Posted on 09/30/2009 6:34:17 AM PDT by Starman417
Some of the readers of FA might know of Larry Elder. Known as "The Sage of South Central" he hosted a radio show on our local LA station KABC for close to 15 years when he ended it last December in hopes of starting a political career. No man would have been better to challenge Boxer in my opinion.
But something funny happened along the way. The state NRSC and Senator Cornyn told him not to because they really want to support someone sure to lose, Carly Fiorina.
You know Larry Elder: the African-American, Californian, libertarian, popular radio host and firebrand. He’s been around for a while, and he’s a solid presence on the California media-and-politics scene. Elder is a serious name and presence among California Republicans. He just wrapped up his radio show. “Why,” you might ask, “doesn’t Larry Elder run for the Senate?”There is an answer accorinding to many of Elder’s friends at the Republican Convention — Senator Cornyn and the NRSC told him not to.
Here’s the story that is circulating at the convention: Back in the spring, Elder went to Washington to sit down with John Cornyn and the NRSC, and ask for their support for a bid for U.S. Senate against Barbara Boxer. Cornyn and the NRSC told him the following:
1. If Elder chose to run, they would not support him. 2. The NRSC was already committed to supporting Carly Fiorina 3. The NRSC expected Fiorina to lose against Boxer, but expected her to tie up Democrat resources in the meantime.
So Larry Elder came back to California and did not run.
(Excerpt) Read more at floppingaces.net
Elder probably couldn’t win that state either. It would be very hard in modern day California for a real conservative to win a senate seat. Only a RINO like that pansy ex-body builder has much of a shot on a state level today. This ain’t the California of 40 years ago.
lib republican cant beat boxer? i thought she was damaged goods
I think that before we make any progress we might have to march to the Republican headquarters first...
Boxer has seniority; Republicans have a shot at adding 7 votes in the Senate leaving them in the minority; California voters are pretty stupid, but not that stupid ~ they'll stick with the pig that can bring home the pork!
Nice strategy, running to lose. If you expect to lose, you will most likely do so... and you will lose in those areas where you thought you could win.
1. Campaigning gets his name out there to those who have no idea who he is.
2. Not sure who this Fiorina woman is, but I doubt she articulates the right's message as strongly or clearly as Elder. Few people do.
3. Given California's downward spiral, we need more McClintocks, Elders, etc. out there highlighting the hypocrisy of the left so that even if they lose now, when the whole thing comes crashing down (or maybe even before, if we're lucky) people will wake up and there will be recognizable names in place that voters can gravitate towards.
I know relatively little about California politics, but IMHO Cornyn screwed up if this story is true as related above.
“Republican” voters need to teach elected Republican’s a lesson.
The lesser of two evils and a republican that can “win” is no longer an option.
DO NOT vote for a RINO. I for one, will never again.
I am on record now. If Romney is our candidate in 2012. I will vote third party. I would much rather work to destroy BO for 4 more years than be responsible for the further deterioration of the Republican Party.
I’m with you, Wilco.
[If you expect to lose, you will most likely do so...]
I was trying to explain my dislike for John Cornyn (one of my Senators) and THIS is the absolute basic example that I can display! He is PLANNING on loosing, but he wants to be able to take a “moral” victory of sorts by forcing them to spend money!
How about the conservatives offer a candidate with solutions to SOLVE the problems? If they have a good product with a good message, the Democrats will still have to spend their money explaining why they haven’t done these things already! (i.e., all these Congress critters saying they will save $500 million to $700 million by cutting waste in the Medicare/Medicaid system - conservatives should be hitting them about doing this NOW (regardless of the Health Care Reform), etc...).
I played football from Jr. High all the way into my Marine Corps days and the one thing I remember was from my Jr. High coach (Coach Slaughter): practice like you play, because you will play like you practice!
so am I! I’m tired of these worthless deal-making party of 7 Rinos!
Being in high tech, I don’t like Carly, period. She ruined a once was a good company - HP. I also like to see Boxer go as well. Elder needs to be supported.
>> Senator Cornyn and the NRSC told him not to.
As a conservative from Texas, Cornyn is a huge disappointment to me.
Nowhere is this more evident than in his role as NRSC chair.
Cornyn would champion and fund Hugo Chavez if he had an (R) by his name (and was a rich guy or gal who would play well in the Senate backroom club sandbox).
Real conservative like Larry Elder, with good ideas and name recognition, grassroots support, but no deep pockets? Fuhgettaboudit.
The NRCC stripped my conservative congressman of money weeks before the last election. They claimed he was a lost cause and handed the seat to a marxist.
The lost cause, lost by a whopping 2%.
Apparently toeing the party line on the big bank bailout was more important than holding the seat. If the GOP tries to run a RINO this time around they may as well hand the seat to the democrats again.
We need more of that across the country, not just in California.
This is the essential argument for running essentially Conservative candidates.
There is no strength and nothing to be gained in running people who support a watered down version of the failed policies which have made the mess.
A clear contrast in political philosophy is needed so people can choose a different way of doing things when the other has clearly been a failure, not to just do less of what made the mess.
Why should Larry Elder need the backing of republican party
this is the peoples gov’t. I am sure that if freepers put
their minds to it, money would flow to a man with true
conservative,small government values. It is time for us to get off the couch and take back our government. Larry Elder
is a true American can’t all of us do something.TAKE BACK OUR GOVERNMENT!!!!!!
I lived in Southern California for 25 years and left the state two years ago. I listened to Larry many, many times. I think Larry would make a good Senator. Too bad California wants to stay screwed up.
Why does California need two Senators? Isn;t Feinstein dumb enough for both of them? Here is an alternative:
The Proposal” - IT ALL ADDS UP!
When a company falls on difficult times, one of the things that seems to
happen is they reduce their staff and workers. The remaining workers must
find ways to continue to do a good job or risk that their job would be
eliminated as well.
Wall street, and the media normally congratulate the CEO for making this
type of “tough decision”, and his board of directors gives him a big
bonus.
Our government should not be immune from similar risks.
Therefore:
Reduce the House of Representatives from the current 435 members to 218
members.
Reduce Senate members from 100 to 50 (one per State)...
Then, reduce their staff by 25%.
Accomplish this over the next 8 years
(two steps/two elections) and of course this would require some
redistricting.
Some Yearly Monetary Gains Include:
$44,108,400 for elimination of base pay for congress.
(267 members X $165,200 pay/memb! er/ yr.)
$97,175,000 for elimination of their staff.
(estimate $1.3 Million in staff per each member of the House,
and $3 Million in staff per each member of the Senate every year)
$240,294 for the reduction in remaining staff by 25%.
$7,500,000,000 reduction in pork barrel ear-marks each year.
(those members whose jobs are gone. Current estimates for total
government pork earmarks are at $15 Billion/yr)
The remaining representatives would need to work smarter and improve
efficiencies.
It might even be in their best interests to work together for the good of
our country!
We may also expect that smaller committees might lead to a more efficient
resolution of issues as well. It might even be easier to keep track of
what your representative is doing.
Congress has more tools available to do their jobs than it had back in
1911 when the
current number of representatives was established. (telephone, computers,
cell phones
to name ! a few)
Note:
Congress did not hesitate to head home when it was a holiday, when the
nation needed a real fix to the economic problems. Also, we have 3
senators that have not been doing their jobs for the past 18+ months (on
the campaign trail) and still they all have been accepting full pay. These
facts alone support a reduction in senators & congress.
Summary of opportunity:
$ 44,108,400 reduction of congress members.
$282,100, 000 for elimination of the reduced house member staff.
$150,000,000 for elimination of reduced senate member staff.
$59,675,000 for 25% reduction of staff for remaining house members.
$37,500,000 for 25% reduction of staff for remaining senate members ...
$7,500,000,000 reduction in pork added to bills by the reduction of
congress members.
$8,073,383,400 per year, estimated total savings. (that’s 8-BILLION just
to start!)
Big business does these types of cuts all the time.
If Congresspersons were required to serve 20, 25 or 30 years
(like everyone else) in order to collect retirement benefits, tax payers
could save a bundle.
Now they get full retirement after serving only ONE term.
This is precisely why I told the NRSC to take a hike when they called me for money last night.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.