I agree and can not understand why some wish to fight their own neighbors over petty nonsense when to *some* public access for their Menorah or Nativity Scene seems to bring them so much happiness.

If there’s no cost to taxpayers, and it makes a bunch of your neighbors happy why not either help them, or sit down and shut up?

FDR/Kennedy-era Democrats: economic liberals, social conservatives, pro-social public works, smaller military, non-involvement unless provoked. (The unified Catholic Vote of 1924 to 1968).

Libertarians: smaller military, states rights, minimal business or social legislation. Social Darwinists.

ACR, in a truly free society religious expression would be allowed in the public arena. The tyranny of the aetheist or secular minority of one is just another form of tyranny and closed-mindedness as shallow as the one it is trying to. replace.

In Connecticut, the Republican Party has a much bigger tent than the Democrats and I’m proud to be one of Connecticut’s newest “RINOs”. I hope both parties become more tolerant of differing views within their ranks and embrace the center as the place where we’ll find decent results.

Sam Caliguri is hardly the Palin-esque conservative some people would like to believe. Compared to the national party, every Republican candidate for Senate is a moderate. We’d do ourselves a favor by ignoring ridiculous left vs. right labels and spend more time worrying about who is trustworthy and qualified.

Not really.

The left has moved the line far more than the right has.

What may strike you as “social conservatism” could well be some backlash from moderates like myself.

The constant drone coming from the moveon.org KOS faction that appears to many us, certainly me – to simply loathe America and is hell-bent to tear down every traditional bastion and symbol for no other reason that they’re traditional.

They’re the first to scream of abuse of the 1st and will do so at the drop of hat; yet they were no where to be found during any Mosque discussions in Wallingford, and in fact it’s been the cars with “Chris Murphy” bumper stickers in Litchfield that carried the most vocal anti-Synagogue faction.
(“We don’t mind Jews….but this people are *those* Jews” said one as we walked into a meeting.)

Many New England towns have a town green where all sorts of secular events occur almost all year long. Yet when a group wishes to place a Nativity Scene on the same green where we issued a permit allowing the KKK to stand and pass out leaflets, someone from the left frequently complains.

The left needs to recognize that tolerance is a two way street.

Sara, when you were supposedly a republican, what didn’t you like about democrats?

You sound like that state rep from Stonington. She was a “maverick” republican, who didn’t believe in any republican ideals. When she switched parties, she said she was going to be a “maverick” Democrat. But since then, she’s one of the most liberal members of their caucus.

Sara thinks that by saying she used to be a republican, her criticism of the GOP has more weight. No one is buying it.

My point here is that the media tries to portray all Republicans as dimwits, and the charge has some resonance in the short term because they managed to make that stick with W. But you look at a McDonnell (who the WashPost tried to turn into a Neanderthal) or a Christie (solid lawyer), and you see bright, personable, educated people. There are many pro-choice Republicans. There are many Republicans who are in favor of gay rights (though usually not same-sex marriage, only because Republicans tend to be both more religious and also Constitutionalists, and neither the US nor any State Constitution mention any “right” to marriage.) There are many Republicans who are environmentalists. The list goes on and on.

So in a primary, in a generally GOP district, I wouldn’t be surprised to see a conservative win over a complete farce like Scozzafava (let’s face it, a majority of DEMOCRATS now call the Stimulus a failure, and she still favors it), and that would have happened of there was a primary. But here, the party bosses picked her, and she simply failed to connect with the Party IN HER OWN DISTRICT. If she had, all the Dick Armey visits in the world would not have had an effect.

Now to our state. Simmons and McMahon have the inside on this race. I actually like Caligiuri very much, but he doesn’t have the name rec to take them on. I still think Foley has no shot, and Schiff is having fun. With Rob and Linda, you get two moderates. If Sam stays in the race, he will get say 10 to 20% from traditionalists and his district, but it won’t be enough to win. The only way a down-the-line social conservative wins in CT is if (a) the moderate candidates all admit to once having been in the Taliban, (b) that at least four people make it into the primary, making only 25 to 35% necessary for victory, and (c) there is an Category 3 or higher hurricane on Election Day. Barring this, either Rob or Linda will most likely win, and the bogey man of the evil right-winger who came to town to eat the Republican Party can head back down to the press room of the New York Times from whence it came.

The problem for mainline “liberals” and “conservatives” is that a very few issues dominate and destroy their own

The fact is – a LOT of us here can “left-flank” (according to today’s newer definitions (which are mostly a load of BS)) on social issues at any rate, most liberals with little trouble at all.

De-criminalize all drugs?
You bet.

Gay issues?
Marry your goldfish, leave me alone.

The odd thing is, *we* see it as being *more* conservative in that the goal should be less government at any cost.
Yet “new conservatives” would have the nerve to call the above “RINO” which of course should cause an untimely fall down an open elevator shaft.

So why aren’t we hearing more of your voices in the national party? Where were all those voices when the GOP controlled Congress was passing legislation to bypass the judiciary to intervene in the Terri Schiavo case?

With those kind of voter breakdowns the Republican party should hold an electoral advantage yet that hasn’t been the case lately. There are, as I see it, two problems. The first is that while these voter breakdowns favor Conservatives this hasn’t translated to party identification. Republicans and Democrats were about tied in 2000, or pre-George W. Bush. However, since then Democrats have opened a wide advantage in 2009, upwards of 15% according to Gallup. It shouldn’t surprise anyone that the blame for that can be attributed to the Bush presidency but the exact reasons for the disaffection are probably more varied and complex among Conservatives than any other group.

The second problem I see is a disproportionate Southern influence in the Republican party as a base of support. What had traditionally been a Northeast power base is now gone (as is the Southern California base of Nixon and Reagan) and has now been replaced. This may explain the advent of social conservatism, the religious right, and so on. While that may play well down South it has proven to be a disaster in other areas of the country.

That lie originated with Pelosi and her courtiers in the press just kept repeating it. These are the recent demographics for that area.

John Gilbert 1960-63 Democrat Redistricted to the 22nd.

Charles Buckley 1963-65 Democrat Redistricted from the 24th.

Jonathan B. Bingham Democrat 1965-73 Redistricted to the 22nd.

Peter A. Peyser Republican 1973-77 Redistricted from the 25th.

Bruce F. Caputo Republican 1977-79

Peter A. Peyser Democrat 1979-83

Samuel S. Stratton Democrat 1983-89 Redistricted from the 28th.

Michael McNulty Democrat 1989-93 Redistricted from the 21st.

Sherwood Boehlert Republican 1993-2003 Redistricted from the 25th. Redistricted to the 24th.

John M. McHugh Republican 2003-2009 Redistricted from the 24th.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_York%27s_23rd_congressional_district

Exactly, hardly a small tent is it?

Yet we hear, even in the northeast, what ultra-right, ultra-white conservatives we Republicans are.
Absurd.

The fact is – a LOT of us here can “left-flank” (according to today’s newer definitions (which are mostly a load of BS)) on social issues at any rate, most liberals with little trouble at all.

De-criminalize all drugs?
You bet.

Gay issues?
Marry your goldfish, leave me alone.

The odd thing is, *we* see it as being *more* conservative in that the goal should be less government at any cost.
Yet “new conservatives” would have the nerve to call the above “RINO” which of course should cause an untimely fall down an open elevator shaft.

The only reason I said unprepared was that (from an outsider’s perspective) he didn’t sweep the municipalities himself with the corruption investigations and completely mismatched the tone of the election. He was very unpopular going in, and from everything I heard he didn’t attack on the basic issues of property taxes and corruption (I didn’t follow this race closely though mind you, I live in CT not NJ). I think the people of NJ did say something loudly, but the tone was towards Trenton and not Washington.

“I don’t know anything about the guy, but do you have any evidence that he wasn’t supported by the conservatives?”

Sorry, let me clarify. The national actors of the conservative movement drew the line for NY-23, which makes sense that election had national implications. So the fact that you, myself, and just about everyone else in the greater electorate was going “yeah, that guy…” to me at least shows that the main force was not behind him. Was his victory big for the GOP? Yes, the VA GOP. What the national conservative movement did not do was make a poster child out of him though, but maybe they will in the future.

I agree completely with your final paragraph though.

~Cheers

John Corzine wasn’t prepared? Say what? He had previously won two statewide races in New Jersey: one as Senator and one as Governor. He outspend Christie 4 to 1, mainly by using his own money. He had Bill Clinton and Barack Obama campaign for him. Joel Benenson was managing strategy for Corzine’s campaign. So no, I don’t really think you can say lack of preparedness is why Corzine lost.

On the other hand, Christie was not an idea candidate: the guy is not telegenic, he is, like or not, very overweight (and you don’t see that often with political candidates, although there are some exceptions like Nadler and most Presidents between the civil war and WWI). Conservatives in the primary had mainly supported Steve Lonegan.

As for McDonnell in Virginia, every commentator on election night said he ran as a conservative and had strong conservative backing. I don’t know anything about the guy, but do you have any evidence that he wasn’t supported by the conservatives?

There were certainly local issues involved: there always are. So while we can argue about whether or not this was a referendum on Obama, I think your two points (Corzine unprepared, McDonnell not their darling) aren’t correct.

One thing that is painfully obvious, however, is that the White House really blundered in where it put its resources. Barack Obama and the Democratic Party spent a lot of effort in New Jersey. Yet no one campaigned against Bloomberg in NYC. Bloomberg spent $100 million to his opponent’s $6 million, and won by a very small margin. Had a little of the reources dumped in NJ been able to come across the Hudson for the NYC effort, the Democrats could have won the mayor’s seat. I hadn’t been following that race, but always just assumed it was going to be a Bloomberg blowout. I was certainly surprised when I saw the results there.

There will allways be attempts for one faction to define the party but in reality the factions are best left to nursing their own regional differences.

Fiscal conservatives
Libertarian conservatives
National Security-oriented
Neoconservatives
Paleoconservatives
Traditionalist conservatives
Religious Right/Theoconservatives
Social conservatives
States’ rights

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Factions_in_the_Republican_Party_(United_States)

Depends on who gets to define “Conservative” doesn’t it?

Goldwater was *the* definitive Conservative for a generation, yet by today’s new standard he would be considered by some (who have no business claiming to be Republicans in the first place) to be a RINO.

That’s a phrase we could do without.

End of story.