Comments on: A Big Tent for the Right Reasons

By: 1SGinTN

1SGinTN — Sat, 31 Jan 2009 22:29:15 +0000

That’s the only bipartianship I can abide.

By: 1SGinTN

1SGinTN — Sat, 31 Jan 2009 22:27:39 +0000

Post election we are fighting over which side will control the party,whereas the discussion should be about how we are going to reconcile our differences and move the party forward – together. Divided we will fail, and false unity with one side being shut out we will fail. One side cannot kick the other out and expect the Party to succeed.

My focus is getting the Party straight first, then the country.

I guess you can say I’m seeking intra-party bipartisanship

By: Praying

Praying — Sat, 31 Jan 2009 21:52:20 +0000

Fiscal. For one thing, after the libs get done totally trashing whatever is left of our economy, fiscal responsibility is a term that may really resonate with many people. People who ordinarily would not go far right on social issues, but are sick and tired of being taxed to death and the thought of having the next 3 generations paying our debts. I’m afraid that “responsibility” and “freedom” are such vague, lofty terms that the tired, huddled masses won’t be able to grab on to them. So I vote for fiscal conservancy as the base, or umbrella, or tent, or wahtever you want to call it. And yes, I like the federalist concept. It is what we started with.

By: Vegas_Rick

Vegas_Rick — Sat, 31 Jan 2009 19:27:11 +0000

Responsibility. Freedom and responsibility. Freedom without responsibility leads to chaos. Which is what we have now.

By: 6eorge Jetson

6eorge Jetson — Sat, 31 Jan 2009 19:22:47 +0000

the rope is contested over the center-left.

Where would you say we ended up?

By: 1SGinTN

1SGinTN — Sat, 31 Jan 2009 17:36:53 +0000

That’s a tad too much hyperbole for me to deal with, and a little too broad for me to address. To which center-left turf positions do you refer?

In my inarticulate way, one point I was trying to address in the diary was that a national platform with a few basic, easy to understand positions with a broad support will attract the greatest number of INDIVIDUALS. This is not the same as trying to find positions to cater to a wide range of interest GROUPS.

Alluding to a theme in Martin Knight’s recently recommended diary, “Through with the Big Tent”; a major portion of the electorate doesn’t give a hoot in hell about the issues that get us RedState denizens fired up. Not until the MSM frames the argument to our detriment, that is. I had rather offer an inclusive message out in the marketplace to get folks in the revival tent, rather than street-preach social conservative doctrine best suited for the “Sunday school”.

Positions such as: limiting the central government’s intrusion into our private lives and local societies by keeping the federal gov’t limited to what the framers of the Constitution had intended, respect fpr private property and the rule of law, promoting a free-market economy for the prosperity of all, and keeping the nation safe from external enemies – all have wide support. Much else is best left to the states. Do not both ends of the Republican spectrum agree on these issues?

By: Brian Hibbert

Brian Hibbert — Sat, 31 Jan 2009 14:40:40 +0000

All the other principals are subsets of the first principal.

To anyone who says we have too many principals, just answer with Freedom!

By: 6eorge Jetson

6eorge Jetson — Sat, 31 Jan 2009 14:05:13 +0000

as the Republican party tried to play on center-left turf?

Maybe it’s just my crazy perception, but I’ll go out on a limb and guess that the size of Republican congressional tent has gotten smaller recently, as presently it needs to house only 177 + 41 = 218 members.