The RNC Post Mortem

Avoiding the punditry associated with the RNC ‘post mortem was no small feat, opting to actually read the RNC document. Sleeplessness is no longer a problem. Apologies in advance for any repetition of points already made elsewhere. There is much to recommend the RNC document. There is also much to criticize.

Essentially the document admits that the DNC kicked RNC butt and the RNC needs to catch up related to infrastructure, technology, outreach and social media. Fine, no surprise; what have you been waiting for? One could make the argument that the political ‘pros’ should have seen this coming a long time ago. There was a reason why the President’s and the DNC’s infrastructure was left in place after 2008. The RNC should have seen this coming. The RNC has to rethink the strategic and tactical direction they’re getting from the pros; it has simply not worked. Had the Tea Party not risen in 2010 the ‘pros’ would have probably lost that battle as well. While the Republican establishment frets over Tea Party influence what they should be fretting over is how to apply a grassroots organization that already exists instead of looking for a way to create a parallel capability. Must be the Pros at work! They can say what they like, but the ‘pros’ are scared to death of an actual grassroots movement. There would have been full throated defense of the Tea Party if they weren’t. The only folks more in fear of the Tea Party than the Republican pros are the Democrats; with good reason.

The document intimates that values should change or be customized based on outreach to voting communities they lost: the young, Asians, Hispanics and African Americans. Wrong! Infrastructure is one thing, values are quite another. It’s not so much Democratic light we’re talking about here as Republican light. Republican light has not been getting the job done and the RNC pros seem to be saying, let’s get lighter? What the RNC should be doing is reaching out to those communities in a way that connects politics with native common sense is one of the missing aspects of the RNC plan. Reach out and talk about the basis for Conservative thinking; logic, anticipation of consequence, confidence in the individual, delivery of the decision making process as close to the voter as possible and bringing people to see that most of them already have a Conservative streak in them and may not even know to call it that.

The RNC should engage communities that rejected them; not to find out what they want and give it to them but to insure the engagement is a two way conversation. Listening is good, the RNC says they want to do a lot of that; a two way conversation that leads people consider the alternative opinion is also critical. To engage absent response is not engagement, it’s pandering. Engagement absent vision is where this document falls flat on its strategic face.

The document fails to consider the actual impact of Democratic policy as we will come to know it over the next two to four years. That is where a significant part of the message will need to be. Dissatisfaction with ObamaCare will escalate, if you’re young your insurance premiums are going to potentially double. Concerns over debt and deficits will become more pointed, the constant push for new taxes will eventually be rejected. Fraud based dependency will become an issue and push Americans toward a commons sense analysis of what is happening and what they’re paying for. The common sense strategy is to point out the nearly daily contradictions between what has been promised and what is actually happening.

There are simple questions to direct to whatever community the RNC wants to talk to. “Are you happy with the new normal?” 15% un/under employment, 2% GDP growth, minority employment falling well behind the national average, exploding health care costs, exploding government intervention that must, by definition, come from the most disrespected institution in the land; Congress? Is the school in your neighborhood going to improve based on your involvement and pressure or another thousand pages of regulation from the Dept. of Education in D.C.? Would you like a choice in where your kids are educated? Is your state government more efficient than the federal government? A look at the accomplishments of Republican Governors over the past few years answers that question. The RNC does highlight Governors, but not sufficiently. Republican Gubernatorial leadership has produced great ideas, creativity, economic improvement, bi-partisan legislation and successful changes in direction.

Leadership is the illumination of vision, the ability to create the context within which people can absorb facts and make decisions. I would suggest that the RNC ‘listen’ not only to minority groups but to people with superior leadership skills, who know how to illuminate vision. Vision is absent from most of what is in the RNC document and it’s a glaring omission!

There are realities to face; Gay Marriage is likely going to become an acceptable state of affairs, there is a rising tide in favor of it. Immigration reform must be a partnership between undocumented residents and the government. Legal Hispanics seeing a path for the illegal community that is not amnesty could change their perception of the Conservative position. The message to them is that we must respect what they have achieved in finding their way to legal status and not minimize what they have accomplished. There are Conservative solutions that can resonate with minority communities; simply saying no will not resonate.

Conservative solutions have to recognize reality. They should be able to apply essential values in a changing environment. Momentum must be stopped before it can be redirected.

Tags:
  • Bill Hedges

    “Had the Tea Party not risen in 2010 the ‘pros’ would have probably lost that battle as well.”

    “Really ?!?”

    The Demos were running IN THE BAD in polls. Nearly EVERY, SINGLE BILL passed by demo controlled Congress was HATED. We won by default. Demos who voted for bumcare loss, loss, loss…

  • Bob

    Hmmmm……I say that “We couldn’t agree more” but then someone might accuse me of putting words in your mouth.

  • Bill Hedges

    If they ran at all. Many demos failed to run.

    Was it SC where a man, living in basement of his Dad’s house, who had charges against him a coming, and used printed handouts to advertise, bet a fellow Demo incumbent ?

  • Leadership is the key word. There has been little to none of it from the RNC apparatus. It has come from the grassroots and has now bubbled up to leaders like Ted Cruz, Rand Paul, Mike Lee and a small handful of others. John Boehner not included.

    Compromising principles to reach certain groups is what the Democrats do all day long except they have no principles to compromise so it is really just pandering. Republicans would be foolhardy to engage in a similar tactic. Anything they might pickup would be undone by the numbers they’ll lose from further watering-down the message of conservatism.

    There is fear among GOP strategists that a simple, well-articulated solid message could mean victory and then we wouldn’t need so many strategists anymore to target particular voting blocs.

    Technology is fairly easy to match if implemented intelligently, organization on the other hand can be tough.

    However, the bottom line is bold leadership in stark opposition to progressive policies. We didn’t see that in 2008 or 2012. Instead we witnessed the GOP nominee out-progressive Senator Obama talking up a plan to “buy back underwater mortgages”.

    The RNC establishment has proven its ability to fail and fail repeatedly and still not grasp why. Time to step aside, let the grassroots run with the ball and score another victory in 2014 just like 2010. Hopefully they can continue momentum in 2016 and not let the RNC make the same juvenile mistakes.

  • Bob

    Nate;

    Well it doesn’t take the recommendations of the “Autopsy” long before you hear the “Amen”chorus by the establishment.The party doesn’t feel they should campaign on principles……….NO! it’s money and it couldn’t be more transparent about it.Perhaps they should change the meaning of G.O.P. to mean “Group Of Panderers”. Below is an article entitled “Republicans See Cash Opportunity in Gay Marriage” from the “Politico’ website.

    http://www.politico.com/story/2013/03/republicans-gay-marriage-89265.html?hp=t1

  • Funny thing about gay marriage, it’s less popular with Democrats than Barack Obama is. Take Maryland, for example, Obama won in 2012 with nearly 62% but gay marriage won by only 52%. That tells me there are votes the GOP could be gaining on this issue. Keep in Mind these are Maryland numbers but the same tenet holds across the country and we saw it numerous times in 2012 when a gay marriage initiative was on the ballot in a state Obama won.

    The GOP shouldn’t be captive to the media or polls, it should be listening the voters and examining actual election results.

  • Bob

    Nate:
    I understand your point about the vote potential among the gay community.However the popularity for gay marriage among Democrats neither surprises me nor worries me it’s the supposed trusted Conservatives flip-flopping that concerns me.The two most recent were Jon Huntsman and Rob Portman.Both of them were either running for President or considered for the Vice-President slot the last election cycle.Can they be counted on if DOMA comes to a vote in Congress?

    A definition of Conservativism is a desire to maintain the status quo.As societies moral status quo degrades there are some Conservatives who believe in following suit.

  • Bob

    Chairmen of the republican National Committee Reince Priebus said concerning gay marriage “I don’t believe we need to act like,you know “Old Testament heretics.”So much for bold leadership and standing on principles.

    “The G.O.P…WHORING FOR VOTES SINCE 7TH NOVEMBER 2012”

    http://www.politico.com/story/2013/03/reince-priebus-gay-marriage-89330.html?hp=l7

  • Bob, re-reading my post I see I might not have been clear. What I mean is the GOP needs to be definitively AGAINST altering traditional marriage. They must NOT become another party in favor of gay marriage.

    What I meant by the examination of the Maryland vote was that even among Democrats, there is a huge number that don’t support gay marriage but they voted for Obama. What I’m saying is the GOP should be a clear party in favor of traditional values and try to lure some of these voters away by being a party strongly in favor of preserving traditional marriage as a foundation of society. They don’t need to pander and begin softening to gay marriage, there is a party for that which cares not about the implications for society. The GOP should be a stark contrast standing for traditional values the country was founded on.

    The flip-flopping sickens me, especially as you said, Portman was being considered for VP. There is a false rising tide the media is creating in favor of SSM but reality doesn’t pan that out in the voting booth. These weak-kneed Republicans are getting caught up in it. That’s fine by me actually, I’d like to know now before we elevate them to greater roles of power.

    I’m strongly against redefining marriage away from a man and woman. God made it, if he thinks it’s broke, he’ll fix it.

  • Bill Hedges

    In Bob’s link:

    Chairman said “My position is that marriage is between a man and a woman, but my other position is also that you treat people with dignity and respect and love and grace and so I think that they’re all compatible with each other,”

    http://www.politico.com/story/2013/03/reince-priebus-gay-marriage-89330.html#ixzz2OhO1kUy7

    In Bible studies I was taught to love the person BUT NOT the ACT. Seems to me that is exactly what Reince Priebus is saying.

    Bob could have picked this MORE CLEAR statement by Chairman who Bob is NOT a fan of.

    Maybe Nate can correct me if I am wrong, but, isn’t example of “Old Testament heretics” stoning a woman who commits adultery (Jesus told woman sin no more) or man to man sexual relationship. New Testament is new law. We love the sinner but not the sin. We do not reward same sex marriage with benefits that man-woman marriage receives from governments…

  • Bill Hedges

    Do explain…

    Landreaux

    “Really !?!”. I am confused !!! You write “Essentially the document admits that the DNC kicked RNC butt and the RNC needs to catch up related to infrastructure, technology, outreach and social media”. Yet, in off year election when a very popular President was not running, we had record breaking WIN in D.C.. with buma’s army not voting in full force. In 2012 with full army voting, FEW REPUBLICAN seat loss in D.C.. buma’s win gave few House or Senate seat net gain to demos.

    I am bewildered & complex by phase “document admits that the DNC kicked RNC butt”. I agree a President with sorry job performance BUT great popularity got second term. BUT after record breaking Republican win in 2010, few net seats were won by demos in D.C…

    I AM missing this “DNC kicked RNC butt”. Could someone explain:

    “ US elections leave House and Senate balance nearly unchanged”

    November 2012

    http://www.wsws.org/en/articles/2012/11/cong-n10.html

    After our BIG WIN IN 2010:

    “Election Day 2010: GOP wins House, Democrats retain Senate”

    Updated 11/3/2010 11:13 AM

    “The GOP needed to pick up 39 new seats to oust the Democrats from the House leadership, and appeared well on their way to taking more than 50 — and perhaps as many as 70 — before the final count was in”

    http://usatoday30.usatoday.com/news/politics/2010-11-03-RW_mainelection02_ST_N.htm

    Saying “DNC kicked RNC butt” MAKES NO SENSE. We loss few of the record win in 2010…

  • Bill Hedges

    Change *& complex by phase * to by phrase…

  • Bob

    A while back on the “Hearing the Hearings” thread I gave mention (and a link) to an article by Fox News entitled “West Continues To Drift into Democrat Column”(27th January @ 6:13PM).The article stated that liberal California is losing population to other states in the west that have been in the Republican column during elections for years.It said “Nevada became the next California,and Arizona is becoming the next Nevada.”

    The second article I posted on the “Swing is The Thing” thread I gave mention (and a link) to an article by National Review Online entitled “Purple Texas” (31st January @10:48PM).This article stated how the state of Texas might still be in the Republican column nationally but many of the major cities government are run by the Democrats.It goes on to say that it is easy for illegal immigrants to find work in Texas.

    Well there is a third article from the Wall Street Journal website entitled “The Reverse…Joads of California”(see link below).The title refers to the Joad family in the book and movie “Grapes of Wrath” and how they migrated from Oklahoma to California in the 1930’s.This article however goes into a little more detail about the people leaving California than the articles mentioned above.It seems California has lost 3.4 million people in the last two decades during this migration.BUT CONTRARY TO CONSERVATIVE LORE there has been no millionaires marching to Texas and other western states.In fact most of the California outbound are low to middle income with relatively little education(only 10% has college degrees)THIS INCLUDES 40% LEAVING ARE HISPANIC (remember the article above “Purple Texas”saying it is easy for illegals to find work in Texas).

    Now the RNC can do all the outreach and amnesty it wants but the facts clearly indicate that they are in deep trouble of also losing solid western red states to the changing face of immigration.
    http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424127887324338604578326402863024028.html?mod=WSJ_article_MoreIn_Opinion

  • Bill Hedges

    If you look at your previous posts you would find numbers don’t support your claims. Even your articles don’t. THEY MIGHT some day.

    DC hasn’t happened. As my 2 links prove. MAYBE IN FUTURE. NOT YET…

  • Bill Hedges

    “Essentially the document admits that the DNC kicked RNC butt and the RNC needs to catch up related to infrastructure, technology, outreach and social media”.

    Bring on real numbers NOT POSSIBLE future numbers. OUR butts have been kicked.

    PROVE…

  • Bill Hedges

    “What Did the Republican National Committee’s Own Report Reveal About Why Republicans Lost in 2012?”

    Mar. 18, 2013

    http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2013/03/18/reince-priebus-growth-opportunity-report-republican-party/

  • Bob

    Nate:
    I agree with your 26th March @ 3:17PM post about the “establishment should step aside and let the new leaders run with the ball.” That not only goes for the republican leaders in Congress but for the leadership behind the scenes at party headquarters making policy decisions.

    If you take the vowels out of chairmen of the RNC’s name Reince Priebus you are left with RNC PR BS

    How appropriate !

  • Bill, “Maybe Nate can correct me if I am wrong….”

    You’re right I think, you have deciphered what he was trying to say, he just doesn’t speak very eloquently when spitting it out.

    The problem with Reince (this could go on for 50 pages) is that he is too much of a weasel in short. I don’t trust the man. Look at the RNC rules change during the convention when he rammed it through to multiple loud “BOOOOs” from the crowd. He’s also tossed people like Michele Bachmann overboard and I think he is trying to straddle the fence between tea party and establishment. He says what grassroots conservatives want to hear but he doesn’t always act on it.

    Second, he’s not the best spokesman. He doesn’t confidently defend why traditional marriage is best for society and why Republicans will boldly defend it. He is timid, almost apologetic for the position.

  • Bill Hedges

    Nate

    Maybe you can respond.

    Bob has been dogging the Chairman over not bidding out those GOP strategists. Those picked having ties to him as well so Bob says. I have not done the research to see IF TRUE, IF common practice, or STRICKLY AGAINST THE RULES set forth by RNC or FEDERAL LAW. COULD YOU RESPOND ??? My limited knowledge leads me to hazard a guess nothing wrong is being done. Since he was voted a second term…

    Personally I feel the Chairman has a hard road to travel. There is as you say “tea party and establishment”. Then what is called “wacho birds”. Reagan spoke of these but not by that name. COMPROMISE being a dirty WORD. You can’t get all you want WITHOUT THE RARE CONTROLLED CONGRESS (BUMA had to sign a meaningless ORDER to get some demos to vote for bumcare). Reagan raised taxes BUT reduced MUCH MORE. Same for Newt.

    I have given the Chairman the benefit of the doubt that he has GOOD INTENTIONS until otherwise known. I know very little about this convention. Had I been able to watch I might be speaking in another language on this IF THIS WAS ON the SCRENE. I watch a lot of movies. Have ban most politics from my cable. I research online…

    Let’s be realistic, “establishment should step aside” ISN’T happening TOMORROW. FRANKLY NOT all TEA is GOOD as in my MO crazy Todd. Karl Rowe says put OUR money on the winnable TEA candidate (IF possible), not on the nag. (Camptown Races Song ):

    A little * lev·i·ty *

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xsXB8j4GRqI

  • Bob

    Here’s an article from National Review Online entitled “Why Hispanics Don’t Vote Republican” that suggest that the G.O.P. can pander all it wants to the Hispanic voters but it isn’t immigration policy that is keeping them from voting republican.It says that they believe in the core Democratic principles of government providing a safety net with nearly ONE QUARTER OF ALL HISPANICS ARE POOR IN CALIFORNIA.United States born Hispanic households in California use welfare programs at twice the rate of native born non-Hispanic households.

    John Echeveste says “What republicans mean by family values and what hispanics mean are two completely different things” The idea of social issues to the Hispanic voters is also a mirage.The Hispanic out of wedlock birth rate is 53% …twice that of whites and according to a Pew poll Hispanics favor gay marriage.

    They believe that government has a role in helping people and are not a natural conservative constituency.They want the kind of big government they voted for but never could quite get in their native lands.

    http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/332916/why-hispanics-dont-vote-republicans-heather-mac-donald

  • Bill Hedges

    Bob’s article TALKS OF California. A VERY LIBERAL STATE. The ultimate NANNY STATE. This State goes out of its way to support illegals:

    “More Hispanic Voting Myths”

    “Why the media’s emphasis on race and ethnicity is wrong”

    13 November 2012

    “Many a postmortem of Mitt Romney’s defeat has focused on his poor showing among Hispanics and argued that Republicans won’t do better in national elections until they find a way to appeal to this growing voting bloc, especially by modifying the party’s stance on immigration. Yet these analyses often rely on faulty data that overstate the impact that Hispanic voters have on elections. They also typically ignore the fact that, as exit polls show, Latinos are almost certainly voting, like everyone else, on major issues—especially the economy—not on narrow ethnic lines. Latinos are just like other voters, history suggests: they’re more likely to vote for Republicans when the party puts forward a good candidate with broad appeal.”

    “Most of the analyses that I’ve read begin by noting the rapid growth of America’s Hispanic population. But one-third of adult Hispanics are not U.S. citizens and consequently can’t vote. Even Latinos who are citizens don’t vote as reliably as whites or blacks do, and as a result, their population growth rate doesn’t translate into commensurate voting power. According to U.S. Census data for the 2010 midterm elections (the most recent national data available), adult Hispanics numbered 32.5 million in the U.S. population, but only 10.9 million were registered to vote and only 6.6 million actually voted (up from 5.6 million in the 2006 midterms). By contrast, of the 155.5 million adult white residents in the United States in 2010, 104 million were registered to vote and 74.3 million did vote. In other words, nearly half of the country’s adult whites participated in the 2010 elections; only 20 percent of adult Latinos did.”

    More data in article breaking Bob’s article balloon.

    http://www.city-journal.org/2012/eon1113sm.html

  • Bill Hedges

    Bob writes:

    “Here’s an article from National Review Online entitled “Why Hispanics Don’t Vote Republican” that suggest that the G.O.P. can pander all it wants to the Hispanic voters but it isn’t immigration policy that is keeping them from voting republican”

    What ??? Voting pattern changes:

    “One recent analysis warns that Latinos’ share of the population by 2050 will be so large as to permanently damage Republicans’ prospects. Such scenarios, however, assume a static electorate that, in 40 years, votes the same way it does today. If in 1940, say, I had constructed a similar chart projecting the growth rate of the country’s Italian-American population, based on its having a higher birthrate than that of the Anglo-American population, I could have issued the same warning to Republicans. Americans of Italian descent were voting heavily Democratic back then. By 1980, they had become a key component of the Reagan coalition.”

    http://www.city-journal.org/2012/eon1113sm.html

    Been finding National Review smells…

  • Bill Hedges

    National review online has “new content consisting of conservative, libertarian, neo-conservative, and neo-liberal opinion articles”

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Review

  • Bob

    So you do admit that the voting patterns change over the years and came out of your cave.You seem to have been in a rut lecturing me on what President Reagan did 34 years ago and your precious victory in 1996 thinking it is still signifigant today.Also the 2010 census doesn’t mean squat when YOUR PARTY PANDERS AND GIVES AMNESTY WITH THE EXPECTATION OF GETTING VOTES THATS WHAT WERE DISCUSSING.THAT HISPANIC POPULATION OF 32 MILLION WILL EXPLODE.But my article had nothing to do with either of these items you mention as you are well aware of.

    Well I guess when you depend on the “World Socialist Web Site” and the liberal “USA Today” (see 26th March @10:27PM) as your source of information you establishment republicans don’t think National Review is reverent.

  • Bill Hedges


    Take your hate and exaggeration of my views and read your own statement:

    “Here’s an article from National Review Online entitled “Why Hispanics Don’t Vote Republican” that suggest that the G.O.P. can pander all it wants to the Hispanic voters but it isn’t immigration policy that is keeping them from voting republican.It says that they believe in the core Democratic principles of government providing a safety net with nearly ONE QUARTER OF ALL HISPANICS ARE POOR IN CALIFORNIA.United States born Hispanic households in California use welfare programs at twice the rate of native born non-Hispanic households.”

    I take NO NOTE of your revised statements of what I say. Quotes required.

    National Review and National Review online are different in style and management.

    Take your personal attack elsewhere…

  • Bill Hedges

    “You seem to have been in a rut lecturing me on what President Reagan did 34 years ago ”

    Can not help article statement about Reagan and Italians went over your head. Maybe Nate will explain to you…

  • Bob

    “Take your hate and exaggeration of my views and read your own statement”

    “Take your personal attack elsewhere…”

    Hmmmm I’m not the one who doesn’t like people attacking the RNC/GOP and goes running to Nate for him to take sides and condemn my post.(27th March @10:51AM)By your own admission you were to lazy to do the research so you want Nate to bail your butt out.Much the same way liberals can’t get legislation passed so they go to the courts.

    “I have not done the research to see if true.”
    “My limited knowledge leads me to hazard a guess……’
    “I know very little about this convention.”
    “I watch a lot of movies.Have ban most politics from my cable.”

    I was taught that if you didn’t know what you were talking about as is clearly evident here YOU KEEP YOUR MOUTH SHUT AND NOT EMBARRESS YOURSELF!

  • Bill Hedges

    Nate

    One reason I do not return NASTY FIRE to Bob was DD MAO. Although I hit REPORT BUTTON, COMPLAINED, even sent Nate a e-mail. All went by the wayside. Then I let loose IN KIND. Both of us got blamed with none of my WARNINGS meaning anything.

    Therefore the list. After EACH REMARK by Bob I print THIS GROWING LIST with no FIRE BACK:

    1. “Messaging Bob Jan 22nd, 2013 at 6:55 pm”

    Bob is ANOTHER DD Mao if not DD Mao. Name calling is his style when in trouble:

    “idiots”…

    2. “Messaging Bob Jan 25th, 2013 at 12:01 am

    “What are you babbling about? AND WHAT NAME DID I BRUISE YOUR TENDER EGO WITH NOW?”

    “UNTIL YOU GROW UP………GOOD NIGHT!”

    3. “ Hearing The Hearings Bob Jan 27th, 2013 at 4:15 pm

    “IGNORE YOUR COMMENT ? I CAN’T EVEN UNDERSTAND IT.”

    “You deal in confusion and delusion…..you try to confuse your opponent and you are delusioned by the g.o.p”

    4. “Hearing The Hearings Bob Jan 27th, 2013 at 4:29 pm

    The term is “ducks in a row” but your delusion with the g.o.p. is still quacked up (sorry folks but I couldn’t pass that one up). Bob Jan 27th, 2013 at 4:15 pm

    “IGNORE YOUR COMMENT ? I CAN’T EVEN UNDERSTAND IT.”

    “You deal in confusion and delusion…..you try to confuse your opponent and you are delusioned by the g.o.p”

    5. “Hearing The Hearings Bob Jan 27th, 2013 at 4:51 pm”

    “No,No !!!!!! You missed my best line in my 4:38PM post about “legend in your own mind” and brain cells.”

    6. “Hearing The Hearings Bob Jan 27th, 2013 at 4:58 pm”

    “It figures you’re a republican you even screwed that up !”

    “The best of Bob should read:”You’re a legend in your own mind who is a day late and a few brain cells short”

    7. “Hearing The Hearings Bob Jan 27th, 2013 at 5:05 pm”

    “Thank you!”

    8. “Hearing The Hearings Bob Jan 27th, 2013 at 5:23 pm”

    “NO FAIR ! I OBJECT! number 3 and number 4 are the same post.”

    9. “Hearing The Hearings Bob Jan 27th, 2013 at 5:35 pm”

    “OK,OK,….IF YOU INSIST! I take back the joke about “quacked up”

    10. “Hearing The Hearings Bob Jan 27th, 2013 at 5:51 pm”

    “YES SIR THERE’S A LOT OF “NASTY FIRE” INCLUDED IN THAT LIST

    “Thank you” would definatly be the worst !!!!!!!”

    11. “Hearing The Hearings Bob Jan 27th, 2013 at 11:55 pm”

    “First off the article is from a recent “Fox News” website which hardly is left leaning.”

    “Secondly You would piss and moan if I said the sky is blue so I hardly give a darn what you think.”

    12. “Hearing The Hearings Bob Jan 28th, 2013 at 12:15 am”

    “Life is to short to deal……….”you know the rest!”

    13. “Hearing The Hearings Bob Jan 29th, 2013 at 10:47 pm”

    ““Shhhh don’t say anything stupid”.”

    14. “Hearing The Hearings Bob Jan 30th, 2013 at 12:28 am”

    “By asking me to answer to all my replies you are only showing you have no defense to my question and how much of an idiot you really are.”

    15. “Hearing The Hearings Bob Jan 30th, 2013 at 12:29 am”

    “UNTIL THAT TIME:”

    “Life is to short to deal with idiots”

    Have stopped updating. May have to begin again.

  • Bill Hedges

    Bob’s partial quote of me:

    “I watch a lot of movies.Have ban most politics from my cable.”

    I wrote:

    I watch a lot of movies. Have ban most politics from my cable. I research online…

  • Bill Hedges

    By partially quoting me you conclude:

    “By your own admission you were to lazy to do the research so you want Nate to bail your butt out.Much the same way liberals can’t get legislation passed so they go to the courts.”

    I want Nate to explain what you don’t understand from article I researched & quoted concerning Reagan & Italians.I got link through RESEARCH. I provide MANY LINKS. I research a lot. Many links. Many…

  • Bob

    Getting back to the gay marriage issue I find it disturbing that A SINGLE SUPREME COURT JUSTICE CAN CHANGE SEVERAL MILLENNIA OF HUMAN HISTORY.This reminds me of the movie and play 1776 where one member of the Continental Convention constantly voted with other members of his delegation (I believe it was the N.C. delegation)When it came down to the fateful vote for independence and his delegation were deadlocked the question of independence was up to him. Ben Franklins character looks at him and says”Well what shall it be?Shall you be remembered for the one who killed the baby in the cradle or be simply a faceless enigma among the crowd? Which shall it be?”Justice Roberts will be remembered for the one giving us Obamacare will Justice Kennedy or someone else be remembered for turning millenniums of human history on it’s ear?

    Has anyone else noticed that the left supports both same sex marriage and abortion. Neither one is for propagating the species.They also by the recent Sandra Fluke episode and the Obamacare ruling concerning Catholic institutions providing for birth control and abortions are in favor of the public paying for their quirks.But then this follows the lefts habit of supporting anything goes without the responsibility involved under the guise of rights.This gives new meaning to the phrase “Being married by a judge”

    I personally believe it is a state issue and as such is accountable to voters which would make it easier to amend or repeal.Nine states have accepted gay marriage since DOMA was passed.As Rush Limbaugh said this is going to pass if not in this session of the SCOTUS then soon.The stampede of politicians from both sides of the aisle if deafening to cover their butts and the electorate to shallow to understand the consequences.NO MATTER WHAT THE SUPREME COURT DECIDES I WILL ANSWER TO THE SUPREME BEING……..GOD!

  • Bill Hedges

    Bob’s partial quotes. Why does Bob do that ? A quote in CONTEXT is NOT THAT LONG. Is NOT DONE for a reason. Not good reason for me. But for him. Is dishonest quoting:

    1. “I have not done the research to see if true.”

    2. “My limited knowledge leads me to hazard a guess……’

    3. “I know very little about this convention.”

    4. “I watch a lot of movies.Have ban most politics from my cable.”

    Bob concludes in insult and referring to my ***** half-quotes ***** he gave:

    “I was taught that if you didn’t know what you were talking about as is clearly evident here YOU KEEP YOUR MOUTH SHUT AND NOT EMBARRESS YOURSELF!”
    _____

    In full context:

    Nate

    Maybe you can respond.

    Bob has been dogging the Chairman over not bidding out those GOP strategists. Those picked having ties to him as well so Bob says. I have not done the research to see IF TRUE, IF common practice, or STRICKLY AGAINST THE RULES set forth by RNC or FEDERAL LAW. COULD YOU RESPOND ??? My limited knowledge leads me to hazard a guess nothing wrong is being done. Since he was voted a second term…

    Personally I feel the Chairman has a hard road to travel. There is as you say “tea party and establishment”. Then what is called “wacho birds”. Reagan spoke of these but not by that name. COMPROMISE being a dirty WORD. You can’t get all you want WITHOUT THE RARE CONTROLLED CONGRESS (BUMA had to sign a meaningless ORDER to get some demos to vote for bumcare). Reagan raised taxes BUT reduced MUCH MORE. Same for Newt.

    I have given the Chairman the benefit of the doubt that he has GOOD INTENTIONS until otherwise known. I know very little about this convention. Had I been able to watch I might be speaking in another language on this IF THIS WAS ON the SCRENE. I watch a lot of movies. Have ban most politics from my cable. I research online.

    _____

    Bob did not understand that Italians, over time, embraced Reagan. Unlike what Bob sited, same could happen with Latinos…

  • Bob

    Throwing cold water on any thoughts that mass immigration from blue states to red states will bring political converts and not political contagion.

    “Conservatives:Winning the State by State War Losing The Federal Battle” by John Hayward on Breitbart website.

    http://www.breitbart.com/InstaBlog/2013/03/28/Conservatives-winning-the-state-by-state-war-losing-the-federal-battle

  • Bob

    The National Republican Senatorial Committee (NRSC) website calls on the Democrats in the Senate to pass a budget……THEY PASSED ONE A WEEK AGO.

    Yep ! Maybe they can get votes by pandering because THEY ARE AS SHARP AS A MARBLE OTHERWISE!

    http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Government/2013/03/28/NRSC-doesnt-know-what-goes-on-in-senate

  • Bob

    “Obama Pitches Immigration Reform On Telemundo and Univision”

    http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Government/2013/03/28/Obama-Pitches-Immigration-Reform-On-Telemundo-and-Univision

    Two thoughts come immediatly to mind here:

    Did any republican even think of the huge effect this Spanish language televised outreach would have on the projection of the parties image?

    President Obama is covering his butt for if/when ANY FORM OF THIS DOESN’T GO THROUGH.

  • Bill Hedges

    Insult by partial story.

    Bob’s partial quote of me:

    “I watch a lot of movies.Have ban most politics from my cable.”

    I wrote:

    I watch a lot of movies. Have ban most politics from my cable. I research online.

    Bob leaves off KEY PART OF MY QUOTE, then says:

    “I was taught that if you didn’t know what you were talking about as is clearly evident here YOU KEEP YOUR MOUTH SHUT AND NOT EMBARRESS YOURSELF!”

    You “EMBARRESS YOURSELF!” Bob. SO dishonest. You should spell your name ** bob **.

    Such a obvious partial quote DIRTY CHEAP SHOT.

    You spoke & got caught. Follow your own words__ “KEEP YOUR MOUTH SHUT “…

  • Bob

    Over the past couple of days there has been a stampede of politicians throwing themselves out in the light as NEW CONVERTS TO SAME SEX MARRIAGE.

    Well they are not only throwing themselves out in the light but throwing Conservatism under the bus.The MSM with total sympathy and support of the G.O.P.(thats Group of Panderers)have been on a witch hunt of late to bring to the public eye any republican who doesn’t see the light of same sex marriage.A Michigan RNC member was asked to resign after he recently put on his Facebook page his beliefs on same sex marriage. Sen.Don Young of Alaska made a dumb remark saying his ranch hired “wetbacks” and every republican immediatly attacked him.Lastly MSNBC had Dr.Ben Carson on for a supposed apology of him saying “the definition of marriage is not open to different interpretations”.I FIND NOTHING WRONG WITH WHAT DR.CARSON SAID THERE.

    Now granted Sen.Youngs remark was just plain dumb and wrong.However I noticed there is an effort that whenever someone on the right says something the left thinks needs apology they label him “Conservative” or “Tea Party member”and the RNC establishment is only to happy to oblige them.You don’t believe me look at the link below where MSNBC labels Dr.Carson “Conservative Hero”.IN FACT ON THE LEFT HAND SIDE OF THE PAGE MSNBC GIVES A BOX WHICH DESCRIBES “5 WAYS TO APOLOGIZE”.NEXT WILL BE RE-EDUCATION CAMPS !

    http://www.politico.com/story/2013/03/ben-carson-gay-remark-apology-89475.html?hp=f3

  • Bill Hedges

    Everyone makes factual mistakes. But repeatedly misleading doctored short quotes of another is a crime of honesty. For Bob to ignore his act as I push his face in the mud with it SHOWS the type of person he is.

    bob HAD IN HIS COMMENT, “5 WAYS TO APOLOGIZE”. Make that 6 giving one to me.Consider this a common theme for awhile if you don’t. Following future articles…

  • Bill Hedges

    Correction

    First Bob should have been bob…

  • Bob

    Politico ran an article about entitled “Social Conservatives Fight Back” where Rick Santorum and Mike Huckabee say how the RNC shouldn’t take the right for granted.The establishment members of the RNC think the “we’ll stay at home threats is as stale and empty as the plea for social moderation is to the Christian conservatives.After all liberals dismayed by Clintons moves to the center and right ultimately swallowed hard and supported him,at least most of the time.”

    I especially find funny the paragraph that says:
    “The key to a principled party succeeding in a changing electorate is to identify core principles that will appeal to rising and new voting groups,” Ken Mehlman(ex-RNC chairmen who came out as being gay)continued “And the reason that more than 60% of evangelicals millennial voters support marriage for same sex couples and the reason many conservatives politicians from Jeb Bush to George W.Bush have been able to win substantial support in the Hispanic community is because there’s a strong conservative case,indeed a family values case for more people who want to join the institution of marriage and who want to come here to work,support their families and live the American dream.”

    Now first off if you’re a “principled party” as is stated in the first sentence you don’t “succeed” by adjusting to a changing electorate.You either have principles that you can persuade the electorate to or you can’t.Second the statistic Mr.Mehlman gives about “60% evangelical millennial voters support marriage for same sex couples” is pure BULL!HE COULDN’T GET 60% TO SUPPORT IT TODAY. AND THIRD equating Jeb and George Bush strong showing among the Hispanic community WITH THEM BEING CONSERVATIVE IS LAUGHABLE.As I gave a link to earlier in this thread Latinos vote along big government lines and Jeb and George AREN’T CONSERVATIVES!

    As the title of this thread “POST MORTEM” suggest YOU ONLY GIVE AN AUTOPSY TO THINGS THAT ARE DEAD!

    http://www.politico.com/story/2013/04/social-conservatives-fight-back-89501.html?ml=po_r

  • Bob

    LMAO….Pull out the “KICK ME” signs if this comes to pass in 2016

    The republicans think this last election a debacle just run Jeb !

    http://www.politico.com/wuerker/2013/03/march-2013/000849-012159.html

  • Bob

    Nate/Conservative Gal;

    We knew the republican party in New York was none existant but they seem so desperate to have a winning candidate that they are willing to RENT A DEMOCRAT.

    State Sen.Malcom Smith (D) from Queens made payments to city councilmen to set up meetings with top New York republicans to assist him getting his name on the mayoral ballot this November as a republican.While the field of candidates is large only Metropolitan Transportation Authority chairmen Joseph Lhota is running on the republican ticket.

    http://news.yahoo.com/two-charged-bribe-probe-related-york-mayors-race-124807777.html