TexasCHLforum.com

JSThane, Outstanding analysis !

anygunanywhere wrote:Thank you JS Thane for your eloquent post.

Anygunanywhere

I agree. Although I would have emphasized the issues that animate Tea Partiers more than you did; smaller government, balanced budgets and non-interference, you have succinctly summed up what the Tea Party is about. And what sunk Eric Cantor.

Well said JSThane...

To put Cantor's standing with Heritage into context, the ONLY Texas congressmen who are worse than him are all democrats. All but one or two of our republicans are significantly better than Cantor, and those one or two are still a couple of points better in the Heritage standings.

JSThane wrote exactly what I would have written. Well done, sir!

I have called myself a "libertarian-leaning conservative" for a little while now. I have abandoned the republican party because I am no longer willing, as JSThane so eloquently put it, to be taken for granted as a pawn in some congressman-for-life's agenda...which has little or no real relevance to MY life or the issues that matter to me.

By the same token, I am not comfortable with the Libertarian party itself because of its foreign policy stances. In fact, I'm done with parties period. Like JSThane says, I just want to be left alone, and I want my elected representatives to A) DO THEIR JOB; and B) STOP INVENTING REASONS TO JUSTIFY THEIR EXISTENCE!

I want smaller government. The republican party has utterly failed to reduce it, and in some instances has grown it. Example: HOW many employees does DHS have now?

I want my gun rights respected, and I want the focus whenever a criminally insane person commits an insane crime to be on the criminal, and not my guns. I will grant that the republican party has been better about that than the democrats, but they are not universally so. If the party has a platform that upholds the 2nd Amendment as an individual right, then how does the party even allow someone to run under its banner and take advantage of its resources if that person does not uphold that platform, IN DETAIL? Two words: Dick Lugar. Two more: Michael Bloomberg. Another two: Mike DeWine. I could go on.

I don't want republicans to vote for sending any more of our young people to deal with the world's crap. If we get attacked, carpet bomb the country that harbored them. Identify the surviving leaders publicly, then place a $100 million reward on their heads, payable in the currency of the assassin's choice. Let the market handle the rest.......and assume the risks.

I don't want republicans to make it easier for illegal aliens to steal jobs from unemployed Americans. I don't want lawbreakers to receive amnesty. I DO want the path to legal residency made easier, and then I want every-single-illegal alien dumped across the border, where they can then turn around and reenter legally. Even when we passed amnesty under Reagan, the vast majority of illegals refused to take advantage of it because they distrusted authority and did not understand the law. The result? They remained here, and they remained undocumented illegals. "Amnesty" is a boondoggle. It is simply Congress refusing do something hard, and I hate them for it.

I don't want republicans to encourage employers to export their jobs. If that means charging them an import duty to bring their products back into the country, so be it. Whatever it takes. I don't want republicans to give better access to big corporations than to small businesses, or to special interest groups instead of individual taxpayers. I don't want republicans to accept money from unions OR corporations. Democrats either.

I want the republican party to make term limits part of its platform. They are not ENTITLED to their jobs. Since they have proven that they cannot be trusted to treat their positions as a sacred trust, they cannot be trusted with employment for life.

I want republicans to avoid Washington DC cocktail parties. The temptation to "do business" under the radar is simply too great.

I want all officials of both parties to fly commercial. The military is NOT a taxi service.

I have a much longer list than this, but the bottom line is that republicans who violate these items, are violating core pillars of conservatism, pillars on which the party platform is built. How can they call themselves republicans?

Now, all of that said, I get some of what Charles is saying. He's looking at it in part from his fairly high position within the NRA. The NRA cannot get the trust and favor of elected politicians if it will not extend them some loyalty and support in return. So, while the temptation to dethrone is strong, it should never be undertaken lightly, and without due consideration to any possible negatives.

As I stated in my first post, I didn't know much about Cantor but I've done as much research as I had time to do today. It does appear that the criticism about his walking away from his previously declared conservative values is well warranted.

It is fun to watch the GOP establishment scrambling to evaluate the true impact of the Cantor loss and to estimate how many other moderates might be in trouble.

Cha.

Evidentally he also picked a fight with the grass party organizers inthe state by trying to get them replaced. Evidently they canvassed heavily to elect "anyone but him."

Yep, that will do it too.

You anger the people who sent you to Washington, you don't get sent back.

Is Cantor a prime example of someone that went to DC with the right intentions and then turned into another go along to get along politician that was more interested in power and keeping his job or did he just say what he needed to to get elected?

I think it is incumbent upon us as voters to start seeking and recruiting candidates that truly believe in the Constitution and small government rather than just waiting for those that are ambitious for power to show up. The challenge is how do we go about this.

As far as Cantor is concerned: good riddance. I consider myself to be libertarian....and I despise the Libertarian Party as much as I despise the Democrats and the Republican Party. The Libertarian party has become the doper and corporate crony party, IOW, Republican party lite. It does not represent libertarian values. It is just as corrupt as the other two parties. It has done more damage to libertarianism than the Democrats, Republicans, and mainstream media combined. The last candidate they ran for president was virtually indistinguishable from a liberal democrat or establishment Republican (not that there is much difference between the two). Every Washington insider needs to go.

If you want to know more about Brat, Mark Levin intereviewed him last evening.

Recent articles in the compliance field claim Cantor was in bed with Wall Street firms that were "too big to fail" and are now trying to get loopholes in the very laws inspired by their malfeasance. They see themselves as too big to obey the laws but, like Cantor, I hope the bigger they are the harder they fall.

Cantor defeat hurts Boeing. Short article says a lot.

http://dailysignal.com/2014/06/12/eric- ... ium=social" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

mojo84 wrote:Is Cantor a prime example of someone that went to DC with the right intentions and then turned into another go along to get along politician that was more interested in power and keeping his job or did he just say what he needed to to get elected?

I think it is incumbent upon us as voters to start seeking and recruiting candidates that truly believe in the Constitution and small government rather than just waiting for those that are ambitious for power to show up. The challenge is how do we go about this.

It's actually pretty easy.

Try to align what they say in their campaigns with what they've done in the past.

If there are discrepancies, their deeds tell you what they'll do if elected.

Vote accordingly.

Excaliber wrote:

mojo84 wrote:Is Cantor a prime example of someone that went to DC with the right intentions and then turned into another go along to get along politician that was more interested in power and keeping his job or did he just say what he needed to to get elected?

I think it is incumbent upon us as voters to start seeking and recruiting candidates that truly believe in the Constitution and small government rather than just waiting for those that are ambitious for power to show up. The challenge is how do we go about this.

It's actually pretty easy.

Try to align what they say in their campaigns with what they've done in the past.

If there are discrepancies, their deeds tell you what they'll do if elected.

Vote accordingly.

I agree with what you say. Better candidate vetting up front is critical. We are learning how much damage can be done before we can get them out. Also, we have to acknowledge it is hard to unseat an incumbent that has become an insider. That's one of the things that makes the Cantor deal so surprising.

JSThane wrote:The following are my observations. Others may interpret the political scene differently.

Well said. Thank you.