July 03, 2006
Fight! Fight! Fight!
Readers of Sound Politics know discussions of Republican Party politics can quickly descend into sharp divisions between different components of the Republican coalition (seen recently here, here, and here). Too many times I have seen comments at this site and Republicans out and about state the belief that in contrast, Democrats are a unified machine. Ironically, some Democrats believe the same thing about Republicans too. See, for example, the mention of "normally unified Republicans" here in a discussion of a Harry Reid memo to Democratic Senators in November 2005. So, for a reality check, it is nice to see a couple prominent examples of Democratic intra-party strife in the news recently with Sen. Tim Sheldon (D) facing a competitive primary from the left, and Senator Cantwell taking continued heat from the left as well.
The rift in the Democratic party over Cantwell's stance on Iraq is well-known, but races such as Sheldon's, or other such primary challenges from the left in legislative races, don't always capture our attention the same way. Personally, I think it is a great reminder both major parties are relatively loose coalitions held together with constant tension that can spill out in public spats. On the flip side, others argue these kind of primary challenges in either party have a cleansing effect on respective party ideologies.
Perhaps I just find it interesting that in this year when conventional wisdom says Democrats are united to defeat the evil Bush and his Republican minions, that unity isn't exactly evident.
Posted by Eric Earling at July 03, 2006
02:24 PM | Email This
For me, the difference is that while I often disagree on specific conservative issues, and will be vocal about why I do, it does not change my overall vote for the most significant issues. In other words, what really drives my vote, is not the minor issues, but the major ones. And the most major being the need to confront Islamic Fanaticism head on. I'll be happy to debate other issues where I think Republican's have screwed up. Terri Schiavo for example, but in the end, that's minor compared to the Islamic assault on the West. Lastly, when I disagree with other conservatives, I certainly don't discount them entirely and I don't care if we disagree, debate, especially amongst like minds is very good. I suspect many other conservatives here feel the same way.
Dems on the other hand seem really content to alienate key, high ranking positions soley because of their stance on certain issues. To me there seems to be a real sentiment on the left to embrace the Nutroots wing, and more importantly tow their line exactly, even if it makes no practical sense. A good example is Darcy Burner. Why the heck would she go to Seattle and effectively declare "Look at me, I am moonbat endorsed" when she's running in the more suburban and rural 8th CD? The "me too" knee jerk for whatever is currently fashionable on the left is their achilles heel. To be a progressive is in large part to be vain.
I think it's ridiculous to assume that the Democrats are ever
cohesive simply because their party is built on single issue GROUPS rather than a set of unifying principles.
I posted this under a different name on H'ASS back in April '05 and I believ it is even more relevant today ans the cracks and fissures in their party become more obvious.
There is a reason that Democrats can’t (and won’t) win national elections of any substance. The Democrat party has courted and gladly collected single-issue extremist groups the way a feral cat collects hairballs.
Earth Liberation Front
People for the American Way
Center for American Progress
Are there extremists on the Republican side of the aisle? Of course there are. But the bottom line is that those on the right simply make more sense to Mr. and Mrs. Average American.
Try to see the Democrat Party through the eyes of Middle America Mom & Dad working hard, raising their children. See what they see when they are faced with choosing Democrat vs. Republican.
St Patrick’s Day Parade vs. Gay Pride Parade
Tom Sawyer vs. Heather Has Two Mommies
Pat Robertson vs. Larry Flint
The right to own guns vs. the “right” to choose to murder a baby
Boy Scouts vs. ACLU trying to destroy them
Property rights vs. Sierra Club
Phyllis Schafly vs. Rachel Corrie
Believing in God vs. Eliminating God
Veneration of the Cross vs. “Cross in Piss”
Pro-Life quiet peaceful rallies vs. WTO riots devolving into destruction.
Personal responsibility vs. nanny government control
Pride in the American soldier vs. Jane Fonda spitting on them
Resolve in convictions (Bush) vs. saying what’s expedient (Kerry)
Ethic absolutes vs. moral relativism
Sex in The City vs. Touched by An Angel
American sovereignty vs. United Nations and/ world court
American Pride vs. “blame America first”
Flying the American flag vs. burning the American flag
Cutting taxes vs. more and more and more taxes
Achievement vs. Affirmative Action
Viewed in the totality of their associations, the democrats are no different than that wild feral cat: undisciplined, ugly and mean.
The Democrat Party is nothing but a collection of "what's in it for me shameless, self-promoting, professional noticers of injustice and their prey."
The Republican Party is little more than a collection of "what's in it for me backstabbers who will dry-shave you every chance they get."
Which is worse? I generally vote Republican, however it is more because the 'Enemy of my enemy is my friend' than because I trust them. I do not.
I do see one problem in the Republican party. We have a very low tolerance for other Republicans.
I myself am very conservative, or at least I like to think I am. I wish every Republican thought exactly like myself. Unfortunately, there are as many opinions within our party as their are people.
We are going to see people who want to attach their name to the Republican party who don't agree with every issue you stand for. While we can't let people who don't support any Republican issues represent us, we must do all we can to support those who support most or even just many of the core issues.
Elections are really about choosing the lesser of two evils when you get right down to it. I'll be frank, I wish we had someone better than McGavick running for the senate. I don't think he's the absolute best guy for the job. I agree on most issues with him, but I disagree on many issues. However, he's a heckuva lot better than Cantwell, and that's why I'm doing all I can to see him elected.
In the end, it really isn't about who stands for what. It's about who can get the largest group of people to stand for them. That's the core of politics, unfortunately, and that's the way it is always going to be. If you want to see your issue moved forward, be sure to stand with the largest group that supports the most of your issue. That will mean that you're not standing with people who see eye-to-eye with yourself, but it will also mean you will have more clout.
I think the conservative majority in Washington state is traditionally divided, at least since WWII. We have been divided by our enemies, convinced by them that our real enemies are ourselves. If we were to come back together, stand united on the core conservative principles, and allow people to disagree with us and still be united with us, then we would win every election every time, no matter how many ballots they find in the machines.
Good to have you on board and congratulations (or condolences) are in order for the promotion!
The most heartening thing I've been seeing over the past couple months, politically, has been the fratricidal behavior of our Democrat adversaries.
It's unfortunate that Tim Sheldon's political career is being threatened. And in a Rueters article (linked by Drudge) it looks like Sen. Joe Leiberman is facing a similar primary challenge in Connecticut.
It's sad to see moderate Democrats go, I'm not going to step in the way of them goring each others oxen.
That is the problem with Democrats - they try to out the moderate ones - who are usually strong candidates because of their lack of tolerance. It ultimately hurts their performance as evidenced in elections since 1994. Republicans do that also to moderate Repubs or RINO's as they are referred to, but to a lesser extent than the left - because they are more tolerant.
The mainstream Repubs are closer to moderate that the mainstream Dems - problem is that the mainstream media is farther to the left and often acts as the 12th man (to recoin a football term). There are other big problems with the mainstream media, such as lack of objectivity and a political ax to grind as shown by the tone of their articles. The MSM and the mainstream Democraps feed off each other and the common people are seldom if ever considered.
7. JG, I see real differences among Republicans. I think we have close to a majority of citizens statewide who consider themselves fiscal conservatives. Unfortunately, a different but overlapping majority are social liberals.
´´¨¨ I'll be happy to debate other issues where I think Republican's have screwed up. Terri Schiavo for example, but in the end, that's minor compared to the Islamic assault on the West.´¨¨´¨
While I agree that the Islamic assault on the West will be the major fight of our future.
I still don't think it is right to allow an adulterous husband to use the settlement, obtained supposedly to take care of his wife'
medical needs, to get a judge to sentence his
wife to death for the crime of being inconvenient. No other crime-just in the husband's way. Murderers under a death sentence
can appeal for ever. A wife, who is charged with
no crime, is starved to death for 13 days. A murderer is put to death in minutes, or even seconds.
Democracy Now! | Nat Hentoff: Terri Schiavo Suffered From "Longest ...In his latest piece in the Voice, the Village Voice, he calls the Terri Schiavo case judicial murder and the longest public execution in history. ...
www.democracynow.org/article.pl?sid=05/03/31/1558242 - 32k
Every single person in America needs to know that the ramifications from the Terri Schiavo
case are not over.
From The Astute blogger.blogspot.
Monday, July 03, 2006
MAN "AWAKES" AFTER 19 YEARS: TERRI SCHIAVO NEVER GOT THIS CHANCE
For 19 years -- until June 11, 2003 -- Mr. Wallis lay mute and virtually unresponsive in a state of minimal consciousness, the result of a head injury suffered in a traffic accident. Since his abrupt recovery -- his first word was "Mom," uttered at the sight of his mother -- he has continued to improve, speaking more, remembering more.
But Mr. Wallis's return to the world, and the progress he has made, have also been a kind of miracle for scientists: an unprecedented opportunity to study, using advanced scanning technology, how the human brain can suddenly recover from such severe, long-lasting injury.
In a paper to be published on Tuesday, researchers are reporting that they have found strong evidence that Mr. Wallis's brain is healing itself, by forming new neural connections since 2003.
Democrat and Leftist political activist Michael Schiavo was an estranged "ex"-husband - (living with another women who had borne him children) - who wanted his "ex"-wife dead, and the state carried out his wishes by starving and dehydrating Terri two death. If you treated your dog that way you would be ARRESTED.
This NYTIMES article - and other recent cases in shich so-called brain-dead or comatose people have MIRACULOUSLY recovered - is reason enough for me to believe that in the absence of legal written instructions explicitly requesting an end to medical intervention and/or sustenance, that the state should err on the side of life. Where there is life, there is hope.
More about the "party of death's" Stalinist tactics HERE. ¨¨¨¨¨¨¨¨¨¨¨¨¨¨¨¨¨¨¨¨¨¨¨¨¨¨¨¨¨¨
Personally, I am appalled that the Republican Party allowed Terri Schiavo (or anyone else) to die under these conditions and even more appalled that punishment seems to be in the works for someone who tried to help Terri Schiavo.
And that this punishment is showing up now, means there are things that are not yet known about this case.
I don't understand how "the Republican Party allowed Terri Schiavo .. to die". It was the Republicans that passed special legislation granting the Federal courts jurisdiction to intervene. Geo W was roused out of bed in the middle of the night to sign the bill. It is the democrat party that is the party of death and wanted Terri dead. The core of the Republican party is pro-life. The demos are pro-death - though they won't say it like that; they prefer the term pro-choice, except that the only choice offered is death! They are not pro-choice when it comes to education or just about anything else that they have on their agenda.
The democrats are animated by the same spirit that demanded the crucifixion of Jesus, while choosing to spare the life of Barabbas, a convicted murderer. While they want innocent babies to be murdered, they fight tooth & nail to spare the life of the worst sort of convicted murderers who have been sentenced to death.
Ann Coulter nailed the Dem/Libs when she wrote her book "Godless" - The Church of Liberalism. They hate God and therefore they love death. Proverbs 8:36 "all they that hate me love death."
10. My feeling is that the Republican party did not make the effort to save Terri Schiavo that was needed. There was an effort made, but it was not enough. Instead of going the extra mile, and doing what was necessary to save her life they said - we tried; that's all we can do.
In contrast, we see Israel, surrounded by enemies, one soldier kidnapped and they throw the
entire country into saving him.