For Republican moderates and conservatives in the North Country, the war goes on
Here's one thing that Tuesday's election made crystal clear: The rift between Republican conservatives and moderate is deep, substantial and personal.
Back in May, Conservative Party leader Mike Long made it clear that North Country Republicans Janet Duprey, Teresa Sayward and Dede Scozzafava would no longer enjoy his party's endorsement.
Why? It was a single-issue litmus test: They voted in favor of same-sex marriage.
Long's party went one better in the summer, running Doug Hoffman against Scozzafava in the 23rd House race.
Local Republicans across the 23rd district questioned whether Scozzafava has a future in the GOP, following her endorsement of Owens.
But in the final days of the campaign, we learned something new: Some moderates are quite willing to fight back.
Most substantial in this equation were the number of centrist Republican voters who crossed over and voted for Democrat Bill Owens, or pulled the protest lever on behalf of Scozzafava.
Here at NCPR, we've heard from many of these GOP voters who say they were simply uncomfortable with Hoffman's conservative social views.
But for the first time, Scozzafava and Duprey are also beginning to articulate their own platform, laying out the specifically Republican basis for their "liberal" social views.
In their opinion, the Hoffman-Conservative positions on social issues represent a big-government intervention into citizens' lives.
According to their argument, it's Hoffman -- not themselves -- who abandoned the GOP's devotion to small-government and personal liberty.
They also express deep disdain for conservative movement leaders such as Glen Beck and Rush Limbaugh, describing them as "hateful" and "divisive." (Hoffman described Beck as a "mentor.")
A similar view was visible in the rejection of Hoffman by the Watertown Daily Times, a newspaper whose editorial page has long been seen as conservative.
The paper accused Hoffman of being " beholden to right-wing ideologues."
So where do we go from here?
Scozzafava and Duprey have been elected Republicans for decades; but it's unclear whether their views are still welcome within the modern GOP, even in New York state.
Republican Assembly minority leader Brian Kolb's defense of their position has been feeble, at best. Other moderates have scurried for cover, or thrown them overboard.
After speaking with leaders on both sides of this divide, my sense is that there's very little stomach for rapprochement.
Instead, the future tone and shape of the party will likely be tested next September, when both Assemblywomen are likely to face primary challenges.
The fight goes on and, as is only proper, the final say will go to the voters.
Labels: election09
posted by Brian Mann @ 11/06/2009 08:01:00 AM
6 Comments
6 Comments:
The North Country has been not particularly conservative or ideological. I hope that continues. "True" conservatives need to do some soul searching of their own and decide if they are conservative first and Republican, or a Republican who happens to be conservative. If they are the former, they are the RINOs in our moderate NYS and North Country Republican Party. Perhaps the former would be more comfortable in the Conservative Party. The latter are welcome as long as they understand that the NYS Republcan party is a big tent. In the past such a cross section as Barry Goldwater's running mate and Jacob Javits were members in good standing of the state party. Ultimately we are all Americans with problems to solve. A moderate Republican party, fiscally conservative and socially libertarian could govern for decades. There are a lot of moderates doing a lot of soul searching in the North Country this week. One, Republican Party county committeeman who recently posted on the Inbox will become an Independent. Purging the Republican Party of moderates as the conservative netroots would have us do will be political suicide nationally. I expect Republican Party registration to drop in the region. Sadly, the national party has become an increasingly regional party with a southern sensibility that does not speak to the rest of the country. Yesterday one conservative column was entitled THE SOUTH HAS WON.
I hope this whole things die down and ideology doesn't keep us from working together to solve our problems.
I never cease to be amazed at the hypocrisy of politicians who rant about smaller government, less regulation and lower taxes (in reference to business) on the one hand and favor outlawing abortion, gay marriage, and other intrusions on personal choice on the other. It seems that they are for total freedom of business to do whatever it wants at the same time they would approve of 'bedroom police' to keep individuals in line. In my experience most North Country folks are more tolerant of their neighbors than the right wing demands of the Republican Party. If I'm right the Republicans have to decide who's in charge and what the Republican brand actually stands for. Then those who's agenda doesn't fit will either have to leave or compromise.
I think the basic premise of the argument is flawed. The Republican party is not the party of smaller gov't and fiscal conservatism. Hasn't been for decades. Even Reagan, as much as I admired his leadership skills and character, was no fiscal conservative. I justified it at the time as fighting the Cold War and fixing the damage done by Carter. I can't honestly do that anymore, not in this climate. The Republicans have fielded poor candidates over the past few years. The only reason Bush won two terms is because the alternatives from the Dems were pathetic. The Repubs turned to Democrat tactics to try and build their support. That's backfired IMO.
So I think the premise that those who feel like I do are somehow extreme or otherwise of some bizarre persuasion is flawed. We just expect the Republicans to live up to their ideals and they aren't doing that. IOW- we really thought they meant it when they talked about smaller gov't, etc.
As for gay marriage and abortion and other "intrusions into personal choice" I think it's unfair to paint the whole argument as centering around those two issues. Both sides take part in limiting personal choice and I find the liberal Democrat limits on my choice much more intrusive than the rights fighting the redefinition of marriage. I've yet to hear any Democrat address the limits put on religious freedom, gun rights, property rights and certainly not on the limits the proposed health care package will put on us all.
The pot is calling the kettle black as far as I can see.
People are leaving the Republican party because they are sick and tired of what they see in Washington. Most people should want fiscal responsibility and with that at some point will be cutting back on the number of free handouts and cutting programs that are rife for corruption and fraud. Medicare fraud in Florida is now a bigger problem than the drug trade (money wise). Drug dealers are now getting into Medicare fraud because they make so much more money at fraud. But we don't have politicians (Democrats) that think there is a problem with the efficiency government programs are run with and want to keep expanding the governments hand into running more programs that will cost 10 times what they said they would.
It is time for the US to get out of the United Nations as well, various UN programs have budgets that have ballooned in the last five years by hundreds of percent. Yet we (the US) are the largest contributor. One program alone will have us going from like $200 million in 2008 to $600 million this year to almost $900 million in aid for next year. The next largest contributor gives about $100 million this year (Saudi Arabia gives just over a milion dollars). Why are our tax dollars and personal values being handed over all over the world, when we have 16 million unemployed and 10.2% unemployment? Take care of our own before giving our money to the corrupt UN. Oh, and enjoy the $600 million the US is going to give up to build a new UN headquarters in New York City. The total construction will be $700-800 million, but we get about 75% of the price tag. I'd love an accounting of how many billions of dollars we give to the UN each year compared to the rest of the world.
We have an incompetent government that will soon realize that we need to go back to when we took care of ourselves as a nation. But the far left (Al Gore included) want one world government so we can all hand over more and more money to the so called poor of the world. Socialism at it's best. Spread the wealth globally, right Barack?
People are leaving the Republican party because they are sick and tired of what they see in Washington. Most people should want fiscal responsibility and with that at some point will be cutting back on the number of free handouts and cutting programs that are rife for corruption and fraud. Medicare fraud in Florida is now a bigger problem than the drug trade (money wise). Drug dealers are now getting into Medicare fraud because they make so much more money at fraud. But we don't have politicians (Democrats) that think there is a problem with the efficiency government programs are run with and want to keep expanding the governments hand into running more programs that will cost 10 times what they said they would.
It is time for the US to get out of the United Nations as well, various UN programs have budgets that have ballooned in the last five years by hundreds of percent. Yet we (the US) are the largest contributor. One program alone will have us going from like $200 million in 2008 to $600 million this year to almost $900 million in aid for next year. The next largest contributor gives about $100 million this year (Saudi Arabia gives just over a milion dollars). Why are our tax dollars and personal values being handed over all over the world, when we have 16 million unemployed and 10.2% unemployment? Take care of our own before giving our money to the corrupt UN. Oh, and enjoy the $600 million the US is going to give up to build a new UN headquarters in New York City. The total construction will be $700-800 million, but we get about 75% of the price tag. I'd love an accounting of how many billions of dollars we give to the UN each year compared to the rest of the world.
We have an incompetent government that will soon realize that we need to go back to when we took care of ourselves as a nation. But the far left (Al Gore included) want one world government so we can all hand over more and more money to the so called poor of the world. Socialism at it's best. Spread the wealth globally, right Barack?
"A house divided against itself cannot stand." A great Republican president said that.
The way things are unfolding, it may well happen that by 2010 or 12, the Conservative party will force any moderates left in the Republican party to seek a political home elsewhere.
Will they then consider themselves to be purified of anyone who may be harboring socialist/marxist tendencies?
Come on guys. Keep on subject. This is the last time I'll do this because it truly is like trying to fill a bottomless well...but here goes. Sorry that Bret's gun rights and religious rights have been so terribly abridged since Barak became presdent. Or maybe it started back with FDR?
Anon. got onto the topic of medicare fraud. I used that device invented by the diabolical Al Gore and funded by the marxist George Soros, known as the internet to look this claim up. Over 5 million hits. A scan of the first 50 sites revealed that the government has sued for many billions of dollars for fraud committed by the health insurance industry, hospitals, medical supply companies, clinics, doctor offices.
Fraud committed by individuals has resulted in losses in the 10s of millions.
I was being sarcastic about Gore and Soros. If only others could say the same.
Post a Comment
<< Home