Payback

The entire country has been attracted to the itty-bitty NY23 race, in which three candidates had entered: Republican Dede Scozzafava, Democrat Bill Owens and Independent Doug Hoffman. Hoffman had attempted to get the Republican nomination, but for reasons nobody has been able to figure out, the GOP endorsed Scozzafava, a pro-abortion, pro-stimulus, pro-big labor and pro-ACORN far-left winner of the Margaret Sanger Award. That was when Hoffman entered as an Independent.

The race took on monumental proportions and pretty soon the whole country was watching. Scozzafava had for a long time supported ACORN, then in the wake of the Biggovernment.com sting videos she said she’d have voted against giving them taxpayer support. She refuses, though, to distance herself from other groups, such as the SEIU and the Working Families Party. WFP is being investigated for voter fraud currently, with no fewer than 20 people finding that when they signed for what they thought was an absentee ballot, they were actually signing a ballot already filled out in their names–and entered for candidates they wouldn’t have voted for.

Newt Gingrich, after sitting down on the big, fluffy global warming couch with Nasty Pelosi, gave Scozzafava the GOP’s official endorsement. The controversies kept on, though. Not the least of those were Scozzafava refusing to debate publicly with Hoffman, then turning around and holding a press conference in front of Hoffman’s campaign headquarters during which she scolded HIM for refusing to engage her in a debate. The Republican party spent upwards of $1 million on Scozzafava’s campaign.

Shortly after Sarah Palin got involved, though, by backing Doug Hoffman, Scozzafava dropped out of the race. Then she generously repaid the Republican party’s backing and financing by–get this–backing Democrat candidate Bill Owens.

I’m pretty sure everybody tried to tell the Republican party that backing Scozzafava was a bad idea. Ann Coulter, Michelle Malkin, HotAir, Politico, everybody–all of the conservative bloggers who have traditionally been involved with the GOP–cried foul when they nominated Scozzafava. They didn’t listen. Now that she’s quit, we’ve been proven right. She’s defected.

The Republican party should listen and listen well. Conservatives are tired of the pandering to liberals and Democrats. The Democrats won because you couldn’t give us a true conservative, and the more you put folks like this up for us to vote for, you’re going to lose more and more support. Fair warning.

You deserve the payback you got from Scozzafava. You were stupid enough to endorse that pit viper in GOP costume, you deserve what she did. I’d rather have more independents than Republicans in office at this point because you’re no longer the party I remember from years ago.

Advertisements

16 thoughts on “Payback

  1. “but for reasons nobody has been able to figure out, the GOP endorsed Scozzafava”

    The reason, Mel, is because a committee already in place decides the candidates….it is a very “you scratch my back and I’ll scratch yours” process. They “selected” Scozzafava over Hoffman.

    There is no primary process, or at least there was not one in this case.

  2. You said it: today, you can tell Charlie Gibson was frustrated while talking to George (me and my wife cried with joy after Obama got elected) Stephanopolous in snarling: “what happened to this “big tent” of the Republican party?”

    Then hours later, an article was written focusing on all the conservatives in NJ, NY23, and Virginia. Right now, it looks like NY23 and Virginia are a win for the non-liberals. While the conservative is in the lead in NJ, it is only by 2 points. However; even if Christie doesn’t take it tomorrow in New Jersey, it is awesome that it frightened the left wing so much that Obama stomped all day on Sunday for Corzine to bring up his numbers….

    Anyway – the article – it was titled “Even if Republicans win on Tuesday, none of the GOP’s fundamental troubles will be solved” (you can read it at http://www.startribune.com/politics/68578592.html ).

    The writer (probably a liberal) refuses to acknowledge America’s mandate and surge for conservatism – yet continues to talk about how Republicans are so undivided.

    The truth is, liberals want Republicans to be liberal, too. They thought they were always going to pick our candidates – especially since the Democrats have suffered a major left-wing takeover.

    All day today as well, many articles discussed a resurge of evangelical christians. This makes me angry….because while it is true that we can count on Christians to vote conservatively, the articles use the “evangelical” bit to frighten voters who might have otherwised voted for the conservative candidate based on their own personal choice.

    All of the perspectives of people NOT HAPPY with this surge of conservatism, particularly since Sarah Palin is not stuck in Alaska anymore and can use her enormous power to deliver these results are nothing but smokescreens to avoid the obvious: conservatism dominates this country.

    Oh, and a third article which suggested that McConnell was not jumping on board today to accept Palin’s sudden support today (she sent out 300,000 robocalls to the people of Virginia) again is an attempt by liberals and the media to undermine the hunger for conservatism and to promote Republicans acting like liberals.

    The fact is, the country is reacting strongly against Obama and liberals in Congress. I only wish 2010 would get here faster.

  3. “the GOP endorsed Scozzafava, a pro-abortion, pro-stimulus, pro-big labor and pro-ACORN far-left winner of the Margaret Sanger Award. ”

    What makes this person a Conservative? I do not see one Conservative view in that list.

    One buzz on the news is the GOP Tent is not wide enough. It can never be wide enough to include the above views or it would not be the GOP.

    Another buzz is the extreme right wingers run the GOP and the moderates have been beaten back. Excuse me? Scozzafava’s views are not moderate Conservative views. They are liberal views.

  4. See, John, that’s exactly it–liberals who espouse those views don’t see themselves as left-wing, they see themselves as middle-of-the-road. That’s how they can get away with claiming that there’s no liberal bias in the media. It’s how anchors not technically classified as opinion hosts can get away with being snippy on the air with conservative candidates–they and their bosses classify their liberal views as being moderate.

    I used to delude myself into thinking I was moderate in my views. It really was pure delusion; I’m quite conservative, no questions asked. At least I have the courage to admit what I am.

  5. “I’m quite conservative, no questions asked. At least I have the courage to admit what I am.”

    Same here and I consider myself a moderate Conservative. But, I might be wrong about that.

  6. “Hoffman had attempted to get the Republican nomination, but for reasons nobody has been able to figure out, the GOP endorsed Scozzafava”

    Maybe it’s because Scozzafava had a record of experience with the state assembly, and Hoffman was a millionaire accountant who doesn’t live in the district, and doesn’t know the issues with which the people deal. I’m pretty sure it’s just a game to him…

  7. “The fact is, the country is reacting strongly against Obama and liberals in Congress. I only wish 2010 would get here faster.”

    I’m sure if you looked at all the facts, you’d have (at least privately) a different opinion. The fact of the matter is, in that little congressional race in New York that Rush Limbaugh and Sarah Palin decided to stick their noses in, that district hasn’t elected a democrat since the 1870’s. I fail to see how maintaining a trend (if it goes to the con) is a reaction to President Obama.

    In Virginia, historical trends show us that whichever party is in power can count on the opposition party winning governorship of the state. I’d like you to notice that not one liberal went on a tirade against Bush, and called the election of Mark Warner a repudiation of 43. Again, I fail to see how this a reaction to Obama.

    And last, but certainly not least, CNN exit polling in Virginia reveals that 60% of people, when asked if their feelings of or about Obama played any part in the way they cast their ballot, said that Obama had no effect on their decision. 20% said that they were expressing dissatisfaction with Obama, and 19% said they were expressing support for him. Those two numbers pretty much cancel each other out, and the other 60% said he had no effect, so once again, this is not a reaction in any way to Obama. I believe CNN also conducted a similar exit poll in NJ, with similar results. That’s okay, though, you’re more than welcome to cling to your uber conservative notions if it gives you hope. Lord knows you could use it. 🙂

  8. So I suppose uber-rich Congressmen and women such as John Kerry, Nancy Pelosi and Charlie Rangel also fall under that “millionaire who doesn’t live in the district” category, too, eh?

    Of course not, because they’re liberal heroes.

  9. “Of course not, because they’re liberal heroes.”

    Well, if they had no background or experience in politics, and ran for Congress and forced out a candidate who had all the requisite experience, yeah, it would be the same scenario, and my argument would still stand.

    Doing a quick Wikipedia check as I’m doing this, Pelosi (whom I wouldn’t be upset to see her lose her seat) started out as a party chairwoman in northern California. She also comes from a very political family. Rangel started out as a lawyer, making no money. He was later appointed Assistant US Attorney in the southern district of New York. John Kerry is the only one your argument actually works on, but the jump from military to politics is not a new one. The two are not mutually exclusive.

  10. Robert, I will accept – in part – some of your explanation regarding historical trends.

    But, historically speaking, Democrats should have had a blowout year in 2006, but they picked up 30-something seats and even most of those wins were Hoffman/Owens types of results. The kind we see right now when if Owens the liberal or Hoffman the conservative wins, it’s going to be by the skin of their teeth.

    In this specific case though, a by-the-skin victory would be more impressive for Hoffman since he began in 3rd place and after Sarah Palin endorsed him giving him massive amounts more of campaign funding.

    Owens had good funding from the beginning.

    Moreover; I find it hypocritical that you say Palin and Limbaugh stuck their noses in.

    Perhaps you can explain why Obama – while troops are dying in Afghanistan in record numbers – felt it important to stop being President and go stomp in New Jersey for Corzine over the weekend?

    Why did Biden stick his nose in by giving a speech in upstate NY23 in favor of Owens?

    Who can stick their noses in and who cannot?

    Democrats in power should be working for us, showing us why liberalism is the answer in lieu of stomping…..Obama/Biden campaign is long gone.

    Palin is an American now, as is Rush – they have just as much right to an opinion as the White House does.

  11. “Moreover; I find it hypocritical that you say Palin and Limbaugh stuck their noses in.

    Perhaps you can explain why Obama – while troops are dying in Afghanistan in record numbers – felt it important to stop being President and go stomp in New Jersey for Corzine over the weekend?”

    Point taken. I will concede that candidates receive campaign help from popular politicians. I just think it’s a lot more unusual for a local congressional district to receive attention on a national scale. Sitting presidents campaign on behalf of Gubernatorial candidates, it’s a fact of life.

    “Palin is an American now, as is Rush – they have just as much right to an opinion as the White House does.”

    Of course they do, and some part of me thinks that this was something of a personal quest for Limbaugh in particular. David Brooks wrote an op-ed about right wing talk radio:

    http://the44diaries.wordpress.com/2009/10/03/the-wizard-of-beck-by-david-brooks/

    In particular, he said that Rush Limbaugh, despite all his claims of representing a silent majority, couldn’t get a republican elected dog catcher. He pointed to all the vitriol in last year’s campaign, and how right wing radio pushed desperately for a defeat of Obama (as opposed to a victory for McCain), and it didn’t amount to a hill of beans. I think Limbaugh took offense to this, and made NY23 his pet project. The first I heard of the race was Newt Gingrich warning the GOP not to push moderates out of the party (and when someone like Gingrich is all but telling the party that they’re too far right, you should listen up). But Limbaugh wanted to hold this guy Hoffman up as some sort of trophy and as proof that his opinion did indeed influence others. The fact that the race went to a democrat for the first time in over a hundred years shows me that these people rejected the ultra right wing conservatism that many thought was seeing a resurgence. Granted, many Scozzafava voters threw their support to Bill Owens, but it was a rejection nonetheless.

    And conservatives see last night as a huge victory. I honestly don’t mean to rain on your parade, but I don’t see it that way. I’ll give you New Jersey. A wildly unpopular governor was ousted. But Virginia is another story. Creigh Deeds was a horrible candidate. Someone else here said that he’s now being thrown under the bus. I don’t know much about Deeds other than the fact that he had Obama’s support in the primary (most likely as a slap to Terry McAuliffe, who managed Hillary’s despicable campaign last year), but I do know that he was not a candidate that any liberal or progressive would be excited to vote for. And they didn’t. Democratic turnout was low, and you can pick your reason. Deeds actually ran ads expressing his intent to opt out of a public health insurance option if it were an opt out plan, he stated publicly his opposition to the Employee Free Choice Act (AFTER receiving union support!), he was anti gay marriage, and he was over the top defensive of the 2nd amendment. The guy basically ran as a republican, and last night merely proved what Eisenhower said so many years ago, that if faced with the choice of voting for a democrat that acts like a republican, or for an actual republican, people are going to choose the real thing every time.

    But overall, last night was bad for the GOP. Including mayoral elections, there were ten races yesterday. The GOP won two. And out of two congressional seats up for grabs (arguably the most important to national politics), they both went to democrats. But all anyone wants to focus on are two gubernatorial races, and the media is going right along with it, if not in fact instigating it.

  12. Robert – I am posting two of your quotes and responding to them because I think it gets to the heart:

    “Granted, many Scozzafava voters threw their support to Bill Owens, but it was a rejection nonetheless.”

    “And conservatives see last night as a huge victory. I honestly don’t mean to rain on your parade, but I don’t see it that way.”

    With NY23, you must take into consideration that Hoffman had 13 days from when Palin endorsed him on 10/22 to election day to run a full force campaign. It was then he began surpassing Scozzofava in the polls because Palin’s endorsement led to campaign contributions helping him out.

    The importance here is how in just 13 days, he catapulted so fastly to the top. Scozzofava and Owens were both selected by a closed-door committee, the people were not granted a right to a primary process, and Scozzofava got almost $900K in public money of the Republican party and had all those weeks to outshine Hoffman in campaigning….as did Owens.

    Owens already had his voters in line. When the sore losing RINO got mad and took her few remaining loyalists with her, it naturally tipped the scales.

    What do you honestly think would have happened if Hoffman had the same amount of time and funding for all of those weeks since August?

    He got that close with just 13 days of true campaigning.

    You and I will still be at war for conservatives versus liberals issues, which is why our conversations are fun and colorful. But I for one have made one switchover and take a lot less focus off of the word “Republican” and give my attention to the “C” word = conservative.

    This myth that all Republicans decided to have this big tent is only shut down by pointing out that it is conservatism’s tent that is the largest tent of all.

    The GALLUP twice this year gave us a poll that proved 40% of Americans identified as “conservative”, 35% as “moderate”, and 20% as “liberal.”

    There are conservative Republicans, conservative Democrats, conservative blacks, whites, hispanics, gays, etc.

    Regarding the GOP victories in NJ and Virginia, comparing the results in 1993 for both states, look at these stark similarities:

    For Virginia,
    1993
    Allen (R) 58%
    Terry (D) 41%

    2009
    McConnell (R) 59%
    Deeds (D) 41%

    For New Jersey:
    1993
    C. Whitman (R) 49%
    J. Florio (D) 48%

    2009
    Christie (R) 49%
    Corzine (D) 45%

    It is stunning to me the similarities. It would be also interesting to note if Clinton had campaigned in New Jersey in 1993 or not as Obama did all over the last weekend.

    The reason I bring up the stark similarities is because 1994 occurred just one year later and we all know what happened then.

    Regarding NY23 though, I would like to go back and see the “Republicans” who held power there like Scozzofava and the last one which was so “Republican” that Obama took him out of there and directly under his wing. It could be the Republicans in Upstate NY continued to vote for Olympia Snowe types of Republicans all along.

    If that is the case, and taking into account Hoffman was massively behind in campaign funding and precious time, the idea that a true-conservative got that close – just a few points away – from winning any seat in NY is amazing to me.

    But Owens has one year and if he endorses a public option and the district elects him again, we will see how “Republican” that base is. Only time will tell, and that’s why you and I will always have something fun to argue about.

  13. “It was then he began surpassing Scozzofava in the polls because Palin’s endorsement led to campaign contributions helping him out.”

    True, but the lion’s share of his campaign contributions came from outside the district, and I believe many came from outside the state. Many conservatives (yourself included) saw this as some sort of battle for the heart and soul of the republican party; were moderates welcome, were they to be purged? In the end, I think that this is what many conservatives, yourself included, want, to shake the coil until all the moderates fall away. This to me is a dangerous position to take. I can guarantee that there are far more moderates in the republican party than there are ultra conservatives. Pushing them out of the party (or at least out of races) will only split the party members, and (as we saw in NY23) leave the opposition with victory.

    “This myth that all Republicans decided to have this big tent is only shut down by pointing out that it is conservatism’s tent that is the largest tent of all.”

    I respectfully disagree. From what I’ve seen as a result of not only this race, but among a good chunk of Teabaggers, right wing conservatives don’t have any sort of tolerance for those who don’t think strictly along the same lines as they do.

    “It could be the Republicans in Upstate NY continued to vote for Olympia Snowe types of Republicans all along.”

    What is wrong with that? Why is your idea of republicanism so narrowly defined? It shouldn’t be hard to find things to agree with moderates on. Take Scozzafava, for example. While not the most conservative socially, from what I can tell she was abundantly fiscally conservative. To push someone like her out because she doesn’t think it’s the government’s place to invade the privacy of a woman’s womb (which makes her very conservative in that respect; less government involvement) is not, in my opinion, in the best interest of the party, in any party.

    I also have a strict definition of what a progressive liberal should be, but since I’m not a member of the Democratic party, I don’t waste my time criticizing the people I don’t think are liberal enough (or at all) in that party. If I did, I’d be bitching all day. I just think that when it comes to political parties, until we can have thirty different choices on election day, should focus on areas of agreement rather than the opposite. It’s kind of like that saying about catching flies…

    “Only time will tell, and that’s why you and I will always have something fun to argue about.”

    True. I’m actually proud of the both of us for not losing our heads and resorting to snide remarks or name calling.

  14. “I can guarantee that there are far more moderates in the republican party than there are ultra conservatives.”

    You know, if that were true and you were confident about that – you wouldn’t have to use “ultra” to describe anyone who is “conservative.” There is no ultra to it, there’s just conservative.

    As I said, NY23 elected a man who Obama chose to be around him…he was supposed to be a “Republican.”

    “right wing conservatives don’t have any sort of tolerance for those who don’t think strictly along the same lines as they do.”

    Again, in lieu of “conservative’, you say “right-wing conservative.” Let’s just stick with “conservative” because as I said, it is possible to be conservative regardless of yur party affiliation.

    To say that they have no tolerance I can tell you first hand is not true. I know them, they listen and they make their choices based on the US Constitution and based on simple lessons of right and wrong.

    Moreover; if there is a “right wing”, there is a “left wing” that has virtually taken over the Democratic Party. They are just as intolerant of opposition as you can possibly imagine the “right wing” is.

    “What is wrong with that? Why is your idea of republicanism so narrowly defined? It shouldn’t be hard to find things to agree with moderates on. Take Scozzafava, for example. While not the most conservative socially, from what I can tell she was abundantly fiscally conservative.”

    So fiscally conservative that; in fact, she claimed to be against a public option but then turns and endorses the candidate that is? Fiscally conservative candidates don’t support a 1.3 trillion dollar plan that is going to create more problems than it solves.

    I actually have heard you complain about politicians like Bill Clinton who were not liberal enough.

    Liberals right now are attacking Obama for not living up to any of his “promises.”

    “True. I’m actually proud of the both of us for not losing our heads and resorting to snide remarks or name calling.”

    After what happened today in Texas, I’m still a little humble. 🙂

    I really am confident in the results from Tuesday because they – like a national health care debate – are precisely what 1994 was preceded by one year earlier.

    If conservatives sweep in 2010, I’ll be interested to get your perspective from then until 2012. If, in fact, Obama winds up signing everything sent up to him by Republicans – as Clinton did – we could see some really great change and Obama may even get a second term out of it.

  15. “You know, if that were true and you were confident about that – you wouldn’t have to use “ultra” to describe anyone who is “conservative.” There is no ultra to it, there’s just conservative.”

    That’s unfortunately not the case. When I hear the word conservative, I think Barry Goldwater, not Ronald Reagan. I’m sure Goldwater is spinning in his grave at what his party has become. It’s not anything an old school conservative would recognize. All the people I work with are Ron Paul fans. They call themselves true conservatives. They hate Bush as much as any liberal I know (maybe more). I’m not sure where the disconnect lies, but I’m curious to know. But, getting back to the topic at hand, I suppose I could go back to using the word neocon. I just think there’s conservative, then there’s a few steps further.

    “Moreover; if there is a “right wing”, there is a “left wing” that has virtually taken over the Democratic Party”

    That’s news to me. I would love to see the Democratic Party move left on a whole host of issues, but I don’t see that happening. Hell, this public option thing pails in comparison to a single payer system.

    “They are just as intolerant of opposition as you can possibly imagine the “right wing” is.”

    You’ve got me there, buddy.

    “Fiscally conservative candidates don’t support a 1.3 trillion dollar plan that is going to create more problems than it solves.”

    I’m not sure what you’ve been reading/hearing, but the CBO has scored both the house and senate bills, and they both have negative impacts on the deficit (also, the tab comes to just over 800 billion). It’s absolutely fiscally conservative to support a bill that will shave billions of dollars off the deficit over a ten year period.

    “I actually have heard you complain about politicians like Bill Clinton who were not liberal enough.”

    Yeah, there’s a joke about him by left leaning people that he was the best Republican president we ever had. But that’s not true, Teddy Roosevelt kicked ass.

    “I really am confident in the results from Tuesday because they – like a national health care debate – are precisely what 1994 was preceded by one year earlier.”

    I know you’re hopeful, but this isn’t 1994, Steve. We’re way closer than ’94 in regards to getting health care passed (and when I say we, I don’t mean wimpy ass Democrats, I mean Americans). We’re 90% there. I don’t want to assign this viewpoint to you, but it’s my opinion that politicians in your party are trying to kill health care because they are scared to death that people will love it, just like what happened with Medicare (Reagan tried scaring the pants off of people in 1964 by telling them that the passage of Medicare would usher in socialism). Orrin Hatch recently admitted as much. They’ve become so desperate (and that is what they are), that they’ve been reduced to (once again) over inflating protest numbers to make it seem like they have some kind of silent majority on their side. The rally yesterday (or, rather, the Super Bowl of Freedom), according to some conservatives, drew as many as a million people. According to the Capitol Hill Police and Fire Departments, a good 4,000 people showed up. I know that I’m sure that If a good bill passes, it has the potential to keep the republicans out of power for a very long time.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s