1 - 10 Next
In response to:

Cruz Control? Part II

SkidTorque Wrote: Feb 20, 2014 2:24 PM
Typical deflection of a RINO. You assume conservative = loss and that a RINO would've won. However, you still haven't answered the question so I'll ask again. How many seats has Karl Rove and the rest of the RINO establishment delivered to the Republicans in recent election cycles? At least the tea party has delivered actual seats including control of the House.
In response to:

Cruz Control? Part II

SkidTorque Wrote: Feb 20, 2014 1:29 PM
There's that word again 'if'. Again, you are making the assumption that putting conservatives up = loss. Again I'll ask, "How many seats has Karl Rove delivered to the 'R' party in recent elections by promoting 'mushy moderates'?
In response to:

Cruz Control? Part II

SkidTorque Wrote: Feb 20, 2014 10:58 AM
All conjecture. You assume that a conservative is going to lose in the general. Exactly how many election victories has Karl Rove secured in recent election cycles by pushing "mushy middle" candidates? How many conservatives has he ignored or attacked?
In response to:

Cruz Control? Part II

SkidTorque Wrote: Feb 20, 2014 10:38 AM
Reality check. I never said anything about third party. Take back the R party through the primary process. Defeat the Marxist enabling RINO's in the primaries.
In response to:

Cruz Control? Part II

SkidTorque Wrote: Feb 20, 2014 10:29 AM
Next, “Senator Cruz's filibuster last year got the Republicans blamed for shutting down the government -- and his threatened filibuster this year forced several Republican Senators to jeopardize their own reelection prospects by voting to impose cloture, to prevent Cruz from repeating his self-serving grandstand play of last year.” Why? Was it because the Democrats blamed the Republicans? Was it because the media blamed Republicans? Or, was it because Republican RINO’s gave credibility to the Democrats and Media by blaming Senator Cruz and not standing and fighting with him? The RINO’s have betrayed those who put them in their positions. What are the facts? Who actually did what the RINO’s promised us they would do in 2010 when conservatives swept them into control of the House? Who was proven correct regarding Obamacare? What is the Administration doing now as damage control for the Obamacare disaster? Who stood on the sidelines or, even worse, took potshots at Senator Cruz, during the fight, and was willing to allow the American people to suffer under the oppressive burdens of Obamacare in an attempt to collect ‘political points’ for the next election cycle? Who is self-serving again? The RINO’s in the GOP have a credibility problem. In 6 years with the Republicans in charge of Congress under President Bush did we get a debt reduction or deficit spending? Did we get government to shrink its power back towards its constitutionally defined limits or did we get more expansion of federal power? The RINO’s continue to put forth the mantra, ‘Now is not the time to fight, the next crisis is’, and they never actually fight. Or, they’ll say, ‘Well, we only have control of ½ of 1/3 of the government, we can’t do anything.’ What a crock! They can stop the destruction of our country. They can stand on principle and virtue but they choose not to. Instead, they conspire, retreat and play political shell games. Even worse, they undermine those who go against this ‘strategy’. Who is self-serving again? Sorry Dr. Sowell, while I have a great amount of respect for you, I am willing to take a chance on the character of Senator Cruz, based on the presented evidence. I have witnessed the character of the RINO’s in congress and have found them lacking.
In response to:

Cruz Control? Part II

SkidTorque Wrote: Feb 20, 2014 10:28 AM
I have an immense amount of respect for Dr. Sowell as he has provided me with much valuable insight through his articles over the years. However, while enthusiasm must always be tempered regarding anyone, Senator Cruz included, I cannot agree with Dr. Sowell’s assessments in these last two commentaries. In this most recent article I disagree strongly with a couple of his assertions: “At this crucial juncture in the history of America, internal battles within the only party that can turn things around are the last thing Americans need.” Why? Should we keep electing the same people to the same seats over and over again just because they have an ‘R’ next to their name? That has worked really well, hasn’t it? Or, do we need to take responsibility for the principles and virtues of the party by challenging them, keeping them honest by threat of sending them home, in a primary, every election? My father’s Democratic Party no longer exists. It was purged of any constitutionally minded principles in much the same way. The ‘progressive’ Marxists waged an internal battle in the democratic party and now the party is fully controlled by these ‘progressive’ Marxists. Now, this battle is waging in the Republican Party. To stand down now would be to capitulate, again, to these ‘progressives’. Then the Republican Party would no longer be ‘the only party that can turn things around’. There will be ‘no party’ that can turn things around. We will have let slip away the gift of liberty that we were entrusted with and, we will have ensured the enslavement our children and future generations to the ‘Utopia’ that the Marxists envision.
I think GW is going full Karl Rove on election night here.
No third party necessary. The GOP needs to stop marching leftward. Support true conservatives and oust the RINO's who do everything in their power to undermine the cause. Provide a real alternative to the Marxist Regressives that the Dem's put out.
Getting mad there GW? Keep on exposing yourself and your character. How successful has Mr. Rove been in recent elections? How quickly you forget how the R's gained control of the house in the first place. The corrupt, marxist enabling RINO's need to be primaried.
Step away from the keyboard GW. You are dishonoring the name. The personal attack and fear mongering are typical tactics of RINO's and in no way represent the character and virtue of the 1st President.
1 - 10 Next