1 - 10 Next
Your argument has merit, but, even so, I reject it, and here's why. I think we can all agree that what we witnessed in the period 2008-2010 was a dramatic tilt to the Left in our politics and policies (Obamacare was just a prime example rather than an isolated case). The election in 2008 of a Democrat President, a Democrat Senate, and a Democrat House of Representatives was certainly the proximate cause of that tilt, but how did that "sweep" happen? Did the country view President Bush as a genuine Conservative, trying to advance a Conservative agenda? Anyone trying to make that argument will have a hard sell. And did the public see Republicans in the House and Senate fighting tooth and nail to hold down deficits and limit the size and reach of government? I can't speak for everyone, but I saw quite the opposite. In short, I would argue that the GOP's failure to define a clear case for Conservative policies, and, further, their failure to demonstrate any committment to their supposed values gave voters no reason at all to vote for them. It was altogether too easy for a charismatic charlatan to promise them "hope and change." Obama's success is equally attributable to his political skills and our own failures in terms of defining who we are. I liked George Bush, and I think he is a true gentleman, but he and the John McCains and John Boehners of this country are the ones who delivered us into the mess we have now. And we won't be rescued from it by their followers, not in one election cycle or a hundred election cycles.
Certainly, I have no disagreement with Ms. Coulter on the amnesty issue. She does an outstanding job of reducing the arguments of proponents to absurdity. I confess my enjoyment when I read her spirited attacks on common political enemies. Still, I cannot completely accept the other aspects of her argument. I have voted Republican in every presidential election, starting in 1980, and only twice -- in 1980 and 1984 -- has the Republican Party given me a candidate I was happy to vote for. The rest have ranged from mildly objectionable (George H. W. Bush) to putrid (John McCain) to hopeless (Bob Dole). And in 2012, the GOP somehow managed to find that rare, rare candidate (and this task was clearly difficult) who could NOT credibly run against Obamacare AND who was afraid to attack President Obama personally. I've watched Democrats attack outstanding Conservatives with some of the most vile and contemptible invectives imaginable, with virtually no pushback from the GOP. When will the GOP fight back? Ms. Coulter ASSUMES that because no Republican voted for Obamacare, those same Republicans would actually repeal Obamacare if they had the power. I confess I am deeply skeptical of that assumption. It's no longer acceptable to me to have Republicans in office whose only goal seems to be slowing down the Liberal agenda. I want people in office who will push back with all their might and who will start implementing a Conservative agenda. Ms. Coulter can label me an idiot all she wants, but if she thinks John Boehner is that kind of person, then she can go looking for another idiot in her mirror.
In response to:

Tea Party at the Crossroads: Part II

Dennis2780 Wrote: Nov 13, 2013 10:32 PM
Sowell does have a point, but I would respond that it was not the Tea Party that started the internal war in the GOP. Tea Party candidates ran by the book, entering Republican primaries in states such as Nevada, Delaware, Alaska, Indiana, and Missouri. I realize that several of these candidates lacked the experience and the sophistication you want from a candidate in a rough and tumble campaign. Nevertheless, they won their primaries fair and square. But when the general election came, they were betrayed by the GOP establishment and left to twist in the wind. This year, the establishment pulled the same backstab against Ken Cuccinelli. What would Mr. Sowell recommend when the Republican Party refuses to properly aid a candidate running on the Republican ticket? And why does his article assume that the Tea Party must be the one to change their approach? Why doesn't Mr. Sowell call out the Republican Party for their actions? Why isn't he recommending that they change? It is my opinion that our country is on the precipice, and the battle to save it can only be won by those who are willing to stand up and fight. Who would you want in the trenches -- Lindsey Graham or Ted Cruz? Do you honestly believe that President Chris Christie would go all out to roll back Progressivism? To employ Mr. Sowell's pre-Civil War analogy, Chris Christie is no Abraham Lincoln, and neither is Mitt Romney, Jeb Bush, nor John McCain. Those establishment types continue to act as if our mission is a rear guard action, a retreat aimed at slowing down the enemy. My response to that approach is unmistakably clear -- Not Now, Not Ever!
Amen. Somehow, people like Saunders just don't quite get it. She seems to understand, as you and I do, that Progressivism is a terminal illness that is killing our country. And, yet, she failed completely to understand that electing a man like John McCain to be president was the equivalent of telling us, "Just take two aspirin and check back with me later." The Tea Party has demonstrated, beyond doubt, that substantial numbers of Americans are ready and willing to fight back against this Progressive disease, but the GOP keeps pushing candidates who apparently see their role as a rear guard agent, covering a retreat.
In response to:

Chris Christie for President?

Dennis2780 Wrote: Nov 11, 2013 11:03 AM
Why aren't Townhall columnists examining Christie's decision to separate his election and the special election for New Jersey's Senate seat? If those two elections had been combined into one election, it would have not only saved money for New Jersey, but it would also have given the Republican candidate a real chance to win that Senate seat. The only Conservative I've heard address this decision is Ann Coulter, but she did it on Hannity's show (I think), rather than in a Townhall column. She blamed Christie for that decision, but, interestingly, she attributed his bad decision to his ego that wanted a BIG win in his race. That's plausible, of course, but it would not surprise me to learn of a more sinister explanation. The Democrat Party completely pulled the rug out from under their candidate in the New Jersey governor's race, which is quite surprising. What if the Dems and Christie made a backroom deal? In exchange for the Dems throwing their candidate under the bus, Christie agreed to hold a separate election for the Senate seat, ensuring a Booker victory. We can never prove it, I suspect, but it wouldn't surprise me.
In response to:

The Knives Come Out -- for Christie

Dennis2780 Wrote: Nov 11, 2013 10:48 AM
Well said. My first presidential race I can remember as a kid was the 1960 election. I lived in Alabama, where there wasn't huge enthusiasm for Kennedy or Nixon (Alabama went for Kennedy, by the way). I remember passing a shop where a sign was hung that said, "I miss Ike (Eisenhower)." And somebody had taken some kind of pen or marker and scribbled, "Hell, I even miss old Harry." In the spirt of that remembrance, I will say, "I miss Bush; Hell, I even miss Bill Clinton." At least when Clinton "hit on" something, it was a female and not the economy or the Constitution.
I will agree that the GOP hasn't got a clue how to win elections. They dump all over their conservative base, treating them like lepers. They make zero attempts at outreach to African-Americans, with whom they share many personal beliefs. They often act like deer in the headlights when some reporter tries to ambush them with a question on abortion. They listen to a bunch of political consultants who are fleecing them for money. Thus, in 2012, when they've got a sure-fire winning argument against Obamacare, they commit the equivalent of political suicide by picking the only candidate who can't run against Obamacare. Inept is too polite for a description. And, yet, I don't accept your "death knell" prediction. And the reason I don't is because the Progressives who run the Democrat Party are supremely arrogant, and Obamacare is the best evidence of that you will ever see. It's too bad the Virginia election didn't come two months later. By then, the utter catastrophe of Obamacare would have become painfully obvious to voters. Even 4 weeks of that fiasco was almost enough. Obamacare is the greatest recruiting tool one political party ever handed their opponents.
And how much help did Lisa Murkowski receive from the GOP? The establishment GOP is dead; we just haven't had the autopsy yet. The Tea Party will either take it over or break away to become a third party. I want to push back Progressivism; why should I support GOP candidates who only want to occasionally slow it down. That way, even if I win, I still lose. There is a WWII movie called "The Battle of the Bulge." Throughout the first 2/3s of the movie, American forces are in retreat from the German onslaught, and, at one point, the Telly Savalas character says to his buddy (in earshot, conveniently, of the commanding general), "When are they going to let us fight?" That's what I've been saying to the GOP for years and years and years. "When are you going to let us fight?" And only the Tea Party seems willing to say, "Now!"
In response to:

The Knives Come Out -- for Christie

Dennis2780 Wrote: Nov 08, 2013 11:10 PM
I am no fan of Pat Buchanan, but I will give him credit for seeing Christie for who he really is. I can, at least, thank Mr. Buchanan for not being the umpteenth Townhall columnist who tried to convince me that Christie was a conservative. Even Pat Buchanan values his credibility enough not to go there. Democrats would absolutely be ecstatic if the GOP nominated Christie in 2016 because the conservative base would stay home and Hillary Clinton would easily win. I think Christie would be better off changing parties and running against Hillary in the Democratic primaries. Those people are his natural constituency.
If I have to listen to one more Townhall columnist proclaiming Chris Christie as a Conservative, my head will explode. What are these people smoking? Lambro claims that Democrats are afraid of Christie, but the evidence from last week's election proves that to be a lie. Democrats did NOTHING to oppose Christie, completely pulling the rug out from under their hapless candidate. If I had to guess, the Democrat Party's betrayal of their candidate was probably a backroom deal they made with Christie. In exchange for not working against Christie's re-election, they got a deal from Christie to schedule the special election for New Jersey's Senate seat at a different date, thereby eliminating any chance for the Republican candidate to win that senate seat. Christie is not only a traitor to conservatism; he's not even a good candidate. How many Republicans were swept into office on Christie's coattails in this recent election? Virtually none! I would write in my dog's name for President before I would ever vote for Christie. And if Mr. Lambro thinks the Conservative base has even a tiny amount of enthusiasm for Chris Christie, he is clearly out of touch.
1 - 10 Next