Politico: Tea Party, Down But Not Out, Plans 2016 Comeback

[Carling]

That is good to know and I do understand your position. I happen to believe that you will never get what you never ask for! 

Fair enough!  I admire and respect your passion.  I'm too analytical at times, almost to a fault, in how I view the cost/benefit ratio of any political action.

[Formerly Once-Ler]

There is nothing wrong with fighting the incumbents in your own party - that is actually a very GOOD thing!  It cleanses the party of old dusty cobwebs that have hung in the corners for far too long.  As a tea partier, I want to see some of these incumbents replaced with new blood and new thinking.  It is my hope that by doing so, we can update the party and infuse it with some passion and new ideals - those being of limiting government. 

Just because someone is an incumbent doesn't give them rights to hold that seat for the rest of their life.  If we can fight them and win - hooray!  If we try to fight them and still lose - better luck next time.  We must never give up - we must never be cowed by pressure or intimidation.  That is the beauty of freedom. 

Another thing - we do not fight our own party harder than we do the Democrats!  That is why we are members of the Republican party - because we recognize that is the only way we can defeat them!  It is not wrong to fight for change within - it actually strengthens and tempers the party.

 

So a good blood letting cleanses the body.

Fair enough.  Your entitled to your opinion.  I disagree.  I think the Tea Party is self destructive, and a waste of resources.  I mean why primary Cornyn?  He's about as conservative as they come. 

Nobody believes an incumbent is entitled to re-election, but some of us believe experience counts for something too.  It is why we...by we I mean Republican primary voters...we usually require our presidential nominee to run for President more than once.  Romney, McCain, Dole, Bush Sr, Reagan, and Nixon were all retreads.   

[Formerly Once-Ler]

Conservatives, whether they be called Tea Party or anything else, far outnumber moderates withing the ranks of the GOP.

Why do you suppose conservatives are so under-represented in the Senate? or do you believe men like Cornyn, McConnell, Rubio, and Flake are authentically conservative?

And that is why no candidate for president will ever win the primaries running as a moderate.

They can't run as, say, a compassionate conservative and win?

http://enquirer.com/editions/1999/06/24/loc_putting_fresh_face.html

Mr. Brinton and others in the group have been impressed by Mr. Kasich's Social Security plan, which would allow workers under 55 to establish their own personal savings accounts.

        But, like most of the others who favor other candidates, Mr. Brinton is ready and willing to work for Mr. Bush. The Bush theme of “compassionate conservatism” will strike a chord with younger voters, he said.

Moderates must run pretending to be conservatives to win, whereas when was the last time we saw a conservative moderating his position in order to better position himself for primary voters?

Like McCain?  Did he fool the primary voters into thinking he was conservative in 2008, despite his 2000 campaign and his Senate history?

So don't buy this BS that we are in the minority.  We aren't.

In fact, most of the Republicans elected to congress this year are CONSERVATIVES, another dirty little secret the GOPe isn't advertising.

Do you have some facts to back that up?  By what standard do you call them conservatives?  Did they call themselves conservative, but then re-elect Boehner as Speaker?  http://www.redstate.com/diary/freedomrepublican/2015/01/06/incoming-freshmen-who-promised-to-vote-against-boehner/
If they promised something before they were elected, and then turned around a month later, and broke their promise, how does that make them better than the GOPe?  Two weeks ago the right was condemning Mia Love for re-electing Boehner as Speaker.  Is she "conservative?"

Only 4 House Republicans lost their primaries, and the GOP only added 13 seats, so most of them are the same yahoos that caved on the Cromnibus last month.   Michele Bachmann, Steve Southerland, Paul Broun, Phil Gingrey, and Steve Stockman are gone.  Those are some big clown shoe to fill.  Who did you gain to plague the GOPe last Nov?

[DCPatriot]

The TEA Party, as it exists right now. has no cohesiveness or structure to it (the Congressional TEA Party Caucus is not even active at this time) and as a result the definition of what the TEA Party is, what it stands for, and what it represents is left up to each and any individual who wishes to portray him or herself a as member of it.

The TEA Party is the ultimate representation of the upside-down triangle theory of political ideology.

There is no TEA Party per se, so each and every individual who claims membership can claim or disavow any policy stance that any other member of the Party may process by simply saying that no one speaks for the Party.

Unfortunately, what was once a great notion eventually became a hunting preserve for opportunists (see: future Mike Huckabee Presidntial campaign).

Excellent summation on what the TEA Party is....and what it isn't.

Being a member of the Tea Party is simply a STATE OF MIND for the average American who understands the value of focus, dedication and effort in obtaining a better standard of living for themselves and their families.  WITHOUT government intrusion.

I associated myself with the Tea Party because even back during the 08 campaign, I 'saw' that Barack Obama was the Trojan Horse, meant to destroy our standard of living at home...and our stature around the world.

All that said, if the so-called Tea Party called for another march on Washington today.....I'd be there with bells on my shoes.

[DCPatriot]

Point taken Luis.  There is rhetoric on both sides.  Actually, I think I am a RINO!  I confess that I'm only a member of the party because it is better than the alternative and I realize that a third party is practically useless in our political system.  I realize that I have to work within the party to achieve the change I want to see.  I'm against much of what I've seen come out of the GOP, but it is the closest I can work with.

Tea partiers such as myself, have got to realize that we are fighting "the system" and that includes both parties.  Both parties profit from larger government control, so to that end, we are fighting a huge battle, and yes - what we want to achieve is a threat to institutional politics.  Still, I think we are making slow and steady progress.  It's not going to happen overnight.

Those people, like yourself Luis, that appreciate the policies of the current leaders in the GOP are NOT RINOs!  You are Republican, and the tea party types should not be flinging those terms in anger.  WE are actually the RINOs, and that's not necessarily a bad thing.  The Republican party has never espoused the ideals that we, the tea partiers espouse.  Neither party does - because it lessens their influence.

 

[DCPatriot]

Just wanted to acknowledge this wonderful thread.

So proud to be part of such a great group of people.   Or, as Obama would say, "folks". (UGH!)   

[alicewonders]

Just wanted to acknowledge this wonderful thread.

So proud to be part of such a great group of people.   Or, as Obama would say, "folks". (UGH!)   

We "folks" have these "notions".  Oh, that always makes me want to throw something at the television!

[Luis Gonzalez]

Excellent summation on what the TEA Party is....and what it isn't.

Being a member of the Tea Party is simply a STATE OF MIND for the average American who understands the value of focus, dedication and effort in obtaining a better standard of living for themselves and their families.  WITHOUT government intrusion.

All of which I ardently believe in, but the implied suggestion (even in your very measured post) is that since I don't identify myself as being part of the TEA Party mind set, I am not an average American and I don't understand the value of "focus, dedication and effort in obtaining a better standard of living" for myself and my family.

I do. I just don't think that new is necessarily better than established and that untried is necessarily better than seasoned, and that appears to be the crux of the TEA Party movement: replace old and seasoned with new and untried. Destabilize the system in order to achieve more suitable results. When you destabilize any system, the one thing that you can't expect are predictable results.

I recall being absolutely baffled (back before there was a TEA Party) at the conservative support for a Fred Thompson Presidency.

Fred Thompson was the savior who would bring us out of the desert.

I looked and looked and tried to find reasons why anyone would be so willing to hand the reigns of power of the greatest economic and military power in the world to Thompson, and I couldn't find any.

To wit, Fred Thompson was a man applying for the position of CEO of McDonald's based on his experience as a part-time fry cook in a franchise in Poughkeepsie, but that was the conservative choice for President!

All of it riding on a lack of a record to criticize which of course meant that lacking any acts that could be criticized, he was obviously a true conservative.

I believe that one of the greatest reasons why conservatives that now identify as TEA Party are so often disillusioned with their candidates (see: Mia Love, Marco Rubio, etc) is that they so very often throw their support behind someone new fighting against the GOPe who lacks any manner of a resume, but that when those individuals transition from being a candidate to actually being a part of the functioning government and rhetoric is replaced by actual governance, reality sets in and things like needing enough votes to get anything done transform that campaign rhetoric into actual Congressional actions and forces them to compromise. They weren't sent there to compromise however, and their constituents feel betrayed.

I associated myself with the Tea Party because even back during the 08 campaign, I 'saw' that Barack Obama was the Trojan Horse, meant to destroy our standard of living at home...and our stature around the world.

All that said, if the so-called Tea Party called for another march on Washington today.....I'd be there with bells on my shoes.

Yet, in 2008 there was a conscious choice made by many on the right to not support McCain, and in what amounts to a national TEA Party vote (coupled with the obvious racial pride support), the voting public opted for new and untried, over established and seasoned, and we got the disaster of a Presidency that we've been enduring these past six years.

And THAT is the problem with voting for new and untried... like Forrest Gump's box of chocolates, you never know what you're gonna get.

I support seasoned and established because I have enough information on those candidates to pretty much KNOW what I am voting for.

I support the GOP because I KNOW what to expect from them and ten times out of ten that's better that what I KNOW I can expect from Democrats

[libertybele]

As an example, I think you would be hard pressed to find much difference between Hillary and McCain. In fact, when McCain was running against the undecided Dem nominees Obama and Hillary, I actually did a vote comparison on several key issues and found Hillary to be the more conservative. Anyway you cut it McCain is a RINO.  Those GOPe who vote along and in line with Democrats and cave to the Democrats in order to try to salvage votes or in the name of political correctness are RINO's.  They are NOT Republicans as they have not only compromised party principles but compromised their integrity and have gone against the wishes and voices of their constituents.

This country is hanging on by a very thin thread due to the hard work of TEA; adhering and honoring the Constitution and the very principles upon which this country was founded.

Thinking that if the GOPe continues to side with the Dems (and so far they have on illegal immigration and abortion) and will retain their majority in the House and Senate and will win the oval office in doing so, is not only unrealistic but ridiculous.  I for one will NOT vote RINO.  Why should I compromise my principles and integrity?  Why would I cast my vote for the continued destruction of this country? The GOPe has lost the last two presidential election cycles; they need to either wake up or they will lose again.  Sadly, they will be just as guilty as the liberals and progressives in destroying this country.   

[Bigun]

As an example, I think you would be hard pressed to find much difference between Hillary and McCain. In fact, when McCain was running against the undecided Dem nominees Obama and Hillary, I actually did a vote comparison on several key issues and found Hillary to be the more conservative. Anyway you cut it McCain is a RINO.  Those GOPe who vote along and in line with Democrats and cave to the Democrats in order to try to salvage votes or in the name of political correctness are RINO's.  They are NOT Republicans as they have not only compromised party principles but compromised their integrity and have gone against the wishes and voices of their constituents.

This country is hanging on by a very thin thread due to the hard work of TEA; adhering and honoring the Constitution and the very principles upon which this country was founded.

Thinking that if the GOPe continues to side with the Dems (and so far they have on illegal immigration and abortion) and will retain their majority in the House and Senate and will win the oval office in doing so, is not only unrealistic but ridiculous.  I for one will NOT vote RINO.  Why should I compromise my principles and integrity?  Why would I cast my vote for the continued destruction of this country? The GOPe has lost the last two presidential election cycles; they need to either wake up or they will lose again.  Sadly, they will be just as guilty as the liberals and progressives in destroying this country.   

I've said it before and I'll say it again!  For the vast majority of those elected to serve in Washington their "standing" as an insider in that group matters FAR more to them than any party label attached to them for the purpose of getting elected. They ALL bow to their real masters on K street and NOTHING much gets done until every last nickle has been extracted from the players on both sides of any issue!

Until that is somehow changed (a NEW and not the same old income tax code refurbished yet again would go a LONG way toward correcting the problem) I have now come to believe that WE,  the great unwashed, would be better represented by throwing a dart at the pages of our local phone books then what we have now!

[musiclady]

I have to this point, not looked at this thread for fear of what I would see, but what a thrill to come here this morning and see how respectful and thoughtful the comments here are.

I'm with DC.  This really is a great forum!

I find myself torn because I have been part of the Tea Party since early 2009, and yet believe the only way conservatives (which I believe we all are) can win the day is to reform and work through the Republican Party.

I do not believe both parties are equally corrupt, nor that the same Puppet Master in the sky rules both parties.  I do believe that power corrupts, and that those who have been in the establishment for decades lose touch with reality and have an inside the beltway mentality that doesn't have the pulse of the American people.  I believe that there needs to be a constant inflow of new people, and I believe that the Tea Party has brought in some amazing new blood, has won many elections (2012 would NOT have happened without us), and has helped to keep the establishment GOP a bit more honest.

I actually think if we had term limits a lot of the "GOP-e" issues would go away.

I also believe thoroughly that the label "RINO" has been so overused that it has been rendered meaningless.

If everyone is a RINO, then there is no such thing as a RINO.

The Republican party has always been a diverse party, with moderates and conservatives in its ranks.  It will always be so.  Our obligation is to vote for the most conservative ELECTABLE person, and for me, that person needs to have governing experience.

We need someone who knows how to lead, with management skills, and with solid conservative principles (a Conservative Governor is best, IMO). 

[libertybele]

I have to this point, not looked at this thread for fear of what I would see, but what a thrill to come here this morning and see how respectful and thoughtful the comments here are.

I'm with DC.  This really is a great forum!

I find myself torn because I have been part of the Tea Party since early 2009, and yet believe the only way conservatives (which I believe we all are) can win the day is to reform and work through the Republican Party.

I do not believe both parties are equally corrupt, nor that the same Puppet Master in the sky rules both parties.  I do believe that power corrupts, and that those who have been in the establishment for decades lose touch with reality and have an inside the beltway mentality that doesn't have the pulse of the American people.  I believe that there needs to be a constant inflow of new people, and I believe that the Tea Party has brought in some amazing new blood, has won many elections (2012 would NOT have happened without us), and has helped to keep the establishment GOP a bit more honest.

I actually think if we had term limits a lot of the "GOP-e" issues would go away.

I also believe thoroughly that the label "RINO" has been so overused that it has been rendered meaningless.

If everyone is a RINO, then there is no such thing as a RINO.

The Republican party has always been a diverse party, with moderates and conservatives in its ranks.  It will always be so.  Our obligation is to vote for the most conservative ELECTABLE person, and for me, that person needs to have governing experience.

We need someone who knows how to lead, with management skills, and with solid conservative principles (a Conservative Governor is best, IMO).

Yes, I do agree with you as far as this is a great forum.  I do believe that there is a huge difference between RINO and conservatives.  I further believe that Washington is broken and cannot be fixed from the top down but rather needs to be fixed from the ground up. Many of the GOPe and Dems ARE of the same country club and are only interested in lining their pockets and playing "ball" on Capitol Hill and are little interested in the welfare of this country. I am of the very firm belief that our elected officials should vote according to the wishes of their constituents; it is called doing the job that they were elected to do.

With all due respect, voting for the most "electable" person rather than the person that is most qualified to be president is why we are in the mess that we are in.  Qualifications should not merely be based on listening to campaign rhetoric and promises and media swagger.  Obama certainly has the experience now, but one definitely cannot assume because of that he is in any way shape or form qualified to lead this country.  He has NOT lead this country in a positive direction; quite the opposite.  A person's integrity, moral fiber, willingness to honor and adhere to the Constitution and principles based upon the very foundation of this country and do what is in the best interest of this country should be first and foremost.  Secondly, comes the ability to head this country in a positive direction which I don't feel necessarily has to come from governorship.  There are all kinds of people inside and outside Washington that have the ability and qualifications to run this country (including Hillary Clinton, Chris Christie, etc.), but that doesn't mean that they would head this country in a positive direction.

[musiclady]

Yes, I do agree with you as far as this is a great forum.  I do believe that there is a huge difference between RINO and conservatives.  I further believe that Washington is broken and cannot be fixed from the top down but rather needs to be fixed from the ground up. Many of the GOPe and Dems ARE of the same country club and are only interested in lining their pockets and playing "ball" on Capitol Hill and are little interested in the welfare of this country. I am of the very firm belief that our elected officials should vote according to the wishes of their constituents; it is called doing the job that they were elected to do.

With all due respect, voting for the most "electable" person rather than the person that is most qualified to be president is why we are in the mess that we are in.  Qualifications should not merely be based on listening to campaign rhetoric and promises and media swagger.  Obama certainly has the experience now, but one definitely cannot assume because of that he is in any way shape or form qualified to lead this country.  He has NOT lead this country in a positive direction; quite the opposite.  A person's integrity, moral fiber, willingness to honor and adhere to the Constitution and principles based upon the very foundation of this country and do what is in the best interest of this country should be first and foremost.  Secondly, comes the ability to head this country in a positive direction which I don't feel necessarily has to come from governorship.  There are all kinds of people inside and outside Washington that have the ability and qualifications to run this country (including Hillary Clinton, Chris Christie, etc.), but that doesn't mean that they would head this country in a positive direction.

I suppose I should have stated it outright, but I assumed that my belief that  a person needs to be both qualified and principled enough to be President would be understood in the context of the rest of my post.

If a candidate we nominate cannot be elected, then what good is it for him or her to have qualifications, or even principles?  We need all of it.

Again.........we need the most conservative, principled, qualified, electable nominee we can come up with.

[Luis Gonzalez]

Yes, I do agree with you as far as this is a great forum.  I do believe that there is a huge difference between RINO and conservatives.  I further believe that Washington is broken and cannot be fixed from the top down but rather needs to be fixed from the ground up. Many of the GOPe and Dems ARE of the same country club and are only interested in lining their pockets and playing "ball" on Capitol Hill and are little interested in the welfare of this country. I am of the very firm belief that our elected officials should vote according to the wishes of their constituents; it is called doing the job that they were elected to do.

With all due respect, voting for the most "electable" person rather than the person that is most qualified to be president is why we are in the mess that we are in.  Qualifications should not merely be based on listening to campaign rhetoric and promises and media swagger.  Obama certainly has the experience now, but one definitely cannot assume because of that he is in any way shape or form qualified to lead this country.  He has NOT lead this country in a positive direction; quite the opposite.  A person's integrity, moral fiber, willingness to honor and adhere to the Constitution and principles based upon the very foundation of this country and do what is in the best interest of this country should be first and foremost.  Secondly, comes the ability to head this country in a positive direction which I don't feel necessarily has to come from governorship.  There are all kinds of people inside and outside Washington that have the ability and qualifications to run this country (including Hillary Clinton, Chris Christie, etc.), but that doesn't mean that they would head this country in a positive direction.

Here's the thing.

Most of the people in these forum left other forums because they would no longer allow themselves to be called names and labeled negatively by the denizens of other forums.

I REALLY object to your constant use of the therm RINO.

It is meant to demean and disparage those who you don't see eye to eye with and it does a great disservice to the forum in general.

You need to respect the forum and all the members of the forum by not lowering the discourse here to the level of the places that we all walked away from.

[libertybele]

OH I do! I understand it VERY well! The TEA folks are the greatest threat to the inside the beltway bastards to come along in ages and they are scared to DEATH of it!

    

[libertybele]

RINO = Republican In Name Only.  Why are you offended by that?? Our GOP elected officials are supposed to do their jobs and act and vote according to the desires of their constituents who voted for them NOT cater to the Dems for monetary and political gain.   It is ridiculous to cast a vote for a candidate because they call themselves a "Republican".  That is in part why this country is in such a mess.

[musiclady]

RINO = Republican In Name Only.  Why are you offended by that?? Our GOP elected officials are supposed to do their jobs and act and vote according to the desires of their constituents who voted for them NOT cater to the Dems for monetary and political gain.   It is ridiculous to cast a vote for a candidate because they call themselves a "Republican".  That is in part why this country is in such a mess.

I'm not sure that it's so much "offense" of the term as it is overuse of the word, and using it for anyone who doesn't follow a particular ideology to the letter.

There are many stripes of genuine conservatism, and many iterations of conservative ideology, and when someone calls another a "RINO" because they do something or believe something different (even if it's a legitimate belief) than the person using the label, it's inappropriate.

I'll give myself as an example.  I have been called a RINO by many, many people (not here) because I supported the invasion of Iraq  and President Bush in the War on Terror (I still do).  I am no more a Republican in Name Only than the proverbial man in the moon.  In fact, here I've been castigated as too conservative because I'm a social conservative as well as a fiscal conservative.

In one sense, labels are appropriate (I use the word 'liberal' when one supports the progressive agenda in a given area, even if that person is or may be conservative in other areas.  Their one particular belief is a liberal belief, even if supported by an otherwise conservative person), but when used all the time and in every situation, they're unhelpful. 

Many people here are fiscal, small government conservatives and social liberals.  They have legitimate, well thought out reasons for their beliefs, as do I for mine.

But I agree with Luis, for the most part.  There are too many people who are willing and anxious to throw anyone and everyone under the bus as a liberal, a RINO, or, as in the case of Mia Love, a liar.   

It's not helpful.

[Luis Gonzalez]

RINO = Republican In Name Only.  Why are you offended by that?? Our GOP elected officials are supposed to do their jobs and act and vote according to the desires of their constituents who voted for them NOT cater to the Dems for monetary and political gain.   It is ridiculous to cast a vote for a candidate because they call themselves a "Republican".  That is in part why this country is in such a mess.

Because your judgment of whether or not I am Republican based on whether or not you approve of my opinion on how the Party should conduct its business is irrelevant. You are not the weather vane for what constitutes anyone's Republicanism, you are only the weather vane for what it means to you 

The label RINO is intended as an insult when applied so why are you surprised that people are insulted by it?

If I started referring to conservatives (I consider myself a conservative BTW) as regressives or knuckle-draggers would that help keep the debate civil?

If anything, I'd say that if there is such a thing as a RINO, it would be those TEA Party members of the GOP (and their supporters) who constantly criticize the Party that they're aligned with.

[libertybele]

Here's the thing.

Most of the people in these forum left other forums because they would no longer allow themselves to be called names and labeled negatively by the denizens of other forums.

I REALLY object to your constant use of the therm RINO.

It is meant to demean and disparage those who you don't see eye to eye with and it does a great disservice to the forum in general.

You need to respect the forum and all the members of the forum by not lowering the discourse here to the level of the places that we all walked away from.

I certainly respect the opinions of others and I am entitled to my opinion to be respected as well without being "called upon" to defend it. For the sake of civility, I will try to expand on my opinion just this once. My use of the term RINO is not meant to be offensive rather to be used in the truest and purest definition of RINO (Republican in name only) which further separates members of the GOP establishment from the GOP conservatives. Even the members of the GOP party themselves have this simple understanding. Perhaps just because you don't see eye to eye with someone you try to demean them or call upon them to defend their opinion, however my intent is not to demean anyone, especially for a difference of opinion.  That is what a forum normally brings about -- debating or agreeing with opinions.

I would encourage you to look up the voting records of many of the GOPe vs. those of the Democrats; many of them have voted along Democratic lines rather than conservative principles.  I understand that you may not have a problem with that, but I do. If I wanted my Republican elected official(s) to vote Democrat or support the Democrat ideals, I would have voted Democrat.

Peace.   

[truth_seeker]

Mindlessly repetitious name calling makes a grownup political discussion almost worthless.

For example: RINO has to be used in a context. For elected Republicans in the particular state, now?

If the best a Republican can be, to get elected in say Oregon, isn't that a good thing. Against Texas Republican standard, he would be declared a RINO by the mindless repeaters. Yet it would be good to have a Republican from a difficult state.

[massadvj]

I think it should be CINO.  Conservative in Name Only.  Conservatives have a better image than Republicans anyway.  in my case, if you wanted to insult me you could call me a SLINO.  Small l libertarian in name only.  I was once married to a WINO, but it didn't last.  It turns out I needed a real woman as opposed to a Woman in Name Only.

[EdinVA]

Each representative is only responsible to his/her constituents, no one else, at least that is what is supposed to happen.  We should only be criticizing the other guys representative IF they have broken the law or not met their oath of office.  Otherwise, we are demanding that all republicans/democrats vote the same, which is what the constant chant of RINO type comments means.  Would you like someone from NY telling your representative/senator how to vote?

It is very frustrating and I have committed the same "sins" myself so I am pointing the finger at me too....

[libertybele]

   Sometimes pointing out how ridiculous things are makes a much better point.

[Luis Gonzalez]

I certainly respect the opinions of others and I am entitled to my opinion to be respected as well without being "called upon" to defend it. For the sake of civility, I will try to expand on my opinion just this once. My use of the term RINO is not meant to be offensive rather to be used in the truest and purest definition of RINO (Republican in name only) which further separates members of the GOP establishment from the GOP conservatives. Even the members of the GOP party themselves have this simple understanding. Perhaps just because you don't see eye to eye with someone you try to demean them or call upon them to defend their opinion, however my intent is not to demean anyone, especially for a difference of opinion.  That is what a forum normally brings about -- debating or agreeing with opinions.

I would encourage you to look up the voting records of many of the GOPe vs. those of the Democrats; many of them have voted along Democratic lines rather than conservative principles.  I understand that you may not have a problem with that, but I do. If I wanted my Republican elected official(s) to vote Democrat or support the Democrat ideals, I would have voted Democrat.

Peace.   :patriot

In the Post WWII South, Southerners couldn't understand why ni@@ers objected to being called ni@@ers.

[libertybele]

I guess I'm just one of those nasty conservatives who have ruined the Republican party and need to become more liberal so that I too am more politically correct!  Darn.  Just when I thought I had a handle on things.