NY Times Wants Two Liberal Parties

Boycott The New York Times ^ | May 26, 2009 | Don Feder

[AIM Freeper]

In reporting on the contretemps between former Vice President Dick Cheney and Colin Powell, The New York Times continues its longstanding agenda to get the Republican Party to move to the left.

In yesterday’s paper, The Times reported on Powell’s Sunday appearance on “Face The Nation,” where the former Secretary of State boldly declared “I am still a Republican” (despite having endorsed Barack Obama) and called for an “after-action review” of GOP losses in the last election.

“Mr. Powell’s appearance underlined an extraordinary public struggle among Republicans over the future of the party,” The Times informed us in the hushed tones of revelation.

What struggle? Colin Powell is about as representative of the Republican Party as Ben Stein is of Hollywood.

Powell has never held public office or been a candidate. Whenever the opportunity to run arose, Powell declined. Besides serving in Congress and as Secretary of Defense for Bush ‘41, Dick Cheney was vice president for 8 years.

Whatever The Times imagines, the Republican Party has no Colin Powell wing.

The so-called moderate, Northeast Republicans (little liberals) are on the verge of extinction. Where “moderate” Republicans once held the governorships of New York, Massachusetts and New Hampshire, all are now in Democratic hands.

Since 1976, the only time the GOP has won the White House is with a conservative, or a candidate who could credibly put himself forth as a conservative. John McCain lost because, after 20 years of doing the bidding of The New York Times, he couldn’t plausibly run as a conservative last year. It’s revealing that even McCain wasn’t enough of a “moderate” to suit Powell.

The Times would like to see the Republican Party become a faint echo of the Democrats. It won’t happen. Other than in the liberal media, there is no internal power struggle in the GOP. The fate of Powell’s version of Republicanism was decided decades ago.

[Hillarys Gate Cult]

I thought they already had two Dem parties, the Marxists and the Maoists.

[FLDemocracker]

I despise Colin Powell.

[Nathan Zachary]

"McCain losing was the best thing that could have happened to the Repubs. He would have been powerless to stop the damage from the financial meltdown and the party would never have recovered."

Yes it was, but allowing these RINO's to control the party while members quit and sit on the sidelines and complain isn't going to fix the party.

We don't have time to create a new party either. So it's time for people to pay their memberships up and get involved, show up at meetings and get these RINO's out, elect and send better delegates to national and get the Mclames and Powell's OUT!

[GeronL]

The after-election review that Powell wants will show that the squishy conservatism that Powell advocates

Powell does not advocate any kind of conservatism, squishy or otherwise

[rod1]

The NY Times and the rest of the MSM want the RATS to be the Harlem Globetrotters and the McCcain/Powell/Ridge types to play the other team whose asole purpose is to make the Globetrotters look really good.

There is never a danger of losing power under this script and the RATS never have any really challenge to their agenda or even serious questions asked of them.

[central_va]

What confuses me is that,as of right now, the GOP seems to be the ideal middle of the road moderate semi liberal party that the NY Times and the Powells of the world want. They’ve got what they want, so STFU already.