSE people are not leaders and should not be in positions of leadership as there is no trust that they won't change and do exactly the opposite of what they promised.

Obama and Romney are no different? L. O. L.

 

[Jaskalas]

Originally posted by: sandorski
Daily show had a good bit on that.

Todays buzzword is "Freedom". Write it down, stick it on your fridge.

Today? Apparently you were living under a rock in 2003 when Freedom Fries came out.

 

[CADsortaGUY]

Originally posted by: Robor

Originally posted by: CADsortaGUY

Originally posted by: RightIsWrong

Originally posted by: CADsortaGUY

Originally posted by: Genx87
So he called him out and acted unprofessionally and the Demint gave him an answer and this is news?

His answer isnt controversial at all. He admits republicans have gone too far and as a party needs to get back to small govt ideals. People around the country republican and democrat are getting fed up with the size and scope of our govt.

I happen to agree with many who say the Republicans must be more inclusive and not crawl into a far right wing shell. But I havent got a damned answer on how to do that. Moderate republicans suffered the most in the last two election cycles. How do you go moderate when you lose over and over to moderate democrats and your base is up in arms?

Yep, people don't want a milk-toast Republican. They want real leaders who will do what they say and have a track record of solid ideals. The idea that the GOP should water itself down more than it has over the last decade or so and become more D-lite is absurd.

I'll respond to both of you at the same time for convenience.

GenX, where did I say that this is in any way controversial? Also, the GOP hasn't been the party of "small govt ideals" in a few decades. Reagan increased the size of govt more than any president before him and the Bushes continued that track record. The GOP reps and sens were along for the ride all along. They pay good lip service to the ideal, but they sure as shit don't walk the walk.

I agree with your second paragraph though.

CAD, people demand their leaders to do what they say which is in direct contradiction with what the true leaders of the country (those pumping in hundreds of millions of dollars into campaign coffers) what. They have the pols get up there and make promise after promise and then make them look silly when they start pulling the strings to get them to do the opposite.

As for the "track record of solid ideals", you'll have to clarify that before I can truly comment. If you are talking about the ideals that include mandated discrimination, forcing religion on others and dictating how people should live their personal lives....I'll pass. But you can correct me if I'm wrong.

<sigh> same old same old crap...

It doesn't matter WHAT the ideals are - just that people can see what the person says and weigh it against what they have done. THAT will show you what you need to know about the person and voters can accept it or pass. It has nothing to do with your little whining about those nasty religious people... - it has to do with ideological consistency.

Case in point - Romney. For whatever reason a large contingent of the GOP liked the guy but he's no different than BHO - a slippery snake oil salesman who says what he thinks people want to hear and is vague enough that most will fall for the BS. THOSE people are not leaders and should not be in positions of leadership as there is no trust that they won't change and do exactly the opposite of what they promised.

Obama and Romney are no different? L. O. L.

Did you even read what I wrote? Apparently not...or you're just being purposely obtuse.

 

[Robor]

Originally posted by: CADsortaGUY

Originally posted by: Robor

Originally posted by: CADsortaGUY

Originally posted by: RightIsWrong

Originally posted by: CADsortaGUY

Originally posted by: Genx87
So he called him out and acted unprofessionally and the Demint gave him an answer and this is news?

His answer isnt controversial at all. He admits republicans have gone too far and as a party needs to get back to small govt ideals. People around the country republican and democrat are getting fed up with the size and scope of our govt.

I happen to agree with many who say the Republicans must be more inclusive and not crawl into a far right wing shell. But I havent got a damned answer on how to do that. Moderate republicans suffered the most in the last two election cycles. How do you go moderate when you lose over and over to moderate democrats and your base is up in arms?

Yep, people don't want a milk-toast Republican. They want real leaders who will do what they say and have a track record of solid ideals. The idea that the GOP should water itself down more than it has over the last decade or so and become more D-lite is absurd.

I'll respond to both of you at the same time for convenience.

GenX, where did I say that this is in any way controversial? Also, the GOP hasn't been the party of "small govt ideals" in a few decades. Reagan increased the size of govt more than any president before him and the Bushes continued that track record. The GOP reps and sens were along for the ride all along. They pay good lip service to the ideal, but they sure as shit don't walk the walk.

I agree with your second paragraph though.

CAD, people demand their leaders to do what they say which is in direct contradiction with what the true leaders of the country (those pumping in hundreds of millions of dollars into campaign coffers) what. They have the pols get up there and make promise after promise and then make them look silly when they start pulling the strings to get them to do the opposite.

As for the "track record of solid ideals", you'll have to clarify that before I can truly comment. If you are talking about the ideals that include mandated discrimination, forcing religion on others and dictating how people should live their personal lives....I'll pass. But you can correct me if I'm wrong.

<sigh> same old same old crap...

It doesn't matter WHAT the ideals are - just that people can see what the person says and weigh it against what they have done. THAT will show you what you need to know about the person and voters can accept it or pass. It has nothing to do with your little whining about those nasty religious people... - it has to do with ideological consistency.

Case in point - Romney. For whatever reason a large contingent of the GOP liked the guy but he's no different than BHO - a slippery snake oil salesman who says what he thinks people want to hear and is vague enough that most will fall for the BS. THOSE people are not leaders and should not be in positions of leadership as there is no trust that they won't change and do exactly the opposite of what they promised.

Obama and Romney are no different? L. O. L.

Did you even read what I wrote? Apparently not...or you're just being purposely obtuse.

What you wrote is your opinion and completely wrong IMO. Sorry.

 

[Doc Savage Fan]

Originally posted by: sandorski
Daily show had a good bit on that.

Todays buzzword is "Freedom". Write it down, stick it on your fridge.

Good idea...I'll put it next to my 'Change We Can Believe In' sticky.

 

[CADsortaGUY]

Originally posted by: Robor


What you wrote is your opinion and completely wrong IMO. Sorry.

OMG!!! an opinion! whatever shall we all do in this forum! :roll:

I don't doubt people like you can't see how slimy BHO is and has been but to anyone not on their knees in front of BHO can see the similarities.

meh...continue on if you wish...

 

[trooper11]

Originally posted by: Genx87

I happen to agree with many who say the Republicans must be more inclusive and not crawl into a far right wing shell. But I havent got a damned answer on how to do that. Moderate republicans suffered the most in the last two election cycles. How do you go moderate when you lose over and over to moderate democrats and your base is up in arms?

I agree with you on that point. The party can certainly have moderates and needs that kind of diversity, but its a fine line to find out how to have that large moderate base without sacrificing too many ideals in 'compromise'. that can be done, but not before many in the leadership (those that would be considered moderate or those considered right wing) are phased out for the next generation. They had thier chance to represent us and havent lived up to the promises made.

there needs to be a mix of 'right wing' and 'moderate' influences in the party to keep it healthy and ahead of the curve with ideas to fix the problems in our country.

 

[sandorski]

Originally posted by: Jaskalas

Originally posted by: sandorski
Daily show had a good bit on that.

Todays buzzword is "Freedom". Write it down, stick it on your fridge.

Today? Apparently you were living under a rock in 2003 when Freedom Fries came out.

It's the rerun.

 

[Genx87]

GenX, where did I say that this is in any way controversial? Also, the GOP hasn't been the party of "small govt ideals" in a few decades. Reagan increased the size of govt more than any president before him and the Bushes continued that track record. The GOP reps and sens were along for the ride all along. They pay good lip service to the ideal, but they sure as shit don't walk the walk.

It may be the compromise within the party for moderates is a more liberal stance on the size and scope of govt. I think recently the Republicans certainly showed when they legislated more from the center fiscally the govt expanded rather quickly.

 

[Robor]

Originally posted by: CADsortaGUY

Originally posted by: Robor


What you wrote is your opinion and completely wrong IMO. Sorry.

OMG!!! an opinion! whatever shall we all do in this forum! :roll:

I don't doubt people like you can't see how slimy BHO is and has been but to anyone not on their knees in front of BHO can see the similarities.

meh...continue on if you wish...

Meh... I'm guessing Obama's tastes better than GWB's. You can resume the teabagging now.

 

[Lemon law]

Originally posted by: Genx87
So he called him out and acted unprofessionally and the Demint gave him an answer and this is news?

His answer isnt controversial at all. He admits republicans have gone too far and as a party needs to get back to small govt ideals. People around the country republican and democrat are getting fed up with the size and scope of our govt.

I happen to agree with many who say the Republicans must be more inclusive and not crawl into a far right wing shell. But I havent got a damned answer on how to do that. Moderate republicans suffered the most in the last two election cycles. How do you go moderate when you lose over and over to moderate democrats and your base is up in arms?

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I think GENx87 both asks the right question and even some what comes to the right conclusion with his last sentence.

But I think there is a larger explanation that should lay the blame at the feet of people like Newt Gingrich and especially Karl Rove, in a general proof of that old adage, he who lives by the sword, dies by the sword.

It was Newt that pushed the idea of all R's=good and all D's=bad, and its the genius of Karl Rove who clothed that argument with the number crunching polling that allowed the GOP to slice and dice various voting groups, peel them off with basically phony wedge issues, and thereby allow the GOP to get to that magic 50.1% that wins an election in a two party system. And when the end goal of slicing and dicing constituencies becomes the over riding concern of the GOP as it did during GWB&co, the problem is that the GOP becomes a one trick pony when slicing and dicing demographics becomes even more important than good governance. And at the same time, this has created a Frankenstein monster best called the
radical right, never more than 25% of the larger GOP, but now convinced they OWN the GOP and have veto power over any moderation. And that same slice and dice demographics strategy ignores how angry the 49.9% losing side becomes as they get ignored.

And now that the voting demographics of the country have changed, and many more than
50.1% of the country are disgusted with the GOP results, the GOP is in real danger of becoming a regional party that will thrive only in districts where radical right type voters predominate.

 

[Doc Savage Fan]

Originally posted by: Lemon law

Originally posted by: Genx87
So he called him out and acted unprofessionally and the Demint gave him an answer and this is news?

His answer isnt controversial at all. He admits republicans have gone too far and as a party needs to get back to small govt ideals. People around the country republican and democrat are getting fed up with the size and scope of our govt.

I happen to agree with many who say the Republicans must be more inclusive and not crawl into a far right wing shell. But I havent got a damned answer on how to do that. Moderate republicans suffered the most in the last two election cycles. How do you go moderate when you lose over and over to moderate democrats and your base is up in arms?

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I think GENx87 both asks the right question and even some what comes to the right conclusion with his last sentence.

But I think there is a larger explanation that should lay the blame at the feet of people like Newt Gingrich and especially Karl Rove, in a general proof of that old adage, he who lives by the sword, dies by the sword.

It was Newt that pushed the idea of all R's=good and all D's=bad, and its the genius of Karl Rove who clothed that argument with the number crunching polling that allowed the GOP to slice and dice various voting groups, peel them off with basically phony wedge issues, and thereby allow the GOP to get to that magic 50.1% that wins an election in a two party system. And when the end goal of slicing and dicing constituencies becomes the over riding concern of the GOP as it did during GWB&co, the problem is that the GOP becomes a one trick pony when slicing and dicing demographics becomes even more important than good governance. And at the same time, this has created a Frankenstein monster best called the
radical right, never more than 25% of the larger GOP, but now convinced they OWN the GOP and have veto power over any moderation. And that same slice and dice demographics strategy ignores how angry the 49.9% losing side becomes as they get ignored.

And now that the voting demographics of the country have changed, and many more than
50.1% of the country are disgusted with the GOP results, the GOP is in real danger of becoming a regional party that will thrive only in districts where radical right type voters predominate.

LL...just curious...who do you think from the Dems side of the aisle is responsible for pushing the idea of all R's=bad and all D's=good? They sure did a good job.

 

[fskimospy]

Originally posted by: CADsortaGUY

Yep, people don't want a milk-toast Republican. They want real leaders who will do what they say and have a track record of solid ideals. The idea that the GOP should water itself down more than it has over the last decade or so and become more D-lite is absurd.

Moderation on social issues for the GOP is inevitable. They are forced to carry out this sort of correction every so many years when society progresses, and I bet they will do it again in the not too distant future. Anyone who thinks that the GOP will still be against gay marriage in say... 20 years is living in a fantasy world.

By the way it's Milquetoast, not milk-toast. Watch that auto correct!

 

[RKDaley]

Originally posted by: RightIsWrong
I was watching this live the other day but couldn't get around to posting it until this morning. The only links I could find to the video are rabid lefties lapping it up....but I thought it was post-worthy anyway.

Enjoy Sen. DeMint's "Big tent of freedom".

LOL, that was funny to watch.