Money is power.
If the people of the USA want a smaller govt which has and spends less money, then the political class has less power.
When the Constitution was written, the congress was compelled to come home, and live among their constituents at a time when it took days to weeks to get to the 'office', so living at home was substantial amount of the time.
That is no longer true, and no substantial equivalent % of time is so spent.
That is true for the South Side, South Boston and South Carolina, East Orange and Downeast.
Listening not to Carl Rove's words, but his crystal clear anger shows how badly he has misunderstood the issue.
The republican and democratic parties are not a tool by which those in the political classes manage the election process in order to win. They are the message bearers of political philosophies which the people wish to see as the basis for policy decisions.
If in order to win, one side must mimic the other then nothing is served.
Rep Castle is a case in point. A republican in a highly liberal state he voted a VOTE OF CONSCIENCE for Cap and Trade. This is more a litmus test issue of small and less intrusive govt then almost any other issue to those who believe in small govt (and most importantly therefore, less debt).He could have explained being a member of NARAL and a lot of these same people would have given him a pass.
Now it may be that many of those who represent the will to smaller govt and spending less and responsible debt management and personal responsibility can be painted as extremists which will cost them the election.
However, I think it will be beneficial for those in the public to see what happens as their OTHER choices who won, RADICALIZE the american people via actions like Obamacare, Cap and Trade, Immigration Reform with a secure border, apologia, loss of strategic initiative in forgien policy, defense which can no longer be afforded, non competitive businesses.
While I want to win every election in which someone who believes in small govt runs, this is not a 2 or 4 year issue.
So perhaps a Sen Coons votes for amnesty without a secure border, where an O'Donnell might compromise on a secure border with some kind of path to citizenship .. let the people see, as they have with Obamacare what it means.
"This is a classic example of where defeating the most electable conservative candidate would be a bad move -- in my view," said the senior GOP senator from South Carolina, Lindsey Graham, discussing the Delaware race in which he backed Castle. "It's one thing to purify the party. It's another thing to build coalitions. Ideological purity has to have some boundaries because the country is fairly center-right, that's my view."
BTW, Mr. Voinovich voted AGAINST John Bolton as UN AmbassadorRetiring Sen. George Voinovich, a moderate from Ohio, said: "I think there needs to be a more moderate voice speaking about the fact that this is a big country with a lot of diverse opinions, that we Republicans have different strains in us like Democrats do."
DeMint insisted that Castle would have done more harm than good to Republican causes.
"What I hear all across the country is we didn't do what we said we're going to do" when Republicans were in the majority, he said. "If we do that again, if we are entrusted with a majority again, even in the House, and we don't do it, I think what happens is when we have a few that vote with the Obama agenda, it defines the whole Republican Party."
Asked if he were concerned that O'Donnell's nomination could cost his party a seat, DeMint said he wasn't "interested in political ideology or party right now. We need people up here to understand we've got to get back to limited government, and we can't afford to have other Republicans who don't get the message."
No comments:
Post a Comment