Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

MA-Sen. 2010: The Lesson Of Brown? (a RINO who supported Romneycare, Sotomayor, abortion)
The Atlantic ^ | 2010-01-15

Posted on 01/15/2010 9:51:31 AM PST by rabscuttle385

Frum sees him as an antidote to the Tea Party madness:

Strong on defense and school choice, opposed to the Obama administration’s signature initiatives, Brown voted in favor of Mitt Romney’s health plan in Massachusetts. He describes himself as pro-choice (subject to reasonable limitations), accepts gay marriage in Massachusetts as a settled fact, and told the Boston Herald editorial board he would have voted to confirm Sonia Sotomayor.


(Excerpt) Read more at andrewsullivan.theatlantic.com ...


TOPICS: Politics/Elections; US: Massachusetts
KEYWORDS: 0bot; 2010; brown; bs; coakley; davidfrum; democratpropaganda; disinformation; fraud; gopcare; lessons; liar; ma2010; madeupcrap; mccain; mccaintruthfile; propaganda; ridiculous; rino; rinoparty; romney; romney2lose; romneycare; scottbrown; troll; trollboy
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-5051-100101-150151-175 next last
To: rabscuttle385
David Frum, Andrew Sullivan and the Atlantic?
Okaaay...
Couldn't find anything relevant or intelligent to post?
101 posted on 01/15/2010 10:40:54 AM PST by astyanax (Liberalism: Logic's retarded cousin.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: rabscuttle385

As social conservatives lost the grip on America during the 20th century, especially since the 1950s, government has become massive, the left has succeeded in blocking conservatism in modern America. The more gains that the anti Christian left make, the more powerful the government becomes. Your side has been making huge headway for several generations, the Americans of old would not recognize this barbaric culture.


102 posted on 01/15/2010 10:41:51 AM PST by ansel12 (anti SoCon. Earl Warren's court 1953-1969, libertarian hero, anti social conservative loser.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 93 | View Replies]

To: PugetSoundSoldier
Coolidge so weakened the conservative movement we ended up with 16 years of FDR and the New Deal.

Wasn't that pretty much Herbert Hoover and the Smoot–Hawley Tariff Act ?
103 posted on 01/15/2010 10:43:35 AM PST by RedMonqey (You only think you are free.....)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 80 | View Replies]

To: jveritas
A Free Republic type conservative cannot win in Massachusetts and cannot win in at least 10 other states, no way, no how. This is a fact that is true as 1+1=2. If Brown wins this coming Tuesday then the 60 vote filibuster proof that the democrats have in the Senate will be broken.

Hallelujah
I've been saying the same things for many years and have been bashed and accused of everything bad including witchcraft here on FR. Yes we all want FR type conservatives IF we can get them. We aren't going to get them in about a dozen states and that surely includes Massachusetts. So we will need to rely on states in the southeast and parts of the Midwest for our brand of conservatives. Tom Campbell is infinitely better than Barbara Boxer in California. Let's get behind people like Brown and Campbell. Holding out for the perfect conservative in certain states is a losing proposition.
104 posted on 01/15/2010 10:45:26 AM PST by truthguy (Good intentions are not enough!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: rabscuttle385
Answer the question Rab, Quit posturing and bleating and answer the question.

What do you do for a living that allows you to spend all day, every day spending 100% of your time here on Free Republic posting “Hate the GOP” Democrat Party propaganda posts?

105 posted on 01/15/2010 10:46:58 AM PST by MNJohnnie
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: MNJohnnie
What do you do for a living that allows you to spend all day, every day spending 100% of your time here on Free Republic posting “Hate the GOP” Democrat Party propaganda posts?

First, considering that this is the first time on this thread you are asking me such a question, it would be rather hard for me to "posture and bleat" in an attempt to avoid providing an answer, now wouldn't it?

Second, I'm not paid by anyone, I'm not operating on behalf of anyone but myself, and I'm not a registered Democrat. I'm a former Republican who finally woke up from the Kool-Aid to reality; at present, I'm not registered or affiliated with any party.

106 posted on 01/15/2010 10:50:53 AM PST by rabscuttle385 (Purge the RINOs! * http://restoretheconstitution.ning.com/)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 105 | View Replies]

To: rabscuttle385

It’s amazing this subject gets so much discussion when the logical course is so simple:

1. Support the most conservative candidate available in every state and every congressional district.

2. Support a conservative and do everything possible to keep RINOs off the Republican presidential ticket.


107 posted on 01/15/2010 10:51:14 AM PST by Will88
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: GOP_Resurrected
Outside of the personal dynamics of the candidates, absolutely true.

True. He's a very good candidate with a very good campaign and she's the opposite.

108 posted on 01/15/2010 10:52:15 AM PST by NeoCaveman (usually clean, often articulate, only a slight Cro-Magnon accent except when I want to have one)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 88 | View Replies]

To: truthguy

Reality Versus Delusion. Pragmatism Versus Purism. Delusion of purism is the sure road for defeat, after defeat, after defeat not just in politics but in everything else in life.


109 posted on 01/15/2010 10:52:33 AM PST by jveritas (God Bless our brave troops)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 104 | View Replies]

To: rabscuttle385
Ok,

So in your bizarre little pseudo Conservative world, it is better to elect an out and out flaming Leftist who will renew the Democrats 60 vote lock on the US Senate rather then elect anyone not 100% dogmatically pure by your measure?

Cause that your choice at this very late date. Either vote for the rabid Leftist and Obama or vote against them. There are no other choices at this point. So by your actions you demonstrate you are firmly on the side of Obama and his agenda.

So spare us the faux Conservative bluster and posturing 0-bot. This thread is going to be thrown in your face over and over and over and over if Coakley wins Tuesday to remind everyone just who you really work for.

110 posted on 01/15/2010 10:54:33 AM PST by MNJohnnie
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: MNJohnnie
This thread is going to be thrown in your face over and over and over and over if Coakley wins Tuesday to remind everyone just who you really work for.

You mean like how anti-McCain threads were thrown in my face over and over again after McKook lost?

/sarc

111 posted on 01/15/2010 10:57:18 AM PST by rabscuttle385 (Purge the RINOs! * http://restoretheconstitution.ning.com/)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 110 | View Replies]

To: rabscuttle385

I guess there is one other explanation.

You are juvenile attention whore who posts this ignorant crap because it the only way to get anyone to pay attention to you.

So which is it Rab?

Faux Conservative working for the Democrat Party?

Just ignorant of basic facts?

or

Attention whore?


112 posted on 01/15/2010 10:58:04 AM PST by MNJohnnie
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: rabscuttle385

Quit ducking the question Rab.

Why is it you never, ever find anything to attack the Left on ever? Look at your posting history.

100% of the time, flaming out at someone on the Right for not being pure enough to suit your personal tastes. Never ever attack anyone on the Left.

Why is that?


113 posted on 01/15/2010 11:00:22 AM PST by MNJohnnie
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: rabscuttle385; misterrob; stephenjohnbanker; mkjessup; sickoflibs; ansel12
Translation: socons love Big Government, so long as it does things they like and they are in charge.

So tell us, exactly which "Big Government" programs do you think SoCons support, and provide the evidence for those of us here on FR who are SoCons that we, in fact, support these.

Are you saying that more laws are the answer to all of our social ills? Because that's exactly what most "conservative" government programs are--more Government!

Quite the opposite, in fact. It ought to be pretty apparent to anybody who's paid the least bit of attention to American history over the last century that the times when this country has leaned in a socially libertarian direction are subsequently followed by times when government expands enormously, often in response to the conditions created by the social libertarian atmosphere previously had.

In the 1920s, we saw a period of social liberalisation, what with the Flappers and opium bars and all, which generated the "need" for all kinds of big government nonsense like the start of the "War on Drugs" and so forth. Because people couldn't exercise self-control, the government stepped in and did it for them. The same thing in the late 1960s/early 1970s - social liberalism (which is essentially the heart of libertarian approaches to social issues) generally wrecked the mores of society, creating all kinds of problems - because people once again couldn't exercise self-control - that lead to the "need" for massive government intervention.

Social conservatism is more than just a laundry list of set-piece issues. If that's how you approach it, then it's no wonder you come off sounding like you haven't got a clue. Social conservatism is really just that - conservatism in the social realm. Conservatism, i.e. seeking to keep what works traditionally, with respect to matters of social changes and their impact on society.

In our society, being that it is a subset of the traditional Judeo-Christian Western civilisation, "conservatism" means maintaining the traditional moral system that generally helps to serve to keep people from harming others (i.e. "do unto others as you would have them do unto you") and which has been the primary motivator in encouraging all sorts of good things like thrift and hard work, respect for innocent life, respect for private property, and the rule of law.

It really isn't surprising to me that at those times when our society has swung towards the socially libertarian side of the pendulum, we have concurrently seen increases in crime, laziness and a desire for welfare, lawlessness, and increasingly capricious understanding of the value of human life, and governmental infringements on property rights. Libertarianism sets the "spirit of the times," and creates the conditions that end up being the seeds of its own destruction.

The converse point is that without the social libertarianism, there would not have been the conditions put into place that would cause people to "need" the big government interventions, etc. There wouldn't be the "need" for more and more prisons, for welfare, for drug laws, etc. etc. Libertarianism, because it wants the freedom and liberty, but eschews the necessary requirement of self-control, generates the very things it rails against.

Oh, and by the way, use of the Federal government for purposes of social engineering is generally a "progressive" or an authoritarian goal, not a conservative one.

So tell us - do you consider laws against abortion that protect innocent life to be "social engineering"? How about opposition to the radical social changes involved with gay "marriage"? Do you consider those to be social engineering?

114 posted on 01/15/2010 11:00:57 AM PST by Titus Quinctius Cincinnatus (Obama is proof that you can send a fool to college, but you can't make him think.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 100 | View Replies]

To: Mamzelle

Very well stated.


115 posted on 01/15/2010 11:08:10 AM PST by verity (Obama Lies)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 59 | View Replies]

To: napscoordinator

Because Kennedy is at 3%
in NY-23 the race was much closer and in a place the conservatives some times wins. Brown is a tea bagging conservative in Boston!
He’s as conservative as they’ll get in the next 20 years...

I wouldn’t vote for him, but I wouldn’t live there either. that said, I’ll speed $20 to try and take a vote out of obamacare...


116 posted on 01/15/2010 11:15:28 AM PST by Robbin (If Sarah isn’t welcome, I’m not welcome, it’s just that simple…)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: rabscuttle385
I dunno. McLame is supporting Brown, which does lend some credence to Frum’s allegations.

Who gives a crap?
99% of Freepers want Scott Brown in as US Senator and Martha Coakley kept out

As US Senator Scott Brown can be the vote that carries a Republican filibuster
Plus Scott is a good and humble guy
If he's a RINO I can deal with that

117 posted on 01/15/2010 11:23:35 AM PST by dennisw (It all comes 'round again --Fairport)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: jveritas
Yes, I couldn't agree more. We have a saying in the industry in which I work:

Perfection is the enemy of the excellent.

Yes pursuit of perfection is wonderful. But every thinking persons should know that perfection is not of this world.
118 posted on 01/15/2010 11:24:29 AM PST by truthguy (Good intentions are not enough!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 109 | View Replies]

To: dennisw

I’m as anti-RINO as one can be. However, Brown is the *ONLY* thing standing between us and the Obamacare monstrosity.

With stakes that high, all I can say is, Go Scott Brown!!!


119 posted on 01/15/2010 11:28:09 AM PST by kevao
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 117 | View Replies]

To: Titus Quinctius Cincinnatus
So tell us, exactly which "Big Government" programs do you think SoCons support, and provide the evidence for those of us here on FR who are SoCons that we, in fact, support these.

The federal War on Drugs, for starters.

There's also No Child Left Behind, but I won't get into that one now.

As for your evidence, holler something about ending the Federal prohibition on marijuana in any of the forums and see how many angry socons respond.

when this country has leaned in a socially libertarian direction

You confuse "libertine" with "libertarian."

They are not one and the same.

While there are some libertarians who do endorse a libertine lifestyle, there are plenty of others who do not.

In the 1920s, we saw a period of social liberalisation, what with the Flappers and opium bars and all, which generated the "need" for all kinds of big government nonsense like the start of the "War on Drugs" and so forth.

The "War on Drugs" was initiated by progressives who believed it acceptable to use the Federal government to reshape American society according to their vision for it.

Because people couldn't exercise self-control, the government stepped in and did it for them.

What you're saying is that people are incapable of making their own decisions and that, consequently, Government must step in and dictate to them how to live their lives, presumably, according to you, in a manner consistent with a Judeo-Christian worldview.

Of course, that's basically out-and-out social planning, which is the same as economic planning, and a variant of authoritarianism.

Conservatism, i.e. seeking to keep what works traditionally, with respect to matters of social changes and their impact on society.

I have no problem with conserving the values that have defined American society and contributed to its success; however, I have problems with the use of "Big Government" to "conserve" those values, particularly since individual freedom and liberty are themselves fundamental American values. The biggest problem is that the use of "Big Government" effectively constitutes, for lack of better terminology, an act of selling one's soul to the devil (i.e., a Faustian bargain). Sure, you may get what you want in the short run, but in the long run, you have just handed control over your life (as well as the lives of others) to the Government. This is a bad idea since it goes against the notion of individual freedom and liberty AND because it's impossible to guarantee that at all times a faction holding views amenable to yours will be in power and thus defining what the Government considers an acceptable and lawful way to live.

Libertarianism, because it wants the freedom and liberty, but eschews the necessary requirement of self-control, generates the very things it rails against.

Again, confusion over the distinction between libertinism and libertarianism.

So tell us - do you consider laws against abortion that protect innocent life to be "social engineering"? How about opposition to the radical social changes involved with gay "marriage"? Do you consider those to be social engineering?

If done at the Federal level, yes.

First, abortion is a State issue. One, if it is generally a form of murder (or homicide), as proponents of a prohibition on abortion claim, then it ought to be handled by the various States as murder (or homicide) as those crimes are handled today. Two, I would be willing to wager that a significant number of States would prohibit abortion to various degrees today if Roe v. Wade were repealed.

Second, I don't believe Government should be involved in marriage, period. Letting Government define what constitutes marriage is dangerous because it opens the door to all manner of unwholesome concoctions that are incompatible with American society. IMO, marriage is a social institution within the realm of the Church (or other religious organization) and ought to remain exclusively under its governance.

120 posted on 01/15/2010 11:38:35 AM PST by rabscuttle385 (Purge the RINOs! * http://restoretheconstitution.ning.com/)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 114 | View Replies]

To: Titus Quinctius Cincinnatus; rabscuttle385; misterrob; stephenjohnbanker; mkjessup; sickoflibs; ...
RE :”So tell us - do you consider laws against abortion that protect innocent life to be “social engineering”? How about opposition to the radical social changes involved with gay “marriage”? Do you consider those to be social engineering?

I would respond that these issues: abortion (like murder) and gay marriage are issues that belong to the states, which through most of history owned them. Demanding that the federal government resolve these issues through federal power (contrary to the constitution's clear meaning) just opens a Pandora's box and kills the principled arguments against liberal social engineering at the federal level.

Terri Shivo case was another example where most Americans agreed that the federal government was far overreaching it's authority for political purposes. (Looked clearly unconstitutional.)

For every one of these issues there are political arguments on both side but a federal solution always takes away our freedom to ‘walk with our feet’.

121 posted on 01/15/2010 11:39:39 AM PST by sickoflibs ( "It's not the taxes, the redistribution is spending you demand stupid")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 114 | View Replies]

To: sickoflibs

While you’re here, check out 121.


122 posted on 01/15/2010 11:41:48 AM PST by rabscuttle385 (Purge the RINOs! * http://restoretheconstitution.ning.com/)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 121 | View Replies]

To: rabscuttle385

I wrote #121....


123 posted on 01/15/2010 11:47:25 AM PST by sickoflibs ( "It's not the taxes, the redistribution is spending you demand stupid")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 122 | View Replies]

To: sickoflibs

My bad...I meant 120. The one above yours, the one I just posted.


124 posted on 01/15/2010 11:48:42 AM PST by rabscuttle385 (Purge the RINOs! * http://restoretheconstitution.ning.com/)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 123 | View Replies]

To: cornelis; NeoCaveman; misterrob
Assuming for the sake of argument that the race is a referendum on ObamaCare and one party supermajority rule, nothing more and nothing less - then what you have is a situation aptly described by the wry humor of 62.

Cordially,

125 posted on 01/15/2010 12:09:09 PM PST by Diamond (He has erected a multitude of new offices, and sent hither swarms of officers to harass our people,)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 41 | View Replies]

To: rabscuttle385

I am also as anti-RINO as anyone. But there are only two viable candidates in this race. Kennedy is going to get low single digits at best and so a vote for him is meaningless and a total waste (and besides he is not a true Libertarian or tea party candidate). A vote for Brown and a win or close loss will send an earth shattering shockwave across the bow and may very well derail Obamacare. There is a time and a place and the best/most conservative candidate (Jack E Robinson) lost in the primary. If he had won we would have rightly expected the RINO’s to vote for him. He didn’t. Scott won. I don’t know what percent Brown will be but whatever it is, it will be a million times better than CRoakley. Brown is the best Massachusetts could possibly hope for at this point. So we need to seize the opportunity of what’s (barely) possible instead of bashing our heads against the immovable wall. If you want good true conservative candidates for which to vote in 2010 you better get to work and pick some clean, charasmatic ones now and start working and funding them like hell so you won’t come whining here when your only choice is a RINO or a MoonBat.


126 posted on 01/15/2010 12:09:18 PM PST by S.O.L.
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Titus Quinctius Cincinnatus

You are a hoot I must say. Your around to just b!tch and complain. You never provide ANYTHING other than that. It would be nice if you would provide a little information inside that pee brain of yours.


127 posted on 01/15/2010 12:44:26 PM PST by napscoordinator
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 67 | View Replies]

To: Titus Quinctius Cincinnatus

I just saw your page. You are a libertarian. This is a conservative site. I guarantee that there are millions of liberaltarian sites on the internet that you will enjoy. Go give them a chance. I am not trying to be nasty but after seeing you political leanings it explains why conservatives scare the crap out of you. I understand you 100 percent now.


128 posted on 01/15/2010 12:52:40 PM PST by napscoordinator
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 114 | View Replies]

To: Titus Quinctius Cincinnatus; rabscuttle385; misterrob; stephenjohnbanker; mkjessup; ansel12
RE :”Translation: socons love Big Government, so long as it does things they like and they are in charge. So tell us, exactly which “Big Government” programs do you think SoCons support, and provide the evidence for those of us here on FR who are SoCons that we, in fact, support these.

While this isn't absolute proof, the love of so-cons for GWB, the defending of him as a 'misunderstood success', and the frantic support of John McCain by socons in 2008 all are areas of concern.

129 posted on 01/15/2010 1:02:21 PM PST by sickoflibs ( "It's not the taxes, the redistribution is spending you demand stupid")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 114 | View Replies]

To: napscoordinator

The perfect shouldn’t be the enemy of the good. You must plow the fields with the oxen God gave you. If Brown wins, there is no doubt that we will be unhappy with some of his votes, but the immediate concern is stopping Obama’s agenda. Even if he doesn’t win, the fact that a Dem is in a tough fight to replace Teddy Kennedy is remarkable and is already sending a very strong message to all Dems regardless of where they are.


130 posted on 01/15/2010 1:09:02 PM PST by kabar
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: mrreaganaut

ping to #43

Brown defends Romneycare


131 posted on 01/15/2010 1:31:51 PM PST by reaganaut (Ex-Mormon, now Christian - "I once was lost but now am found, was blind but now I see")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 43 | View Replies]

To: Diamond

My guess is that you yourself would wish it wasn’t that way.


132 posted on 01/15/2010 1:48:43 PM PST by cornelis
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 125 | View Replies]

To: kevao
I’m as anti-RINO as one can be. However, Brown is the *ONLY* thing standing between us and the Obamacare monstrosity.

With stakes that high, all I can say is, Go Scott Brown!!!

The Democrats have proven how high the stakes are by pouring in three million dollars worth of TV advertising and an 0bama visit
They know that a Scott Brown win can kill off 0bama-care

133 posted on 01/15/2010 2:01:05 PM PST by dennisw (It all comes 'round again --Fairport)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 119 | View Replies]

To: Titus Quinctius Cincinnatus; rabscuttle385

There is a two-level problem here. First, I will assume that both Titus and rabscuttle385 are genuinely motivated by principle: practicality vs. purity, respectively.

As to purity, is is true that many, MANY, FReepers have inveighed against RINOs in the GOP, and pledged to abstain rather than support them. As for practicality, it should be obvious that a minority can do next to nothing to stop things with which we disagree.

The two levels, then, are strategy and tactics, or long-term vs. short-term goals. Of course we want in the long run to vote only for Conservatives. It is in light of this, and not abstractly, that we should judge the contest in front of us today. Will the present vote (not a theoretical, pie-in-the-sky vote) get us to a more conservative tomorrow? Sometimes, the answer may indeed lead to some RINOs losing to Dems (as should have happened to Arlen Specter, and did happen to Dede Scozzafava).

Conclusion: Practicality gets a bad rap, but losers never prosper. A hold-your-nose vote against Coakley is still a vote for America.


134 posted on 01/15/2010 2:15:07 PM PST by mrreaganaut (Long ago when men cursed and beat the ground with sticks, it was witchcraft. Today, it's golf.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 44 | View Replies]

To: cornelis
Yes.

If this is chess not checkers, as someone above has said, then the position of having to sacrifice the Queen of principle to try to escape the mating net of socialist/commie health rationing is a very desperate position indeed. It seems that the commies control all the good squares on the board at the moment.

Cordially,

135 posted on 01/15/2010 2:45:07 PM PST by Diamond (He has erected a multitude of new offices, and sent hither swarms of officers to harass our people,)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 132 | View Replies]

To: PugetSoundSoldier

Whoa, there! I’m not saying that rabscuttle’s not a troll, but that he’s right about Coolidge being conservative. It was Hoover who was the moderate GOP president who so tarnished our brand that FDR got to blame the economy on him for 12 years (Obama’s ‘blame Bush’ strategy should scare us.)

Just don’t throw the baby out with the bathwater.


136 posted on 01/15/2010 2:47:23 PM PST by mrreaganaut (Long ago when men cursed and beat the ground with sticks, it was witchcraft. Today, it's golf.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 80 | View Replies]

To: rabscuttle385
Brown is a RINO...

Yeah, a full-blown Obama-loving Dem would be MUCH better, wouldn't it?

I still can't believe the sheer absurdity on FR sometimes...

137 posted on 01/15/2010 2:51:06 PM PST by TChris ("Hello", the politician lied.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 43 | View Replies]

To: rabscuttle385

A conservative fool loses elections


138 posted on 01/15/2010 2:52:15 PM PST by bert (K.E. N.P. +12 . Tax the poor. They are a drag on society)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: PugetSoundSoldier

Anything which reduces the size and scope of government is conservative. Anything which GROWS government is NOT. See how easy that is?


139 posted on 01/15/2010 3:27:12 PM PST by dcwusmc (We need to make government so small that it can be drowned in a bathtub. III OK)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 64 | View Replies]

To: rabscuttle385

Ok but is he still a better choice then Coakley? I’ll take him over her dumb butt any day.


140 posted on 01/15/2010 3:28:43 PM PST by linn37 ( "The problem with socialism is that you eventually run out of other peoples money.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Steve_Stifler

Yes, Frum is THAT delusional.


141 posted on 01/15/2010 3:34:11 PM PST by WashingtonSource
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: PugetSoundSoldier

Wasn’t Herbert Hoover a pubbie? And wasn’t he the President when the Crash occurred? So how did Silent Cal cause the Conservative Movement problems?


142 posted on 01/15/2010 3:38:16 PM PST by dcwusmc (We need to make government so small that it can be drowned in a bathtub. III OK)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 80 | View Replies]

To: All

.
HELP SCOTT DEFEAT THE ‘RAT’S SOCK PUPPET!!

(stole this from another FReeper, but bears repeating)

•People in ANY state can volunteer for the phone bank! http://www.resistnet.com/forum/topics/phone-calls-for-freedom-call-1?commentId=2600775%3AComment%3A1891491&xg_source=activity

•Anyone… Anywhere… Contribute! https://www.icontribute.us/scottbrown

•Live in or near MA? Volunteers still needed at many regional offices. If you can help, please email Laura@brownforussenate.com and she will tell you how.

•If you live in Massachusetts, become an election judge. In Boston they pay $135-$185 and they NEED Republican monitors.

Needed; military and retired law enforcement VFW and police organizations etc to monitor polls- prevent the voter fraud they’re plotting right now. Video tape everything; document everything; prosecute the perpetrators. http://www.cityofboston.gov/news/default.aspx?id=3599

. .


143 posted on 01/15/2010 3:52:52 PM PST by patriot08 (TEXAS GAL- born and bred and proud of it!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Gator113

Nothing is perfect in this world, you just have to play with the cards that you are dealth. I already voted for Scott Brown at town hall, thousands of people have already voted by absentee. There is a lot of enthusiasm here.


144 posted on 01/15/2010 4:08:38 PM PST by cradle of freedom (Long live the Republic !)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 51 | View Replies]

To: sickoflibs; Titus Quinctius Cincinnatus; rabscuttle385; misterrob; stephenjohnbanker; mkjessup; ...

I grew up in Newton, Massachusetts. Fellow FReepers, a true conservative Republican cannot be elected in Massachusetts. This is the best you are going to get, and Brown hasn’t won yet. Massachusetts is chock full of the worst leftist whiners, the worst sick, twisted freaks in the country. Massachusetts is a conservative hell on earth. That is, Boston is to the left of San Francisco.


145 posted on 01/15/2010 4:09:33 PM PST by stephenjohnbanker (Support our troops, and vote out the RINO's!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 129 | View Replies]

To: cradle of freedom

” I already voted for Scott Brown .....”

My grandchildren thank you.

You did more than vote, you served your country.


146 posted on 01/15/2010 4:11:54 PM PST by Gator113 (Obama is America's First FAILED "light skinned African American [Pres-dent] with no Negro dialect..")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 144 | View Replies]

To: RedMonqey

Well, Hoover was Coolidge’s Secretary of Commerce, and was in office for 9 months when the stock market crashed; Coolidge had set the policies that basically were in effect - including the budget - while Hoover was in office when it all fell apart. He certainly didn’t help it, but he didn’t set it up...

Additionally, Coolidge had a Republican majority for his entire term in both the Senate and House, something Ronald Reagan never had. During Coolidge’s term, the Democrats made steady gains in the Senate and House; he didn’t keep it together, unlike George Bush who saw actual gains, and Ronald Reagan who saw the Senate switch from Democrat to Republican majority.

Coolidge may have had good ideas, but he was a pretty weak political leader. You have to have actual leadership skills and charisma as well as sound ideas to be an effective political leader; apparently rabscuttle thinks just having a good idea is enough.


147 posted on 01/15/2010 4:23:33 PM PST by PugetSoundSoldier (Indignation over the Sting of Truth is the defense of the indefensible)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 103 | View Replies]

To: dcwusmc

Defense spending included? How about tax receipts? Government should get out of abortion and marriage? Eliminating Federal and State regulations on abortion and marriage would be conservative? Criminalization of drugs?

See how complex it is?


148 posted on 01/15/2010 4:29:40 PM PST by PugetSoundSoldier (Indignation over the Sting of Truth is the defense of the indefensible)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 139 | View Replies]

To: rabscuttle385

>> He should NOT be elected, unless the end result desired is another {Snowe, Collins, Jeffords, Chafee}.

We want the most Conservative representatives possible in each State. There’s sufficient difference between Coakley and Brown on every major issue including abortion that qualifies Brown as the more Conservative candidate.

Unless you prefer the more Liberal candidate, it would seem rational to either support Brown, or avoid marginalizing his campaign.

It’s not about ignoring RINOism, but the consequences of not selecting the better representative.


149 posted on 01/15/2010 4:42:30 PM PST by Gene Eric (Your Hope has been redistributed. Here's your Change.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 43 | View Replies]

To: PugetSoundSoldier; RedMonqey; dcwusmc
Well, Hoover was Coolidge’s Secretary of Commerce, and was in office for 9 months when the stock market crashed; Coolidge had set the policies that basically were in effect - including the budget - while Hoover was in office when it all fell apart.

Are you suggesting that Coolidge was responsible for the crash, i.e., that small-government conservative policies lead to economic disaster?

150 posted on 01/15/2010 5:12:38 PM PST by rabscuttle385 (Purge the RINOs! * http://restoretheconstitution.ning.com/)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 147 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-5051-100101-150151-175 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson