We know who you are and we won't forget
As Joe Harrington’s pull-out-every-stop fanatic drive to support Dan Maes continues, my friend Joe has posted a note to Facebook listing Republicans of some note who have endorsed Dan Maes.
The title and subtitle of the note are:
List of Republicans that need to be voted out of party leadership positions and undervoted at the election.
We know who you are and we won’t forget.
I offered my strong agreement with the subtitle, as follows:
I know who all these people are, too, and I won’t forget – to support them more enthusiastically in the future for recognizing that if the GOP doesn’t stand for good, principled government, then it should be disbanded. The people who are supporting Maes simply because they are Republicans need to realize they are part of the problem.
Thanks to all of the Republicans who endorsed Tancredo – and I say that as someone who is only very slightly positive about Tancredo’s candidacy and who thinks that Tancredo can’t win this election.
I would add to this the thought that many of Maes’ supporters are Tea Party activists who don’t like the GOP, who essentially work against the party structure, and now they’re arguing that the GOP must support Maes just because he’s the GOP candidate. These are the same people, and I with them, who refused to support John McCain notwithstanding that he was the party’s duly chosen nominee. The hypocrisy of these people is amazing, though I really don’t think they see it because this is, for them, almost a religious adventure.
For good measure, State Senator Shawn Mitchell offered his response to Joe:
“I guess you better knit my name into your scarf as well, Joseph. I haven’t declared yet, but my best analysis makes me much more favorable to Tancredo than to Maes. Honestly though, you sound like a French revolutionary marking your list for the trundle wagons. Isn’t it possible for any of them–or us–to disagree honorably? Couldn’t good people honestly conclude that even a candidate chosen by the people hid flaws, misrepresented things, and keeps stumbling in fatal ways? Reaching a position different from yours demands excommunication? Please reconsider your position. You don’t have to agree. But do you have to insist your thinking is the only decent, honorable way to see this race and its candidates?”
| Print article | This entry was posted by Rossputin on 09/09/10 at 09:17:14 am . Follow any responses to this post through RSS 2.0. |
Yours truly
-
Following Obama's Economic Policies
Facebook NetworkedBlogs
XML Feeds
09/09/10 @ 11:03:42 am
Maes is supposed to announce a surprise today. I bet he has the report of his secret agent man work "released " in that Colorado Springs blog/paper owned by a large supporter. In no way can it be a Sarah Palin endorsement. No one can be that ignorant of the facts of this race or be that stupid to back someone knowing the situation. Like Obama, all you have to go on with what Maes would do as governor would be his word and that was never worth the website it's posted on.
09/09/10 @ 05:48:10 pm
As I've been taken to task by the higher-ups for not supporting candidates because they failed to meet my personal standards for competence and integrity, I'm enjoying a heapin' helpin' of schadenfreude.
09/09/10 @ 05:54:08 pm
That made me laugh out loud, Ken.
09/11/10 @ 03:40:01 pm
Good call on these points. In the larger scheme of things, this is exactly the issue which was recently predicted since the Tea-Party call for (for ease of description) person-over-party.
The ankst is also similar to that forseen. When I referenced Mike Rosen's 'hand wringing' over Mr. Maes's's screwups, and how they may be reaching a threshold for even him to defy the POP-Principle, he got really mad and said "I'm not wringing my hands!" Within the week though, he was giving a sort-of mea-culpa (yeah i'm taking liberty (but only some...)) about his struggle to hold-onto support of Mr. Maes in light if 'new' (not really)developments. This included him saying he was "wringing my hands" over. Classic!
Don't get me wrong, I love Mike, and am proud he has been in the Conservative fight since displacing the likes of Nervous-Murvous. I felt about the same excitement to hear his first broadcast as I did the first time I heard Rush Limbaugh, and have enjoued him since. But it's always an academic lesson when I watch him shoot himself in the head with his fully-pragmatic-rifle.
09/11/10 @ 03:51:40 pm
p.s.
it's seperating the men from the boys, men like Hank.
09/11/10 @ 04:32:23 pm
Awshucks,
That's exactly right on my point about party-over-person.
The Tea Party movement has rightly scorned that, despite (my friend) Mike Rosen's ultra-pragmatic approach.
Yet now, those same people are arguing for party over person because their person is all but indefensible.
09/11/10 @ 08:14:38 pm
.
Mike's pragmatism has actually helped me discern a lot of subtle issues through the years. His clear holding-to, and defining of principles usually comes up in an almost devils-advocacy context as events outpace the usual confines of pragmatism. This has been coming up a lot in the myriad discussions about the Lefts' march, and as deveopments defy conventional patriotic motives or rational governance.
What I'm saying is that this kind of conversation and analysis has not fully taken place yet with the Gov. race. Many Tea Partiers were just convinced rightly of the 'don't start a third party' danger.
The Tea Party leadership was on-message and effective about that!
But Maes transcended that here. If you take the constants for Maes of:
1) no real current or forseeable money
2) gaff-factory
3) me-tooism of Conservative policy formulation
4) an almost compulsury,inescapable defensive posture
5) etc, I'm sure there's more but that should be enough
...you can predict the soon-coersive realizations for his 'rational' (most of them) supporters. I'm saying that some of the support of him as the GOP candidate is not so much hypocracy as newness to political involvement and nievete'.
While the rationals (I think, in time, 50+% of the electorate) see the viability of Mr. Maes morf even further, Tanky just needs to create and be a soft place to land for them while the panic, dread and horror of hickenstein closes-in on them. The Tea Party leadership should already be about to figure out the mathmatical logic of these dynamics.
This is why I have been urging Conservative and Republican stallwarts to move to Tanky's side QUICKLY, as all that can be done barring Mr. Maes' withdrawl, and time is of the essence to build what we can against the hick. Even Mike Rosen is starting to get the coersiveness that Tom spoke of upon entering the race.
Most importantly now: the Tea Party leadership needs to be on-message quickly FOR Tom Tancredo, AGAINSTJohn Hickenlooper.
Ross, Sorry about the essay, I'm new here, I'll work on it....
09/11/10 @ 08:19:20 pm
Awshucks,
You're right conceptually except that there's no chance that Tancredo can win with Maes in the race, and very little chance even if Maes got out of the race.
09/11/10 @ 08:37:21 pm
yeah true...(there really is nothing new under the sun)
Well at least I'm a true-believer, and a possibility-thinker, and...
I have unique insight you may not have. I can directly relate to the power of a nerd in a year like this.
Gentleman's bet?
09/11/10 @ 09:44:31 pm
Gentleman's bet on what, exactly?
09/12/10 @ 10:03:02 am
No bet, I agree with you and with Rosen about Tom's chances today: on the edge of -0-. I have believed what you say about Tom's chances since he got into the race. I also saw, and see that the campaign has only upside for his prospects. I believe that Mr. Maes is proving daily that he can bring his support down to below 10% with his capacity for overt action with each 'effort' he makes, notwithstanding the dirt that will undoubtedly emerge if only by it's very nondisclosure. There is possibly other, new dirt. I think the character he has revealed actuates this possibility.
Hickenlooper's upside is non-existant from where it is now. His unlimited money can only make so many ad-buys about his feelgood-liberal personna before they play-out their limited effectiveness on an energized electorate that already borders on complete rejection of such tripe. Can he turn his commercials then to ones attacking Tancredo? No. That will only put him in the 'boxer's dillema' in which each will only leave him open to the counterpunches of more specific questioning about his own forthcomingness, which, for the most part is set in stone. Further attacks may allow Tom to give the simple answer to his 'you mecca me hot' statement (the one even Mike still insists on bringing up for some reason only in the context of Tom's detractors). On the national scene, I think immigration issues and national security/radical Islamic terrorism will flare up in the next 60 days, to dovetail fully with Tom's known messages. So this time, Tom's explainations will see a more receptive audiunce. But Hick can't go there, the kinds of ads he can run will make each on of supporters really-really-really-really want to vote for him. But by the time they vote each will count only as one vote, not four.
Keep in mind also that Tom claims he can peel off some of the different, non-city statewide Dem. vote. This statement of Tom's is noteable because of his accurate prediction of virtually everything that has happened since he's entered the race.
The point of my position is that the ONLY thing Conservatives can do as their part to lesson the likelihood of a Hickenlooper win is to be non-obstructionist toward's Tom's effort. That hasn't quite happened yet. But if it can, the rest will be up to Tom. But today, no bet.