Posted on 01/20/2010 9:50:36 AM PST by EternalVigilance
Wednesday, January 20, 2010
(Excerpt) Read more at loyaltoliberty.com ...
I wouldn't call them that, though I *would* refer to them as our "Daily KOS" wing - a small but vocal group of people who are completely unsatisfied with a candidate or politician unless that candidate or politician agrees with them, personally, 150% of the time. Unfortunately, because the members of this small but vocal group are usually some conglomeration of kooks and wackos (think: Buchananites, RonPaulians, etc.), there are almost no candidates or politicians who can hope to get more than 1-2% in a general election who will make these folks happy, so we have to hear their constant screeching.
A guideline for the conservative movement as we move forward is that we need to support real conservatives (i.e. people like DeMint, Palin, Hayworth, Rubio, Toomey, etc.) while avoiding the obvious fruits, flakes, kooks, and weirdos out there who want to try to present themselves as the Only True Conservatives (tm).
“Hey, Alan, how did your campaign as a Conservative in a deep blue state like Illinois go?”
Yes!
His was the first battle against Obama, and for all of his high-horse attitude, HE BLEW IT!
He is one of the main reasons why we have this nightmare today.
I understand what Dr. Keyes is trying to say.
Scott Brown WILL give us trouble down the road, just like the senators from Maine do.
However, his win is a MAJOR victory and killing Obamacare is worth any possible trouble he will give us in the future.
Not even that. The only reason we were able to defeat the second stimulus was with so-called Blue-dogs. The only reason we delayed the retreat on Obamacare long enought for Brown to matter was due to Lieberman, dirtbag Nelson, etc.
Do we think all the heroes at the Alamo were good Christian Nobility? Hell no. Lots of criminals and ne'er do wells! HEROES ALL!
I agree. I have to wonder if some of them aren’t really conservatives at all. Maybe they are Trojan horses pretending to be conservatives but really on the side of the Commies. Mind games ya know.
I don’t care if Brown is a RINO or not and I’m not sure he is a RINO. 2 years ago I would have cared. Not at this time. We needed to take that 60th vote away and I din’t give a darn who did it. If we don’t manage to stop this train wreck now we may never stop it. Any speed bump is a good thing. I like Keyes but this ticks me off.
I can't help but look at what Alan Keyes says without wondering what happened to the intelligent, articulate, and sane fellow who used to bear that name.
LOL, I noticed that you didn't address him as "Senator Keyes."
I will take a “RINO” who is 80% with us to any Democrat who is 100% against us!
________________
Me too! But when the RINOS’s go too far, we need to make sure they know that they will be voted out and replaced. We have let them get away with too much. I think some of them are really Dems posing as RINOS.
The problem here in California is that dumping Gray Davis was a START, but everyone thought it was the be all and end all. I seem to recall Arnold had a special election shortly after his initial election. There were a bunch of initiatives that may have saved us a lot of financial grief, as well as toning down the roar of the state legis-rats. Not only did all of the initiatives go down in flames, he ended up eviscerated worse than any of his opponents in his "Conan the Barbarian" movies.
Heck, even Tom Campbell has realized he can do more to save the state and the country from Washington than he can in the snake pit of Sacramento.
I am as conservative as Alan Keyes, and I’m elated over Scott Brown’s win, even if it means having to cuss him for being a RINO in the future. Scott Brown is one more sign that people are waking up from the stupor that brought us Obamao and the Democrat majority. As for Brown being an opening for Mitt, ...I don’t think so. Americans may have escaped Obamaocare, but Massachusetts has Mittcare dragging it down. Of course the struggle of conservatives against RINOs will go on in the Republican Party, but it is still the main tool in our arsenal of weapons against the left. We need to stop using it to commit political suicide, and turn it against the Democrats.
I think Mr. Keyes is making a stretch to state RINO’s masterminded this victory. Romney may have lurk around as to not be a liability visa vi “Romney Care”, but the Tea Party movement elevated Brown. If Brown crosses the Tea Party, he is done. So to the contrary, RINO and Romney are losers, second only to Democrats, in the Brown victory.
I wanted Brown to win. I’m happy he won, but only because of the health care bill. I don’t expect much else out of him, and I don’t understand why so many Freepers want him to be the new “star” of the party. You have to keep an eye on all of them.
“These men (government officials), in point of fact, are seldom if ever moved by anything rationally describable as public spirit; there is actually no more public spirit among them than among so many burglars or street-walkers.”
~ H. L. Mencken
Shut up, Alan.
“The person who agrees with you 80 percent of the time is a friend and an ally — not a 20 percent traitor.” Ronald Reagan - 1972
Keyes does have a bit of a point here. I think Scott is more conservative than your average RINO. He is not as conservative as I’d like. Nonetheless, for a man as conservative as he to get elected in MA is really amazing.
The electorate is now heavily involved in the primary process. I’d like to think that citizens, both Democrats and Republicans, will be successful in selecting quality candidates.
For conservatives, that means nominees who are actually conservative and are honest about their views, and who have demonstrated integrity necessary to stand their ground on the Hill.
For Democrats, I’d hope that at least they’d nominate honest people who genuinely believe in an open and transparent process. They are tired of being lied to, also.
We should not lose hope because Scott is not a hyper-conservative.
However, we should also not stop looking for the best genuine conservatives in every district. We should avoid running RINOs whenever possible.
I was once leaning in the direction of third-party. However, I can see now, and believe that the GOP can be restored to its conservative, constitutional principles by the conservative electorate... And that it’s far better than third party.
Alan Keyes is correct on this...regarding the long term implications.
Brown is NOT a true conservative (at least on moral issues). At best he is a right leaning moderate. Would I rather that the Dem won....No not at all. Brown is about as “conservative” as one can be and get elected in Mass. In the long run he may just be another Snowe in the Senate.
The best face that one can put on this election is that it will possibly derail the Obama administrations push towards socialed medicine. I sincerely hope the man moves more to the right of social/moral issues. Don’t expect him to though.
For those that are Palin supporters....should his election concern you...You Betcha! He is definitely a risk to her candidcy should he run.
The worst, most suicidal move for Republicans to make is to now insist on all Republican candidates, even in Blue States, to be absolutely pure religious right conservatives — because they will lose.
Go for the most conservative which can win, but realize that in some States and Congressional Districts, the most conservative who can win may be a RINO — which is better than a socialist Democrat like Coakley.
Mary Anne Kreitzer makes clear Why I would never support Scott Brown
http://lesfemmes-thetruth.blogspot.com/2010/01/why-i-would-never-support-scott-brown.html
Saturday, January 16, 2010
Suppose you were trying to decide whom to vote for in a Senatorial election. You had already ruled out one candidate, but were considering the other who was great on economic issues. Only one problem — he is a white supremacist who believes in segregation. Do you think you’d vote for him? Heck no! Everyone repudiates that position (which is the politically correct position to take).
(Text omitted)
If I lived in Massachusetts I would not vote for Scott Brown. Why? Because he favors killing unborn children. You can read about his position here. All I had to see was that he thinks abortion should always be legally available and he went straight into the “disqualified” column. Some, who would object to my being a “purist,” (”Don’t let the perfect be the enemy of the good.”) are the same folks who would disqualify outright a white supremicist. Is being a bigot less serious than supporting the murder of the innocent? I don’t think so.
(Excerpted)
Sorry Alan, You are an idealist, when we need a realist. This is a big win. Let’s wait and see what Brown does. We will hold him accountable.
I'm with saftler and vandk...Keyes' disaster run in illinois is partly responsible for "President Obama."
Keyes influence has waned over the last couple of years as reality has intruded upon fantasy for most conservatives. America demands to be ruled from the center-right. I have no problem with Alan speaking his mind, but the battles that matter will not be fought in his arena.
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.