About Me

Name: Sanity 102
Biography
Loading...

Create Your Own Blog Find Other Townhall Blogs

Comments

Uniting the party of Republicans

My business partner is a Tory: the British version of the GOP.  He's been shaking his head for years watching the "base" bad mouth their leaders.  As most people learn in grade school, when you bash your own, you in effect tell everyone that your group provides bad people--and that if given another chance, you will put forth another bad person to hurt the people.
 
I too, found this amazing but it wasn't until I really considered this psychological question that all the pieces began to fit.  Simply put: conservatives as preached by Libertarians, Constitutionists, Reaganites, are NOT Republicans.  They even refuse to call themselves Republicans; saying that the party is just a vehicle they use. 
 
In other words, conservatives aren't bad mouthing THEIR party...they are bad mouthing the party of Republicans.  That is why they are unable to commit support, loyalty or even honor the selection on the GOP ticket.  That is why there is so much talk about REPLACING the Republican party with THEIR constitutionist party--and claim erroneously that Republicans replaced The Whigs.
 
When they say they want REAL conservatism to be given a chance...they are saying they want THEIR party to be given a chance.  When they offer loyalty to a REAL candidate; they mean one that is NOT a Republican. 
 
The only way to unite those who sit under the Republican tent is to tell those who wish to take it over to leave.
 
HERE IN ARE REPUBLICANS the sign in front of the tent should read.  WHEN ENTERING, PARK YOUR OTHER PARTY AGENDA AT THE FRONT.
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (11) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Of course, it's Bush's fault!

A  question being asked is when does Obama own the economy...when does the state of the nation becomes HIS fault?
 
A former writer for National Review Online hit it right on the nail:
 
Actually, it will be Bush's fault until the economy get's better, THEN it will be Obama's "fault".
 
The same type of "real" conservative logic applies here:  "amnesty", "big spending", "high deficits" are the SINS of Bush  but not Reagan who had REAL amnesty, huge spending, and high deficits but remains the only TRUE conservative.
 
Is it any wonder Conservatives keep losing?  They try to play the Liberal "word games" and "die" on the hill of principles that has "loyalty" as an option.
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (2) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

The GOP didn't "try" moderate

You've heard it from blog to blog..."we tried moderate and picked McCain...and look what happened!"
 
The ugly truth is that the GOP tried "conservatism" as preached by Libertarian, Constitutionist, Revamped Reaganites...all claiming to be the base of a party they have neither respect nor loyalty to.  Also true is that "real" conservatism did not give Clinton his two terms, nor did it help Santorium to keep his seat.  It couldn't even put a conservative on the GOP ticket!
 
The reason "true" conservatism doesn't work is painfully simple.  The voters NEEDED to take a minority and make it into the majority are NOT conservative.
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (4) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Is the GOP worthy of loyalty?

You've heard it before, the idea that loyalty has to be earned.  Conservatives even put a word in front of it..."mindless" when they want to excuse their lack of loyalty to the party they claim to be the base of.
 
But isn't loyalty implied in any relationship?  When you join a company, an organization, a church...create a friendship, a partnership, or a marriage?  You don't start with, "prove to me you're worthy".  Membership doesn't give you the right to tear down and destroy.
 
Beginning with a man who gave a birthday toast, conservatives have sat in judgement without the slightest sense of loyalty.  Years of joining their Liberal counterpart in finding fault in Bush and the GOP has done little to promote the idea that the party of the Republicans is a party that cross over Democrats and Independents would want to join on election day.
 
Nor is the attacks on Palin, Jindal, and recently Steele conducive for bright, exciting politicians to throw their hat into the "R" side of the ring. 
 
Peggy Noonan has written a Reagan book about "Character being king".  Perhaps, "conservatives" should ask themselves about this lack of loyalty in their principles...and more, why this lack doesn't seem to bother them.
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (1) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

I get it

For weeks I have been asking why conservatives think that a more conservative candidate would attract NON-conservative cross over Democrats and Independents.  And if conservatism and high morals and principes gave Reagan and Bush their victories, how did Democrat, no morals and zip principles Clinton manage to win two terms?
 
But now I get it.
 
It is the same mentality that thinks that nit picking rising stars like Palin, Jendal, and Steel will somehow encourage the best and brightest of conservatives to run on the Republican ticket.
 
The same piece of logic that will watch Obama spend more in one month that Bush has spent in 7 years, redefine marriage, gun rights and abortion, and cut military defense but feel absolutely no responsibility.
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (1) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Finally crossing from Sanity101 to 102

For months I've been in a right nasty mood.  I've seen my stocks go down, long time businesses in town close, troops, cops and emergency people no longer respected, the courts moving in the wrong direction and our enemies rearming.
 
I don't blame the Left...they are pushing their agenda as the Right would have if they won.  I blame conservatives whose principles did not include loyalty; who joined their Liberal counterpart in blaming Bush and the party of Republicans.
 
Well, it looks like things are starting to turn around.
 
It began with Hewitt and his number one method of winning the White House and Congress: DROP BASHING ILLEGAL MEXICANS.
Hewitt has in fact, started to defend Bush and Republicans...even disagreeing with guest he once used to join in finding fault with Bush and the GOP.
 
Then today, I heard David Frum who had previously knocked both McCain and Palin go after Rush for being the Conservative version of Jesse Jackson!  "He's an entertainer", fumed the National Review Online Editor, "he doesn't speak for my party and I am tired of him driving away women and moderates from my party's tent".
 
Whoa.  It took the lost of both Houses of Congress and the White House for Frum to finally get that "conservatism" doesn't win elections when there's a majority out there that is NOT conservative.  Despite the Rush hype, core conservative values did not win Reagan or Bush the White House.  The ability to appeal to the widest portion of the voting population wins which is why a non-conservative, non-moral and zero value Clinton won two terms.  (Funny how conservatives never explain how Clinton managed to win if core conservative, morals, and principles are what attracts American voters.)
 
Yesterday I despaired of Obama ever being called on his wracko ideas.  Today, I heard about two people who had supported Obama express disappointment and anger.  One was a preacher who had believed that Obama truly wanted to bring the pro-choice and pro-life groups together.  He had to face the truth upon learning that Obama is looking into lifting the rights of medical people to choose not to  participate in abortion. 
 
The other was an investor who went off on Obama "destroying" the wealth of people.  He said that he understood that Obama believed he had a mandate and wanted to change the world...BUT...these were people's hard earned wealth that Obama was messing with.
 
The sheer disbelief and sense of betrayal of these supporters of Obama made me think that this is just the beginning.  As more and more people realize exactly who Obama is, they will turn back to the party of Reagan and Bush and we can get back to the seriousness of the economy, the courts, and the war on terror.
 
Finally, we are moving from sanity101, the basics to sanity102.
 
Let us hope that when we finally settle down to writing 103, conservatives will decide to join the party of Republicans where respect for ALL opinions is a requirement and loyalty non-negotiable.
 
 
 
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (6) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

An ideal that just might work

For weeks, conservative's idea for winning has been to be MORE of what those they need (Independents and 9/11 Democrats) are NOT.
 
Now we know that conservatives couldn't even muster a "true" conservative to win the Republican nominee, much less win back Congress or keep the White House.  They claim they have tried "lite" and "moderate".  NOW, they think a "real" conservative will somehow win. 
 
How's this for an idea?
 
How about trying a "real Republican."?  You know the ADULT, pragmatic, willing to accept those who agree with them most of the time, Republicans?
 
The Republicans who don't have a test in order to give you their loyalty.
 
The Republicans who welcome different opinions, strong enough in their convictions to meet a disagreement without name calling.
 
The Republicans whose principles allow compromise to attain funding for troops, filling judical seats, and attaining and keeping majorities.
 
The Republicans that focus on what unites us, instead of a utopia that only a minority would find joy in.
 
The Republicans that proudly stand with their party, finding no shame in saying, I AM a Republican.
 
But Sanity...that sounds like Bush...and Reagan (before his ex-speech writers rewrote his history)...
 
Yeah, and THEY WON.
 
TWICE.
 
 
 
 
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (9) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Explain to me

The other day, some caller told Medved what was painfully obvious: the voters CHOSE Democrats because the Republicans had moved too far to the Right.  Medved disagreed saying that voters were given a choice between what was perceived as "Dem lite" and chose the real deal.
 
Now Medved is one of the very few talk show hosts that I believed has been practical and loyal to the party he claims to be a part of.  I like him and for the most agree with most of his opinions.  This idea of needing more conservatism to attract NON-conservative voters was very disappointing.
 
Will someone please explain to me why a Reagan DEMOCRAT or 9/11 INDEPENDENT would vote for a party that is MORE of what they are NOT?
 
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (4) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Why am I back?

I left for almost a year after having had it with the long load times and the multiple lost posts at TH.  I've noticed a marked improvement; however I still intend to use my main blog to fulfill my primary purpose for blogging: to rant and let off steam.  I actually intended to post here at TH whenever the Dems did something that got conservatives all riled up.  Little did I know it was going to happen so often.
 
Some things you should know if you do leave a comment.  Blogging is my primary b*tch area, my call into Medved, Hewitt, Pragger.  It contains the things I would have said if those shows were live, instead of hours ahead or behind Hawaii time.  I don't need to have  comments to my posts.  But if you should leave your thoughts and your opinions, I want you to know that I will never allow anyone to come to this blog and attack you. 
 
See, when and if I do invite you, I really do want to converse with you.  I don't want a choir to preach to.  I don't need anyone to tell me how much they agree with what I've written.  If you want to b*tch or defend a certain position then know that I will do the same--and those who spend their time to share their thoughts and their complaints on this blog are free to do the same.
 
I will never allow someone to go off on you, or abuse you, nor will I accept an apology with the lame excuse of that person doing so because he was not feeling well.
 
But then I believe in good manners...and I give and expect loyalty...and when I claim to be a part of any group, I do so with total knowledge of who they are and full acceptance.
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Third Parties & Conservatives

In answer to someone who asked about third parties--and am thinking about leaving to start or join one.
 
I don't hold to Medved's belief that 3rd parties lose elections for the major parties. They make up less than 10% so they don't really have the numbers to sway the election either way.

The damage they DO cause is their negativity on the party they claim to belong to. Think how many people got turned off to the Dems with Move on.org. tactics...the same happened with the GOP. Many bloggers left TH and some even began to question if they were indeed "conservative".

Which brings me to my entire problem with conservatives. Their insistance on being the "base" of the Republican party, yet joining the Liberals in finding fault with Bush and the GOP gave the public only one opinion: the party of Republicans are crap and there is no reason to vote Republican.

I hear conservatives say that we (meaning the GOP) tried "moderate" and lost..actually, the party of Republicans tried to appease "their" conservative base and drove off all those who in 2004 saw a clear difference between the Left and the Right...and choose Right.

Again, Conservatives should either find something in the party of Republicans that they can be loyal to and can support or leave. The GOP cannot afford 4 more years of being torn down from those that are supposed to be in their corner.
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (2) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Same Sex Marriage Rights

How odd. 
 
I watch as tons of people line my roads and gather at the state capital; screaming for the government to respect the will of the people who overwhelmingly voted against same sex marriage in 1998 and wonder exactly what did they expect from a Democrat legislation?
 
I mean really people.  There are only two viable parties.  One is pro-abortion, one is pro-life.  One supports global community, one supports our troops.  One believes in taking from the rich and giving to the poor, the other wants to keep what they earn and decide for themselves where and if to give.  One sees the people who provide jobs as the enemy, the other as a partner in the American dream.
 
Yet, year after year, the people of Hawaii put Democrats into office.  In fact, one year they elected a dead woman to "show her respect", even though it cost the taxpayer 2 million dollars to run a separate election.  The only time Hawaii voted Republican was after the last Democratic governor put in those "televans" that ticketed anyone going over 5 miles per hour and got every driver p*ssed as h*ll!
 
The "good" news is the Dems have won it all...Congress, the White House, so I expect there will be more crowds of "good principled" people upset about one issue or another...and all I can say is...
 
What did you expect? 
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

True Conservatives

A question was posed to me about "evil" conservatives--and what exactly did I have against them.
 
First of all I am one of those 60% Independents that Karl Rove and Dick Morris talk about...the voter that leans Left on some issues and Right on others.  It doesn't mean that I refuse to align myself with either political group, it just means that while I agree on MOST issues with Republicans; I do see merit in some of the concerns of the Left. 
 
In the last 3 years I've been more than extremely angry with the Right.  They could have had the WH and the Congress sewed up for decades, but people who had more in common with Libertarians began to push their views on the rest of the party of Republicans--and joined the opposition in bashing Bush and all things GOP.  In fact "Republican" became a dirty word.
 
Which brings me to my "beef" with conservatives who refuse to call themselves Republicans.
 
I find it incredulous that "loyalty" is not included in their principles.
 
Liberals are always demanding a test of America's worthiness for their loyalty to this nation, which makes it how different from conservatives who are demanding a test of "true" conservatism before they agree to loyalty to the party of Republicans?
 
Every time I hear about what Republicans need to do to keep conservatives in their party, I ask why?
 
Why stay with a party you do not believe in who keeps giving you candidates you can not give your money or your vote to?
 
--Other than, of course, the FACT that the party of Republicans is the only viable party that will care, even a little bit, what conservatives think and feel.
 
I say it's time to end this unhealthy relationship.  "True" Conservatives should create or join a third party wannabe that has zero chance of ever being in a position to actually do something about their issues.  And the party of Republicans can once again open up their party to those who agree with them enough to put the WH and Congress back into the hands of the only party serious about the war, the courts and the economy.
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (13) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

What If?

What if Laura Ingraham had done what she asked her own listeners to do before the 2004 election and "trusted" the ONLY man to send our sons and daughters to war when he picked Harriet Miers to the Supreme Court?
 
What if Hugh Hewitt had remembered what he had told his listeners about how Proposition 187 (the California bill that would deny illegals social services) had banished the Republican party to the political wilderness because those millions of illegal Mexicans had American voting family and friends? Or when he had told his fellow talk show hosts that they've had their fit over the Miers nomination and to get back to supporting our GOP president who HAS nominating tons of really great judges including Roberts?
 
What if Bush had been able to spend his "political capital" earned during his 2004 re-election on fixing Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac and Social Security instead of fighting his own party on the illegal immigration bill?
 
What if the NRO, Rush, Hannity, Noonan, had NOT joined their Liberal counterparts in finding fault with Bush and everything Republican?
 
What if they had remembered that the GOP was the ONLY party serious about the war on terror, who believed in tax cuts, and who wanted to protect unborn children, the sanctity of marriage, and gun rights and continued, as they had before Bush was elected for his last term, to support the party?
 
What if they understood that these are people--politicians and not demanded a conservative standard that not even Reagan--high spending, deficit leaving, amnesty giving Reagan--could live up to?
 
What if conservative politicians felt that they would have to fight just one side, the Democrats, instead of being dictated to by the talk show mafia and the "base"?
 
Would we have right now, a Super Majority of Republicans in Congress?
 
The first Black AND female in the White House?
 
Or at the very least, an experienced Senator that never took pork, hates taxes, and a VP waiting in the wings that people in other states are asking to trade governors with?
 
Imagine that when we hear about the Super Democrat Majority's spending spree and efforts to bring back the fairness doctrine, make the barbaric procedure of partial birth abortion legal again, and cut funding to defense.
 
And when the arrogant, totally unqualified Commander in Chief of the world's greatest military turns his back on Israel and appeases those who want to see America and the world burn, remember the soft spoken, humble, gracious president that made Libya and Syria give up their nuclear program and returned not one but two economies (dot com bust and the 9/11 after math) to prosperity.
 
 
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (5) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Feeling Conned?

A few weeks ago, Hugh Hewitt ran an ad telling his listeners how the GOP can start winning elections again...number one on his list: DROP BASHING ILLEGAL MEXICANS.
 
Yesterday, in the middle of a tirade about this spending bill and California's rush to tax he and others out of the state, he said, "we have serious problems and all you wanted to talk about was ILLEGAL IMMIGRATION!!!
 
Excuse me?
 
This was the man who based on hearsay, went on a personal crusade to dump the GOP created "amnesty" bill.  Didn't matter that tons of guest (including Senator Kyle--one of the most conservative politicians in Congress) explained that the bill was trying to correct holes in the present immigration laws...all Hewitt and company wanted to hear was that the Mexicans were going to be round up and carted back to the SOUTHERN border.  Anything less was, AMNESTY.
 
It wasn't as if Hewitt didn't know better.  He spent a good portion of 2004 telling his listeners about the GOP being sent to the political wilderness in California after trying to push thru a bill that would prohibit social services to illegal Mexicans.  He KNEW that those 12 million illegals had American voting family and friends and the kind of vitrolic rhetoric wasn't going to go over with a generation that had grown up with the Berlin wall and seen clips of people being "rounded up and taken away".
 
He KNEW that the Dems would raise taxes, find constitutional reasons to ban guns and support gay marriages.  He knew that a Dem president would cause another 9/11 by his refusal to take the war on terror seriously.
 
He was counting on "smart" conservatives to have their little fit and come together when it counted and vote GOP.
 
He is now counting on those same conservatives to forget that he was right there in the middle of making Bush and the GOP focus on illegal immigration instead of Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae and Social Security...and writing a column of the wisdom of teaching the GOP a lesson by having a term or two of a Democratic Congress.
 
I've even heard him say NOW how he likes Ingraham and Coultier...but perhaps other women, strong GOP moms pushing less caustic issues might bring people back to the GOP.
 
Feeling conned?
 
Yeah, you were. 
 
Don't get me wrong.  I am glad that Hewitt and others are coming back to logic and sanity.  But they have a lot of credibility to rebuild.  They should begin with...I was wrong...and I will make sure that I never stand on the wrong side again.
 
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (1) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Now Tell Me Again How Important the Illegal Immigration issue is?

Hugh Hewitt and Glenn Beck is all upset about this ridiculous trillion dollar bail out.
 
Ingraham, the NRO, Hannity and the "great one" are screaming about the "fairness doctrine" and witch hunt hearings led by a Democratic Congress and sanctioned by a Democratic President.
 
Did they REALLY think that they could bash Bush and the only party that was serious about the war on terror and they'd be little or no consequences?
 
I made a promise...as each of the 3 issues I kept trying to keep the Right focus on was stripped away: the budget, the courts, and the war, I would come back and ask:
 
Tell me again how important rounding up a bunch of people who had a vested interest in seeing the nation they were trying to make a living from survive and sending them home is? 
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive