That’s an argument I can mostly buy.

But some people seem to approach this subject from the standpoint that we actually could get a “real Republican” in either of Maine’s Senate seats….the party just has to stop supporting her and Collins and start supporting somebody else.

So it may well be that her and Collins’ seats are better off in Democrat hands. That is something I could be persuaded to agree with on the grounds that they muddle the party’s message and brand (not to mention being an unreliable vote on virtually everything).

I, personally, think that if conservatives have to rely on RINOs in order to get anything done, then we’re not going to get anything done.

As I said, what we need to focus our energy on is electing conservatives — preferably Republicans — in as many places they can win as possible….thus making the Snowes’ and Collins’ of the world irrelevant.

…I’d have no problem conceding that the Maine seat(s) may well be better off in Democrat hands….whether by Snowe/Collins or somebody else. After all, it’s Maine voters who elect them….not conservatives or Republicans from wherever.

And, yeah, I’d rather she vote the way I want her to vote on these things. But I stopped actively hoping for that a long time ago, and I don’t think I ever expected it.

So I’m not going to get bent out of shape when she votes the way I *do* expect her to vote.

As far as the RNC and RSC are concerned, I think it’s their job to field as many competitive candidates in races as possible. I don’t think it’s their job to ensure that the conservative agenda is being advanced.

All that said, I don’t think the Democratic Party fears losing its brand as the “party of big government” because of Ben Nelson & Co. Nor should they.

…and some who act in good faith. I’ve encountered both, but haven’t had a fight like you’ve apparently been through.

The problem when I boil down all the debate is that government running things is worse. And the idea that government is somehow purer that “profit making businesses” is sheer delusion.

With private business, you know the money motivations. With the government, the money is hidden behind the stage out of public sight driving the decisions. With businesses, competitors will punish idiocy whereas government doubles down and rewards it.

The worse combination is big business buying politicans to freeze out competition via government’s coercive powers, which is what is fast happening under the curent administration (though past Congresses haven’t done so great either). In its extreme form it becomes crony capitalism or good-ol’ Corporatism.

And the health initiatives under consideration in the bills seem designed to promote such trends. Not to mention all the other easily foreseeable “unintended consequences” contained therein. And the worst perhaps is that we won’t see the real damage because it will be in the category of advances and treatment that never get a chance to see the light of day.

Best would be for a state to figure out how to do things right rather than following a path that has always led to failure in the past. We’ve got 50 of them, which opens the door to quite a number of experiments. Anecdotes (on both sides) make good polemical stories but poor policy.