Meet the new guard; even worse than the old guard

September 15, 2006

A number of Republican House members, who by their own admission are conservatives, are leaving Congress this year, only to find a new brand of even-more-conservative lawmakers anxious to take their place. Oddly enough, it seems the old guard isn’t at all happy about it.

Consider Arizona’s 8th congressional district, for example.

Dems pleased about facing conservative GOP nominee Randy Graf have just received more good news: Retiring 11-term GOP Rep. Jim Kolbe has just announced that he’s refusing to endorse Graf. The backstory here is interesting: Graf ran a nasty primary against Kolbe in 2004, with observers insinuating that Graf was tacitly using the fact that Kolbe is openly gay to whip up right wing support. In that light, Kolbe’s statement citing “profound and fundamental differences” with Graf seems to have more resonance. Either way, Kolbe’s announcement will make life much tougher for Graf in the coming showdown with Gabrielle Giffords, who romped to the Dem nomination last night.

And also Colorado’s 5th, where Doug Lamborn won the GOP nomination to replace Rep. Joel Hefley (R). A week after the primary, Hefley announced he was so disgusted by Lamborn’s campaign, which Hefley described as “the most sleazy, dishonest campaign I’ve seen in a long, long time,” the incumbent said he could not in good conscience endorse his would-be successor, even if that hurt the GOP.

And, of course, Michigan’s 7th, where challenger Tim Walberg (R) defeated Rep. Joe Schwarz (R) in an August primary. Walberg is so right-wing, and Schwarz so concerned about the Republican purge of moderates, the incumbent is also not backing the GOP candidate.

It’s unusual when departing members of Congress announce publicly that they won’t support their would-be replacements from their own party, but three? In the same year?

When conservative Republicans are in open revolt against really conservative Republicans, it seems like a trend about which the GOP should be concerned.

As you reap, so shall you sow.

Karma’s a bitch ain’t it?

  • Can we retire the adjective/noun conservative? The term has been so bastardized it has no meaning.
    The ruling Republican’ts are radicals, not conservatives.

  • BuzzMon, amen. I’ve been saying this for years. “Conservative” is an honorable (if more often than not, IMO, wrong) position indicating belief in limited government, fiscal prudence and healthy skepticism about what the public sector can accomplish.

    These bastards are right-wing radicals, and should be referred to as such.

  • Amen to BuzzMon’s comment. Radical right-wingers are far more interested in destroying any progressive change of the last 100 years than they are in conserving anything.

  • The GOP is far more concerned when a “Democratic” incumbant loses a primary than when their own party fractures. How many candidates are they just not supporting this year?

    Hell, I got a mailer from the RSCC yesterday condemning Melissa Bean but nowhere on it did they endorse McSweeny by name.

    It’s sounding more and more like Republicans would prefer if Democrats won. I guess they realize someone has to clean up the mess (plus they need a new scapegoat, the Clinton schtik is getting tired).

  • “When conservative Republicans are in open revolt against really conservative Republicans, it seems like a trend about which the GOP should be concerned.”

    So tell me Carpetbagger… Do you share the same concern when Liberals revolt against the ultra liberals (or vice versa)?

    For example, Just look at a recent Survey USA (9/9-9/11) poll in CT that shows Lieberman beating Lamont by 13 points (51%-38%). It looks like the general public in CT might be a bit concerned about handing an ultra liberal one of their US Senate seat.

    How soon do you think it is until all the rats who originally supported Joe and switched to Ned start jumping ship and start cozying back up to him??? Heck, some of that has already started with Joe’s warm reception in the Senate ealier this month. And how soon will it be when you start crowing that a Lieberman win isn’t really a Dem loss in the Senate?

    I can’t wait to watch this all play out!

  • JRS Jr, thanks for confirming my previous comment.
    Ned Lamont, Ultra-Liberal. Ha! LOL! ROFL!
    Jr must refer to amount of awareness or mental capacity, or both.
    Mr CB, You’ve Got Trolls! (think AOL)

  • Thank you BuzzMon. I consider myself very conservative on certain issues (ie, it is none of the government what two consenting adults do together). I know many people who fit the conservative mold, but would slap you senseless if you suggested this because it has become an insult. I know still more people who catch a lot of shit because they identify themselves as conservative and are labeled traitors before they get a chance to explain. Further proof that radicalism (of any sort) is bad for people and the language.

    But to get back to the topic…I’d just have to echo ET. Let’s hope this stops the current slide into the abyss where radical “Christians” (another sore abused word) rule the country.

  • Of course BuzzMon, you Liberals have all the mental capacity that this great nation needs… I’m now confused why we have elections and just let all deep intellectuals like you pick our leadership while we moderates sit on our hands and sing kumbaya!

    PS Didn’t guys like the Rev Al and Jessie stand by Lamont’s side during his speach post his primary win? If they aren’t ulta Liberal, I don’t know who really is.

  • JRS Jr is very concerned with the Lieberman/Lamont race. In fact, I think almost damned near every comment of his has something to do with it.

    Seems like the GOP and their drones really wants to beat Lamont. Must be afraid. Gotta have their useful idiot on Fox News, I guess. Just ask Schlesinger about the unfaithful GOP not support their own candidate.

    Thanks for proving the point of the post JRS Jr. The GOP is fractured and isn’t supporting their own.

  • Hey JRS, I seem to remember Don Rumsfeld shaking Sadaam’s hand.
    Maybe there is somthing to this “if you are near them, you are one of them” logic.
    Thanks for the laughs.

  • I, as a moderate, am just trying to point out that radicals on both sides have to be stopped. Congress is a mess and its because the radicals (both Dems and Rep) are pulling both sides to the extremes and no one can come to middle and make compromises. As a CT resident I saw it first hand with the Lamont primary and pointed out yesterday that I was glad to see Chafee beat his “ultra conservative” adversary in RI.

  • JRS Jr — Methinks you spend too much time listening to Rush. The real radicals in this country are the ones that are hellbent on undoing/discarding the Constitution. FYI, they aren’t aren’t in the left column.

    Educational hint. Try reading Glenn Greenwald’s blog Unclaimed Territory for ongoing deep analysis.

  • OK,JRS post #14 sounds reasonable. My response to # 7 was because Lamont is moderate/(real) conservative in most of the policies of which I have heard him speak.
    Can his moral stand against an illegal, insane war trump all of that and make him an ultra liberal? That made me laugh and question your ability to perceive the same reality that I perceive.
    You see, I believe in paying my bills, and I think that the country should, too. Is that liberal?
    I believe that the government should stay out of our personal lives, get rid of prosecutions of so called victimless “crimes”, protect us here at home, not support totalitarian goverments around the world, respect sovereign nations, and quite a few other things that stand at odds with radicals like G.W. Bush.
    If that makes me a liberal, so be it. I am proud of my beliefs.

    But if you support GWB’s policies of torture, warantless wiretapping, invading countries not threatening us, lining the pockets of his war-profiteering family and buddies, handing over vast amount of my commonly owned country’s resources to non-accountable corporations while limiting the public’s ability to object, and on and on…
    And you feel that this makes you a moderate, I disagree. That would make you a radical, and complicit in the crimes that the Bush/Cheney Admin have comitted.

    Think about it.

  • “It’s sounding more and more like Republicans would prefer if Democrats won.” – doubtful

    The plan would be for the Democrats to gain control of the House and Rove use that as amunition for electing a Republican’t to the White House in 2008. Sound a little unlikely?

    “JRS Jr is very concerned with the Lieberman/Lamont race.” – doubtful

    Give the poor deluded soul a break. He’s from Connecticut and thinks he’s a Republican. Now, I’m from Virginia and down here we know there are no Republicans in Connecticut (or Rhode Island), just a bunch of deluded people who call themselves Republicans to whom the Republican National Committee won’t give money (that rules doesn’t apply in RI). 😉

    Say it ain’t so JRS Jr. You won’t even support your own candidate for Senate.

    There’s a 11 term openly gay supposedly conservative Republican’t representative from Arizona? What the sun down there must do to peoples’ brains for that to have happended!

  • Hey JRS, Jr., what’s the big difference between the Lieberman/Lamont race and the Republican seats discussed here?

    Come on, it’s easy…

    Unlike Lieberman, the Republicans who lost their primaries dropped out of the race.

    Good for them for respecting the process, and for respecting their own principles. It’s why Lieberman is a piece of shit and should go.

  • Lamont/Leiberman is Dems eating their own in the MSM, but Reps eating their own gets no mention. Yeah, it is a “Liberal Media.”

  • Ken #6 is right. Sali is so hated by his fellow Republicans that when the then-Speaker of the Legislature threatened to throw him out his office window, it was other Republicans who complained that the office was on the third floor and suggested he take him up another floor first. (The Speaker, btw, was later elected in Idaho-2, so if Sali were to win, they’d be colleagues. If every vote in organizing the Congress weren’t so important, it might be fun to hope Sali won and watch the intra-state fun.)

  • “When conservative Republicans are in open revolt against really conservative Republicans, it seems like a trend about which the GOP should be concerned.”

    Let’s get something straight: far right fascist revolutionaries are NOT CONSERVATIVES!!! We need to stop calling them “conservatives and call them what they are: far right radicals – there is nothing “conservative” about them. The German conservatives 70 years ago found out that difference the hard way, to their detriment.

  • JRS Jr: If you’re a “moderate”, I am the Easter Bunny.

    Please stick your head back up your ass, but I gotta tell you, it’s not Chanel No. 5 you’ve been breathing in there all these years.

  • Tommy-Boy, so please do tell me what’s your definition of a moderate?

    Your outburst sure has signs that you’re a foaming-at-the-mouth-radical that can’t handle a somewhat diverging view without lashing out, so I question if you can even define what a moderate is before you start barking again.

  • And Lance, if this nation was filled with those that had the mentality of either Northeast (relatively liberal) Republicans and Southern (relatively conservative) Democrats vs. both being hijacked by the outermost fringes, it would be a much better country for all — because the Govenment could actually come to some sort of compromise and get stuff done.

  • …if this nation was filled with those that had the mentality of either Northeast (relatively liberal) Republicans… JRS Jr

    So then JRS Jr, you support Alan Schlesinger? He’s that Nor’easter Republican running against “ultra liberal” Ned Lamont. He’s not getting much love these days so if you could spare a few bucks, I’m sure he’d much appreciate it.

    Let me help you out:

    http://www.schlesinger2006.com/contribute.shtml

  • It’s sounding more and more like Republicans would prefer if Democrats won. — doubtful, @7

    There was an op-ed in NYTimes the other day which actually proposed that very idea. The logic went as follows:
    Let them win midterms. Their win is not likely to be all that large. With the executive we have (intractable) and with the mess we have (insurmountable; all the king’s horses…), they’ll be able to do damn-all in those two years. But 2 yrs will be enough to get the public sick and tired of them too, so ’08 will be a landslide victory and we’ll be back in the saddle again.

    We sure as sure need to address the issue of the “intractable” from day one… 🙂

    • Comments are closed.