Friends of Darwin


He loves and she loves

Just Causes

  • Support_denmark

  • Marykay_1

Password required

Enter your email address:

Delivered by FeedBurner

« As Alaska goes, so goes the nation? | Main | I have a dream … and a nightmare »

August 27, 2010


Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.

Thanks for this fantastic post!

(One thing: When linking to an item on Amazon.com, you might want to do so via someone's "Associate" link; I was about to link, using mine... But then, scrolling down your right sidebar, I see you have one, too! ;-)


Well, I guess this is where someone like me turns, and reacts to something I feel is way too overt.

Just like the claims "Sarah Palin alone" debased Obamacare, etc.

The HYPE is just too much, and we see the whine of a candidate complaining about Legal Counsel?

Suddenly after a potential victory, all the recent loses are ignored, in all those States, and we are being sold the idea of greatness again. It actually is fun. Great to be happy, and good to see.

But those cynics, like myself, will wince.

Miller now sounds like a complainer, not a strong leader, in this regard. Frankly, the conspiracy implications and debasing the NRSC is rather tiresome. Who wouldn't seek Legal guidance in such a close race? This is standard procedure for the most part. Anyone this invested in something, with such a close race, with thousands of supporters also invested - you want to get it right.

I just see the fashionable push as way, way, way over the top. Reform Party folly failure memories are growing.

Rand Paul and Sharon Angle are not the best candidates for Conservatives. The GOP, RNC, NRSC, etc., are not the enemy. And those who took over the image of the very attractive - early TEA PARTY Protests (I greatly enjoyed), in the form of the organized Express and others - have made huge mistakes, actually at times making the so-called professional Establishment a little more attractive.

The hype is pushing some to demean and debase others on the good side, in a rather unsightly manner again. It reminds me of the Minute Men flop, the Fred Head bubble, the regretful treatment of GW, etc., and will again only weaken all - for it loses sight of the one priority - the Democratic Party.

This is the same fashion which debased Our interests after 2004, and helped give the Congress to Reid and Pelosi - even enabled the terrible Maverick Ticket.

I have watched fashion produced endless failures in Our political offering. I thought Conservatives were learning after 2006 and 2008, from the races in NJ, VA, MA. But now I am more certain than ever, that the fashion is weakening and misguided.

If the HYPE were close to the reality, we would not have the Maverick winning in an AZ Primary. Mrs. Palin would have been able to name any winner in any Primary around the Country. I could go on and on...

Now I see many spin the appearance of a Daughter of a Celebrity Hockey Mom, going on a Prime Time TV program, called "Dancing with the Stars". I wish her well. I know many will try to sell this as a good idea.

I am sorry to have to disagree with many associates and friends. I am growing even more skeptical.

This Dance with the Stars, shows another problem with judgment, like accepting the Maverick Platform prior (especially with a young Child Expecting at the time) when a later venture would have allowed for a more sound, or Conservative offering.

Who wouldn't want to spoil the Child? But most Conservatives would normally wonder why the young Mother wouldn't be more focused on raising her new Child - and why a Celebrity Grandmother would not encourage this responsibility. But what do I know?

Remember the goal is to win

"The GOAL is to WIN". Duh. The problem with the ruling classes is that they only listen hard when the whale check writers whisper. Those days are in their twilight. No small group of big investors in a politicians face can oppose the WILL of THE PEOPLE. Funding is moving to where the little people are having some say in politics and the internet is going to make it even more democratic. At last.

"the goal is to win"

No. The goal is to stop the beatings and abuse. I refuse for my only choice to be between "the devil I know and the one I don't."

Remember the last time we won? Remember how it was squandered at the table of the Protection Racket we call Congress? And someone thinks Newt will save us! Same actions=same results.

Like we have anything left to lose at this point. The GOP brought us to this dance as surely as did the DEMs. The President is dismantling the Republic and we're worried about wrinkly elephants who have forgotten their way home. Maybe because they're seeking the famed Elephant Graveyard.

It's a hostile takeover of the GOP by the TEA Party, folks. And long overdue.

The NRSC once funded Lincoln Chafee in RI against a primary challenge by Steve Laffey. That's when I switched my contributions from the national party to candidates only. The party needs to stay out of primaries.
BTW, that boneheaded NRSC meddling helped give the seat to Sheldon Whitehouse.

It is a mistake to look at the NRSC (or the NRCC or RNC) as ideological institutions. They aren't, they never will be, and they can't be.

What the NRSC believes in first and foremost is incumbency. (Not unlike the UN that believes foremost in sovereignty because they're all sovereigns.) That is because it is run by and as a club for elected Republican senators. Of course they help people challenging Democrats, but they are for incumbents first.

A substantial amount of their fundraising comes from the Senators themselves -- either direct contributions or fundraising on behalf of the NRSC. Senators are requested to raise amounts of money (based on tenure and committee or leadership position) to make up much of its budget. Senators who participate in this fundraising -- just about all of them -- are guaranteed (in practice if not legally) NRSC protection. If they fail to protect their fundraisers, Senators won't help raise money for them. If they make an exception and cut Murkowski loose for ideological reasons, how are they going to get Olympia Snowe, Susan Collins, Lindsey Graham, et al to keep giving them money?

Bottom line: Don't give any of these organizations any money unless you're comfortable backing ANY of the incumbents. Do your homework and find some individual candidates to back who actually share your values.

" the whine of a candidate complaining about Legal Counsel?"

Wow, that's almost as dishonest as Bloomberg's attacks on the Park51 critics.

Nobody is saying that anyone is not entitled to legal counsel. They are focusing on the one fact you failed to mention - just who is providing that counsel to Murkowski.

The powers that be have chosen sides in a primary, thereby confirming that they are really only interested in serving THE POWERS THAT BE.

It's not a private club no matter what the ARP or NRSC may think. Perpetual incumbency is not something that needs any help from the Republican party.

Consider this, what happens to the relationship between Alaska and the NRSC if Miller goes on to win the Senate seat?

Your entire argument boils down to 'let the big boys tell us how it's gonna be.'

Not buying it.

Not one dime to the RNC. I will only support conservative candidates.

Change is what we want. Change away from those who make politics a life-long business of buying votes from special interests. Change back to dedication to keeping the Republic a free nation.

I seem to recall that every election cycle conservatives are told that they must support GOP hardcore lefties like Murkowski, Snowe, Graham, Collins, Lugar, Scozzofava, Crist, Brown, Chafee, McCain, Specter, etc. Funny how many of these same GOP lefties defect to the Democrat Party, run as independents, or otherwise do everything in their power to sabotage Republican conservatives who defeat them in the primary. In other words, conservatives are permitted to mill around outside the Republican Party's Big Tent, but they must not profane the Holy Temple of Moderate Republicanism by daring to actually go inside and mingle with their moral and intellectual betters.

Right now the GOP's hands are clean when it comes to President Hussein's more destructive proposals. But you can bet that if the GOP takes control of Congress (which I predict will not happen), "moderates" like Murkowski will take a mend-it-don't-end-it approach to disasters like ObamaCare. Very quickly the GOP's hands will become just as filthy as Democrats'.

This is what folks like brooklyn don't get. What good is it to replace D's with R's if the R's vote just like the D's? Should not the GOP offer a choice and not an echo?

Incidentally, I find the notion that Alaska's libertarians are entertaining considering having Murkowski become their standard-bearer quite funny. What they will get (if she wins) is an Obama tax-and-spend Democrats who will toss them the occasional bone on homosexual marriage and abortion.

The battle for the soul of the GOP is being fought between the TEA Party and those folks who I like to refer to as: younger dumber Harold Stassens. The Social Conservatives are split between the two but more of them are realizing their error in using Caesar's Sword to do the Lord's work.


The GOP, RNC, NRSC, etc., are not the enemy.

You are mistaken. They ARE in fact the enemies of ordinary Americans, and have been for some time.

I pray enough people have awakened to this fact, but despite the primary results in AL and FL I'm not confident of that prayer being answered.

You know, why can't Miller threaten to go third party? It would be a lot easier for him. My understanding is there is an AK third party that is a seccessionist one.

Murkowski would be toast, scorched Earth by Miller but I am sure most AK Repub's would forgive him for it when he went after Begich in 2014.

BUT, he should be real careful about a Coleman/Rossi stolen election. With 7600 returned ballots, figure that a quarter of them are Dems that leaves 5700 Repubs.

Murkowski would have to win approx 65% of them to win. Not impossible but,,,,,,,

I have given my $$$$ support to six Conservative Candidates so far this year. I refuse to donate to the RNC until 1) they get rid of Michael Steele and 2) they support Conservative candidates.

The republican BLEW it repeatedly. I will only support fresh faces, f*&^ the RNC - they had their chance and squandered it. I will only donate to REAL conservatives and libertarians, the RNC is democrat lite, and can burn in the deepest lakes of HELL for what they have been a party too - the dismantling of our nation.

I would rather loose every race, every contest, than "settle" for the "red" guy that's nothing more than some establishment hack, completely owned, just another Congressional sociopath.

No more. No more "de facto" votes for the red guy. If you are not a REAL conservative/libertarian, then you won't get my vote. PERIOD. I won't settle for substandard s&^% anymore just because the other guy is "WORSE."

RINO's to GTFO and crumble to dist and ash in the corner. These idiot moderate repubics are every bit as responsible for the destruction of our republic as the dimwit leftist pigs under Barry Soetoro.

@Colin Wilkinson:
"The Social Conservatives are split between the two but more of them are realizing their error in using Caesar's Sword to do the Lord's work."

I've been on about this since 1980. Welcome to the party folks!

"Man's got to realize his limitations." - Harry Callahan

the cowardly odious deeply useless and tremendously establishment John McCain won in a landslide... and Sarah Palin helped.

If this is the revolution I'd rather just go get some tasty pancakes.

Great post, Sissy. But I think they are still counting on the fact that as November and then 2012, approach we will become so focussed on cleaning the donkeys out of the stable that we need them. I'm fed up with the rascals, tho.

The comments to this entry are closed.

The Cold Turkey Cookbook

Look to the animals

  • looktotheanimals


Blog powered by Typepad