<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Moderates? Who Needs &#8216;em</title>
	<atom:link href="http://rightwingnuthouse.com/archives/2009/04/29/moderates-who-needs-em/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://rightwingnuthouse.com/archives/2009/04/29/moderates-who-needs-em/</link>
	<description>Politics served up with a smile... And a stilletto.</description>
	<pubDate>Fri, 17 Apr 2026 02:16:39 +0000</pubDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.7</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: Mark</title>
		<link>http://rightwingnuthouse.com/archives/2009/04/29/moderates-who-needs-em/comment-page-1/#comment-1760374</link>
		<dc:creator>Mark</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 12 May 2009 05:46:28 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://rightwingnuthouse.com/?p=3750#comment-1760374</guid>
		<description>How is government activism to promote an agenda of religious morality conservatism? I've always thought of myself as fundamentally conservative. The government should not interfere with our individual liberty without a compelling need to prevent interference in the liberty of others. As far as I can see, it is the "religious right" that are not following a genuinely conservative philosophy. Why do some supposed conservatives think it is OK for the government to interfere in peoples private lives as long as the behavior they are trying to impose fits within traditional Christian values?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>How is government activism to promote an agenda of religious morality conservatism? I&#8217;ve always thought of myself as fundamentally conservative. The government should not interfere with our individual liberty without a compelling need to prevent interference in the liberty of others. As far as I can see, it is the &#8220;religious right&#8221; that are not following a genuinely conservative philosophy. Why do some supposed conservatives think it is OK for the government to interfere in peoples private lives as long as the behavior they are trying to impose fits within traditional Christian values?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: bsjones</title>
		<link>http://rightwingnuthouse.com/archives/2009/04/29/moderates-who-needs-em/comment-page-1/#comment-1760287</link>
		<dc:creator>bsjones</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 08 May 2009 06:53:01 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://rightwingnuthouse.com/?p=3750#comment-1760287</guid>
		<description>Maybe "conservatives" are just a small subset of Republicans?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Maybe &#8220;conservatives&#8221; are just a small subset of Republicans?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: BD57</title>
		<link>http://rightwingnuthouse.com/archives/2009/04/29/moderates-who-needs-em/comment-page-1/#comment-1760116</link>
		<dc:creator>BD57</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 04 May 2009 00:32:26 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://rightwingnuthouse.com/?p=3750#comment-1760116</guid>
		<description>I'll be fascinated to learn where the likes of Specter agreed with Republicans "on principle" ...

Make the case that Specter's orthodoxy outweighed his apostasies - it'd make interesting reading.

Until then, this "purge of the RINOs" storyline is a conceit - - - the aggressor claiming the role of victim.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I&#8217;ll be fascinated to learn where the likes of Specter agreed with Republicans &#8220;on principle&#8221; &#8230;</p>
<p>Make the case that Specter&#8217;s orthodoxy outweighed his apostasies - it&#8217;d make interesting reading.</p>
<p>Until then, this &#8220;purge of the RINOs&#8221; storyline is a conceit - - - the aggressor claiming the role of victim.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: bobwire</title>
		<link>http://rightwingnuthouse.com/archives/2009/04/29/moderates-who-needs-em/comment-page-1/#comment-1760100</link>
		<dc:creator>bobwire</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 02 May 2009 05:58:23 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://rightwingnuthouse.com/?p=3750#comment-1760100</guid>
		<description>"Chasing away those who agree with you in principle but differ with you on interpretation will only lead to permanent minority status for conservatives. I have to think we’re too smart to allow that to happen".

the meta-narrative here is that Rick is asking for your help!

Who is too smart? If they are in office, can they be identified? And if so will they face a difficult primary against a candidate backed by the less-smart?

Rick is clearly against the likes of Specter, well okay. Will he now come out against or for anybody else, or wait until the wind blows? Why not help him out and offer up who can stay, and who must go.

C'mon, let's form the support/firing squad.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>&#8220;Chasing away those who agree with you in principle but differ with you on interpretation will only lead to permanent minority status for conservatives. I have to think we’re too smart to allow that to happen&#8221;.</p>
<p>the meta-narrative here is that Rick is asking for your help!</p>
<p>Who is too smart? If they are in office, can they be identified? And if so will they face a difficult primary against a candidate backed by the less-smart?</p>
<p>Rick is clearly against the likes of Specter, well okay. Will he now come out against or for anybody else, or wait until the wind blows? Why not help him out and offer up who can stay, and who must go.</p>
<p>C&#8217;mon, let&#8217;s form the support/firing squad.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: funny man</title>
		<link>http://rightwingnuthouse.com/archives/2009/04/29/moderates-who-needs-em/comment-page-1/#comment-1760093</link>
		<dc:creator>funny man</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 01 May 2009 21:51:41 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://rightwingnuthouse.com/?p=3750#comment-1760093</guid>
		<description>Gayle:
"Voters in this country have put into the Oval Office the most unprepared, incompetent and ultimately disastrous product of the Chicago machine". So are you saying we should follow suit with Sarah Palin?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Gayle:<br />
&#8220;Voters in this country have put into the Oval Office the most unprepared, incompetent and ultimately disastrous product of the Chicago machine&#8221;. So are you saying we should follow suit with Sarah Palin?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Gayle Miller</title>
		<link>http://rightwingnuthouse.com/archives/2009/04/29/moderates-who-needs-em/comment-page-1/#comment-1760088</link>
		<dc:creator>Gayle Miller</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 01 May 2009 14:44:52 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://rightwingnuthouse.com/?p=3750#comment-1760088</guid>
		<description>Sarah Palin is governor of Alaska.  Ronald Reagan was the two-time governor of California and, at the time, not exactly wildly approved by his state's voters!  How does this militate against Ms. Palin? Voters in this country have put into the Oval Office the most unprepared, incompetent and ultimately disastrous product of the Chicago machine. As we have with James Earl Carter, Jr., we will rue the day Obama took the oath of office - assuming we're even alive to do so!  And yes, I think he is THAT dangerous.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Sarah Palin is governor of Alaska.  Ronald Reagan was the two-time governor of California and, at the time, not exactly wildly approved by his state&#8217;s voters!  How does this militate against Ms. Palin? Voters in this country have put into the Oval Office the most unprepared, incompetent and ultimately disastrous product of the Chicago machine. As we have with James Earl Carter, Jr., we will rue the day Obama took the oath of office - assuming we&#8217;re even alive to do so!  And yes, I think he is THAT dangerous.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: United Conservatives of Virginia</title>
		<link>http://rightwingnuthouse.com/archives/2009/04/29/moderates-who-needs-em/comment-page-1/#comment-1760087</link>
		<dc:creator>United Conservatives of Virginia</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 01 May 2009 14:23:58 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://rightwingnuthouse.com/?p=3750#comment-1760087</guid>
		<description>&lt;strong&gt;Republican Party - Conservatives - Moderates- Who...&lt;/strong&gt;

Rick Moran at Right Wing Nut House has a very interesting post about the future of the GOP and the importance of moderates and conservatives therein.....

In response to the section I emphasized about the Dems putting up more moderate candidates, a.....</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><strong>Republican Party - Conservatives - Moderates- Who&#8230;</strong></p>
<p>Rick Moran at Right Wing Nut House has a very interesting post about the future of the GOP and the importance of moderates and conservatives therein&#8230;..</p>
<p>In response to the section I emphasized about the Dems putting up more moderate candidates, a&#8230;..</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Cargosquid</title>
		<link>http://rightwingnuthouse.com/archives/2009/04/29/moderates-who-needs-em/comment-page-1/#comment-1760085</link>
		<dc:creator>Cargosquid</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 01 May 2009 13:59:49 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://rightwingnuthouse.com/?p=3750#comment-1760085</guid>
		<description>The GOP is in trouble. Self identified "conservatives" want to purge the "moderates."  The moderates, aka the GOP "elite" or the "stuck up crowd around George Will..." etc, depending upon who is commenting, want to purge the conservatives.  All parts of the GOP are attacking each other to the benefit of the Democratic party.  

All this talk of purging each other is a false premise.  Snowe, etc, will not be purged.  No one can be forced out.  But, she and the other liberal Republicans have to accept that they are unpopular with the GOP base; the base that gets national figures elected.  

On the other hand, conservatives HAVE to understand that Snowe, etc, cannot run as a staunch conservative.  And I think most conservatives realize that.  The conservative base has supported the GOP through numerous missteps.  All that the conservatives ask is that the GOP candidates, at least, try to support the conservatives.  When McCain disparaged the conservative base, and then picked Palin as running mate to pull them back in, conservatives knew why he did it.  Our support of him was the hope that his win would provide Palin with "legs."  Moderates seem to delight in disparaging the conservative wing as "uneducated" and seem to be embarrassed by their religiosity.  They have treated the conservative base as an embarrassment to the party since Reagan.  Unlike some supporters of the Democrats, however,conservatives are showing that they don't mind being in the wilderness.  They already know that the culture is running to the liberal side due to the mainstream cultural biases put out by the media and education.  

Conservatives have watched for years as actions have not suited words professed by many GOP representatives.  And we are tire of it.  Republicans are asking for our vote while acting as Democratic light.  Where was the conservative action when the GOP was in total control?  The GOP made deals with the Democrats.  Why is it that it seems that only GOP members cross the aisle for "bi-partisanship?"  Conservatives want to win elections.  But, more importantly, we want our representatives to actually represent us.  If we lose, so be it. That means that there are more liberals than conservatives voting.  But there is no point in voting for a Republican that advocates the same politics as a Democrat except the Republican will only grow government more slowly.  

For all the disparagement of the "uneducated" conservative base, the "Rush Limbaugh" listeners, (Glenn Beck is not a Republican. He can't stand either party.) where is the conservative brain trust that is trying to educate the "masses?"  Where are the principled voices and opposition to Obama?  Buckeley is gone.  Who is his replacement?  Heck, his son voted for Obama.  For all their talk, I see very little of the "First Principles" being espoused.  Rush and Hannity are the only ones speaking to the populace of REPUBLICAN principles.  Beck is the only one speaking of the Constituion and the ideas behind the Democrats.  Where is the GOP's opposition to progressive movement?  When the presidential candidate is basically agreeing with the Democratic candidate, except in some details, why shouldn't the conservatives reject him?  The GOP conservatives do not seem to want to do the hard work of educating the public as to why conservatives ideals are the best choice and how those ideals will benefit the public.  "Lower taxes" can only go so far.  Perhaps its time to promote "more taxes" across the board at a flat rate.  When 40% of the public does not pay income tax, the cry of "lower taxes" does nothing.  Its time for big ideas based on First Principles.  

Its understandable that those that enter politics don't really want to reduce the size of government and thereby reduce their own power.  But, since Reagan, the GOP's platform has been that government is the problem, not the solution. And that platform has been anathema to many Republicans. They feel that they are doing good things in governmental service.  And most conservatives probably feel, when pressed, that things such as Medicaid, Medicare, etc, have improved things. Safety nets are necessary.  But!  Where does it stop?  It is the nature of government to grow and the only check we have on it seems to be the ideals of strict conservatives.  

If the GOP wishes to continue to run "moderates", so be it.  If those same moderates refuse to support the conservative ideals they professed in order to be elected, don't be surprised when the GOP as a whole loses support.

Perhaps its time for a new GOP.  Perhaps its time for the GOP to get together and decide what they believe in and how they will achieve those goals.  Maybe the social conservative platform will be dropped.  Maybe the idea of smaller government is no longer possible to achieve.  Perhaps the GOP needs to change its platform to a more libertarian outlook? Or return to the liberal "compassionate conservative" mantra that seems to have worked, oh so well....

Either way, all forms of conservatives in the GOP need to work together.  None of the "flavors" of conservative in the party will get elected without the other....

However, the conservative Rush Limbaugh listeners have shown that they are willing to put their principles first, even if they can't articulate the ideas that form them.  Perhaps the rest of the party should do a better job of paying more than lip service to those principles.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The GOP is in trouble. Self identified &#8220;conservatives&#8221; want to purge the &#8220;moderates.&#8221;  The moderates, aka the GOP &#8220;elite&#8221; or the &#8220;stuck up crowd around George Will&#8230;&#8221; etc, depending upon who is commenting, want to purge the conservatives.  All parts of the GOP are attacking each other to the benefit of the Democratic party.  </p>
<p>All this talk of purging each other is a false premise.  Snowe, etc, will not be purged.  No one can be forced out.  But, she and the other liberal Republicans have to accept that they are unpopular with the GOP base; the base that gets national figures elected.  </p>
<p>On the other hand, conservatives HAVE to understand that Snowe, etc, cannot run as a staunch conservative.  And I think most conservatives realize that.  The conservative base has supported the GOP through numerous missteps.  All that the conservatives ask is that the GOP candidates, at least, try to support the conservatives.  When McCain disparaged the conservative base, and then picked Palin as running mate to pull them back in, conservatives knew why he did it.  Our support of him was the hope that his win would provide Palin with &#8220;legs.&#8221;  Moderates seem to delight in disparaging the conservative wing as &#8220;uneducated&#8221; and seem to be embarrassed by their religiosity.  They have treated the conservative base as an embarrassment to the party since Reagan.  Unlike some supporters of the Democrats, however,conservatives are showing that they don&#8217;t mind being in the wilderness.  They already know that the culture is running to the liberal side due to the mainstream cultural biases put out by the media and education.  </p>
<p>Conservatives have watched for years as actions have not suited words professed by many GOP representatives.  And we are tire of it.  Republicans are asking for our vote while acting as Democratic light.  Where was the conservative action when the GOP was in total control?  The GOP made deals with the Democrats.  Why is it that it seems that only GOP members cross the aisle for &#8220;bi-partisanship?&#8221;  Conservatives want to win elections.  But, more importantly, we want our representatives to actually represent us.  If we lose, so be it. That means that there are more liberals than conservatives voting.  But there is no point in voting for a Republican that advocates the same politics as a Democrat except the Republican will only grow government more slowly.  </p>
<p>For all the disparagement of the &#8220;uneducated&#8221; conservative base, the &#8220;Rush Limbaugh&#8221; listeners, (Glenn Beck is not a Republican. He can&#8217;t stand either party.) where is the conservative brain trust that is trying to educate the &#8220;masses?&#8221;  Where are the principled voices and opposition to Obama?  Buckeley is gone.  Who is his replacement?  Heck, his son voted for Obama.  For all their talk, I see very little of the &#8220;First Principles&#8221; being espoused.  Rush and Hannity are the only ones speaking to the populace of REPUBLICAN principles.  Beck is the only one speaking of the Constituion and the ideas behind the Democrats.  Where is the GOP&#8217;s opposition to progressive movement?  When the presidential candidate is basically agreeing with the Democratic candidate, except in some details, why shouldn&#8217;t the conservatives reject him?  The GOP conservatives do not seem to want to do the hard work of educating the public as to why conservatives ideals are the best choice and how those ideals will benefit the public.  &#8220;Lower taxes&#8221; can only go so far.  Perhaps its time to promote &#8220;more taxes&#8221; across the board at a flat rate.  When 40% of the public does not pay income tax, the cry of &#8220;lower taxes&#8221; does nothing.  Its time for big ideas based on First Principles.  </p>
<p>Its understandable that those that enter politics don&#8217;t really want to reduce the size of government and thereby reduce their own power.  But, since Reagan, the GOP&#8217;s platform has been that government is the problem, not the solution. And that platform has been anathema to many Republicans. They feel that they are doing good things in governmental service.  And most conservatives probably feel, when pressed, that things such as Medicaid, Medicare, etc, have improved things. Safety nets are necessary.  But!  Where does it stop?  It is the nature of government to grow and the only check we have on it seems to be the ideals of strict conservatives.  </p>
<p>If the GOP wishes to continue to run &#8220;moderates&#8221;, so be it.  If those same moderates refuse to support the conservative ideals they professed in order to be elected, don&#8217;t be surprised when the GOP as a whole loses support.</p>
<p>Perhaps its time for a new GOP.  Perhaps its time for the GOP to get together and decide what they believe in and how they will achieve those goals.  Maybe the social conservative platform will be dropped.  Maybe the idea of smaller government is no longer possible to achieve.  Perhaps the GOP needs to change its platform to a more libertarian outlook? Or return to the liberal &#8220;compassionate conservative&#8221; mantra that seems to have worked, oh so well&#8230;.</p>
<p>Either way, all forms of conservatives in the GOP need to work together.  None of the &#8220;flavors&#8221; of conservative in the party will get elected without the other&#8230;.</p>
<p>However, the conservative Rush Limbaugh listeners have shown that they are willing to put their principles first, even if they can&#8217;t articulate the ideas that form them.  Perhaps the rest of the party should do a better job of paying more than lip service to those principles.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: mannning</title>
		<link>http://rightwingnuthouse.com/archives/2009/04/29/moderates-who-needs-em/comment-page-1/#comment-1760083</link>
		<dc:creator>mannning</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 01 May 2009 12:52:56 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://rightwingnuthouse.com/?p=3750#comment-1760083</guid>
		<description>The quote in #36 above is most frequently attributed to Lord Tytler(1748-1813),but it has also been attributed to numerous others--- Tocqueville, Marx, Disraeli, and more.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The quote in #36 above is most frequently attributed to Lord Tytler(1748-1813),but it has also been attributed to numerous others&#8212; Tocqueville, Marx, Disraeli, and more.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: mannning</title>
		<link>http://rightwingnuthouse.com/archives/2009/04/29/moderates-who-needs-em/comment-page-1/#comment-1760082</link>
		<dc:creator>mannning</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 01 May 2009 12:15:47 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://rightwingnuthouse.com/?p=3750#comment-1760082</guid>
		<description>What better justification is there for strict fiscal conservatism?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>What better justification is there for strict fiscal conservatism?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
