Honest: Would You Rather Win with Chris Christie or Lose with Ted Cruz?

Time CoverThose sophisticates at Time magazine made a funny.  They put Chris Christie on their cover with the headline, “The Elephant in the Room.”  Get it?  Elephant.  Christie.  Time magazine did a junior high fat joke right there on its cover. Time’s executive editor Michael Duffy explained the cheap shot this way:   “Well, he’s obviously a big guy.  He’s obviously a big Republican.  But he’s also done a really huge thing here this week.”

The “huge thing” wasn’t only winning re-election as New Jersey’s governor, but doing it by appealing to a broad range of voters in a very blue state – not just to his conservative base.

But, hey, no harm no foul.  Time isn’t even a newsmagazine anymore.  It became a liberal journal of opinion a long time ago.  So you can just hear those wild and crazy journalists at Time sitting around the conference room table giggling about how they’d get away with their fat joke because, well, in the world of politics,  the word “elephant” isn’t a synonym with “fatso.”

But do you think the gang at Time would ever say Barack Obama is a “dark horse.”  In the world of politics “dark” doesn’t mean “black,” right?

Time’s cover doesn’t necessarily mean that Chris Christie is the GOP frontrunner for 2016.  It’s way too early for that.  But it does help make him the flavor of the month.  He was also on all the Sunday TV talk shows this week.  You don’t get to do that unless you’re the flavor of the month, or at least of the week.

Besides, he’s a favorite of liberal journalists, not only because he’s got a big mouth which makes for some interesting quotes, but also because he’s not the most conservative Republican out there.  For the same reasons they despise Ted Cruz, they adore Chris Christie.  For now.

But if he becomes a serious threat to one of their all-time favs, Hillary Clinton, the so-called mainstream media will turn on Christie with a vengeance.  They hated Goldwater and Reagan while they were alive, painting them as crazy right-wing ideologues.  When they were dead, they became good conservatives – to contrast them with every other conservative who was still breathing.

It’s a good bet Christie will run.  And if he does, he’s charismatic enough to cause the Democrats some sleepless nights.  But Christie’s greatest strength is also his greatest weakness.

Christie can win in a deep blue state like New Jersey because he’s not a hard right Tea Party type.  That means he can win the support of women and minorities – crucial to winning a nationwide election.  But the hard right sees him as the latest incarnation of John McCain and Mitt Romney – two moderates who lost.

Chris Christie can attract moderates and independents that would give him a shot in swing states that Republicans must win to take the White House.  He could win Florida and Ohio and North Carolina and Colorado and New Hampshire, and maybe even Iowa and New Mexico.  But he might not be able to win his party’s nomination because it’s conservatives who make up the majority of primary voters, and they – at least as of now – don’t want a Chris Christie.  They want a Ted Cruz or a Rand Paul or some other candidate who can’t win a national election despite what they think.

What the hard right needs to understand is that if they really want change, first they have to win elections.  I know it sounds obvious, but it’s one of those obvious facts the Tea Party never seemed able to grasp.  They picked a bad candidate in Nevada a few years back when a good candidate might have defeated Harry Reid.  And they picked a candidate in Delaware who had to go on TV and tell everyone that she’s not a witch.  She also lost.  And there have been other Tea Party favorites who appealed to the hard right base, but because that’s never enough, they also lost.

The Tea Party folks are very proud of the fact that they stand on principle.  Bulletin:  so do less hardline Republicans.  But the hard right calls everyone to the left of Ted Cruz a RINO, a Republican in name only.  The Tea Party won’t like this, but the real RINOs are the Tea Party people.  They’ve been very clear that their allegiance is to pure conservatism, not to the Republican Party.  Yes, my right wing friends, Ted Cruz and Rand Paul and the others on the far right are the real RINOs.

Because I want Republicans to win, let me offer two pieces of advice.  The first to Chris Christie:

Don’t pick a fight with your own base, the conservatives who at the moment don’t really like you.  As Ross Douthat puts in his New York Times column: “As a would-be nominee, you have to woo base voters, not run against them, and make them feel respected even when they disagree with you.  This doesn’t mean muzzling yourself, or pandering to every right-wing interest group.  But it means persuading conservatives that you like them, that you understand them and that as president you’re going to be (mostly) on their side.”

In other words, fight the temptation to go along with liberal journalists who believe the GOP is a party of right-wing morons.  Don’t get drawn in by their phony admiration for you.

The second piece of advice is for the Tea Party and other purists on the right.  If it looks like Chris Christie can win, jump on his bandwagon.  Give him your support.  And do you best to be passionate about it. If you don’t, you’ll have up to eight years of Mrs. Clinton.  No matter how you feel about Christie, he’s a lot better than another liberal Democrat, right?

The answer to that last question is obviously yes.  But true believers sometimes don’t think rationally.  I’m cautiously optimistic that Chris Christie could win in 2016 (although cautiously hopeful may come closer to my real feelings).  But I’m pessimistic about his chances of winning the support of his own party.  Fundamentalists – political, religious or any other kind – don’t like to bend.  Sometimes I think they’d rather lose than compromise.  Rush Limbaugh, after all, can barely get the word “compromise” out of his mouth without gagging.  To him, compromise is caving in.  He’s a lot like Barrack Obama in that respect.

And so the real elephants in the room are those purist conservatives who will have to decide how badly they want to win.  It’s still early, but I fear too many of them would rather lose with Ted Cruz than win with Chris Christie.


Bernie's Next Column.

Enter your email and find out first.

  • jim g

    Bernie is right. If Obama drives conservatives crazy, just wait till Hillary Clinton and her feminist ideologues get the White House. You will be wishing for the good ‘ol days!

  • Donna E Turner

    NOBODY is going to vote for this wannabe democrat.

  • Virgil Renfroe

    There is a time to do the right thing even if you loose and you may just win, career politicians and rinos will never save America,

  • Patrick Q. McLaughlin

    Honest: Would you rather die on your feet, fighting for freedom, or die on your knees, begging for handouts.

  • badluckz

    If I really wanted a liberal in the White House, I’d probably be voting Democrat. They are, after all, better at that sort of thing. Also, if it’s true that Republicans can’t win unless they :
    A) Run liberal candidates,
    B) Distance themselves from conservatives,
    C) Appeal to moderates,
    then the question is moot. We have already lost.

  • Pipecreek

    Three Presidential Portraits you will never see : President McCain, President Romney, and President Christi. You ask stupid questions sometimes Bernie.

  • D Parri

    How ’bout, “I’d rather see the GOP take the full Congress in 2014 and watch Obama sit around for his last two years so that he can’t do any more harm to our country.” Period.

  • Shane

    Unfortunately, most of the tea party fanatics would rather not vote, if a moderate Republican is the GOP Presidential candidate. It’s irrational.

    RINO Definition – A RINO is any republican who dares to
    disagree with you (a tea party member) on any issue.

  • Gradivus

    A better title might be, “Would You Rather Lose with Ted Cruz, or Lose Less Badly by Winning with Chris Christie?”

  • Bryan

    Ed, I’m curious. Exactly how is my analysis “racist”? I did not state that I myself would ever consider the race of a political candidate in making my decision regarding whether or not to cast my vote for them. I most certainly would never do so. I’m simply pragmatic enough to take advantage of the proven, predictable racist voting habits of other demographic groups to ensure that my political beliefs remain represented in our government.

    It is inarguable that large numbers of members of non-Caucasian-male demographic groups DO consider whether a candidate is a member of their group….often to the exclusion of all other factors….when choosing who they will vote for. If you don’t agree that it’s obvious, then you’re so far into fantasy land that you can’t be reached by human reason. Candidates re-elected from prison, re-elected after being caught on film taking bribes, re-elected after $50K in bribe money is found in their freezer, refusing to condemn Louis Farrakhan after he is recorded on film screaming anti-Semitic statements and that white babies should be murdered in their cribs……it just goes on and on. I’ve spoken with them, all across the country. All they cared about in the last election was that, no matter how horrible a president Obama has proven to be, if he failed for re-election then “Whitey wins”. They cared about nothing else…..NOTHING.

    My reporting this fact does NOT make me a “racist”. It makes me “conscious” and it makes me “not stupid” and “not oblivious”.

    Obama got elected with no qualifications, no experience and an extensive case history that he was an anti American, socialist who wanted to bring down the “neo Colonial empire of the United States”. How? His people just yelled “racist” whenever anyone brings up any of the above. The U.S. populace has, for the past three or four generations, been so thoroughly conditioned to cower in fear whenever a non-Caucasian male screams racism that all objections to his candidacy just melted away.

    I’m merely pointing out that non-racist conservative people who want to stop the bleeding can take advantage of this exact same conditioned social mindset and turn it to our advantage. Worrying about getting someone elected who is “too conservative, too Tea Party, or too libertarian to get elected”? Just select a hard core, libertarian conservative candidate who embodies all of the political positions that you agree with who ALSO happens to be Hispanic. Now YOU can take advantage of the same RACIST mindset that the Democrats used to get Obama elected to get a conservative elected.

    For the record, my chosen candidate in the last presidential election was Herman Cain. I couldn’t have cared less if his skin was purple, he was far and away the best candidate for the job. He happened to be black however, and that’s why the Democratic party paid off every woman they could bribe to accuse him of every heinous act they could…….because he was the only candidate that they truly feared. He would take away a large portion of the “93+ % automatic black vote” and all the benefits that go with it.

    Here’s a news flash for you: It is NOT “racism” for a Caucasian male to recognize the racist acts of non-Caucasian males. It’s simply being perceptive, and refusing to live in an idealistic dream world.

    • Ed

      Among other things, you said: “The next Republican presidential candidate, above all else, needs to be H.I.S.P.A.N.I.C.”, there ya go. I never ever EVER vote based on race, creed or sex…EVER! and I never will under ANY circumstance

      PS- WOW, I must be honest, your Manifesto was just too long and full of hot air to even make it past the first paragraph….I’ll leave you with one word of advice; Brevity

      • Bryan

        Good job, sir. If you call it a “Manifesto” than it can’t be correct, now can it?

        • Ed

          The term “Manifesto” is used in many cases to imply arrogance, not necessarily ignorance or even correctness (though I am not suggesting either of the latter would not apply to you) but a disregard for others, in that you didn’t feel the need to introduce some brevity. I picked up your racist point immediately though, so there was no need to waste any time reading your elongated rant / Manifesto.

          PS- this is last years topic. Next.

          • Bryan

            Your argument is the type used by those who cannot discuss any point on it’s on merits. If someone responds with your beloved “brevity” then you accuse them of stating “sound bites” or “talking points”. If they thoroughly examine and cover the issue, then you state that they are delivering a “Manifesto” or a “rant”.

            You’ve now made personal insults against me and delivered rather condescending and pompous lectures about the length and tone of my discourse. The only thing that you have neglected to do is present any rational contravening argument.

            Congratulations. Enjoy your next DNC meeting.

          • Ed

            And you are a pompous ass. You choose to ignore my point on purpose. Any
            time someone says- “we need to elect a Hispanic as President…” that
            is inherently racist. No shut up you buffoon.

          • Bryan

            No, Ed, the word you are looking for is “perspicacious”.

            Recognizing the proven racist voting tendencies of other demographic groups than one’s own does not define oneself as racist. It merely makes one perceptive.

            But thanks for the compliment, anyway. You always know when you’ve won an argument with a liberal/socialist when they resort to insults. Funny how conservatives never do, isn’t it? They don’t need to.

          • Bryan

            Recognizing the racist behavior of ANOTHER group and taking advantage of it for one’s on political ends is NOT racism. It’s intelligence.

  • aloyisious

    And…the kind of “commentators” on the Palin thing below…(and these people should be studies like rats in a cage…

    “Anonymous8:47 AM

    Howdy doody Todd.

    Your wife slept with a ginormous black man.

    Karma for bulling the only black student in Wasilla.

    The world is pointing and laughing at you.

    So do the manly thing, Todd.

    Do what you would have done in high school.

    Kick Mike Tyson’s ass.

    After all, the world is waiting for you to man up.”


    “Anonymous9:12 AM

    Mike Tyson had a tough upbringing and
    his formal education ended when he dropped out of high school in his junior year.
    His life has been full of ups and downs and controversies.
    He has been diagnosed with bipolar disorder and possibly suffered some brain trauma from boxing.
    And yet.. with all the strikes against him,
    the uneducated and roughed up
    Tyson speaks in a more educated and gracious way than Palin could ever dream of speaking.
    His response is understandable and more grammatically correct than Palin’s typical word jumble.
    Palin is also always , aways angry
    and it’s Tyson that exhibits serenity.”
    What an amazing contrast.”

    So, one sees the rejects who populate this world.

  • aloyisious

    Further things on the news that….well, you decide:
    “Surely she must know that Sarah Palin’s base of supporters are deeply, deeply racist, and that bringing this whole thing up again can only remind them that she once spread her legs for one of them darkies.”

    That..from this site:


    You see the warped and degraded minds of some of those in the 4th estate.

  • aloyisious

    Further things on the news that….well, you decide:
    “Surely she must know that Sarah Palin’s base of supporters are deeply, deeply racist, and that bringing this whole thing up again can only remind them that she once spread her legs for one of them darkies.”

    That..from this site:


    You see the warped and degraded minds of some of those in the 4th estate.

  • AufWiedersehnUSA

    You still do not get it – The Tea Party ‘People’, not ‘Folks’ Bernie, keep on winning because of the RHINOs, such as Arlen Specter. You’re wrong about Cruz, and so is the rest of the press. He can take away 50% of the latino vote, get the conservative base, plus The Tea Party ‘People’. This is why Moh-bama pivoted the day the government shutdown ended, but many conservative latinos will tell you, they’d rather have a REAL President in Cruz, than a DREAM Amnesty under another Clinton Regime. It is certain now, Moh-bama, hope you don’t mind me playing with letters to make it look almost like Mohammed, will not get the Dream Amesty, nor gun control. He’s stuck with gay marriage and a failed bureaucratic mess with his healthcare plan which no software can ever fix. I do not care for Christie, for the record. If the liberals can run a far left candidate and win, we can run a far right candidate, and win!

  • aloyisious

    And then there is the pot stirring of the Fourth Estate…if it is going to keep up like that….and I see things already happening, such as what The Butler did to Reagan. True movie? That seems to have been knocked down by historians, but the movie was a hit. And just what do people remember?
    And there is more and it would be cool if Bernie commented more on these forces. Maybe he has…but one must find ways to counteract this stuff.
    Just one example…some months before the last election one small radio station in my area changed format and became a mouth-piece for the Democrats with all-their-way talk shows. Boom! Right after the election it went over to another format. And was this done nationwide? I think it is stuff like this that churns up just enough votes to get people like Obama elected.
    Oh, someone below mentioned about the instantaneous memory, the short term event that jogged minds and caught or rejected votes. But…it seems to be more complex than that. Having a movie like The Butler as a false yet memorable reference for some people carries long term cause you know how people remember movies. Combine that with short term happenings and you get the election…wrapped an packaged.

  • aloyisious

    In going over the comments below one finds them thoughtful and full of promise. And whoever comes out of this as the candidate hopefully will have leadership written all over him or her. The ball is rolling…really rolling already towards this election.

  • aloyisious

    Things to ponder fer sure…imagine 12-16 years of floundering with Obama and WhoNext? from the Democratic (as it now is) side. Not pretty for the country. Can the Republicans advance the learning curve? To be seen….

  • nnw59

    Bernie: If BernardGolberg.com had been around in 1980 we would have seen the headline from you: “Honest, would you rather win with Ford or lose with Reagan?” Don’t try to deny it. Reagan was perceived then way off to the “hard right” and could not possibly win. You want t know something? You know nothing about Ted Cruz. He could win. Christie cannot.

    • brickman

      Reagan was never in 6th place among Republicans in any poll in 1980 the way Cruz is right now.

      • nnw59

        You miss the point. Reagan was perceived as UN-electable. Period. A right-wing extremist dunce who could never win. That’s the point.

        • brickman

          You’re missing the point. Reagan did have an uphill climb but he was the unanimous choice of conservatives. Cruz is not. I successfully ran in the 1980 NJ Republican Primary down ballot from Reagan. It was for a local office. Reagan had the support at that time (June 1980) of every single county chairman in what is now called the bluist of blue states. I understand Reagan had to beat the odds. I was there. Cruz is not Reagan. Reagan governed for 8 years in a blue state( like Christie by 2017) and had run for President on a previous occasion. Plus he was Ronald Reagan, not Ted Cruz.

          • Patriot502003

            Yes, Cruz is the UNANIMOUS choice for conservatives.

          • brickman

            Cruz is not the unanimous choice of conservatives. Rand Paul, Paul Ryan, Marco Rubio and Jeb Bush all out poll him. So does Christie. If all of the above aren’t conservative, then the GOP is not a conservative party. Conservatives should not feel surprised if moderates keep winning the nomination.

    • brickman

      Ford did not run in 1980!

  • brickman

    Bernie, why do you mention Cruz as the alternative to Christie? The Real Clear Politics Poll of Polls shows Christie leading for the nomination, but Rand Paul is close behind. The others that are behind in order are Ryan, Bush,Rubio and Cruz. Cruz is in 6th place. The difference between Christie and Cruz is almost the same as the difference between Cruz and Jindal. You can say it’s early but it’s equally early for all contenders.

    • Josh

      I can’t speak for Bernie, obviously, but I read the article as more of a hypothetical scenario which plays directly to the context of his previous posts and debates here.

      I see Cruz-Christie being general placeholders for hardline conservatives vs. moderates. Bernie has been speaking about Cruz and battling with the with-us-or-against-us brand of conservatives for a few months now. So the hypothetical seems to fit in that context.

      Reading through the comments, people who claim it’s a “false dichotomy” and such seem to be over-thinking it. Or maybe I am. But, to me, it reads as a hypothetical: What will these conservative diehards do if it’s Cruz or Christie vs. the Democratic nominee? Will they stick with principle, or will they vote for the better shot of winning?

      I agree that it’s very early. And, IMO, it doesn’t look like any Republican will end up winning. I can’t see America’s youth and minority communities suddenly switching. But time will tell.

      • brickman

        I know that.

        • Josh

          My bad. I thought you had asked.

          • brickman

            Not your bad. I agree with every word.

    • S Huges

      Cruz is ahead in some southern states like Mississippi primary, but what’s the big shocker is Christie is 2nd place there. He is even 1st place in Iowa and NC in GOP primary.

      • brickman

        You know what they say ” As Mississippi goes, so goes the nation.”

        • S Huges

          That’s Missouri, LOL.

  • kayakbob

    2016 is a long way off. Battles (real battles) have been won or lost in a span of 15 minutes. And as we are currently witnessing – 6 weeks is a lifetime in politics. So 3 years is an eternity. Anything can happen between now and Nov. 2016.

  • DebC

    Bernie, I’m enthusiastic about Gov Christie running, and winning. I’m getting pretty darned weary of the “purists” who will never win. I used to be one of them. But I’ve grown up at the late age of 60 and now want someone who can win, can do a good job, and talk down the morons on the left in language that few can get away with. Gosh, I can’t WAIT! Go Chris!

    • KStrett

      The apotheosis of a moderate republican ran in 08 and 2012. You can’t get more moderate than McCain or Romney. They both lost.

      Bush was a moderate and he barley won in 2000 and 04. The moderate GOP held the House, Senate and presidency and they were kicked out of office the next election.

      Explain to me what evidence you have that the GOP will have success by running another McCain or Romney?

      The tea party won big in 2010. The Obama administration used the IRS to target groups that funded the 2010 tea party candidates.

      Why would the Obama administration do that if all the tea party does is lose?

      On top of that, there are a lot of rumors that Christie has many skeletons in his closet. If that is true, the press is going to sit on the skeletons, help him get the nomination, and then release a new scandal every week torpedoing his presidential run.

      • That’sEnoughHarold

        McCain lost because he was up against a silver tongued Pied Piper who bewitched all the young’uns into voting for him. He already had the home boys, Chicano’s, LGBT crowd, and the rest of the liberal rabble in his corner. Any republican, conservative or moderate, will need some charisma to win over this bunch and take some of those blue states.

        • Josh

          I think that’s an important point that a lot of conservatives seem to be missing. I don’t know if it’s intentional, something they’re overlooking, if they really believe the entire world is waiting to go conservative, or something else. But the nation is trending more liberal. Even if it’s mostly due to Obama, it’s a hard trend to reverse.

          I’ve brought up the young folks and minorities and such, and no one addresses those points. But if there’s to be a Republican POTUS even more polarizing than a chameleon like Romney or McCain, then conservatives need to figure out how to present their case to people who are inclined to dismiss conservative candidates on reputation.

          Fair or not, that’s where conservatives are to people outside of the conservative loop. It’s definitely going to take charisma.

          It’s also going to take some assurance that a conservative won’t do the things the middle and left fear the conservatives will do: Crack down on gays, attempt to overturn Roe V Wade, attack immigrants and those “anchor babies,” make a single religion more pervasive throughout the public culture, fight more wars, cut off school funding, ignore the climate, etc.

          These are things many Americans don’t want to see happen. So it’s an uphill battle for any true conservative who wants to take a chainsaw to trending culture.

          Pointing that out often makes me a bad guy around these parts for some reason. But so it goes.

          • KStrett

            “I think that’s an important point that a lot of conservatives seem to be missing…..But the nation is trending more liberal.”

            You are parroting the moderate argument. The country is going more liberal, therefore, the GOP needs to go more liberal. That is exactly what the GOP has done and it has failed over and over again.

            Yet, despite failing, moderates keep doing the exact same thing, making the exact same arguments, and keep blaming conservatives for the failure of their tactic.

            Why were the moderates kicked out of office?

            “I’ve brought up the young folks and minorities and such, and no one addresses those points”

            It is the epitome of hypocrisy that you would complain about no one addressing your points when you have ignored the majority of the points against your moderate to win position.

            Young folks are sporadic voters. Often times they don’t show up. The majority of them believe the John Stewart is a news show.

            The problem with young people is the educational system in this country has turned into a liberal reeducation camps.

            What do you propose to do with minorities?

            Right now the prevailing wisdom in the moderate camp is to grant amnesty to 20 million illegal aliens. The GOP progressives believe the Latino community will all of the sudden start voting for the GOP if we grant them amnesty.

            If the GOP grants amnesty, it is over. Democrats will pick up 20 million new voters if the GOP goes ahead with this. That is what this issue is about. Democrats know amnesty will dramatically change the demographic of this country.

            Despite attempting the same thing under Reagan and it failing miserably, the GOP goes right along with it The GOP received less votes from Latinos after they passed amnesty in the 80s.

            Let’s listen to the democrats advise and try it again…… maybe this time it will work and the democrats obviously have the GOP’s best interest in mind just like KC does when they tell the Broncos to run the ball and abandon the passing game.

            The Black community votes for democrats 95% of the time. Do you think they are going to vote for the GOP if they act like watered down democrats? No!

            How many of that 95% know that the KKK was the terrorist wing of the democratic party?

            Call me crazy but maybe instead attempting to act more like liberals, the tactic should be to fight the disease instead of the cure.

            The fundamental problem with your position is you are letting the left set the narrative and going along with it. Don’t allowing them to set the narrative because it’s rigged for anyone who disagrees with them to lose.

            You are also starting to buy into their narrative. Look at your comments here:

            “Crack down on gays”

            What does that even mean? Are conservatives going to round gay people up and put them in prison? NO!

            Conservatives don’t believe redefining marriage is a constitutional right. That doesn’t have anything to do with rounding up gays or cracking down on them.

            “attempt to overturn Roe V Wade”

            Even if they were successful in over turning in Roe V Wade, all it would do is kick the issue back to individual states. It would not ban abortion.

            Abortion is the most successful propaganda campaign in modern history. It literately took part of the platform of the eugenics movement and turned eliminating the genetically inferior and turned it into a constitutional right.

            ” attack immigrants and those “anchor babies,”

            There is a difference between legal and illegal immigrates.

            Is not allowing someone who cut in line and sneaked into the movie theater without paying to finish watching the movie attacking them when they are thrown out of the theater?

            “make a single religion more pervasive throughout the public culture”

            This is simply not true and a argument liberals use all the time.

            “ignore the climate”

            Over in Europe, the environmental movement is called the water melon movement. Why? Because it is green on the out side and Marxist on the inside.

            In other words, you want the GOP to embrace the environmental movement. Do you think cap and trade is a good idea? It is not and will destroy the economy which is the point of it. You do not understand the left.

            On top of that, the science does not support the Global warming hysteria. It is showing the opposite. If you look at polls no one really cares about this issue besides the media and democrats.

            You really believe having the GOP supporting the environmentalist movement but not to the extent of democratic party is a winning strategy?

            The sky is falling and one side wants to pull out all the stops and sells cap and trade as a solution. The other side believes the same thing but opposes cap and trade and wants cap and trade-lite.

            You believe this is a wining strategy? Cap and trade passes under this model. This is a losing strategy.

            I could go on here but it is apparent that you have bought into and believe the liberal smears of conservatives.

            “Pointing that out often makes me a bad guy around these parts for some reason”

            Pointing out falsehoods, smears, lies, and caricatures of conservatives as facts obviously isn’t going to make you very popular. You sound like someone on MSNBC rather than a conservative who just wants to win.

          • Josh

            When I take the position that you’re still trying to give me, I’ll offer up more of a reply. But I’m not going to get further into a continuing strawman.

            Until then, just remember that it’s not me you have to convince. You get scream and stomp your feet with me about how conservatives are mislabeled and the like, but perception is reality.

            It’s not me you have to convince. It’s the nation that conservatives have to convince.

            When it comes time for that, you folks are going to need more persuasive arguments.

          • KStrett

            You claim that you don’t hold the moderate to win position. Okay……

            All you are doing is launching ad hominem attacks against conservatives. You are not attacking the moderates.

            Yet, the moderates are in control. The moderates have lost two presidential elections and caused the GOP to lose big after they controlled the House, Senate, and Executive Office.

            The tea party won big in 2010. In fact, they were so successful, the Obama administration used the IRS to target and harass groups that funded the successful 2010 campaign.

            If you are going to blame someone, it seems to me the most logical group would be the moderates. All they do is lose.

            However, You have not been attacking the philosophy that the GOP needs to be more moderate to win and you also stated that this tactic gives the GOP a better chance of winning.

            You said something to the effect of:

            If the conservatives can’t get the support of the rest of the GOP(who are moderates), how can they get the support of of the American people?

            You also stated the conservative movement needs to change but said nothing about the moderates…..

            You were special pleading. You weren’t complaining about the moderate GOP knifing conservatives in the back but you were complaining when conservatives started defending themselves.

            How about my point about the Virginia gubernatorial race? The moderates hung Cuccinelli out to dry.

            You said negative things about Michele Bachmann. The GOP progressives attempted to get rid of her too. They cut off funding to her but she won anyway.

            Would you rather have Bachmann or a liberal?

            The moderate wing would apparently rather have a democrat. I grantee you their thinking in Virgina was twofold:

            1. Blame Ted Cruz for the loss

            2. Argue that fighting to get rid of Obama care is a losing strategy.

            The exit polls shots coupled with the fact the libertarian (who took 5% of the vote) was funded by the democrats shot the two arguments in the foot.

            You have a moderate wing that would rather have a democrat in office than a conservative but you are attacking the conservatives?

            Does that sound like a winning strategy to you? To me that sounds like the suicidal wing of the GOP.

            You are seriously attempting to argue that you don’t hold the moderate to win position but you stated even though it hasn’t worked, it still gives the GOP a better chance to win!


            If it looks like a duck and walks like a duck, it’s a duck.

            You attack conservatives and say screw the moderates but you have not attacked the moderates wing with the same vitriol you attack conservatives. You haven’t attacked moderates at all.

            Now you are arguing that you don’t hold the position conservatives need to be moderate to win after arguing it gives them the best chance to win.

            Instead, you appear to be arguing conservatives need to tilt to the left on social issues, which is also a losing strategy.

            “When it comes time for that, you folks are going to need more persuasive arguments.”

            First of all, what argument are you making other than you don’t like social conservatives?

            Once again, you attack conservatives and let moderates off the hook. Do moderates need to make more persuasive arguments too?

            If the answer is yes why aren’t you attacking them?

            You are either equivocating or your position incoherent. What is your strategy?

            Acquiesce to liberals on social issues? That is another recipe for failure as I have already explained.

            I am not making a straw-man. The problem is you are not making a cogent argument. Conservatives suck isn’t a argument, is a logical fallacy.

            Finally, every argument, position, and policy the left has is 100% illogical. They know they can’t win the argument. This is why they need to smear people, distort and lie.

            I am dumbfounded that you would take the left’s position on social issues and buy into the caricature and propaganda they smear conservatives with. The GOP is not going to win anything acting like liberals on social issues.

            Moreover, you also parroting their argument conservatives want to take away personal freedoms.The left stands for the government taking control of everything.

            They want to tell you what you can pack for your children’s lunch at school. They want the government in your car and tax the amount of driving you do. They use schools to force their values on your children.

            You are seriously arguing conservatives want to take away person freedom?

            The only thing the left is the bumper sticker slogan:

            Stay out of my bed room!.

            Conservatives don’t want to go into your bedroom. Liberals want everyone to pay for what goes on in their bedrooms.

            How about:

            Stay out of my family room!

            Stay out of my refrigerator!

            Stay out of my school!

            Stay out of my car!.


            Stay out of every aspect of my life!

            The people who want to take away your freedom are liberals.

          • Josh

            Defending themselves?

            Well, the back-and-forth is pointless at this point. The fact is that we’re not going to see that the same. I don’t see what’s going on here from some conservatives–the obvious recipients of my comments–as defending themselves. I see it as creating a we’re-fed-up-with-the-world cult-like atmosphere where they’re now seeking ideological purity, and anyone not wholly aligned is libeled and cast aside as an enemy.

            You have personally already done that to me. So it’s not like I’m blowing smoke on that front.

            If you want to play the victim and act as if it’s just you and like-minded folks defending yourselves, then have at it. My response to that: lol

            What’s that old Dylan line? “Fearing not I become my enemy in the instant that I preach.”

            And I don’t know how many times or different ways I can say this. You’re obviously just glancing over what I write for the sake of keeping up with your own responses. A point of pride to throw out terms like “special pleading” and “logical fallacy,” I suspect. It’s LULZ fodder, so no complaints.

            But let me try it one last time:

            Fair or not, many conservatives are viewed by many non-conservatives as backward, Bible-thumping, anti-science, bigoted cultists who want to drag America backward in time.

            That is how they are viewed.

            That is how I know they are viewed by many non-conservatives.

            Do I personally feel that way? No I do not. Except for the fringe fundamentalists who want America to operate like their interpretation of the Bible and who have a pick-and-choose take on the Constitution, and the folks here who willingly throw folks like me under the bus for simply not agreeing, I do not view conservatives at large that way.

            But. Others. Do.

            My family is full of conservatives. Many of my friends are conservatives. The “you’re a liberal” and “you’re far left” conservatives are not what I’d call conservatives. They’re the Obama-is-a-Kenyan-socialist-Muslim-usurper crowd who shat upon the Tea Party with their moronic signs and slogans, which sullied the real message coming out.

            My point, for the umpteenth time:

            Conservatives don’t come across well to non-conservatives. That fringe that I’m speaking about, found in plenty supply around here, paint them all the same to the outside world.

            Fair or not, that’s how it goes.

            And instead of trying to send out a different, friendlier message (because that would be seen as caving in), conservatives further entrench themselves in their own ideology, expecting everyone will come to them.

            This is turning people off. That is creating little more than a cult. I know. I live in the world outside of a conservative bubble. I know how they’re viewed, and I know conservatives aren’t doing anything to change this view.

            You guys have to change that view! 2010 was 2010, and it wasn’t the Senate, and 2012 wasn’t the White House, not even a conservative nomination.

            Yeah. Everyone’s against you. Bad media. Moderates. Liberals. I agree — not being facetious, either; I agree. The deck is stacked.

            So, what’s the brilliant PR campaign from the conservative camp? Throw everyone in the same group, attack and act like it’s justified, set up a never-ending litmus test to gauge ideological purity, and throw aside every man, woman and child who doesn’t fully support the cause!

            Become martyrs who think it’s the next Revolution; the Alamo redux.

            I’m making it up? I’m being hyperbolic, unfair, just like a liberal — what?

            Oh, that’s a mischaracterization. That’s a logical fallacy. That’s special pleading. That’s an ad hominem attack. That’s liberal propaganda. That’s not fair.

            Waa!! Stand on principle and invite more conservatives to the conservatives-only pity-patty party.

            That’s the perception of hardline conservatives in the world! And perception is reality.

            That’s what you guys are up against. That’s what you guys have to change. And instead of changing it, you’re only making it worse on yourselves by sinking further into the hole and taking on more of a with-us-or-against-us mentality.

            You seem unable to separate my pointing that out from my holding that belief.

            And that, coupled with the “far left” bit, says plenty to me about you personally.

            So good luck with 2016. Unless you guys can change how you’re perceived (which is up to YOU GUYS, not everyone else), all you’re going to have are more stories about how everyone’s against you rather than having actual power.

            The nation doesn’t want to elect a moderate. You really think they want to elect someone exponentially more polarizing?

            Argue against it; I would too. 2010! Bachmann! Logical fallacy! Ad hominem!

            We’ll see how it works out for conservatives with this strategy.

          • KStrett

            “I don’t see what’s going on here from some conservatives–the obvious recipients of my comments–as defending themselves. I see it as creating a we’re-fed-up-with-the-world cult-like atmosphere where they’re now seeking ideological purity, and anyone not wholly aligned is libeled and cast aside as an enemy.”

            Once again you are special pleading. The moderates are attempting to get rid of conservatives. They would rather elect a democrat than keep a conservative. This is a point you have continually not addressed. Yet, you are only attacking conservatives.

            Do you have a problem with the moderate GOP attempting to choke out conservatives in elections?

            How does that not amount to wanting party purity?

            “You have personally already done that to me. So it’s not like I’m blowing smoke on that front.”

            You have not made your position clear. The majority of what you say is simply attacking conservatives. You said even though running moderates has failed it gives the GOP a better chance of winning but you don’t hold this position.

            You don’t hold the position the GOP needs to be more moderate to win but being more moderate gives the GOP a better chance of winning? That is self contradictory position.

            From your previous arguments, as far as I can tell, you want the GOP to be fiscally conservative and socially liberal.

            I have asked you to clarify this and you have not. Saying they need to be better at PR is vague.

            “If you want to play the victim and act as if it’s just you and like-minded folks defending yourselves, then have at it. My response to that: lol”

            That is great but you did not address what I said, did you?

            “And I don’t know how many times or different ways I can say this. You’re obviously just glancing over what I write for the sake of keeping up with your own responses. A point of pride to throw out terms like “special pleading” and “logical fallacy,” I suspect. It’s LULZ fodder, so no complaints.”

            I am cutting and pasting your comments and directly responding to them. I am asking you direct question which you have not answered, and I am providing evidence to back my points up which you are not responding to either.

            The moderate GOP cut of funding in Virginia and cut off funding to Michele Bachmann to back up my point and your response is LOL but I am simply glancing over your posts?

            I asked you a direct question about the GOP’s tactic of chocking off funds and allowing democrats to win. Did you answer my question?

            “Fair or not, many conservatives are viewed by many non-conservatives as backward, Bible-thumping, anti-science, bigoted cultists who want to drag America backward in time.That is how they are viewed.”

            That is how they are viewed by liberals. Independents are not liberals are they?

            “Conservatives don’t come across well to non-conservatives. That fringe that I’m speaking about, found in plenty supply around here, paint them all the same to the outside world.”

            You are assuming independents think like liberals. This is a caricature and you are cherry picking a group to construct a straw-man to knock down.

            Ted Cruz is not a birther nor is any other tea party candidate that I know of. The birther allegation started with the Hillary Clinton campaign.

            The other problem is you have absolutely no evidence to support your contention. In fact, the evidence shows the exact opposite.

            Aside from a few bad candidates, tea party candidates have won. Moderates have lost. It’s not like a tea party conservative has failed to win the last two elections.

            “And instead of trying to send out a different, friendlier message (because that would be seen as caving in), conservatives further entrench themselves in their own ideology, expecting everyone will come to them”

            The moderates are in control of the GOP! McCain and Romney are not social conservatives. Where is your evidence to support your position?

            Why can’t you answer a simple question?

            You are essentially saying that you believe.the GOP should abandon social conservationism, are you not?

            “This is turning people off. That is creating little more than a cult. I know. I live in the world outside of a conservative bubble. I know how they’re viewed, and I know conservatives aren’t doing anything to change this view.”

            Ted Cruz was committing suicide, right? How did that play out?

            You were wrong! In Colorado, a swing state that Obama won Cruz is tied with Hillary. Rand Paul is beating her. Both of these guys are tea party conservatives. How do you explain that?

            If you were correct Cruz’s favorability numbers should be slightly higher than stepping on a nail.

            Are you changing your position or at least admitting you were wrong? No, you are blindly asserting the exact same thing despite the evidence showing you are wrong.

            “You guys have to change that view! 2010 was 2010, and it wasn’t the Senate, and 2012 wasn’t the White House, not even a conservative nomination.”

            Again, why don’t moderates need to change their view when it clearly isn’t working?

            Why aren’t you change your view? You were wrong about the government shut down and Obama-care.

            2010 worked and the Obama administration attacked the funding. How much money did Karl Rove have at his disposal? The money he wasted was an astounding amount but you are still attacking conservatives!

            “Yeah. Everyone’s against you. Bad media. Moderates. Liberals. I agree — not being facetious, either; I agree. The deck is stacked.”

            The decking isn’t just stacked against conservatives. It’s stacked against moderates too. Anyone with an (R) at the end of their name is on the media hit list. The press loves moderates until they run for president.

            “So, what’s the brilliant PR campaign from the conservative camp? Throw everyone in the same group, attack and act like it’s justified, set up a never-ending litmus test to gauge ideological purity, and throw aside every man, woman and child who doesn’t fully support the cause!”

            Conservatives challenge sitting republicans who act like democrats in a primary. The moderates cut off funding and would rather a democrat take the seat.

            If you don’t stand lock step with the moderate GOP and disagree with them, they cut off your funding and let a democrat win but conservatives are after purity?

            “That’s what you guys are up against. That’s what you guys have to change. And instead of changing it, you’re only making it worse on yourselves by sinking further into the hole and taking on more of a with-us-or-against-us mentality.”

            You need to clearly explain what you think the GOP needs to do. Attacking conservatives without anything to back your position isn’t an argument.

            Vaguely stating conservatives need to change because liberals are smearing conservatives and they need to fight the perception isn’t clear position.

            What do they need to do?

            It sounds to me like you favor abandoning social conservatism. I have ask you this several times and you have not answered the question.

            If you are correct, why isn’t Ted Cruz the most hated man in America? You ignored this question too.

            “You seem unable to separate my pointing that out from my holding that belief.”

            You are attacking conservatives. You will not say what you believe.

            “And that, coupled with the “far left” bit, says plenty to me about you personally”

            Pointing out that the far left frequently states that conservatives wants to take science out of schools is ridiculous, tells you what? If you actually believe that it says more about you.

            “So good luck with 2016. Unless you guys can change how you’re perceived (which is up to YOU GUYS, not everyone else), all you’re going to have are more stories about how everyone’s against you rather than having actual power.”

            McCain Fail + Romney fails = a moderate win in 2016?

            McCain fail + Romney fail= the GOP should go farther left?

            You are essentially saying social conservatives suck and conservative PR tactics suck, ad ad nauseam.

            What do you think they should do?

            “The nation doesn’t want to elect a moderate. You really think they want to elect someone exponentially more polarizing?”

            The nation wants to elect liberals, so the GOP needs to become more liberal?

            Are you arguing the GOP needs to go more to the left? How many times have I asked you this question?

            The nation doesn’t want to elect a moderate, therefore the GOP needs to run another moderate?

            What is your position? Should we attempt to out liberal the liberals?

            “Argue against it; I would too. 2010! Bachmann! Logical fallacy! Ad hominem!”

            Your arguments are based on two logical fallacies, circular reasoning and ad hominem. You apparently just added the appeal to ridicule. I get it! you don’t like conservatives and/ or Christians but you are not offering any arguments.

            “We’ll see how it works out for conservatives with this strategy.”

            What strategy do you think will work?

          • Josh

            Practically everything I’ve been saying has been in response to inaccurate claims about my position made by you. And, no, I’m probably not addressing every single point you attempt to make in your 1,500-word replies.

            Most of what I write is an attempt to explain something wholly different than what you’re insisting I’m trying to say.

            So there hasn’t been a point in context yet to get at moderates, liberals, or the green party, or libertarians, or China, or North Korea, or Pluto no longer being a planet.


            Follow the entire conservation back to the initial exchange (I think it’s a few responses down). The point the poster made was that conservative values are embraced by the vast majority of Americans. I responded sarcastically to that obvious loose statement of opinion, and then I was asked what I thought “conservative values” were. Using information gleaned from this and similar forums, where numerous conservatives call any deviation from conservatism “selling out” or “leftist,” etc, I responded.

            You said that was an attack on conservatives.

            I still have no earthly idea how, but from what I can tell, it’s an “attack” on conservatives because I have yet to say these people are justified for their attitudes because moderates are against them and liberals are big meanies.

            90% of the exchange to this point has revolved in some fashion around that point.

            Again, sorry. I should have submitted that you folks are poor, innocent victims much earlier, I reckon.

            A winning conservative strategy, IMO: Start with throwing nutters under the bus. When people say God put them in office or that global warming isn’t a big deal because God controls everything, snuff them out.

            Unless one believes that a religious fundamentalist IS a conservative.

            Also get the folks down around Texas and the Bible belt to hold true to a church/state separation when it comes to public schools. The more they try to push religion in schools, the more the nutters on the left feel emboldened to push for unisex bathrooms and no dodge ball and trans-specific studies and the like.

            And, again, I’m not saying change any social stances; just tone down on the rhetoric.

            Conservatives can hold their social stances. I’m personally for the legalization of prostitution. It’s a social stance I hold. But I don’t go around screaming it from the rooftops. And the fact that I don’t DOES NOT MEAN that I don’t hold that stance.

            It’s about the image you put out there.

            For supposedly business-savvy people, conservatives are horrible at attracting a larger customer base.

            You guys are totally entrenched in this belief that pretending it’s anything other than the Revolution is selling out. It’s worse than Metallica fans when the band cut their hair.

            Disassociating from the delusional and toning down the rhetoric allows people to focus more on a message of small, responsible government.

            It’s about winning, right? Or it is about being principled 24/7 — about every little belief becoming a matter of pride to the point it needs to be worn on the sleeve?

            If the idea is about winning an election, then all conservatives need to focus on telling people exactly what their ideas are, how they’re better, and showing examples. Blasting big government is cool, but expound on the benefits of smaller government. That message isn’t getting out there. “Obamacare is bad,” “The debt is bad,” etc — these are the only messages getting out to people, basically. And that appears that partisan bickering.

            Believe in the social stuff. Knock yourselves out! But as a platform? IMO, it should be put on the backburner.

            That’s not out-liberaling the liberals. That’s not becoming liberals. That’s not even dropping what one stands for. That’s just trying to appeal to more people to win elections rather than becoming a polarizing person.

            Ted Cruz isn’t the most hated. But he’s far from the most loved — even among the right. And that has a lot to do with his unwillingness to compromise. On anything. He’s the right’s version of Obama, Reid, Pelosi, etc.

            Maybe that’s what guys like you want out of a conservative. Maybe even suggesting that a politician would compromise to appeal to an entire nation and what’s best for it collectively IS what “moderate” or “liberal” is.

            And if that’s the case, no wonder you see what I say as attacking and not offering any strategy.

            To some of you folks, it really is the Alamo here.

          • KStrett

            “Practically everything I’ve been saying has been in response to inaccurate claims about my position made by you”

            I have asked you several question to clarify your position which you declined to answer. When the majority of your responses are predicated on ad hominem attacks on conservatives, social conservatives, and christian without much else, the blame for being misunderstood isn’t on me.

            After your last few posts you sound like a libertarian.

            “I’m probably not addressing every single point you attempt to make”

            You are ignoring points and refusing to answer questions that show your contentions are incorrect.


            You believe a conservative would be slaughtered in a presidential election. If that is the case why is Rand Paul beating Hillary and why is Ted Cruz tied with her?

            “Ted Cruz isn’t the most hated. But he’s far from the most loved — even among the right.”

            You didn’t answer the question. No response….

            Conservatives are killing us. They are the suicide wing… They are the real RINO’s They are horrible at PR… etc.

            Why all this vitriol toward conservatives? The moderates are in control of the GOP and are choking off funds to conservatives allowing democrats to win elections.

            Wouldn’t a group of people who would rather the democrats win rather than conservatives be the real suicide wing?

            No response…..

            Would you rather have Bachmann or a democrat?

            No response…..

            You can’t answer the questions because it shows your position is incorrect and you will not change your opinion.

            You bought into the suicide wing argument Bernie made. What happened with that?

            The conservatives demise was greatly exaggerated. In other words, despite being completely wrong and the exact opposite happening, the prediction gets swept under the carpet, and the same arguments are repeated.

            The failed prediction illustrates the flaw in the GOP strategy. Their strategy is predicated on instant gratification.

            The people who were lamenting about Ted Cruz and the government shut down view political strategy only in the short term. They have no offense and are completely reactionary to democrat and media attacks.

            In short, they want instant gratification. The barometer they use measure instant gratification are polls. Public opinion can and will change in a short amount of time. The democrats are playing three dimensional chess and the GOP is playing tick tack toe.

            After asking you several time what strategy you believe will work you essentially repeated the same vague ideas.

            You believe the GOP should shut up about God and social conservatism, jump on the global warming band wagon, and do a better job of PR, which would include attempting to get support from minorities and the youth.

            I have addressed ever single one of those points, which you have mainly ignored.

            One of the main flaws in your position is even if social issues and God is dropped, the media is still going to attack the candidate any way.

            You are fiscally conservative? You hate the poor, children, and old people. You want to throw them off a cliff. Because you want to cut funding that probably means you are racist too.Why do you hate minorities?

            “It’s about the image you put out there. ”

            The media is not going to sit back and let anyone with a (R) get favorable treatment. It doesn’t matter if the candidate is a conservative, a moderate, a democrat disguised as a republican, or socially liberal/ fiscally conservative or a libertarian.

            Whoever is nominated must be prepared to fight the propaganda arm of the democratic party. The media is no longer just biased in favor of the left. They are in the tank for the democratic party.

            “To some of you folks, it really is the Alamo here.”

            We have the largest debt in the history of the world. How much longer do you believe the FED can print money?

            How much more national debt do you believe can be added before this country hits a tipping point?

            The government is going one one direction regardless of whether the GOP or the democrats are in control.We are going to hit a wall sooner rather than later.

            You are fiscally conservative and you believe the moderates have a better chance of winning?

            The moderates keep increasing the size of government too, albeit at a slower rate than the democrats.

            How much did government shrink during the 8 years of Bush?

            What is the point of the GOP winning if they aren’t going to act fiscally conservative? To answer your question, no it isn’t simply about winning.

            “Maybe even suggesting that a politician would compromise to appeal to an entire nation and what’s best for it collectively IS what “moderate” or “liberal” is. ”

            The definition of comprise is to give the democrats 500 billion dollars when they ask for one trillion. Comprise never means cutting 500 billion dollars when the republicans ask for one trillion in spending cuts. This type of comprising is one of the reasons were are in this economic mess.

        • KStrett

          McCain lost because is/ was and is a horrible candidate. He offered no measurable difference between President Obama and himself.

          Obama was surrounded by radicals and he didn’t want to attack Obama. Obama went to a church that might as well have been preaching kill whitey every week and he wouldn’t use it. He wanted Joe Lieberman as his VP.

          McCain is a democrat. If the choice is between a grumpy old democrat with an (R) at the end of his name and hip young cool democrat, the hip democrat will win every time.

          “Any republican, conservative or moderate, will need some charisma”

          Do you think the media is going to let a republican be portrayed as charismatic?

          This is another area where Bernie is wrong. He believes Obama is a cult of personality, therefore the GOP needs the same to win.

          The problem is Obama is a creation of the media and they will never let a republican get away with that. No matter how charismatic, hip, young, and cool a republican candidate is, by the time the media is done with them they will be evil incarnate.

      • S Huges

        Christie is no McCain or Romney. More like Reagan or Eisenhower. Guys that can win. Cruz/Paul is like Goldwater.

        • KStrett

          The nomination process has gotten so ridiculous, it is almost comical. The nomination process is predicated on arguing candidate X is the only candidate who can win and if enough sycophants buy into this, they win the nomination.

          Newt Gingrich was arguing this when he had no chance of winning. It is absurd!

          While this is going on, the media is attempting to get the most liberal candidate the nomination and if they win, the media attempts to destroy them.

          Christie is nothing like Reagan. Reagan was a conservative.People said Reagan couldn’t win too.

          If Cruz can’t win, why is he tied with the presumed democrat front runner in Colorado.

          Finally, there are many rumors about Christie’s closet being full of skeletons. If that is true the media will push for his nomination and when he wins, they will release a skeleton a week until the end of the election.

          He apparently had enough skeletons in his closet for the Romney campaign to pass him over for the VP slot.

          Obviously, it would be foolish to nominate him because he can’t win or would have a more difficult time winning.

          He would be too side tracked putting out the fires of various scandals and fighting with a media who will be attempting to magnify each scandal.

    • outraged_mom

      Ok. you think Christy is your guy. I think Ted is my Guy. We have a primary and the man with the most support wins

      But is it fair that Mitch McConnell is making threats that the fat cats will ice out any contractors/promoters than also support a conservative (even if in another state) and behind the scenes explains that THEY being the people that are elected by their constitutions will rue the day they took him on. I (used to) contribute to a party that is employing Obama tactics to use my own money against me. And you guys are all saying we are purists? I will support the man I chose, as is each of our right, without intimidation from the likes of Obama or McConnell.

  • Cordelia Mae Crockett

    The last Democrat I voted for was Jimmy Carter. The party left me, so conservatism was it. If a liberal Republican is the nominee, then Tea looks mighty refreshing! Dick Tater has done so much damage to the conservative cause, “at this point what difference does it make?” That was similar to the statement made by the most famous shrew of late.

    • outraged_mom

      You are as fed up with the Political Elite trampling our rights and freedoms in our name claiming to be doing it for us. They are not. The Tea Party did not rise in 2010 against Obama, it was 2009 against George Bush using our tax money to bail out investment firms. There is no party leadership, just regular people who think this really sucks. Tea Party candidates have risen to positions of influence and if that person can be demonized effectively; well you just killed millions of birds with just that one stone – The Tea Party is not threat, it isn’t even a party it is left behinds, the people who can’t sign on to what our great, unique nation is being eaten alive from inside. So even without being the two headed monster they portray us to be, we are the skunk at the massive party that is the government machine. We are in the Republican party because it was the party that once claimed to believe in the things stated. But the attempt use our own money to tells us what we are allowed to thinK – well that right there with Obama.

      • That’sEnoughHarold

        It’s too bad the Tea Party has been as thoroughly demonized and marginalized by the Lamestream Media and Late Night Liberal smirking heads as Sarah Palin has. Not sure how to counter that.

  • Charlie

    I am hoping the big guy runs; can’t wait to see how that in your face, New York/New Jersey edge plays outside the greater NY area. I personally don’t think it will.

    • That’sEnoughHarold

      He’ll give as good as he gets in any debate. I think people will like a straight talking politician with some gumption.

  • http://hemingwayreport.blogspot.com/ MerchantofVenom

    The Time Magazine cover and what it really is…
    the first sign of fear from the left and the response is always the same. To demean your opponent “no matter what”… to borrow a line from Barry.

    I agree with Mr Goldberg. I’m not ecstatic about Christie but it sure as hell beats the alternative.

    • helplessinil

      I can’t imagine 16 consecutive years of BHO and then Hillary, I will vote for any Republican and have the “hope” that they can “change” the current direction of my country.
      I agree with you that the liberal press will waste no time attacking whomever they feel is the current leader on the conservative/Republican campaign. It was not too early for Bill to put in his 2 cents to let us all know that Hillary would never have allowed this to happen to them if she were President.
      Thanks for another great article Mr. Goldberg.

  • Paul Courtney

    Bernie: As you continue to call for some semblance of unity on right, sure is discouraging to see Rs attack each other over Christie, Cruz, Rubio, etc. when election is 3 yrs out, and we ought to be basking in the warming glow of the bonfire of Obamacare, a fire that will burn bright through at least this next yr. Any chance we can stop sniping about Christie the RINO (or “fill in the blank” is a RINO), stop trying to knock off Mitch McConnell etc. and enjoy the moment as Nancy Pelosi and even D. Feinstein are finding out what’s in the legislative achievement of their careers? No, I thought not. Ah, well, maybe discouragement will be covered under the new standard insurance I can’t afford, which I’ll love so much better than the crappy insurance I couldn’t afford. I have always thought highly of Sarah, but I’m begging you guys and her, please put fratricide on the shelf for a bit.

  • Ernesto Del Toro

    If it was guaranteed that Christie will win, I’d say Christie, but since it’s not, I’d take my chances with Cruz. Christie is like the dad that always tells his child that his friends are always right and that he must adapt to them insetad of the opposite. We have a saying for that in Spanish. Luz de la calle, y oscuridad en la casa. I’ll try to translate, Light of the streets, and darkness at home. sort of that.

    • brickman

      Christie is not guaranteed to win but Cruz is guaranteed to lose.

      • outraged_mom

        Ya. I was “guaranteed” I could keep my health care plan. Are you some sort of fortune teller or just fancy yourself an expert-cause experts guaranteed Reagan could not win – and fought him brutally – he was our most conservative nominee. History is a teacher – if you’ll listen. Good policy IS good politics, and if you don’t believe in your own candidate on policy how can you expect a good political result. I believe in the ideals of Ted Cruz-I believe many others do to, I am not so afraid to lose that I become more life my opponent – that is how they are able to define us to the public – because we don’t define ourselves.

        • brickman

          I admit that I don’t have the expertise that George Will, Dick Morris, Peggy Noonan, Karl Rove, Lawrence Kudlow, Glenn Beck, Sean Hannity and Rush Limbaugh have. You know, the people who predicted Romney would win. I don’t have God telling me (incorrectly as it turns out) who will win like Pat Robertson did. I can however do basic math. I looked at the polls last time and thought Obama would get 303 electoral votes. I admit that I was wrong. He got 332.

          Current polls ( I admit it’s early) show Cruz doesn’t stand a chance. As regards a national contest against Clinton, Quinnipiac shows Christie +1, Paul -9, Ryan -9, and Cruz -15.
          PPP shows Christie -5, Bush -9, Paul -12 and Cruz -17. Cruz even loses to Biden by 10.

          This country is more electorally polarized than in 1980. I don’t expect people to change their opinions that drastically even though the election is three years away. Are YOU likely to change yours? Despite what you have read people with opinions different from yours have principles too.

          Dems are hoping for Cruz to win the nomination. They don’t see Reagan, they see Goldwater.

          • That’sEnoughHarold

            Good post.

      • AbdullahtheButcher

        What about Rand Paul? What do you think his chances are/

  • Erzsi

    I understand that this rhetorical question meant to be thought provoking or simply provocative, but it is a great disservice to make the different approaches and some not so significant differences in opinion between republicans appear as a great divide. Actually it is quite “American” to voice differences within the party rather then baa-baa as sheep in unison. It is exciting to see that groups emerge that are more “radical”, but it is valuable to have groups that are more cautious and advise tried and true tactics. Maybe different times call for different approaches and the right ones needs to be worked out. I agree with Charles Krauthammer who said that the core believes and goals are the same within the Republican party, but tactics are vary.

  • DaveW

    Bernie, you are correct and the key phrase is “would rather lose than compromise”. Some months ago, I had a written dialogue with one of your contributors Burt Prelewsky about how the Republicans could not get elected without some compromise on their positions and the bottom line was that he essentially said he would rather that the Republicans lose than compromise.

    • Ernesto Del Toro

      stop it, there’s no compromise that would get black and latinos to vote Republican. I am a Latino, and I know that the majority of blacks and latinos in this Country now are just looking for handouts and freebies. A Republican ticket that talks about creating jobs like Romney did, it’s just wasting his time, cause these minorities are not looking for work. wake up. Offer them the same thing that the Democrats do and you’ll see it’s an even battle then. They need to take the same approach Wal Mart does, we’ll match anybody’s price. Republicans just need to match the Democrat freebies. If I’m not looking to work and all you keep talking about is creating jobs, you ain’t got a shot with that type of mentality, I don’t care how much you compromise on anything.

    • Shawn

      No…we’d rather get back to the methods that work rather than become part of the problem. The Tea Party isn’t new. Republicans USED to be the way the tea party is. Used to be small government minded. We’re spending a Trillion dollars more annually than we bring in. Isn’t that morally wrong? Isn’t $50,000 in debt per person morally wrong? Isn’t 80 trillion in unfunded liabilities ($500,000+ per person) morally wrong? Isn’t taking the wealth from responsible people and giving it away to others morally wrong? Isn’t killing babies morally wrong? Does the government work for us, or the other way around? I could go on and on. We ran McCain…he lost. We ran Romney…he lost. Was it because they were too conservative? I don’t think so.

      Conservatives have a hard sell. It’s tough to go up against Sally Sue who promises ice cream if you vote for her…and your message is one of hard work in order to achieve something. But, that’s what needs to be said. We need to change people’s minds. Socialism doesn’t work. Capitalism isn’t perfect…but socialism just doesn’t work. And…if we don’t tackle the size of government…nobody will.

    • AbdullahtheButcher

      With all due respect, it seems like all the Reps have been doing is compromising, and the Dems are basically walking all over them.

  • Pat

    I consider myself a tea party member; however, I WILL vote for whoever is the Republican nominee because I do not want a Democrat in the White House

    • D Parri

      I think the important thing is that we might wanna’ listen to what some of the pundits say, and we might want to discard an equal or even greater amount. I think most of us consider that a Republican is a Republican is a Republican. Period.

      • believernangels

        How I wish that were true, but it isn’t. The Republican Party is divided into groups .. Republicans, Conservatives, Tea Party and Libertarians which is a problem.
        Personally I have no respect for anyone associated with any “group” of the Republican Party who Denigrates Publically or Privately another member of the Republican Party. Period!

        • D Parri

          Thanks. It is just a matter of being able to ‘tame the herd’ of wild stallions that needs to take place. Once all groups start traveling in the same direction…then we’ll be able to step back and listen to the thunder of the stampede.

          Then…hello Whitehouse, 2016!

          • believernangels

            Do me a favor Mr. Parri? When you figure out how to “tame the herd” of wild stallions, make sure you find me and let me how you intend to accomplish that feat. Meanwhile, I’ll keep on Tweeting “UniteRight” or “RightUnite”, actually I’m easy to locate.

          • D Parri

            BNA, it was more intended to be a metaphorical reference to exactly what you more accurately termed as uniting the various groups which collectively make up the Republican Party. I believe that there is lot’s of energy that needs to be channeled properly so that we can work together more productively. Hence, the ‘tame the herd’ reference. It will obviously require a strong leader, one that can earn the respect of many.

          • believernangels

            Smiling, I understood exactly what you meant. Our problem is fulfilling the requirement of an obviously strong leader capable of earning the respect of the many. There is no doubt the energy needs to be channeled enabling all Republicans to productively work together, however time is fleeting without a glimpse of “who” that strong leader is.
            BTW, are you interested? I’ll work your campaign, and I’m good at it. Like I’ve said, I’m easy to locate.

          • D Parri

            Well, thank you for the ‘offer’, I appreciate your vote of confidence, as it were. If I felt like I had the wherewithal to mount a campaign I would certainly accept your offer and look forward to working together with you.

            However, I am not a political person and I wouldn’t waste valuable resources such as what you could provide when there are some many people out there with immense talent and skills. The one characteristic that I place as critical in whomever is selected is the quality of honesty. Sometimes, though, I feel a little like the Diogenes of Sinope when we go looking for an honest politician. Is it the environment that causes corruption or is the corruption precedent to politics?

    • believernangels

      Good Answer Pat! Although I’m not a Tea Party member as I believe they are too unbending for my way of thinking, I would vote for a TP member if nominated for the same reason as you. Our problem is that you are a TP oddity, and can say that with certainty as an active participant on Twitter. Any follower of Twitter would agree that the TP members don’t consider themselves Republicans, which is ridicuous as we are a Two Party System Period. However most of them openly preach against Republicans and admit/encourage not voting if a “Christie” were nominated. It makes me sick that these self-described Patriots would rather see Hillary in office then a “Christie”.
      My Tweets continually encourage RightUnite .. UniteRight .. UnitedRightWins!
      One thing the Republican Party needs to Learn from the Democratic Party is UNITY. A “D” is a “D” is a “D” Period, they may not even like each other but will stand behind each other without reservation and until we learn that lesson, we will have the Obama’s and Hillary’s of the country as President.

      • Shawn

        What is the TEA PARTY unbending about that Republicans do bend on that you like? I want that question answered when I see the response above. It’s not that we’re preaching against republicans…we’re preaching against socialist philosophies that are being adopted by republicans. If Boehner grew a set and supported smaller government and a balanced budget…he’d be getting TEA PARTY support. But as it is…he seems content to be democrat light. And, my friends will vote no matter what. It’s too early to know who will get the nomination. If Christie does, then he’ll have to promote a platform that brings us all together. If he can’t, then we’ll vote…but for someone else. I get tired of people talking down to principled people. If you’re not principled…what are you?

  • Brian Fr Langley

    Bernie, your whole website is about lying, cheating, disembling, mainstream media, now you seem to be buying what they’re selling? Hard right tea partiers? Really? Tea partiers are now hard right? (and unelectable)? Against gay marriage, you’re hard right? Just 2 years ago Obama was also against it. Against abortion, you’re hard right? Most polls show vast majorities against partial birth abortion, abortion as birth control, and abortions based on gender selection, etc. etc. Against condoms in schools, birth control and abortions without parental consent, you’re hard right? Against dependancy creating welfare programs, you’re hard right? Against teenage promisicuity, you’re hard right? Lets get real. These are NOT the issues of the HARD RIGHT.
    The unelectable “hard right” label is a media invention. Words like “hard right” and “denier” (as in climate change, or holocaust) are designed only to paint traditionalist’s as fascists or nazi’s. Yes, I’m against gay marriage, abortion on demand, profligate spending, (and borrowing), illicit sex, and soul sucking dependancies, because these things don’t help people, they HURT people. Underpinning traditionalist (conservative) ideology’s are ethics of the highest calibre. Ethics that built the greatest civilization mankind has ever known. What would be gained by selling them out for power, that in the end would be just a another step, on the slow march, into the abyss?

    • D Parri

      Can you say REPUBLICAN? That’s all it takes to vote for the candidate our nation needs to have elected.

      • Brian Fr Langley

        and just why would someone vote for a Republican candidate who is NOT a traditionalist or conservative? Too many Republican’s have supported ultra liberal ideas at every turn. Creating the so called “moderate republican Bul*s#hit the media spouts. They are NOT moderates, they are liberals pure and simple, and should be in the Democratic party. They are big government supporters, pro abortion, pro gay marriage, and of course amnesty. (posing as immigration reform). They are the reason normal folks get labeled “far right”. (because they are Republicans who are actually left) The march left is wrecking the place. It needs to STOPPED. not just slowed down for a little while.

        • Ernesto Del Toro

          refer to the tittle, would you rather win with a Republican with those values, or lose to a Democrat.???

          • Brian Fr Langley

            You are so brainwashed? Typical media response, offer a Hobson’s choice, like these are the only options. How many (Marxist) lumps would you like in your coffee? Just 1, vote Rino, for 2, vote democrat. How about NONE. 2016 is over 2 years away there is plenty of time to elect a true traditionalist (conservative) who actually believes and supports the constitution envisioned by the framers.

        • believernangels

          Read and Learn Brian, I hope!

        • D Parri

          Brian Fr Langley, the absolute guarantee for electing a Demo-head into the WH seat in 2016 is to maintain an intransigent position as a supporter and follower of the far-right. I consider myself a conservative, I am a Republican, and I agree with most of the positions on issues that you have stated. The reality of elections and campaigning for votes cannot be limited to the purist sentiments without recognizing that it is all for naught.

          So, I believe that our philosophical views are pretty much consistent with one another, but where we differ the most is in the battle strategy to be employed to achieve those goals. I am not asking you to change your position on the core issues that define a political agenda, but I would like for you and so many others out there that your…no, our ideas can never be promoted effectively until we get someone from our team back in the Whitehouse.

          • Brian Fr Langley

            I couldn’t agree more with the sentiment, BUT liberals who call themselves Republican are NOT on our team. They’re on the team of the media party, and the media party is all liberal with a capital “L”. Don’t let them stampede you into voting for their policies just because any one who is NOT a leftie, (a moderate republican), (according to them) is not electable. It then becomes a self (media) fulfilling prophecy. PS I note even you call yourself far right? Let me assure you, you are NOT far right, just because you oppose gay marriage, abortion, profligate spending, big Government and illicit sex. In fact that pretty much makes you a mainstream American. The media is lying, and you’re buying?

          • D Parri

            Yes, I consider myself a mainstream American with conservative values. Perhaps that is not the measure of a ‘far-right’ for some, but I’d bet it is for most of those on the left. Just curious, though, how would you describe a “far-right” political position?

          • Brian Fr Langley

            If you can get yourself a political spectrum chart you will find Marxist Leninist’s on the far left, while fascists, Nazi’s, neo Nazi’s and skin heads occupy the far right. The media calls us far right to equate us with execrable Nazi’s. (you know the perpetrators of the holocaust)

          • D Parri

            Thanks. Yes, I just now looked at a chart and saw the references that you speak of–that ain’t me. You’re right (moderate) and I am mod-R also. I have been going on the assumption that the far right simply meant staunchly conservative, and I was not placing the other tags on it. I am not Nazi or anywhere close to that. I will correct my terminology in the future. Thanks again.

          • Brian Fr Langley

            The real point is the media describing you, me and a Ted Cruz as extremist in order to paint us as far right racist, women hating, homophobes. (and it works). For example, say you’re for abortion and I’m against? My point of view compared to yours is extreme, BUT your point of view compared to mine is also extreme. YET, pro choicer’s are always referred to as moderates (by the media) while pro lifer’s are always referred to as extremist! Gay marriage? supporters, moderates. Opposers? extremist. All designed to coach Americans to believe normal (traditionalist) views are in fact outside the norm. Equating us a Nazi’s just the latest in their bag of tricks.

          • D Parri

            I hadn’t given it enough thought until you pointed it out to me, but I can see how the media has been neatly pushing the moderate/conservative/right much further out the scale than is appropriate. I guess that some of it may have come from a simple ignorance–such as my case, but I also believe that much of it has been intentional, manipulative, and meant to harm.

            The true mainstream American appears to vary either a little left or a little right, but the term “far” is almost never accurate.

          • Brian Fr Langley

            The unhappy truth is virtually ALL mainstream media are left. While many pretend to be centrist, they’re obfuscations and dissembling’s prove otherwise. In media polls some 80+% donate to the Democrats while only some 15% donate to Republicans. (and known Republicans in the media party are badly treated). As an aside, the mainstream media virtually to a person, supported the “Kyoto Accords” (on global warming) there is no reading of this document that suggests it is not a plan for a world wide collective. Nothing shows the media’s true colors better than this. (that they’d support en masse a world wide collective)

          • D Parri

            Just curious, where do you place the Fox networks? Mainstream, Left, Right, something else?

          • Brian Fr Langley

            Of course they lean conservative, BUT unlike the lying media, I believe their views are basically centrist. They are NOT far right. They are simply middle of the road folks like you n me. And while like all media the odd personality spins a little, I think what you get for the most part are the basic facts. (truth)

          • D Parri

            I suppose that’s why I tend to spend most of my news-gathering time with the O’Reilly/Kelly/Hannity/Sustern lineup. I don’t always agree with the host opinions 100%, but I don’t think it would speak very well of me if I did. The mid-day news usually starts it off.

            I tried to watch a little bit of Chris Matthews last night, but I could not take it. It was bad.

            Got another question for ya’. What does the “Fr” mean?

    • Paul Courtney

      Agreed, except I don’t see tp stopping the slide anyway, even if they could put together a few elections. Problem is that one branch of fed gov’t more equal than others, and (never mind Constitution says whatever A. Kennedy says it says), our hero and savior J. Roberts thinks fed gov’t can make us buy insurance, evidently the space under “Amendment IX” was left blank in the copy he’s using. I voted for Romney despite doubts, and I’ll vote for Christie if other choice is not to vote (Hillary not a choice, just a nightmare), but Americans have chosen fiscal and cultural madness for so long now, I believe Mark Steyn’s prediction of collapse. Also believe that day after collapse, I’ll still wake up and choose to get out of bed. Not too worried about Dems becoming tyrants if Rs go into electoral hibernation, ’cause Dems will be incompetent at that, too.

      • Brian Fr Langley

        The REAL point here is the media will try to stampede conservatives into NOT voting for conservative candidates. HOW? Like any cattle) stampede, you start by turning the big bulls. (aka Bernie Goldberg et al) It’s already started. I hear dozens of times a day that the “hard right” (normal folks like you and I) can’t win. So more and more traditionalist types start “compromising (surrendering) their values. Pretty soon we’re agreeing the night is light, and the day is dark. I mean can you really compromise on a core ethic. Is their really no right and no wrong?

        • D Parri

          Do not compromise your core ethics–you don’t need to. It takes a whole team, though, to win the POTUS game. I feel like the far-right is needed as an anchor, but there has got to be some flexibility allowable in the chief officer’s campaign strategy. If you don’t win, you don’t win.

    • Shawn

      I agree! And, I am slowly understanding that democrat-lite (RINO, whatever) is not a winning strategy. I too bought into the thought that as a conservative you have to support the R to make progress. Well, where did that get us? 2 failed attempts at the WH. I think now…more people are like us…saying why support that? If it takes 12-16 years to develop a truly conservative party…then so be it. If the country tanks….most of us have means to survive. The cities will be a mess…you can’t eat concrete and steel. Might be just as well to have the beast bleed….

      We need to be principled and raise a generation of people who will fight for principles.

  • D Parri

    Just curious, but who out there feels ‘sorry’ for President Obama ‘finding himself’ in the present mess he’s facing? RU Democrat?…Republican?

    • T Ko

      Not me, but I consider that a more honest answer than Obama gave when he tried to sound remorseful. He actually slipped and revealed his true feeling when he referred to his having been “burned”. He quickly changed it to “the American people” have been burned. Hmmm…sounds like he was sorry to ‘find’ himself in this situation.

  • DesertLady

    In my very humble opinion, republicans of any stripe or banner will not win the presidency until they figure out how to sell the public and make them want their Constitution and their freedoms back more than they want the “free stuff” the left will always be there to offer them. The public climate in this country has shifted 180 degrees from Kennedy’s patriotic “What can you do for your country?” to “what can my country get for me?” Republicans have to learn how to market what they have to offer and make what America originally stood for valuable and desirable again. We have a whole new couple or three generations of voters now who have never really known the original America for its freedom-loving, individualism and have never seen the real Constitution at work.

    • D Parri

      Yes, Ma’am. I believe that this strategy of ‘buying votes’ by promoting increased entitlements far beyond the thresholds of simple fraud have been driving our political agendas for far too long. Unfortunately, it has not been a single-party issue and the fixes will only come from bipartisan solutions. That is a clear and distinct–challenge.

    • believernangels

      Exactly, and that strategy is exactly why The United States of America has become the “come and get-it” country people from all over the world are flocking to.
      The Statue Of Liberty is best known for her Torch of Freedom and a partial quote from the poem The New Colossus which in it’s entirety is on a Bronze Plaque inside the Statue itself. This well know often abbreviated few versus are:
      “Give me your tired, your poor,
      Your huddled masses yearning to breathe free,
      The wretched refuse of your teeming shore.
      Send these, the homeless, tempest-lost to me,
      I lift my lamp beside the golden door!”
      These words once represented Freedom, and the Opportunity to Work Hard with the Possibility of Fulfilling your Dreams.
      Today, people flock here but not for these opportunities, but instead to be taken care of .. after all American’s are Rich and we owe it to the World. Or so the Democrat’s believe!

  • D Parri

    It would be nice to see a symbiosis develop between the far-right and the moderate-right that avoids the toxic representations that are now plaguing some of the party members. Bipartisanship is a voluntary and absolutely essential for input and participation to take place amongst people who have differing opinions and viewpoints.

    The internal strife within the GOP can be healthy if it is maintained in check. The greatest question to be answered in these days appears to be whether a diverse organization can work cooperatively with one another and avoid the ideological bone-breaking that sometimes happens whenever there is not the leadership tutelage of a single-figure leader that can serve to ‘make peace’ among the many factions within the current-day GOP party.

  • potemkin_village_usa


    __The acronym RINO (Republican In Name Only) was created by Republican Celeste Greig of California in defining Republican Candidate for mayor of Los Angeles who held views of the political left. She defined Riordan as a candidate who claims to be Republican but his plank aligns itself with liberal democrats dividing the Republican party diluting a winning conservative composition of the Republican base. RINOs come from traditionally blue states and hold liberal/progressive ideals like raising taxes, the right to abortion, marginalization of the 2nd amendment, population control, campaign contributions from progressive groups like Planned Parenthood and the Brady Gun Control Lobby.
    __The common false narrative by RINOs and their backers on the left is that the Republican party would become a minor party had they not populated the
    Congress. RINO Republicans make it possible for to keep the democrats from totally controlling all houses of Congress and the Presidency. When the GOP campaigned under the banner of Nelson Rockefeller Liberal/Progressivism, the Democrats controlled congress anyway! What changed things around was the Reagan Revolution where Ronald Reagan swept the states with his “Bold-Colors” conservatism and not the pastels of “Rockefeller-Liberalism” and was proven the success of the Republican Party when Newt Gingrich took over the Congress for the first time in 40 years under the “Bold-Colors” of Conservatism. When pastel progressive republicans ran like Bob Dole and Mitt Romney, the republicans had their butts handed to them.
    __Now, the propagandists on the left are trying to mischaracterize the Tea-Party as RINOs without any real evidence. They forward this “Red-Herring” as a distraction to those who would re-elect conservatives to both houses of Congress and the White House. The next false premise is that we should have Chris Christie as our standard bearer in 2016, or, lose the election with Ted Cruz. The evidence is to the contrary and it scares the Doo-Doo out of the progressive left. The RINOs and the liberal progressives on the left have more in common with each other than the Tea-Party does. The Tea-Party has more in common with the Conservative/Libertarians and they know it!!
    __Bold Colors will win the day in 2014 and in 2016 and that scares the pants off of the left which has put their misleading and deceptive propaganda campaign into high gear.

    ****Support Freedom Works and the Tea-Party; call your Congressional Delegation and give them moral support. Call: (202)-224-3121 and ask to be connected to your reps and senators!!

    • DesertLady

      OK. You make a lot of good sense in this comment. One question I have right off though– Do you have a sense for the differences in the voting population from back then to the voting population now? Surely the general tone and attitudes of the public have changed over all the years you’re referencing and I would think this would have a bearing in your analysis. If Tea Party conservative ( or RINO or true republican) are to win this time, they really need to market and sell their message and it has to be something the public are convinced they should want more than the “free stuff” another democrat will give them!

      • potemkin_village_usa

        FIRST: An NBC poll just out last Tuesday showed that Chris Christie trailed the generic republican candidate in every region of the United States except for the North Eastern U.S. Christie’s popularity does not extend past the northeastern United States. In the Midwest, Christie trails by 5 percentage points; in the south by a slimmer margin of 2 percentage points; however, in the west, Christie trails by a whopping 18 percentage points. This is my sense of the voting public and other polls confirm ABCs statistics.

        SECOND: The Tea-Party never has claimed Republicanism as its standard bearer. In fact, polls have shown that the Republicans are a minority within the Tea-Party with a plurality of independents and Democrats holding the majority. RINO is a term coined in the 1990s referring to those who claim to be Republicans, but, hold the ideology of liberal progressives.

        THIRD: It seems to me that the Tea-Party has gotten the ‘Better-Late-Than-Never’ message in regard to their marketing skills. I also believe that the object lesson of the failed policies on the left in conjunction with real journalism coming back from the dead in regard to the real effects of these policies, vis-à-vis the ACA, the economy, scandals and bad acts of this administration are now an object lesson far more instructive than any marketing scheme.

        __Thank You for your post. “As iron sharpens iron, so one person sharpens another.” Proverbs 27:17

    • hihoze

      Thanks for the post Potemkin. Bernie Goldberg pointed out on the O’Reilly Factor 11/11/13 that there is another kind of RINO….a Tea Party RINO and Bernie is right …. as an registered Independent who always voted Republican, I lost faith in the Republican Party when I realized that we are becoming AINO’s – “Americans In Name Only”. The Progressives in both parties have turned the USA into a White European Socialist-Fascist State….so yes Bernie was right….I’m a Tea Party RINO that does NOT want a 3rd Party but a Constitutional Republican Party to compare and contrast to the Manifesto Democratic National Socialist Party. It’s time for the Euro-Elitists in the Democratic National Socialist Party to compromise with a new Constitutional & American Republican Party.

      • potemkin_village_usa

        The Tea-Party does not operate under the name Republican; never has, never will. The Tea-Party is made up of a plurality of independents and democrats with a minority of Republicans. As I have pointed out previously, the term RINO was coined in the 1990s referring to those who claim to be Republicans, but, hold the ideology of liberal progressives. I do not disparage nor promote a third party. If a third party is at the nexus of a paradigm shift as when Abraham Lincoln was nominated then elected president, then so be it. However, taking over the Republican party is not out of the question.
        __Thank You for your post. “As iron sharpens iron, so one person sharpens another.” Proverbs 27:17

      • outraged_mom

        I share your philosophy exactly – I have been telling Mitch McConnell, Eric Cantor the rest of them, when the GOP send a funding request form – Call the dogs off and I will team play – but until then, I’m sending my money directly to my candidate of choice – Mitch and Cantor are doing everything they can with the power they derive from its members to do what its members don’t want…sound familiar

  • Bob Bailey

    The standard big govt establishment GOP pick Christie… Mr Goldberg, the lifetime politicians brought us to the place we are at… Establishment, lifetime politicians, on both sides of the aisel… I would rather lose with a Cruz or Rand Paul… Then offer up more sheep…

  • D Parri

    So, when did it become a foregone conclusion that Ted Cruz was a loser? That Ted Cruz would choose to enter into the presidential race? That Christie will enter the race? That there is no possible common ground for Christie and Cruz to stand upon?

    It is getting closer all the time, but isn’t it a tad soon to be pitting two Republican potential nominees against one another? At what point would it serve in the best interests of the party to start with the issuance of blood from its own people?

    It appears that I have more questions than answers, obviously, but there is no doubt that some of these issues will need to be settled–and the sooner the better.

  • Shawn

    I’m 36…and I’m tired of holding my nose to vote for pseudo conservatives. We didn’t win with McCain or Romney. Not bad guys…just not politically aligned with conservatives who are SICK AND TIRED of tax and spend and print and spend philosophies from both parties. I’m tired of the choice of socialist and socialist light. We need the pendulum swung back hard. I have an idea….spend only what you bring in. Balanced budget. FLAT tax. Sequestration was a joke. We need to cut $1 trillion A YEAR from the budget to get on track. OBAMA spends $1 trillion more/yr than we did in 2007 and Repubs let it happen. Enough is enough. I’m taxed enough already and hope someone like Ben Carson runs. Study Germany in the 1920’s….we are there. Debt we cannot repay. Printing money to devalue the debt. Inflation is next. Get your dumptrucks ready to carry the money you’ll need to buy a loaf of bread. Think I’m nuts? Just do the research on Germany. Do the math on our unfunded liabilities.

    • brickman

      Germany had hyper inflation because it didn’t raise taxes or create new taxes when it incurred debt to finance its war machine in 1914. They thought that they would win the war and that reparations from France would pay off their debt. This is how they funded the Franco-Prussian War. When they lost in WW l they had to PAY reparations and cede equipment and resources. They printed money which led to inflation. Their inflation was not caused by government spending on social programs, it was caused by military spending without raising taxes.

      The Iraq War was said to be self funding by its architects. No tax increase was needed. An unfunded war is the cause of much of our problem. Bill Clinton left us with 4 balanced budgets. Yes the GOP controlled Congress, they deserve praise too. Once Bush was elected they changed their tune and cut taxes while starting a war. I know you’re 36 . Did you say , don’t cut my taxes and keep a balanced budget. If you didn’t YOU are the problem.

      • Shawn

        Now…my family is FROM GERMANY. Yes, they incurred debt due to their war. You hit the nail on the head…they printed money. It really doesn’t matter at this point how the money is/was spent. It’s like a dumb college kid who maxed out his credit card and has nothing to show for it. We have a war on poverty…40+ years of wealth transfer and no real reduction in poverty….just a destruction of work ethic and personal responsibility.

        We spent $100bln annually on the wars. We’re spending $1 trillion more than we bring in now annually (since 2008). The cause of 17 trillion in debt is not just the wars. The cause is government that won’t live within its means…wars, social programs, entitlements, pork…you name it. I am TAXED ENOUGH ALREADY. I am not part of the problem…I am part of the top 3-5% of wage earners sick and tired of paying the bills for the loafers and still having government print to satisfy its appetite. My work ethic (and that of my friends and family) is the solution. It needs to be contagious. But democrat policies kill it.

        • brickman

          My maternal great grandfather came here FROM GERMANY in 1912. Germany was not a financial basket case at that time. Bismarck had legislated the German public health care system with laws passed in 1883,1884 and 1889. They were not what led Germany to ruin. Since WW ll they have expanded this system. They are not carrying money in wheelbarrows.

          The cause of their debt was the war and post war reparations. Hitler repudiated the reparations and the economy improved. They did not raise taxes to fund WW l unlike the the USA which did. We did to fund WW ll also. We didn’t to fund Iraq. We cut taxes instead. We had balanced budgets until that time. After that we didn’t.

          The deficit for this year is $ 680.3 billion down from the trillion dollar deficits of the past few years. What changed? The sequester lowered spending somewhat but the main reason was WE RAISED TAXES. This raised revenues. NOBODY likes to pay taxes. I don’t. We need to cut spending on things like farm subsidies and other pork. When you advocate tax cuts, you advocate deficits.

          • Shawn

            No…do some research on tax cuts in this country and the federal revenue…revenue increases due to economic expansion. If they’d then return even more money, it would make things better. Taxes drain economic growth.

            And, it was an absolute fact that people used wheel barrows full of deutschmarks to pay for bread in the 1920s. Why? Economic ruin. They printed money. They had massive debt. The ended up with massive inflation. You can argue how it happened, and as I said…it doesn’t matter. It happened. How do you take enough money to cover our current debt and unfunded liabilities? THERE ISN’T ENOUGH TO TAKE!!! We need to cut it all as far as I’m concerned.

            Advocating tax cuts is not advocating for deficits. That is a fact.

          • brickman

            You missed the timeline of my wheelbarrow statement . Please read it again. The point is that in a postwar German welfare state they aren’t experiencing hyper inflation.

            You don’t have to do much research to see that the tax increase we had last year increased government revenue. It went up 13%. The amount is the largest in US history. After a tax increase not a tax cut.

            The last time we had balanced budgets were at the end of the Clinton years. After he raised taxes. Clinton’s taxes were the largest in history. It ushered in an economic boom, even though govt revenue was the at the highest % of GDP in american history.

            The first President to say tax cuts led to more revenue was Jimmy Carter in a debate with Gerald Ford. How’d his economic plan work out? Reagan saw he could promise the same painless fix. It led to then record deficits.

  • Debdeb

    It is too early to quiet the debates. However in the final stretch, it should be as you say. When statistical reality presents itself, compromise and surrender are required to win. Principle put on hold is not principle abandoned.

    Chris Christie is an interesting discussion. I am not certain I agree with your statement that he can win the support of women. I am looking forward to how it all plays.

  • kidderdoc

    Hey Bernie et al…. we have held our collective noses for many elections to vote for RINOS and look where it has gotten us….How about it’s YOUR turn to vote for a conservative, bend over, hold your nose and watch us win…. remember how hated Reagan was by the establishment Republicans??? Or did you conveniently forget that ….. conservative ideas ring true to the vast majority!!

    • Josh

      When we go back to 1980, I’ll agree. But like it or not, we’re in the 2000s, and conservatives don’t have the adaptability, scalability, nor the desire to cater to a nation. If all of Conservatism was a single Twitter handle, the Beliebers in Delaware would outnumber its followers.

      If conservative values rang true for the vast majority, it wouldn’t need to be said repeatedly by political underdogs whose only role of note is a sporadic infantry of obstruction — not change, not winning hearts and minds; just throwing monkey wrenches at everyone else.

      • rider237

        just out of curiosity, what do you think conservative values are?

        • Josh

          Deductive reasoning applied on a forum like this would suggest conservative values include: God, smaller government (not less intrusive, just less spending), and gladly making enemies out of every single man, woman and child who isn’t a conservative on some mission of martyrdom where it’s better to hang on principle while watching the country turn blue than it is to compromise to empower the entire party.

          If based upon what’s written here, what gets thumbed up and down, etc, then I’d say conservative values include a selfish, authoritarian way of thinking, libeling anyone not in complete lockstep, and willingly throwing the rest of us under the bus as if we’re not also Americans but rather enemies of a state that supposedly belongs in whole to conservatives and their values, thus it needs to be “taken back.”

          I was once under the mistaken impression that conservative thinking was more in line with how a true democracy needs to function; i.e. not the wolves deciding what’s for dinner, but a coming together of the minds to maybe hunt for something to satisfy all tastes and leave the poor sheep unharmed. It appears I was woefully wrong, however, and conservatives are foaming at the mouth to reclaim power so they can make the rest of us fall in line with what they want.

          • KStrett

            You post is simply an ad hominem attack.

            If you are correct, why does the moderate model for success fail more than it succeeds?

            “I was once under the mistaken impression that conservative thinking was more in line with how a true democracy needs to function”

            America is not a democracy. It is a constitutional republic.

            “conservatives are foaming at the mouth to reclaim power so they can make the rest of us fall in line with what they want.”

            You mischaracterized conservatives. Your characterization would accurately apply the moderate Karl Rove wing of the GOP.

            They want to win so they can get a majority again and do nothing. What did they do when the GOP held the House, Senate, and Presidency under the Bush administration?

            They acted like watered down democrats and got kicked out of office paving the way for Obama to win the presidency.

            If you factor in unfunded liabilities, America’s debt is around 100 trillion dollars or more. We can’t not stay on this road. If we do the economy will collapse.

            We are reaching the end of the road and can no longer afford to pick between driving toward the end of the road at 200 miles an hour and driving toward the end of the road at 40 mph.

          • Josh

            I don’t care anything for Karl Rove. Or Republicans. Or politicians in general. And perhaps some conservatives are being mischaracterized, but I’m not going to pretend that Bernie’s blog commenters, many of whom are foaming at the mouth for their values to be the prevailing values by which we’re all governed, aren’t a fair sampling of conservative attitudes.

            Constitutional Republic, with some insisting we’re already a socialist state — democracy is still an apt description, especially given the context. Quibbles aside, the point was that many conservatives are seeking to institute majority rule to ensure an America they claim as “their” America is “taken back” and the entire nation is subsequently governed by their values.

            Reading these comments on many of Bernie’s posts, I don’t think describing what I see is an attack on anyone. Many hardline conservatives here are acting incredibly selfish, very authoritarian, and are willing to make enemies out of everyone who doesn’t subscribe to their values, including others within the party and others who may vote Republican.

          • KStrett

            You are not addressing my arguments against your position that the GOP need moderates to win.

            “I don’t care anything for Karl Rove. Or Republicans.”

            The model you are endorsing is the Karl Rove plan. The GOP had moderate majority in the house, senate, and presidency. They acted like watered down democrats and got kicked out of office.

            On top of that, this model has failed over and over again since Bush left office. Bush barely won both of his elections. It wasn’t like he won two elections by land slides.

            I am dumbfounded that despite the moderates being kicked out of office and failing to win elections, proponents of this kind of thinking keep ignoring the failure rate of their model and keep blaming the tea party. This model doesn’t work.

            Even if it did work, moderates increase the size of government just like democrats do. What is the point of electing them?

            “And perhaps some conservatives are being mischaracterized”

            You were mischaracterizing conservatives.

            “Quibbles aside, the point was that many conservatives are seeking to institute majority rule to ensure an America they claim as “their” America is “taken back” and the entire nation is subsequently governed by their values.”

            You are special pleading. You don’t have a problem with GOP progressives knifing conservatives in the back but when conservatives give it back to them, that is when you have a problem.

            A month or so ago, the moderates were chiseling a tomb stone for the GOP because of Ted Cruz and other tea party candidates. Now they are essentially making the same arguments. I thought the Tea Party was crazy?

            Once again, the moderates were wrong. Even though they were wrong and are now taking Cruz’s position (which they argued was insane), they are pretending it never happened and are still blaming Cruz.

            “Reading these comments on many of Bernie’s posts, I don’t think describing what I see is an attack on anyone”

            Comparing conservatives to the “ayatollahs in Tehran” isn’t attacking conservatives?

            Calling conservatives the “suicide wing” of the GOP isn’t attacking conservatives?

            Bernie was wrong about the government shut down. It was a wash. Did he write a Mea culpa for comparing to conservatives to ayatollahs or calling them the suicide wing?

            No, he doubled down on his position and he is still attacking “conservative purists.”

            Again, I have no problem if he respectfully disagrees and takes arguments similar to mine and addresses them in an article.However, that is not what he is doing.

            He is insulting conservatives, cherry picking comments and candidates, and constructing straw-men to attack.

            “Constitutional Republic, with some insisting we’re already a socialist state — democracy is still an apt description”

            We are a constitutional republic not a democracy. A democracy is not an apt description of the American government.

            Whether or not we are a socialist state yet is up for debate. There is no question the democrats want a socialist state and that is the best case scenario.

            Why aren’t you lamenting about the democrats seeking to institute majority rule?

            Do they tolerate any deviation from their positions? Do you ever see a “moderate” democrat calling a far left democrat crazy? No!

            The democrat progressives are incrementally changing the country to a huge government system.

            The GOP moderate progressives want a big government system too, albeit a smaller version and structured differently. They are both taking the country in the same direction.

            When you have one party who wants to drive off the road right away and another who wants to slowly drive off the road, eventually you are going to drive off the road. America is close to that point.

            The dinosaurs living the past are the moderate proponents. The game has changed.

            The establishment GOP is losing power and the Tea party is gaining power.The tea party is a threat to the establishment GOP. The 2010 elections demonstrate this and that is why they are attacking conservative candidates.

            The moderate GOP is attempting to keep their power and that is all this is about. They have more in common with the democrats than they do with conservatives.

            If you want to scoff at that, let me ask you this:

            Why would you cut off funding and/or refuse to help established conservative candidates?

            Look at what they did in the Virginia gubernatorial race. The GOP spend 3 million and the last election they spend 9 million. They abandoned Cuccinelli on October 1.

            The “libertarian” candidate held no libertarian views and was bankrolled by the democrats, yet no one managed to figure that out?

          • Josh

            Your entire attempted dressing down of my comments is based on a massive strawman. I answered below about my stance.

      • Bob Bailey

        I tell you what you should do Josh… Go look at the Electorial map of PA … Obama loses all of the counties but Philly and Pittsburg and wins the state… Do the same in Ohio, other swing states… its all the same… Look at the VA governor’s race, last week… Same thing… Whole state is red, except around DC and it goes blue… The Red counties, support the Blue counties, and we are out of money… Spending twice as much as you take in can’t last forever, think about it…

        • Josh

          Red =/= conservative, which is well established by conservatives running around here insulting the rest of us by libeling us RINOs, Democrat lite, Obama supporters, etc, simply because we aren’t Cruz-style conservatives.

      • hihoze

        Freedom never goes out of style. If a Republican talked about the Constitution instead of compromising with their Manifesto, a new Constitutional Republican Party would win in all 50 states. I think Rand Paul would fill venues in colleges and cities all over America. It’s time for a more Libertarian Republican instead of another Liberal Progressive.

  • Phil B

    I would rather WIN with CRUZ, but if it came down to it I would lose with Cruz rather than win with Christie. ANY DAY OF THE WEEK.

    • LyingMediaScum

      Yeah, I would rather vote for a Republican and lose than vote for a Democrat with an R next to his name and win.

      Maybe this time around we should nominate someone who represents conservative principles so that the choice isn’t between bananas and plantains.

  • plsilverman

    well done, Bernie. I’m amazed that so many GOP soured on Christie because he wants ACA to work and he actually showed cordiality to the President. Mr. Kasich wants ACA to work.
    you see, Cruz is a Jester who wants to be King. Christie and Kasich, and I would not vote for them, as they are union busters, at least have a genuine interest in people, and have substance.
    Christie said, in effect, my own party didn’t send a dime for Sandy. He was right. He did not “scold” the President at the airport like Brewer, Koch-shill.
    There are “RINOs” like Murkowski, Kasich, Christie, who are Presidential.

    • hihoze

      Senator Cruz is no wanna be King….he stands in opposition of the self appointed Imperial President who currently has his Democratic National Socialist boot on our necks. Only a collectivist, Euro Marxist wants the ACA ObamaCrap to work. How about throwing it out and starting over with free market solutions instead of Big Gov & Big Insurance doing a Big Fascist number on us?

      • plsilverman

        I disagree. He’s like Governor Walker > a Koch kid..and he wants to be President in 2016. he’s wiling to shut the gov’t down to start his campaign! (Owes us 24 billion). but, go for it, baby, what do I care? here we go with the negative, biased clichés: “collectivist”, “Marxist” – you cannot name one Marxist action of Obama since day one. FRee Market: yeah, let’s deregulatute the entire world like Reagan and increase the debt 3 fold and cause two more crashes. “Fascist”? care to explain?:) > How is Obama self-appointed? you mean his electorate has no credibility? Euro-Marxists! new one from the RNC! I guess all those GOP who are globalists fit that description. please do not send me any more posts. …….afterword>>>”socialist”, yeah. restoring the auto industry, real pinko stuff. never raising taxes on 95% of taxpayers?…maybe telling insurers to no longer deny on precondition. go back to your Foxnews outtakes. so long. as I wrote, please no more posts in my direction. I’ll do the same for you.

  • outraged_mom
  • KStrett

    The article is predicated on a false dichotomy. There could be another candidate besides Christie or Cruz who could be more conservative than Christie. Bernnie also assumes Cruz can’t win.

    The proponents of the republicans need to be moderate to win argument were lamenting about Cruz’s actions with Obama-care. The moderate GOP proponents believed Cruz speaking out about how bad Obama-care is coupled with the government shut down was equivalent of the republican party committing suicide.

    However, exit polls showed the blame for the government shut down was essentially a wash. As more and more people lose their insurance or see massive increases in their premiums, Cruz will gain more support for standing up against Obama-care.

    “Chris Christie can attract moderates and independents that would give him a
    shot in swing states that Republicans must win to take the White House.”

    The exact same arguments were used to support McCain and Romney. How did those elections turn out?

    Finally, we had the perfect moderate GOP situation when Bush was in office. The GOP held the Presidency, the House, and the Senate. What did they do? Nothing!

    After that republicans were kicked out of office and the democrats took over. Yet, for some reason it wasn’t the moderate GOP’s fault….. It never is.

    “They picked a bad candidate in Nevada a few years back when a good candidate might have defeated Harry Reid. And they picked a candidate in
    Delaware who had to go on TV and tell everyone that she’s not a witch.
    She also lost. ”

    Here Bernie is just cherry picking candidates that lost to back up the GOP needs to be moderate to win argument.

    In the 2010 elections, the candidates were mainly tea party affiliated and the republicans won most of the elections. Were there a few bad candidates? Yes but that does nothing to back up the assertion that the GOP needs to be more moderate because the tea party candidates actually won.

    Generally, the moderate candidates lose and the tea party candidates win but the GOP needs to become more moderate any way?

    When the moderate GOP gain full control they don’t do anything but we need to support that out-dated model to win? Even they are correct, what is the point? The moderate GOP is taking the country in the same direction the democrats are but at a slower rate.

    If we keep offering the American people a distinction without a difference, the democrats will continue to win.

    • TheOriginalDonald

      Until Mr. Goldberg explains WHY Linda McMahon got beat twice in Connecticut, I’ll sooner listen to Melissa Joan Hart telling us who should be the GOP candidate in 2016

      • KStrett

        He can’t explain why moderates lose more than win. He cherry picks a few bad candidates as a text book straw-man to knock down.

        Was Christine O’Donnell a bad candidate? Yes but the majority of tea party candidates won in 2010 and they weren’t like O’Donnell.

        If the tea party is so bad, why did the Obama administration use the IRS to go after groups that funded the successful election of 2010?

        Why is the left going after Ted Cruz like a rabid dog? If he is killing the Republican party, I would think they would shut up and let him do it.

        Finally, even though Christiane O’Donnell was a bad candidate ,she shouldn’t have to fight the Democrats and the GOP simultaneously while she is running for office. After she won the primary the GOP refused to give her any funding, which didn’t help her win.

        • brickman

          Why didn’t the Tea Party and their supporters provide funding? I’m hearing the same thing as regards Cuccinelli. The people who complain that the GOP establishment didn’t fund them don’t contribute money either. Go to vpap.org and see the list of Cuccinelli donors. Brent Bozell gave $1,022 and Bill Kristol’s wife gave a grand.

          No Pat Robertson, no Laura Ingraham, no Ollie North to name some Virginians. No Rush, no Sean, no Beck, no Cruz, to name national people. Even Sarah Palin’s SarahPac contributed absolutely nada.

    • plsilverman

      I wonder why Bernie thinks Cruz can’t win? :/ Because, politically, he is a useless cliché machine who does not care his campaign kick-off cost us 24,000,000,000 dollars?

      • KStrett

        Cruz ran against a moderate and won. Moderates argued Cruz was killing the republican party because he stood up against Obama-care and was in favor of shutting down the government to cut of funding for it.

        How accurate were the moderates?

        Exit polls showed the blame for the government shut down was a wash between the Republicans and democrats. The American people are seeing huge increases in their insurance premiums or losing they plans.

        Democrats are now are coming forward supporting a delay and an amendment to the Obama-care law that will stop people from losing their insurance.

        The moderate proponents were wrong again. Despite being wrong less than a month ago they are still attacking and blaming the tea party rather than admitting they were wrong.

        • plsilverman

          I think Cruz is an over-achiever who started his 2016 campaign on the backs of the American people, reaching into their pockets for 24,000,000,000 dollars. I don’t agree that half the people thought the government shutdown was ok. But thanks for your thoughts.

          • KStrett

            You did not address one thing I said. The narrative coming out of the moderate GOP camp was that Cruz was committing suicide with his actions on Obama-care.

            They were clearly wrong. The American people were split on who was to blame. Obama-care is so bad democrats are running away from it.

            Once again, the moderate camp is wrong. This happened about a month ago and they still attack Cruz. This is about the moderate wing losing power and nothing more.

            “I don’t agree that half the people thought the government shutdown was ok.”

            I did not say they thought it was okay. I said half blamed the democrats and half blamed republicans. The moderate wing was arguing that republicans were going to take all the blame they were wrong.

            “reaching into their pockets for 24,000,000 dollars.”

            You don’t have a problem with the democrats shutting down the government and refusing to compromise on Obama-care and now the democrats are running away from it because they don’t want to get kicked out of office?

            You don’t like Cruz and you don’t have much to say….

          • plsilverman

            ok, I was a little lax. sorry. fixing or ending ACA can be done without screwing hundreds of 1000s of American workers. I’ll re-read your post. > I’m 62, give me a break.

          • KStrett

            Why aren’t you blaming the democrats?

            Obama-care is a nightmare. The democrats refused to budge on the issue. They wouldn’t even delay it.

            Now that millions are losing their health insurance or seeing huge rate increases and the issue is turning against them, they want to do something about because they will be kicked out of office but you blame Ted Cruz?

            Federal workers got sent home for a few weeks and you are upset about that but you aren’t upset that millions of Americans are losing their health insurance or their premiums are being jacked up to the point where they can’t afford it?

          • plsilverman

            apples and oranges, isn’t it? Fed. workers got sent home for reasons of Cruz
            2016 campaign kickoff. ACA got started because10s of 1000s of taxpayers who wanted to buy a premium were denied because they had a precondition; because women were being charged 1.5 to 2 times what men were getting charged for, for the same treatment. ACA took 65 years to come about and it IS a major achievement for the country. go ahead and smirk. ACA was co-written by Romneycare experts and sourced the 1993 GOP plan. 5% of potential members are in individual plans which were sub-par to begin win. DEms should have anticipated these fly by nite providers would not retain their clients. blame the DEms? for what? I blame the GOP who are shilling for the healthcare bigs who fund their campaigns, for any fault within ACA.

    • Concerned American

      Are you kidding me? Chris Christie not only attracts moderates and independents; but also organized crime just like the one in the WH. Romney’s campaign dug up enough dirt to fill a dump trunk on this RINO. I’m sick and tired of catering to the left with the likes of McCain and Christie. It’s time to get the Republican Party back on track with a candidate that stands firm but is persuasive; not one that cows down to the media and progressives.

      • outraged_mom

        THe Oh so critical moderates-who told us we had to not be us so that people would like us – Oh – Karl Rove
        I’d rather lose standing next to Cruz-and live to fight the good fight again – then to sail into the white house with Christy- So when the Say Christy is the only one that can win -I will say – I am on the side of right – and it will win, maybe not today..but it will win – I can live with that. So that is the test – can you live with the worst outcome – I can. I am a wackobird and I will stand with Cruz- Plus those jerks are ALWAYS WRONG – send contributions to Ted – Not GOP – the have hit men all over the place going after our – guys – McConnell has his people out there saying you don’t want a fight with him – I say bring it! Without our money – Ill bet his bravado fades –

    • Josh

      It’s metaphorical more than literal. Cruz and Christie are just placeholders for hardline conservatives and moderate Republicans.

      • KStrett

        The problem is Bernie is wrong. Tea party candidates have been more successful than moderate candidates. For some reason proponents of this line of thinking refuse to recognize this model fails more than it is successful.

        • Josh

          Success is relative to local leanings when speaking of local politicians. Pelosi and Reid continually reelected says it all.

          Things the Republicans do not have include the Senate and the White House. Especially the latter, a national level of support is needed. If the type of conservatives flaming Bernie were that pervasive throughout America, Romney wouldn’t have been running in the first place. Nor McCain. (And if the nation doesn’t like a moderate at large, what hope is there for an even more ideologically entrenched candidate? Republicans in general suck at getting minority and young voters. Most conservative core values–not Obama-based complaints–aren’t that appealing to anyone but conservatives.)

          Also, moderates don’t decide to sit home, and they don’t complain like hardline conservatives. They lend their votes to the party, whereas conservatives seem far more fickle and willing to drive their car into the creek if the gas station isn’t carrying unleaded. So, despite being spat upon and libeled as traitors, these “RINOs” and “D-Lites” still show party-wide support to these candidates once whittled down to R vs. D.

          If you folks think a real conservative is going to come along and develop a following like an Obama, then good luck. The more logical thing that’s going to happen: A “real” conservative is going to say things like Santorum or Bachman and scare the crap out of guys like me and everyone else who doesn’t hold that ideology.

          A “real” conservative is going to come along, obstinate and refusing to budge while citing “values,” and, to the rest of the nation, will appear as a totalitarian of the right. We’re not in the ’80s anymore.

          I know it’s downed-thumb fodder, but it’s the truth. Other people outside of the ideology do not identify with the conservative message. Partly because of the poor quality of the translation, partly because there’s no attempt made by many conservatives to do anything but insult everyone else, and partly because it’s not an ideology by which we wish to be governed.

          Conservatives certainly want what they want. It’s clear reading Bernie’s blogs, listening to radio, reading other right-wing content, etc. But the Rolling Stones said it as well as anyone can. Whether or not folks listen when the choice is upon us, well, I guess we’ll see.

          What’s working in any Republican’s favor next go ’round is that the best the Democrats can do is most likely Clinton. It’s a death sentence to be thought a racist, but just a wrist slap to be thought a sexist. So I doubt an impenetrable cult of personality would form around Hillary to create a shield. But can a conservative even get through the primaries to test his or her luck?

          Forget convincing the nation. A conservative first has to convince the party. Blasting fellow Republicans doesn’t help the conservative cause.

          • KStrett

            “Success is relative to local leanings when speaking of local politicians. Pelosi and Reid continually reelected says it all”

            You are comparing apples and oranges. Tea party candidates won big in 2010. We are not talking about a seat occupied by a politician who will lose it when they keel over and die in it.

            On top of that, when moderates do win they initially campaign as conservatives and change after they get into office.

            They don’t run as moderates and win. When they run for the presidency they run as moderates and lose.

            If you are correct why did why did the apotheosis of moderate fail to
            win the Presidency?

            McCain and Romney failed but you are telling me we need to run another McCain or Romney? Why would it work this time when it has failed over and over again? Your model does not work any more!

            ” We’re not in the ’80s anymore.”

            We aren’t in the 90s any more either. The moderate model is the outdated one.

            When it did work and you had the perfect moderate GOP scenario when W Bush was in office, what did they do?

            Did they start turning the ship around and start undoing the left’s giant government provisions?

            The GOP held the Presidency, the House, and the Senate. They acted like watered down democrats and
            republicans were kicked out of office. The democrats
            took over.

            You had the perfect moderate GOP scenario and the American people kicked them out of office but it wasn’t the moderate GOP’s fault and we need to repeat that?

            Why? Even if they win they are going to go in the exact same direction as the democrats.

            I assume you are speaking of the Reagan presidency with the 80’s reference. Why do you think he won?

            I always believed that Reagan was stupid because the media and entertainment industry always portrayed him as a moron and I was very young. After hearing some of his speaches after he died, I changed my opinion.

            He articulated conservative principles clearly and put them in simple terms. That is why he won. George H.W Bush proceeded Reagan. Bush belongs to the moderate GOP wing and was defeated by Clinton.

            “Romney wouldn’t have been running in the first place”

            The media plays a role into who runs in the republican primaries. McCain and his campaign staff likely thought because he generally gets favorable media attention, therefore he will get favorable media attention in the presidential race.

            You could almost see the look of shock on their faces when the media started insinuating he might have had an affair when there was no evidence to support the claim.

            The media attempts to pick the most liberal republican candidate and then attacks them after they win. If a conservative candidate is the front runner they launch an all out attack and attempt to knock them out of the race.

            “A “real” conservative is going to say things like Santorum or Bachman
            and scare the crap out of guys like me and everyone else who doesn’t
            hold that ideology. ”

            You are letting the media define candidates for you. Look what they did to Santorum:

            The republican candidates were have a debate and all of the sudden George stephanopoulos asks a question out of left field about whether they believe contraception could be made illegal.

            This question also coincidentally was asked right before the democrats launched their war on woman campaign.

            Santorum position was clear. He follows Catholic Church’s position on contraception but he doesn’t want to impose the Church’s position on everyone else.

            Despite repeating his position several times, the press continually made it an issue and presented Santorum as someone who wants to ban contraception.

            After he bowed out, the press had the gall to say he could never get out from under the contraception issue. The only people who were concerned with the contraception issue was the media and the democratic party.

            As for gaffes, the press magnifies any conservative candidate misspeaking and ignores the democrats. If any conservative said there were 56 states the entire media and entertainment complex would have wall to wall coverage of it. When President Obama said it they ignore it.

            ” A conservative first has to convince the party. Blasting fellow Republicans doesn’t help the conservative cause.”

            In your view, it is permissible for the moderates to attack conservatives but conservatives can’t attack moderates?

            “If the type of conservatives flaming Bernie were that pervasive throughout America”

            Why isn’t Bernie flaming conservatives?

            It isn’t like he is addressing their arguments and writing an article respectfully disagreeing with their position.

            He sounds like someone on MSNBC when he addresses conservatives. He makes ad hominem attacks and cherry picks comments or candidates to construct a straw-man to knock down.

            “Most conservative core values–not Obama-based…..aren’t that appealing to anyone but conservatives.”

            The moderate GOP is in control of the party and has been for a long time. They are not making the argument for conservative values. They have more in common with the democrats. They like big government they just want a different version of it.

          • Josh

            “If you are correct why did why did the apotheosis of moderate fail to
            win the Presidency?”

            My point exactly. If the exemplar of a moderate Republican can’t gain nationwide support, what do you folks think a hardline conservative is going to do on a national stage?

            I’m not necessarily arguing on a horse with Bernie and the moderates that a moderate is needed to win. Though I do believe a moderate stands a better chance, I also believe a conservative stands zero chance. So let me be clear on that point. With a moderate, at least new support stands as more of a tangible possibility. With a conservative, I just don’t see that being the case.

            (Personally, I want an Independent POTUS with no party affiliation, religious affiliation, and one whose loyalties lie to the people and not donors. I want a president who is able to compromise without feeling it’s “caving in,’ because in a nation of over 300 million, one value set doesn’t fit everyone.)

            I know it’s difficult for any person to see outside of their own political leanings, but conservative values are seriously not embraced by the nation at large.

            White conservatives should place themselves in a minority’s shoes, especially a black person, and think about how it sounds when the “Constitution” is brought up. Sure, conservatives don’t mean they want to go back to slavery. Obviously. But it’s scary. Name-dropping the doc 12 times per 200 words gives the impression to some that conservatives want to travel backwards in time. I know a lot of black folks and Latinos from my skeptic community who are legitimately scared of conservatives.

            Media creation? Perhaps in part. Though conservatives don’t seem to step in to put those fears at ease.

            Place yourselves in the shoes of young people who live socially in today’s world and are accepting of homosexuality, transgenders, freedom to sell one’s self and to use drugs, and people who embrace the idea of secularism. The religious aspect of the party scares people. It just does. Young folks don’t want to be associated with people they believe to be old, backward fogies.

            Things like smaller, honest, frugal government is something able to catch on. It’s much of the rest that loses people.

            “In your view, it is permissible for the moderates to attack conservatives but conservatives can’t attack moderates?”

            We can get into the chicken-or-egg game of what happened first: Bernie attacked, or he fought back. But that’s specific. In general, my failing to mention something doesn’t mean I agree or disagree with it. The context wasn’t about the bickering. Though to that point, the infighting definitely goes both ways. Moderates are obviously trying to stay in power, conservatives are trying to claim more power. So it goes in politics.

            To quickly address it: If it is Bernie and the moderates instigating, then conservatives should take the higher ground so that they’re recognizable amidst the flying elbows.

            But that’s not what I’m speaking about.

            All I’m pointing out is that conservatives are not embraced outside of conservatives.

            As for the media and Santorum: They didn’t need to selectively edit the man. Religious candidates are becoming scarier every cycle. It’s just the way the world is trending with better science, more information, and less adherence to old ways. It’s a worldwide thing, and today’s youth are connected to the world.

            For the GOP not making the argument for conservative values: Of course they’re not. But neither are conservatives, really. Their obstruction in government reads as anti-Obama. Perhaps that isn’t the sum of it, but that’s how it comes across. Their stances read to the public at large like a group of people who want to fit the nation with tricorns and puffy man blouses with our wimmenz in the kitchen. Perhaps that isn’t the sum of it, but that’s how it comes across.

            I’m fully aware Republicans have their own version of big government. And many people outside of the conservative niche fear the same for conservatives. We fear being dragged against our will to an adherence to holy interpretations and less freedoms.

            If it’s media unfairly representing conservatives, then maybe conservatives, when able, should do a better job of representing what their values are, and why we all should abide, rather than engaging in name-calling and finger-pointing.

            Whether Bernie and the GOP moderates are the bullies, those from the outside looking in just see a fight, not an instigation from one and a retaliation from the other. And, personally, I expect to see the people claiming moral superiority to be morally superior when it comes to knuckle-dragging.

            I won’t be. I’m going to call things how I see them. And how I see them, particularly around here, is a group of isolationist conservatives wanting badly to rule. Then again, I’m not trying to convince a nation that my values are what 300m+ should live by.

            As a said in a previous response: I believe these many conservatives around content such as this are a fair sampling. I have no reason to feel otherwise.

          • Josh


            If there’s anything important missed you wanted addressed, just shout it out. We both seem to be very longwinded, and scrolling up to address each point gets tedious. As I’m sure you’re aware.

          • KStrett

            I think you are a person who has more in common with democrats. You want to the GOP to become more like the democrats. Because of this political ideology you have a problem with conservatives.

            You are not complaining about the direction the far left is taking the country. Nor do you have a problem when the left or the moderates attack conservatives.

            Moreover, you are buying into and parroting all the arguments the left uses against conservatives. You want conservatives to go away.

            That is fine but be honest about it. Don’t present your self as a right of center person who wants republicans to win when you are not.

            “If the exemplar of a moderate Republican can’t gain nationwide support, what do you folks think a hardline conservative is going to do on a national stage?”

            Your argument is that the GOP needs to go to the left of Romney and McCain to win?

            IF the GOP goes to the left of Romney and McCain, what is the point? What you are left with is a distinction without a difference.

            “Though I do believe a moderate stands a better chance, I also believe a conservative stands zero chance.”

            Your position is incoherent! You are contradicting yourself. You can’t concede that moderates lose and then argue they have a better chance of winning when they haven’t won in a long time.

            You are totally ignoring the 2010 success of the tea party. Having a choice between a true conservative and a far left democrat is a real choice.

            Offering the choice between a big mac and a big mac-lite isn’t a choice.

            As for the list of social issues liberal can not win them if they are argued properly. The democrat party monumentally supported slavery. Republicans were responsible for eliminating it. The KKK was the terrorist arm of the democratic party!

            Liberals can not win the argument on abortion or changing the definition of marriage for gay people either.

            “I want a president who is able to compromise without feeling it’s “caving in,’ because in a nation of over 300 million, one value set doesn’t fit everyone”

            If someone is a capitalist there is no common ground or compromise they can make with a Marxists.

            “As for the media and Santorum: They didn’t need to selectively edit the man.”

            You just ignored the example I gave to prove my point. He did not support banning contraceptives but the media insinuated he did! That is a smear campaign. Yet, you don’t seem to have a problem with that……..

            You have a far left political ideology and you don’t like conservatives.

          • Josh

            Want to see me complain about progressive liberals and big government and how I loathe heading in that direction? Read around. I’ve been commenting here for a while, and it’s a matter of record that I’m no fan at all of Democrats, liberals, and particularly progressives.

            I’m sure it’d be a little out of the ordinary, though. You seem much more the type to extrapolate from a snippet a person’s entire ideology.

            So have at it.

            I’m simply pointing out–and obviously it’s falling on blind eyes–that conservative values are not embraced by non-conservatives. Especially not with the way conservatives are presenting them today.

            Besides smaller government, what other values do you guys have that can be translated to non-conservatives in a way that non-conservatives don’t feel threatened?

            Until you folks can figure that out, it’s going to be a long, hard climb for the Senate and White House.

            “Your position is incoherent!”

            Not at all. Perhaps you just fail to understand the world outside of conservative values. Moderate Republicans aren’t winning. True. Yet hardline conservatives believe that their values and their politics are so divine that, if only given a platform, America would thrust a true conservative into the highest office?

            Not with the way conservatives fail to get their point across. Not with the way conservatives legitimately scare people.

            And, no, I’m not ignoring the success of 2010. I’m just not cherry-picking instances where conservatives did well locally to extrapolate those results to a nation at large. Republicans in general are behind the 8 ball.

            Their values don’t click with many people.

            Media paints them as racists and even terrorists (hey, I even wrote a song about it and won a contest for it. Check it out on youtube – /watch?v=Q8wFoAuT-7c ).

            But, still, instead of actually trying to get people on their side, the hardline conservatives of the nation have this tendency to entrench themselves further in some of the very values non-conservatives, particularly young people and minorities, have issues with.

            Screw the GOP moderates. I really don’t give phuck-one about them or any politician. Conservatives SHOULD change, though. Not by dropping their core values. Not by becoming liberal. But by assuring the public at large that, if they do get power, they won’t be coming after people’s freedoms and looking to smack folks with holy books. Perhaps by giving up on things like trying to force science out of schools. Maybe by, at the very least, toning down their rhetoric concerning “global warming” being a scam. Or start throwing people under the bus when they claim a deity will work things out in that regard.

            It scares people.

            That segues nicely into Santorum. Again, it didn’t matter! Media didn’t have to screw him over. His stance on homosexuality alone was more than enough to cause people to cringe. For Pete’s sake. This is the 2000s. Most folks 30-something and under felt like they were listening to their drunk grandfather ramble on about “dem there gays.”

            But lol @ “far left.”

            It’s as good a guess as any, I suppose.

            I was a huge Tea Party supporter for a few years. I supported them. They supported me. I wrote articles in support, a song for my friends’ and family’s values to show support (as I’m not religious), and I’m as gung-ho to get progressives out as anyone.

            But I don’t recognize the Tea Party in 2013. I really don’t. I don’t recognize conservatives anymore. They’re scaring me. Where I used to be open embraced, now I’m called things like “far left” by anyone with whom I disagree. It used to be cool that my values weren’t perfectly simpatico. Now it makes me an enemy; now it makes me a secular progressive looking to take their freedoms.

            I believe Bernie was absolutely right. Many of these conservatives have turned into American ayatollahs. And you’re doing a great job at driving that point home.

            We’ll see how far that gets y’all.

          • KStrett

            “Many of these conservatives have turned into American ayatollahs. And you’re doing a great job at driving that point home.”

            All I am doing is disagreeing with your position on conservatives. You have no evidence to back it up. Nor, have you made a case to support it.

            The majority of what you say is predicated on ad hominem attacks on conservatives and assuming the majority of people agree with you. In fact, you haven’t made your position clear to begin with.

            You say you don’t support the position the GOP needs to become more moderate to win position.
            However, you insinuate you support the notion the GOP needs to become more moderate to win and then you disavow that sentiment only to repeat the same thing again.

            Whether you want to admit it or not your position has to be the moderate position as you stated it has a better chance of winning and you haven’t offered any other option.

            Your entire case is predicated on a circular argument coupled with ad hominem attacks on conservatives.

            Conservatives Can’t win. How can the GOP win if they nominate a conservative?

            The ayatollahs comment was about the government shut down and Obama-care. According to moderates or non-moderates who dislike social conservatives, It was a suicidal tactic that couldn’t work.

            What is happening now?

            Democrats are running away from Obama-care faster than the Flash on cocaine. If you were correct, Ted Cruz’s numbers or any tea party republican for that matter should be plummeting.

            In Colorado, Cruz is tied with Hillary and Rand Paul is beating her. Shouldn’t Cruz be in the single digits by this point?

            You were wrong about the government shut down and Obama-care but you doubled down on it anyway and you are making the same argument that proved to be incorrect.

            “I’m no fan at all of Democrats, liberals, and particularly progressives.”

            You are attacking conservatives and blaming them for the GOP’s failures when the moderates are in charge and their tactic for success failed over and over again. You are not attacking liberals or the moderate GOP or blaming them for any thing.

            “You seem much more the type to extrapolate from a snippet a person’s entire ideology.”

            You might be socially liberal and fiscally conservatives. However, that leads to liberal fiscal policies.

            Let’s say the GOP embraces the environmental movement. People have the choice of the GOP who support the environmental movement and the democrats who support it.

            The democrats want cap and trade and the republicans don’t. If the sky is falling how can you be against cap and trade?

            What if the GOP have their own version of cap and trade? The sky is falling and one party has cap and trade and the other party has cap and trade-lite. This is a recipe for failure.


            If the sky is falling, why would people vote for a watered down version of cap and trade when they can get the real thing?

            The same thing goes for health care. There are a large number of low information voters who believe a single payer socialized system is great and would solve all of the country’s health care problems.

            If the GOP caves on health-care and people have the choice between socialized medicine and a “better version” of Obama-care, we will end up with socialized medicine.

            If someone articulates why socialized medicine is horrible the way Reagan did, you offer people a clear choice.

            It doesn’t seem like you understand the far left. The left imbeds policies in their social movement. That is why the environmental movement is often referred to the water melon movement.

            It is green on the outside and Marxist on the inside. If you cave on the social issues you get the policies too.

            Finally, the science is against man made global warming….. I mean climate change…….This issue isn’t important to voters either. It is important to the far left because they are using environmentalism as a Trojan horse.

            “that conservative values are not embraced by non-conservatives ”

            You are presupposing independents are siding with liberals. That isn’t the case.

            “Until you folks can figure that out, it’s going to be a long, hard climb for the Senate and White House. ”

            Was McCain or Romney running as a social conservative? Not really. This is a circular argument.

            “Moderate Republicans aren’t winning. True. Yet hardline conservatives believe that their values and their politics are so divine that, if only given a platform, America would thrust a true conservative into the highest office?”

            Circular argument.

            You concede moderates aren’t winning and believe conservatives can’t win.
            Do you believe the GOP needs to go to the left of McCain or Romney to win? You dodged this question.

            If the answer is no, what strategy do you believe will win?

            Since moderates have failed and conservatives haven’t been put up against the democrats, how can you say it will fail when it hasn’t been tried?

            Running moderates is a better strategy but you concede that it doesn’t work and keep arguing that they need to be more moderate? That is an incoherent position. Moving to the left on social issues amounts to becoming more moderate….

            “And, no, I’m not ignoring the success of 2010. I’m just not cherry-picking instances where conservatives did well locally to extrapolate those results to a nation at large. Republicans in general are behind the 8 ball.”

            That may be true but that is exactly what Bernie has been doing. The moderates are farther behind the 8 ball than conservatives are. Conservationism has won recently and moderates have failed.

            Yet, you continually attack conservatives. If the conservative movement is so bad why did the Obama administration target the groups that funded the 2010 elections?

            “instead of actually trying to get people on their side,”

            How can they get people on their side when they are being attacked by the media, the moderate GOP, and moderate GOP within the conservative media landscape?

            They attacked Ted Cruz and the moderates were wrong again. Instead of admitting they are wrong they double down and continuing their attack.

            “Screw the GOP moderates”

            You are either equivocating or just simply haven’t thought about this issue very much.

            “Conservatives SHOULD change, though. Not by dropping their core values. Not by becoming liberal. But by assuring the public at large that, if they do get power, they won’t be coming after people’s freedoms and looking to smack folks with holy books.”

            It sounds like you want conservatives to abandon their positions on social issues or at best tone it down. If someone is socially conservative that amounts to dropping their core values. I explained why this won’t work above…..
            Should the moderate GOP change?

            Why isn’t the left’s attempt to have the government regulate and control everything coming after people’s freedoms?

            “Perhaps by giving up on things like trying to force science out of schools.”

            No one wants to force science out of the schools. This is an argument the far left makes all the time.

            “That segues nicely into Santorum.”

            First of all, Santorum wasn’t a tea party candidate. People supported him when they realized the only other choice was Romney. Santorum was kicked out when the democrats took the senate.

            What didn’t you do in your response?

            A: Address the point I made. The contraception issue was media generated and amounted to a smear campaign.

            Holding the position that redefining marriage is not a constitutional right, makes people cringe?

            Why is it when redefining marriage went 0-30, no one was telling the left to give up on redefining marriage but when they have some success every tells conservatives to abandon the issue? The game is rigged for conservatives to lose.

            “Besides smaller government, what other values do you guys have that can be translated to non-conservatives in a way that non-conservatives don’t feel threatened?”

            A small government political philosophy is being for individual freedom! You can’t simultaneously have a political philosophy of large government and be for individual freedom. Large government political philosophies are always collectivist in nature. They are not individualists.

            “But I don’t recognize the Tea Party in 2013.”

            I don’t see the Tea party having any different positions from when it started. The media launched a massive smear campaign against the tea party and the Obama administration used the IRS to go after their funding. Maybe the Tea party hasn’t changed but you have.

          • Josh

            Why aren’t moderates like Romney winning? Seriously. Why aren’t they?

            Because there are too many conservatives in the nation who don’t want to vote for a moderate? Because a moderate can’t rally support from independents? Because conservative values ring true for the majority of America, so these Americans would rather have a progressive liberal than a moderate Republican?

            Or could it possibly be because the nation at large is trending more liberal with the young, educated and minorities?

            What’s the reason? Damn. For someone dropping the hammer on me, you sure seem to offer incredibly slim pickings on your end.

            Failing to understand the point I’m making, unintentionally or due to partisan nonsense, and accusing me of logical fallacies, and creating long replies based on your confusion isn’t worth the time responding.

            I’m an Oakland Raiders fan. Diehard. Tried and f’n true. But I know they’re not making the playoffs. And I’ll point out why they won’t, and what I think they should do to improve.

            By your logic, that makes me more of a Broncos fan. So why would anyone in their right mind bother responding and debating inside of such a sinkhole?

            But damn if I don’t like to type!

            In a nutshell, here’s my stance on this whole “the GOP needs moderates to win” bit.

            As it stands right now in America, assuming conservatives keep their strategy the same and moderates keep their strategy the same, a conservative presidential nominee (assuming they’d make it there) would be crushed compared to Romney and McCain.

            Moderates aren’t winning. But I believe a conservative would be destroyed vs. a popular Dem.

            Not in your picked-and-chosen spots. I mean America.

            In short, I don’t believe ANY Republican can win the presidency (or take back the Senate) with the way things are right now! Not any.

            You can spin that and play it off like it’s illogical for me to hold that stance, since conservatives have done well in sporadic seats which do not require a majority of electoral votes to win. But I can turn right around and go off of Romney and McCain losing, Dems keeping the Senate, etc.

            So who’s right in that regard? To whom do we look for the accurate gauge of the American political atmosphere? The people who gained a little bit of headway, or the people who keep winning in droves?

            Talk about special pleading!

            And if you don’t understand from my comments and from your own life how conservatives are viewed and what they need to do to reverse that view, then I can’t offer much more.

            Maybe conservatives need better political minds doing better PR.

            This line-item point quibbling to spite context doesn’t address a person’s meaning; it addresses a person’s wording pulled out as a snippet.

            Listening to Jimi but not hearing Jimi.

            It comes across as more of a creationist tactic. “Win” the debate by any means necessary, and that somehow trumps facts and logic and makes the entire world contingent on who proves their point the best in one-on-one dialogue.

            It’s like debating Eric Hovind.

            Exclusion = inclusion by default? What type of convoluted logic is that?

            And not coming across as if someone is forcing the country to a particular ideology = dropping core values? Dafuq am I reading?

            And who has a political philosophy of large government? I hope you’re not directing that at me. My idea of government is exceedingly small. Even to the point of privatized town maintenance, schools and local police forces.

            However–and this is what made me a pariah to the Tea Party after 2012–I also don’t want God in government either. I don’t want religion forcing its way into public schools, forcing science out. (There’s a lot of liberal propaganda out there, but that’s not liberal propaganda, ffs. Who you fooling with that?) I don’t want a picked-and-chosen religious morality to govern my life. Just as I don’t want politicians in general to.

            That used to be cool with conservatives at large. And maybe it still is. But now the fringe has the loudest microphones. Now beliefs like mine (damn, dirty atheists!) are not only unwelcome, but they make me damn near Stalin.

            That in and of itself transformed me from one of the common folk just wanting small, responsible government to a far left kook who wants to steal their Christmas away. So don’t tell me the Tea Party hasn’t changed. I know firsthand how it’s changed. The fringe with their “Obama is a communist!” rhetoric drowned out the folks preaching responsibility in government and in lives. Now the Tea Party–at least as it stands around where I live–and many conservatives demand ideological purity, from religion and politics.

            And now I’m not addressing Santorum on principle. Seriously. My points about the young, minorities, etc, have been ignored this entire time. I’m not whining about it.

            And the science being against global warming shows some serious scientific literacy issues.

            Cap and Trade isn’t the answer. Any government-mandated change is only going to screw things up. But the science is incredibly sound. It’s the scientifically illiterate who look at a snapshot in time to paint a “trend” who are convincing anti-liberal-government people that it’s all a scam. I

            I don’t bust balls on that front. Liberals and science don’t have the best record. They claim that genetically modified food is bad, that nuclear power and fracking is absolutely horrible, that genetics play little to no role in health (with the bullsh1t ACA and their one-size-fits-all pyramid approach to dieting), and many of these kooks subscribe to alternative medicine and believe you can communicate with dolphins and get in touch with chakras.

            And don’t get me started on their crooked “social science” that seeks to prove white American gun owners are racist and the like, even sending their studies off to peer review.

            So, make no mistake, I’m not championing any progressive take on science. I don’t fault conservatives for not believing in global warming; liberals and science are totally hit-or-miss. They’re using climate science for an attempted power grab. They have an entire market lying in wait. Many of the scammers have already become very rich from playing to the guilt of people.

            But that doesn’t make the science faulty. Climate science has an incredibly impressive body of work, just like evolutionary theory and the multitude of sciences which support it. It shouldn’t be political either way, but it is.

            And just like Piltdown Man doesn’t affect that body of evolution, neither does some scammer in the system who wants to stack the climate deck. The facts exist with or without the tampering by self-interested chadrools.

          • KStrett

            “Why aren’t moderates like Romney winning? Seriously. Why aren’t they?”

            No where in your response have you articulated what you believe republicans need to do to win. You don’t believe America will elect a conservative and you have to conceded moderates have failed miserably. What do you believe is the solution?

            Attacking conservatives and lamenting about how bad they are while ignoring the moderate wing, isn’t a solution.

            “Because there are too many conservatives in the nation who don’t want to vote for a moderate? Because a moderate can’t rally support from independents? Because conservative values ring true for the majority of America, so these Americans would rather have a progressive liberal than a moderate Republican? Or could it possibly be because the nation at large is trending more liberal with the young, educated and minorities?What’s the reason? Damn. For someone dropping the hammer on me, you sure seem to offer incredibly slim pickings on your end.”

            More lamenting……Do you believe the winning strategy is to abandon social conservationism? Yes or No?

            You do realize even if the GOP goes in whole hog becoming socially liberal, you are still going to have the image of fiscal conservatives kicking granny off a cliff because they left her with out any money.

            The media isn’t just against conservatives but anyone with an (R).

            If you are correct why isn’t Ted Cruz or Rand Paul’s poll numbers in the toilet?

            I wonder if you are going to ignore these questions and rant about how bad conservatives are…….

            “I’m an Oakland Raiders fan. Diehard. Tried and f’n true. But I know they’re not making the playoffs. And I’ll point out why they won’t, and what I think they should do to improve.”

            The problem is you aren’t pointing out what they need to do to improve. You are just pointing out a group within the Raiders suck.

            “By your logic, that makes me more of a Broncos fan. So why would anyone in their right mind bother responding and debating inside of such a sinkhole?”

            YES! As a Broncos fan do you think the opposing team has the Broncos best interest in mind when they give Manning advice?

            “As it stands right now in America, assuming conservatives keep their strategy the same and moderates keep their strategy the same, a conservative presidential nominee (assuming they’d make it there) would be crushed compared to Romney and McCain.Moderates aren’t winning. But I believe a conservative would be destroyed vs. a popular Dem.”

            You have no evidence to support your contention that a conservatives would be crushed. If you are correct, the polling data should show Ted Cruz at 1%, Chris” Christie at 35%, and Hillary at 40%.

            That is not the case. In swing state Colorado, Rand Paul is beating Hillary and Cruz is tied with her. We don’t have a national election, we have 50 state elections.

            “In short, I don’t believe ANY Republican can win the presidency (or take back the Senate) with the way things are right now! Not any.”

            I didn’t ask you if you believe the Republicans can win the presidency or the senate. I asked you what you believe they should do to win.

            Do you know why democrats are running away from Obama-care? Because internal polling is showing they are going to be slaughtered in 2014.

            “You can spin that and play it off like it’s illogical for me to hold that stance, since conservatives have done well in sporadic seats which do not require a majority of electoral votes to win. But I can turn right around and go off of Romney and McCain losing, Dems keeping the Senate, etc.”

            You are not addressing the lack of funding the Tea party faced. I have pointed out several times the IRS was used to attack the funding. They also were stopping the formation of grass root groups.

            “Conservatives did very well in 2010. That is sporadic.”

            Again, the Obama administration attacked the funding. You don’t seem to like Michele Bachmann very much but she was reelected in 2012, wasn’t she? Winning big in 2010 wasn’t sporadic.

            If you are correct in your assertion that the Tea party is detrimental, the Obama administration would not have attacked it’s funding or attempted stop grass root groups from forming. The left would not be attacking Ted Cruz or anyone with similar views.

            “So who’s right in that regard? To whom do we look for the accurate gauge of the American political atmosphere? The people who gained a little bit of headway, or the people who keep winning in droves?”

            Moderates are not winning at all and Democrats are not winning in droves. If the democrats were winning in droves does that mean the GOP should just become more like the democrats?

            “And if you don’t understand from my comments and from your own life how conservatives are viewed and what they need to do to reverse that view, then I can’t offer much more.Maybe conservatives need better political minds doing better PR.”

            I understand how conservatives are viewed by liberals. I agree conservatives need to do a better job with PR.

            Doing a better job with PR does not mean going to the liberal side on social issues. It means know the case the media is making and destroy it.

            For example, when Scott Brown was running for Ted Kennedy’s vacant seat, David Gergen, one of the debate moderators, asked him a question about health care that was predicated on the assumption the senate seat was Kennedy’s, therefore Brown should vote like Kennedy.

            Brown was clearly ready for a question like that and replied, “With all due respect, it’s not the Kennedy’s seat, it’s not the Democrats’ seat, it’s the people’s seat.”

            This became the sound bite for the debate and clearly showed Gergen was in the tank for the Democrats.

            Breitbart’s Ben Shapiro demolished Piers Morgan in a debate about gun control after the Sandy Hook massacre.

            Shapiro knew Morgan’s arguments and was well prepared. He didn’t attempt to compromise, change his position, or soften his message.

            During the NY mayoral debate it was pointed out De Blasio’s opponent spoke at a Tea party event. He attempted to disassociate himself from any Tea Party connections instead using jiu jitsu and pointing out De Blasio’s radical associations. The guy supported the Sandinistas!

            The problem is you are conflating liberals with independents and assuming independents think like liberals. Look at Obama-care:

            He assured everyone they could keep their doctor and their healthcare. They don’t pay attention and now they are surprised their are losing their insurance policies and the democrats are in big trouble.

            It is not that people supported Obama-care, they don’t pay attention, and pick up snippets from a biased media.

            Now when they see their insurance premiums sky rocketing and they are losing their policies they realize Obama-care is a horrible law.

            The problem is I don’t think they understand that Obama-care, by it’s very design is an incremental step toward socialized medicine. I don’t believe the majority in the GOP understands this either.

            “This line-item point quibbling to spite context doesn’t address a person’s meaning; it addresses a person’s wording pulled out as a snippet.Listening to Jimi but not hearing Jimi.”

            I am not taking what you say out of context. I am providing the full context and then commenting on it. On top of that, I have asked you several questions to clarify your position which you have not answered.

            “And who has a political philosophy of large government? I hope you’re not directing that at me. My idea of government is exceedingly small. Even to the point of privatized town maintenance, schools and local police forces.”

            Are you reading what I am writing? I said that in response to the notion the perception of conservatives is they want to take people’s freedoms away.Large government’s nature is to be oppressive.

            “However–and this is what made me a pariah to the Tea Party after 2012-”

            First of all, I don’t see any change in the tea party other than a smear campaign. Freedom works is involved in the tea party movement or has a similar ideology and the head of the organization is an agnostic.

            “-I also don’t want God in government either. I don’t want religion forcing its way into public schools, forcing science out.”There’s a lot of liberal propaganda out there, but that’s not liberal propaganda, ffs. Who you fooling with that?) I don’t want a picked-and-chosen religious morality to govern my life. Just as I don’t want politicians in general to.”

            You seem very intolerant of Christians and you are repeating liberal propaganda. Christians do not want to take science out of schools and don’t want to govern your life.

            As for taking God out of government, it appears you have misconstrued the first amendment. It does not mean you can’t put a nativity scene in the town square or pray during a graduation ceremony.

            “That used to be cool with conservatives at large. And maybe it still is. But now the fringe has the loudest microphones. Now beliefs like mine (damn, dirty atheists!) are not only unwelcome, but they make me damn near Stalin……That in and of itself transformed me from one of the common folk just wanting small, responsible government to a far left kook who wants to steal their Christmas away. So don’t tell me the Tea Party hasn’t changed. I know firsthand how it’s changed. The fringe with their “Obama is a communist!” rhetoric drowned out the folks preaching responsibility in government and in lives. Now the Tea Party–at least as it stands around where I live–and many conservatives demand ideological purity, from religion and politics.”

            It sounds like you has a bad experience with a few people.

            “And now I’m not addressing Santorum on principle. Seriously. My points about the young, minorities, etc, have been ignored this entire time. I’m not whining about it.”

            You completely ignored my points on Santorum. You obviously don’t like him and essentially what your argument boils down too.

            I addressed your arguments about the young and minorities and you completely ignored the points I made and the questions I asked you.

            “And the science being against global warming shows some serious scientific literacy issues.”

            I used to be a rabid environmentalist. The science does not support the notion of man made global warming. It is simply not there.

            Notice the change in the language; they changed global warming to climate change. The climate is always changing.

            “Cap and Trade isn’t the answer.”

            You ignored my point. If the sky is falling people will go to the liberal side.

            “But the science is incredibly sound. It’s the scientifically illiterate who look at a snapshot in time to paint a “trend” who are convincing anti-liberal-government people that it’s all a scam.”

            The case against global warming is not predicated on a cooling trend. Global warming is an issue like abortion and redefining marriage just for gays. People just assume they are true without putting into any thought into it or looking at the issue.

          • Josh

            Yes. I’m ignoring a lot of your points.

            Purely principle at this point. Keep responding or don’t; that’s your call.

            I responded about Santorum. Twice. I said it didn’t matter that media screwed him over, and then offered my take on why it didn’t matter.

            Just because it’s not the response you wanted doesn’t mean I ignored it.

            Overall, I’m trying to stick with the meat of the matter and address things I feel to be pertinent to the discussion, not quibbles and asides and snippets and mischaracterizations of my stance from glossing over looking for quote fodder. As it unfolds, I leave more and more behind because the line-by-line snippets quoted out of a wider body of context only serve as a platform for you to repeat things like Obama coming after the Tea Party, Bachmann winning, Santorum, etc.

            I responded as to what I feel would be a more appropriate strategy for the conservatives above.

            If you feel a Bachmann-like candidate can actually win the presidency because of retaining a seat, then it’s obvious my suggestions don’t mean much.

            I see a conservative losing at least 8 points worse than Romney.

            Obviously that’s just an opinion. You’re essentially asking me to prove that will happen.

            You can use your anecdotal evidence and extrapolate it to mean whatever you wish. I’ll use the fact that Obama’s won twice, the Senate is still blue, and moderates don’t win to make my case that Republicans are currently stained, and conservatives are more polarizing versions of moderates to the nation at large.

            So, in my opinion, conservatives won’t get the presidency. If you don’t agree with that opinion, you don’t agree.

            Fundamentalists Christians in America are consistently attempting to put their holy scripture alongside science. Creationism isn’t an invention of liberals.

            Attempting to put mythology beside science in the classroom IS removing science. For every 5 minutes devoted to creation in science, it’s 5 fewer minutes of science.

            Simple math. Including creation = removing science.

            I suppose not being a Christian is enough for you to suggest that I don’t like them. But I also don’t want Islam in the science class, or Judaism, or Hinduism, or any other religious belief disguising itself as “science” because some PHD from a Sunday school college has an opinion that all of science is an opinion.

            People can place their nativity scenes wherever they want. Who said otherwise? Be careful with your strawmen in the midst of finger-wagging about my logical fallacies.

            As far as Christians not wanting to govern lives: I’m still in the middle of a discussion with a Christian on this forum who thinks out-of-wedlock sex should be prohibited and shamed by society at large. Drugs, prostitution and gambling being illegal all have religious ties. Marriage laws are influenced by religion. Sodomy.

            Obviously it’s not ALL Christians. Obama is a Christian. Many politicians are Christians. But the fundamentalists are scary.


            And instead of referencing dozens of scientific journals and typing out another 50 paragraphs that will be quote-mined rather than read, I’ll just link this:


            It’s a very thorough and easy-to-understand scientific perspective on global warming/climate change. It’s backed by multiple reputable, peer-reviewed sources in the descriptions of the vids, and it’s not an opinion piece. It’s an examination of the science surrounding the subject, and the bad science people have attempted to inject into the debate.

          • KStrett

            “Purely principle at this point. Keep responding or don’t; that’s your call. ”

            You are not ignoring my points out of principle. You are ignoring them because you can’t respond. If you held the position Ted Cruz and the government shut down was the death blow to the GOP two months ago, you were 100% wrong.

            Polls show the blame for the shut down was a wash and Cruz’s favorability numbers are not in the toilet. In one swing state he is tied with the presumed democrat front runner. Democrats are sprinting away from Obama-care. There is nothing you can say other than admitting you were wrong.

            “I responded about Santorum. Twice.”

            You did not directly address my points….

            “I see a conservative losing at least 8 points worse than Romney.Obviously that’s just an opinion. You’re essentially asking me to prove that will happen.”

            The problem is you have no evidence to support your opinion. If your opinion was correct Cruz’s favorability is not in the toilet.

            ” I’ll use the fact that Obama’s won twice,”

            You are looking at political issues in a one dimensional way. How did he win? Did he win because people are jumping on the progressive movement?

            He won the first time by being a polished young Rorschach Inkblot candidate saying “hope and change” ad noiseam, while running against a grumpy old man who agrees with democrats more than republicans.

            The second time, Obama-care hadn’t kicked in, he convinced people people the economy was getting better by rigging statistics, they used the IRS to attack grass roots funding and formations, and democrats were much more sophisticated and modern in targeting independents. Romney couldn’t attack Obama-care because of Romney-care.

            “So, in my opinion, conservatives won’t get the presidency. If you don’t agree with that opinion, you don’t agree. ”

            You are not basing your opinion on any evidence. You case against conservatives is predicated on circular reasoning.

            “For every 5 minutes devoted to creation in science, it’s 5 fewer minutes of science. ”

            I assume you are referring to intelligent design. Intelligent design is not creationism.

            “Simple math. Including creation = removing science.”

            Flawed logic. Wanting to include intelligent design(which is not creationism) does not equate to removing science. Wanting schools to only teach creationism would be removing science from the classroom.

            “I suppose not being a Christian is enough for you to suggest that I don’t like them.”

            No, not at all. Presenting a vitriolic caricature of Christians and blaming them for the GOP’s failure suggests you don’t like them.

            “People can place their nativity scenes wherever they want. Who said otherwise? Be careful with your strawmen in the midst of finger-wagging about my logical fallacies.”

            I didn’t say you held that position and you ignored saying a prayer at a high school graduation. However, there is a misconception about the first amendment.It does not say there is a separation of church and state.

            It says the federal government cannot establish a religion or interfere with the freedom of religious expression.

            That did not mean you can’t say a prayer at graduation or congress can’t open with a prayer. In fact, that was the first thing they did. In your other posts you used the term separation of church and state.

            “Obviously it’s not ALL Christians. Obama is a Christian. Many politicians are Christians. But the fundamentalists are scary. ”

            You would probably regard me as a Christian fundamentalist and I don’t hold those positions for the most part. Obama belonged to a liberation theology church. If you think fundamentalists are scary, I urge you to read about liberation theology.

            “wedlock sex should be prohibited and shamed by society at large. Drugs, prostitution and gambling being illegal all have religious ties. Marriage laws are influenced by religion. Sodomy. ”

            The pendulum has drastically swung in the other direction. It is one thing to give someone a scarlet letter but do you think encouraging society to be promiscuous is better?

            Do you think teaching teenagers sex with out consequences is a good idea?

            Are drugs being plentiful and legal a good idea? Have you talked to someone in their early 20 about weed? The majority of them think it is permissible to drive while stoned.

            “It’s a very thorough and easy-to-understand scientific perspective on global warming/climate change.’

            I am not getting into a debate about global warming. If you look at both sides of the issue, the science does not support the notion of man made global warming. At best, global warming proponents claims are bordering on hysteria.

  • laughnow

    I will never vote for any RINO such as Christie. I held my nose last time and voted for Romney. Never again. Should have stayed home. Better not to vote than to see a RINO elected because there is no difference as compared to a Democrat. Romney wouldnt have undone ACA anyway. Goldberg cant see that without the TP a RINO has no chance. What this means is that a 3rd party is needed.

    • outraged_mom

      No, NO, NO – No third party – The Republican party is ours, too. There is some difference between those guys and Democrats (especially the radical democrats of today) – The only thing we need to do is let the backstabbing establishment understand that we are not going anywhere and they will bleed – we all don’t have to agree – but we must agree to support people in our own party – there is a shift – the conservative message is resonating. If Mitch McConnell and Cantor want to sabotage our guys – their will be a hefty price – no more power – which is all they care about anyway – we can work this our and forego the civil war – the establishment just needs the turn their guns outward – not inward. They will get if after 2014 – then we will be one large happy family (even if we disagree behind the scenes)

    • Phil B

      I don’t agree with a 3rd party but I agree with where your heart is. We need to take back OUR party and destroy the Republican establishment. That’s exactly why Cruz was voted into office. Let’s take back what’s ours. A 3rd party will only guarantee Democrats stay in power, like what happened in Virginia. Libertarianism and Conservatism are basically the same thing, so lets join together and take our country back!

      • Josh

        “Libertarianism and Conservatism are basically the same thing”

        In whose world? Not to bust chops here, but I don’t know of any conservatives who are for legalized drugs and prostitution, willing to stand against god in government to have a secular land, and who want America’s military to actually decrease in size, scope and spending.

        Most conservatives I know are devoutly religious, want America to be (or “remain,” depending to whom you’re speaking) God’s country, and want America to flex its military muscle.

        Other than sharing a common enemy, I don’t see how the two are ideologically aligned.

        Am I missing something here?

        • Phil B

          It depends on your definition of libertarianism. The libertarians I like aren’t secular and follow the founding fathers in their principles.

          As far as drugs, prostitution and the military go I think a lot of it depends on how you view government. Is government (on the taxpayer dime) able to police drugs and drug use? The war on drugs is an utter failure and has cost billions upon billions of dollars. A smarter approach may be legalization, not because drugs are good, but because prohibition doesn’t work. If drugs are cheap and legal, they lose their appeal. People don’t have to break into houses and steal in order to buy their drugs. Drugs are definitely wrong, but I don’t see how government is the answer to reducing drugs or drug use.

          Prostitution, same thing. It’s wrong but why/how is making it illegal helping anything?

          As far as the military goes, I’m an Iraq war veteran and I think we should greatly reduce the military in many areas. For example, why the hell are we spending billions of dollars to keep soldiers permanantly stationed in Germany and hundreds of other sites around the world? It’s a waste of money that we don’t have. And second, I used to naively believe the purpose of our recent wars was to stop terrorism but now it seems more like the purpose has been to protect the US dollar’s status as the world reserve currency, but that’s a long discussion in itself. I mean, do you really trust this government that’s corrupt to the core to have good motives in the conflicts going on around the world?

          Now that’s not to say we should reduce our military capability to defend ourselves or go into a conflict when necessary. More that we need to cut waste and have good leaders that will use our military appropriately. Not unnecessary and illegal wars like Obama is getting us into. Wars like Libya where Obama went to war without congressional approval, and like he almost did in Syria.

          The main difference between libertarianism and traditional conservatism comes down to the role of government and what they can/should do. I think most conservatives are actually starting to lean toward libertarianism in their views because they’re realizing the government can’t be trusted and is far too big….even if they don’t use the word libertarianism. Though I agree most conservatives don’t want to legalize drugs or prostitution. The legalization of drugs and prostitution is a small obstacle if you ask me, because neither party want drugs or prostitution, they just disagree on the approach to slow it down. The “conservative” approach to drugs and prostitution has failed miserably and has probably actually increased the abuse.

          • Josh

            I believe the thing that will disrupt the relationship between libertarians and conservatives going forward is the role of religion in government, not necessarily the role of government itself.

            Though they may exist, I’ve yet to encounter a true conservative who didn’t want religion to guide government in some capacity. On the flip side, I’ve yet to encounter a true libertarian who didn’t want religion completely out of government.

            Perhaps the Obama years are shedding light on a hybrid libertarianism.

            For prostitution, I don’t believe it’s wrong. Sex is natural, and a person owns him or herself and should be free to give away or sell their services.

            For trusting government to carry out wars, I definitely do not. As a 21-year-old kid drunk out of my mind most days, I remember 911 sent me into a 3-year flag-waving frenzy, where I believed, like many, warring with sporadic tribes and cells and ideologies was necessary. And like paratroopers in the Bulge or soldiers surging on the sand, I have confidence in Americans to conquer objectives. It’s the people out of harm’s way calling the shots that worry me.

    • rider237

      yeah….no. what you do is what happened in VA, and even happened in the last national election. you give the vote to the very people you least want elected.

      i don’t want republican lite in office, but no one can make the argument that Romney would have been worse, or even comparable, to what we got.
      because there were to many like you, and because there were those who threw their vote to the ego Ron Paul, we are where we are now.

  • hihoze

    As an independent, non-affiliated RINO I am tired of voting for the Republican Party. For too long they have been the only sane alternative to the Democratic National Socialist Party, so I voted Republican without really knowing what Republicans believe in or will fight for…sadly they vote for themselves and their party. The Republican Party members and elected representatives are the other variety of RINOs. They are Washington DC’vers who will tell their voters lies about defending the Constitution while they vote for the Manifesto in the name of bi-partisanship. So this Tea Party American simply wants More Madison and Less Marx and unfortunately that has made me a former RINO and a supporter of a hostile take over of the Republican Party….and yes Bernie, I don’t give a damn if the Republican establishment loses to the National Socialists anymore….they are a slow walking version of the Democratic National Socialists and I detest both.

    • Phil B

      True conservatism is the only thing that can destroy the Democrats and destroy the establishment Republicans. I’m in the same boat. NO MORE selling out and voting for RINOs. I’ll only vote for someone that will restore our country, even if that means another Democrat is elected. All or nothing. If we stop voting for RINOs the establishment will learn they can’t survive and the power will shift to those that truly love their country. People like Cruz and Rand Paul.

    • hihoze

      We are becoming AINO’s….AMERICANS IN NAME ONLY and I’ll be damned if I’m going to vote Republican or give a wit if Bernie thinks I’m far right or an ideolog….I’m not….I’m an American, not a Hyphenated-American, Not a European American…..I’m an American and I want my America Constitution not a European Manifesto. Now tell me Bernie, where in the Constitution does it say the federal government can force me to buy their crapcare or their damn Chevrolets? That’s Fascism Bernie. Call me crazy, call me far right but my parents didn’t fight the German National Socialists so my grandchildren can live under the American National Socialists. Bernie, with all due respect, and I like you, isn’t it time to Redistribute Their Power and Not Our Wealth? Isn’t it time to end the rule of the Washington DC’vers and DonkeyPhants? I don’t speak for anyone but myself Bernie, but I’m for More Madison and Less Marx. No Democrats and fewer RINO’s….crazy eh?

  • aloha

    The truth is Christie has won elections by bending down too far into Democrat ponds, hitting GOP quicksand ! He won’t express his personal views on issues or stand on conservative principals ! Being liked & reelected is his main concern ! That makes him “burnt toast” in my book !

  • aloha

    You are completely WRONG about your comments on Oreilly last night about the GOP feud & Ted Cruz/Tea Party ! Bernie, IF IT WERE NOT for the Tea Party in 2010, the HOUSE would not be under GOP control ?? You give no credit or appreciation for significant accomplishments of the TEA Party , that represent millions of outraged citizens at losing our Constitutional freedoms ? How can you rationally support establishment GOP candidiates that have consistently been dismal LOSING FAILURES twice in the past two Presidential elections (McCain, Romney) & trash the Tea Party ???? Republicans CANNOT AFFORD any more significant election LOSSES , as we watch America suffer in serious DEBT & DECLINE under disasterous Democrat control ???? Wise UP, Bernie !

  • LyingMediaScum

    Why does Goldberg even have a venue to speak on national television? He never says anything of value.

    And here he is again saying that conservatives should vote democrat lite. No thanks Bernie. We need a two party system. The only difference between Rinos like McCain and Pelosi is their genitalia.

    Yes lets just go ahead and usher in another two terms of the Rino Bush years, expanding government and the debt. Yes please. Lets focus on winning elections with closet democrats just so we can pretend we have a Republican in the white house. Yes please.

    In case you haven’t noticed, Bernie…this country is in a death spiral. Rinos like the Bushies are also to blame for that. If you don’t have anything intelligent to say, then don’t. You look like a damn fool.

  • NHB

    Honestly Bernie
    you would rather continue to kick the can down the road with the dems and rinos than to say enough is enough as in the Tea party.

    Now I know how they get all their power, when they can turn the head of a man like you.
    %$# FRIGHTENING %$^!

  • RickonhisHarleyJohnson

    After listening to you and Bill O’Reilly last night, I get the feeling that the two of you would have told George Washington he hadn’t a chance; go home and plant your crops. Chris Christie is nothing but Bush the elder, reincarnate. I’m tired of Democrat Lite Republicans.

    • aloha

      You are right about Goldberg & O’Reilly badly advising George Washington to give up , with no chance to win! They are both lost RHINOS !

  • rider237

    i like Christie. he’s perfect for NJ. i don’t think his style will translate into middle America. i think the press knows that and that’s why they are suddenly in love with him….as they were, if you remember, with McCain….until they weren’t. that’s an argument we can have forever, but it’s not the point.

    you present a false choice. you also present the premise that the worst thing is losing.

    every time we elect a moderate, whether they are republican or democrat, we slide left. it’s not the shocking cliff jump we have done with Obama. it’s more like hitting small, wet clay patches on our way down the hill. even though we don’t fall on our ass and tumble to the bottom, we still speed up the trip to the bottom.

    the question is not whether it’s better to win with someone like Christie? the question is: “if you win with a moderate, does it matter that you won?”

    we look back fondly at the Clinton years. for someone my age, who clearly remembers the Clinton years, the fact that we can be nostalgic for them scares the crap out of me!

    while the left has happily become more radical and more openly socialist, we talk about moderation. in order to win, we will become as “moderate” as we need to be.

    think about this…the democrats of my youth, would be moderate republicans today. who is really winning?

    • outraged_mom

      I agree with you. We must use this election cycle to let Mitch McConnell and Eric Cantor and the Republican National Committee know that we are the republican party and if they continue to try to force us down – they will lose. I think we can all play nice and somewhat agree on many things – but the party needs to stop the kind of things it did in VA (outright support the Dem – amoung other things) and Mitch McConnell is threatening one group who does campaign stuff that if they (the group) works to support any conservative candidates – they will not get any business from the larger (for now) group in power. That is dirty pool-we get to have our say to – and we WONT leave our party – if its civil war (amongst the party) that they want – that is exactly what they will get and the Democrats win – but they should know, what you said “There are worse things than losing.” It’s time – I can feel it.

  • Cleburne

    Bernie is absolutely right and you folks criticizing him are the real RINO’s. Someone such as Christie would be recognized by Dewey, Eisenhower, Nixon, Taft, Reagan, etc. A lot of the folks calling others “RINO’s” are really at heart the heirs of the Dixiecrats who have been pandered to by the likes of the Bush Family for far too long. Go ahead and nominate a Rick Santorum, Michele Bachmann, Sarah Palin, Richard Mourdock, Sharron Angle, Ken Cuccinelli or Christine O’Donnell type again and watch the blow out. I am not a fan of Christie’s because of his selfishness and other things but he at least actually shows himself in the black and Hispanic communities and actually does win elections. One of the reasons Romney lost was not that he was too “moderate” but thanks to yahoos such as Bachmann and Santorum he tried to be something he was not – a hard core ideologue instead of the Eisenhower Republican he always was. The real Mitt Romney showed up at the first debate on October 3, 2012. Go ahead and form your own tea party (Freedom Party, lol) lead by St. Sarah. The GOP would lose but it would regroup, maybe recreate its urban wing and start winning over moderate Democrats.

    • Michael B

      Reagan would see Christie for what he is – a compromising sellout.

      • brickman

        Reagan would see him as the Republican governor of a state that Reagan won twice.

    • outraged_mom

      You don’t know anything about what conservatives think. No one should be criticizing (at least no one from his own party) It is wonderful that he has NJ and is doing well. But the conservative voice of the party has been beaten, defunded, and left to fight all sides alone. The GOP at best turns its back and more often throws the daggers themselves. All ideas should be welcome – it is time conservative ideas can be spoken with the wrath of all coming down upon them without any filters, no outrage – everyone gives a free pass to absolutely abuse and terrorize anyone who speaks about the conservative philosophy. I am not saying it should win the day – I am just saying its time to stop calling them enemies of the state,domestic Terrorists, hostage takers, Wacko birds, radicals, racists….its wrong, it’s Un-American, and it hinders the free exchange of ideas.

  • John Sponcia

    Get real, Tea Party…Bernie is spot on! Nominate an electable candidate or Hillary will cruise into the White House, Benghazi baggage and all. Republicans, you need to win first, then govern!

    • Michael B

      So, its win at any cost? What about our core values? Do we sell out, like McCain and Romney or stand firm like Reagan?

    • outraged_mom

      No. We tried that with the last two elections – we were told by guys like you that they were the only ones that could win – well you were wrong then, and you are wrong now. We must have the courage to define ourselves instead of cowering in fear of name calling. The nominee has to be someone who knows and most importantly believes in the ideals of conservatism, limited government and the constitution in no uncertain terms – and yes those things are absolute – anything else we can compromise – but no more compromising our rights, our constitution and a government with LIMITED, Enumerated powers. The constitution is not on the ballet.

  • paco12348

    Goldberg is a hack. I’m sick of seeing him on O’Riley.

    • Cleburne

      It’s O’Reilly and anyone to the left of Michele Bachmann I guess is a hack to you. Personally I am tired of seeing Palin on Hannity as she contributes no insight at all.

  • outraged_mom

    Ok – I get why why we are ranting-BUT let’s not participate in the mud slinging (Ted won’t do it) All we want is the non conservatives to STOP trashing Conservatives – THAT IS ALL WE WANT! There is room for all – but don’t try to force us out or there will be a long bloody battle (one I am willing to fight) and the Democrats will rule until someone wins – so stop shooting at your own troops.

  • Michael B

    I would rather maintain my principles and die that to compromise my beliefs and live. Where would America be if our founders had compromised their beliefs, Mr. Goldberg? We would probably still be a part of dying empire. Anyone who would compromise their core values just for a short-term victory deserves the problems that will ensue. Gov. Christie does not share my values and I am not going water-down my values just for the sake of a short-lived political victory. Presidents come and go. My self-worth and my values are who I am. How could I look myself in the mirror everyday if I negate those values for a temporary victory.

    The GOP Old Guard are willing to listen to the opposition in order to achieve victory and that is a mistake. They are willing to change their belief system for a fleeting success. That is how we ended up with McCain and Romney. That is how we lost a governorship in Virginia and that is how we will lose in 2016. You are quick to take the advice of the Democrats who are telling how to beat them. That is like asking Al Qaeda for advice on how to defeat them and then following that advice.
    The Dems are playing B’rer Rabbit: “Please, don’t throw me in that briar patch. If you do you will win and I will lose.”
    And the GOP is falling in line playing B’rer Fox and B’rer Bear: “Ha! We gonna throw you in that briar patch and we will and you will be so sorry.”
    Get the picture, Mr. Goldberg?

  • boats48

    I listened to your segment on O’Reilly last night & couldn’t disagree more. First, I think that you are confusing Tea Party ideology with far right libertarian Ron Paul types. The last two presidential elections I held my nose and supported the GOP candidate. I liked Romney far better than McCain but supported both anyway. McCain is a snake. He’s as much to blame for bad press his VP pick received as anyone. His past comments on Cruz & Lee demonstrate that. Bottom line is Bernie, that the Tea Party will not support anyone it believes will go to Washington and do the same corrupt things as previous politicians have done.We want honest government within the boundaries set down by the Constitution. Is that really too much to ask?

    • rider237

      i wondered as i heard him, if he knew what the Tea Party was. seems there are a lot of republicans who have bought the democrat description of the tea party.

      • boats48


      • KStrett

        “seems there are a lot of republicans who have bought the democrat description of the tea party.”

        Not only that but they have bought into the democrat advise to on how to win elections. Democrats are advising republicans to act more like democrats as a recipe to win and they are buying this line of thinking.

        Just like the opposing team’s advise to Peyton Manning to only run the ball, I am sure the democratic party really wants the GOP to be more competitive and win.

      • Josh

        I thought I had a pretty good read on the Tea Party a few years back. When they found out I didn’t share their religion and was a libertarian in the “get religion out of schools” and “legalize prostitution” sense, I was suddenly a secular progressive and no longer welcome.

        A lot of those folks earn their description. Just like the OWS idiots smashing carts and windows while everyone else just watched, if the Tea Party wants to be treated more fairly, then the sane ones have to chase the crazies out.

    • KStrett

      “Tea Party ideology with far right libertarian Ron Paul”

      I would think even the libertarian candidates would have a better shot at winning than the Romney or McCain type candidates. Bernie is stuck in the old out dated the GOP needs to pickup independents and the only way to do that is to become more moderate philosophy.

  • outraged_mom

    You are welcome to opine – Just don’t call the peoples pick things like radical – you can stay with the McCain crowd – DON’T TRASH the people’s pick!!

  • Harish Gopalakrishna

    This whole article is about the far right rigidity that will bring defeat to the conservatives. Remember the entire hatred against Ted Cruz is he brought the shut down. The evidence simply prove this unless you want to discount the evidence. All that the conservatives in the congress wanted is to defund the law that these guys foresaw would be one of the biggest disasters. They didn’t say they are not going to negotiate as any moderate would have loved the term. Negotiate. But who were the extremists here? The senate democrats and the President who didn’t wanted to negotiate. For me they were the only reason the country’s government’s less than 15% were shut down. How is Ted Cruz the fearful far right, when all he wanted is to defund a law, that had already is the cause of huge unemployment, people losing their health insurance. He is a visionary as all conservatives were who predicted the worst will happen when the law goes into effect. Law of the land is for everyone including the President who can arbitrarily decide which part of the law to enforce, he can just dictate the law as he decides. Now we have a name for that type of person who can dictate laws as he wishes! Good luck USA.

    • outraged_mom

      Thank you. It’s pretty said when the obvious is understood by so few – I don’t care if Bernie or anyone else wants to support Christy – but DON”T trash Cruz – We want him. We love him. You Sir, we can do without – A difference of opinion is fine but don’t help the Democrats trash the only guy the people REALLY want –

  • Neil_rouse

    i would rather lose with cruz. christi is more liberal than some western democrats.

  • Harish Gopalakrishna

    I generally wouldn’t have cared what Bernie spews about far right, but just thought letting him know there is a whole bunch of people who do not agree with his way of thinking. I would rather win with Cruz than lose again with a moderate Christie. Being a moderate with Romney didn’t win in 2012, Mccain in 2008, Dole in 2000 and of course moderate’s in both Bush. I still do not understand what is so radical with Ted Cruz and the tea party. All they want to smaller government, lower taxes & rule by the law of the land than by law on the fly. You keep talking about the far right ideological rigidity. To the life of me I don’t understand why do you not see the ideological rigidity on the left. Is Hillary Clinton someone who is moderate? In what way? She is the product of the 60’s far far left. How do you right away accept she is going to be an easy winner against Cruz. Is this some sort of American Idol where you can text your candidate for election? 2016 there is so much in stake if at all USA can survive this present tortuous years of Big spending and low performance government. How would Clinton’s administration be any different than the present one?

  • D Parri

    The real potential firepower will come from a widely-distributed party (GOP) that covers the largest spectrum of voters in 2016. The charisma of Christie and the integrity of Cruz can–and will–be melded into a force that has long been needed for the GOP.

    There’s no question that Christie has charisma, and it will be seen in the future that Cruz stood up to make a statement based upon his principles. He suffered in the short term but it will serve as a worthwhile investment for his future.
    Consider the fact that both Christie and Cruz possess the intellect needed to win an election and they currently each sit at what are considered by many to be the internally opposite ends of the right-side political spectrum. Consider also that both men are capable of reaching a state of compromise with leaders of the liberal political forces. Now, why is it hard to imagine the coming together of the Cruz/Christie team at the proper time and place.

    I believe that a little drama played out prior to any such union would only serve to enhance the message that this is an organization truly capable of bringing together the conservative-to-moderates, and the liberals will not be ignored. There may still be some hope.

  • D Parri

    After all, 2016 is decades away…right? It will be here before you know it.

    • T Ko

      I am looking forward to it…Obamacare blood will run in the streets!

  • pagarymac

    Mr. Goldberg is about winning with Democrat-lite, and his attempt to semantically turn the RINO label is laughable. We need to be about winning with someone who honestly respects and honors The Law Of The Land. It’s better to lose with a true Constitutionalist than win with a fraud. Moving slowly to a bad end with a fraud is of no comfort and serves little purpose. Better to make the good fight for the right reasons. Mr. Goldberg’s serves up “The breakfast of RINO champions”.

  • joeknowsbest23

    Bernie you can’t redefine and re-assign RHINO. Republicans used to be Conservative but too many are now Right Leaning Democrats. They are RHINO’s! Republicans who fight for, and represent un-withering Conservative values are welcome in OUR party. RHINO’s can start their own – Call it the “We’re Not Who We Say We Are” Party!

  • USMC69

    Bernie’s become a RHINO himself. He just won’t admit it. What the RHINOs don’t get is – if we wanted a liberal – we would be democrats.

    • Neil_rouse

      as far as i know bernie never officially changed parties and might still be a democrat. he IS an admitted social lefty but embraces common sense and despises the media bias. he is unabashedly who and what he is, and therefore, he is in no way a rino.

      • USMC69

        I stand corrected. He’s just a liberal pretending to be conservative. What would you call that? CINO?

  • Paul Vasek

    I, for one, am tired of the media and the establishment on both sides picking our candidates. The conservatives (Tea Party) won big in 2010, so they can win elections and a core conservative can win the presidency as Ronald Reagan did. We don’t want another spineless moderate in 2016.

    • brickman

      The 2010 election is over. Yes, the Tea Party won that one. Things change. The Dems won 25 of the 33 Senate elections in 2012. The held the presidency by a large electoral vote total. They won more House votes. The Miami Marlins twice won the World Series. That didn’t help them this year. Ronald Reagan won two terms. Ronald Reagan was a friend of mine. Ted Cruz and Rand Paul are not Ronald Reagan.

  • kidderdoc

    I am a new ex-fan of Bernie Goldberg after hearing him on O’Reilly tonight. I was OUTRAGED at how he portrayed the “tea party”….Bernie …get a clue!!! We have supported the establishment moderates and for what???? They are progressive light!!! You are truly out of touch with mainstream America. You have no clue how fed up we are with the corruption, the game playing, the cow tailing to democrats that are our current bozos in office. Their days are numbered. We want LIMITED government …not this endless “growth” and intrusion into our lives….. We want FISCAL responsibility!!! WOAH!!! how RADICAL!!!! You, sir are part of the problem and I have lost all respect for you.

  • joe harold

    don’t you love it how demlite Rinos like Bernie try to tell us which medicine we must take again and again?? didn’t we get told that with the last 2 Rinos? how’d that work out for us? and I love the advice he gives to Christie…now if you wanna win over those wacky right wingers, you got to act like a comelian and pretend to be something your not! I guess Bernie thinks we’re all a bunch of stooges and will just swoon over another establishment pick hey? really? not happening again this time cause so many of us will stay home if another Rino is forced down our throats by the inside the beltway morons! so you can take your Obama prop doughboy Christie and shove him up your elitist a&& Bernie! not buying your snake oil salesmen anymore!

  • wylie123

    Christie cannot win. Mc Cain didn’t and Christie is like him, he will compromise the country’s future into the hands of democrat visions. No more politicians who believe they can do as they please and ignore the constitution as liberal democrats and liberal republican politicians do.

    • ScootersMom

      I agree with you 100% that McCain would compromise the constitution to get a deal with democrats. But where do you come off think that just because someone is a moderate like Christie, that they are would not protect the constitution? Christies background as US Attorney means he protect those laws all of the time. I know we are all angered with Christie in his perceptions of cooperation with Obama over Sandy. Set that anger aside long enough to find a candidate to defeat any democrat that comes along.

      • wylie123

        Christie can’t win the South and Southwest. He is marching with government control, just following a parallel path.

      • wylie123

        Have you seen his latest? Attacking the GOP for not compromising. Tell me when the democrats have compromised and tell me when any democrat leaning lawyer protected anyone’s rights? Ever hear of Mike Nifong among others? Just because he was a US attonery doesn’t tell me he would do the right thing. If it did he would find a way to work with the GOP and the Tea Party representatives including Ted Cruz.

  • Jerry Kazee

    No more RINO’s period. I would vote democrat before I vote for another RNC pick to run for president. That’s what’s wrong with Washington, same old game to fool the public. Vote TeaParty save America

  • BestandBrightest

    I have seen zero evidence that Christie is more likely to beat Hillary than Cruz or Paul. None.

  • JRawl

    All of you “die-hard” conservatives are missing the point. As the great, erudite, William F. Buckley once said, “He (William F. Buckley, Jr.—ed.) was asked who would be the wisest Republican choice.

    He said: “The wisest choice would be the one who would win. No sense running Mona Lisa in a beauty contest. I’d be for the most right, viable candidate who could win. If you could convince me that Barry Goldwater could win, I’d vote for him.” He was right then, and he’s right now. We need to win first, and then sort things out.

    • BestandBrightest

      You have horribly misconstrued the great Bill Buckley. Buckley was never talking about “electability”, he was talking about “viability”.

      In other words, the one who will most effectively articulate conservative thought and move the conservative ball forward.

      Is that Chris Christie? Not even close.

      Did Buckley’s brother become a giant RINO in order to win an election?

  • TheOriginalDonald

    Didn’t we hear the same crap about John McDole Keating V and Mittens? If Fat Boy is the nominee I’ll vote for Julie Borowski!

    • plsilverman

      what’s wrong with him? he shook hands with Obama?

      • Josh


        The not-so-much-an-enemy of my enemy is my bigger enemy.

        • plsilverman

          (Stan Laurel): It certainly is.

      • outraged_mom

        Nothing. He’s great. The problem is that whenever someone say’s Christie’s all that they ALWAYS say the Tea Party Candidates must sit down and shut up – then they do hit pieces on the people who represent our beliefs. That Christy “can win” another prediction so the tear down people in our party that we really support, generally, not necessarily 2016 – They need to stop doing that.

        • plsilverman

          the TP tells people to sit down and shut up all over the place. I WAS TOLD to sit down and shut up here in Laguna Woods, CA, at a GOP gathering!. asked some simple questions to the guest speaker, a Birther.>>>> the TP are extremists and tolerate “Obama in jungle gear” posters. believe it. that’s why traditional GOP don’t want that association. GOP should run MURKOWSI!

          • outraged_mom

            There is nothing that is vile and disgusting that has not been attributed to the Tea Party before you – so that tactic will have no impact on my debate with you. The Tea Party isn’t a party at all. Its many people who don’t embrace big government, taxation without representation when its done by the democrats or republicans. there are many black people that consider themselves Tea Party – yet according to people like the VP-the Tea Party would like to see them in chains – on and on the baseless nonsense goes on. I know who and what I am – so do the many Americans who are tired of being taxed to death and then told they are stupid, evil, and will be taxed some more without any representative whatsoever. I want my kids to live in the only truly free place there has ever been or ever will be – My legacy will not be that I stood idly by while we crushed them with generations of debt, and carelessly and cowardly aloud the only protection of the people against tyranny – without the constitution and its defenders we will cease to be what our founders and many after them fought, died, and carefully constructed (from a vantage point that this spoiled generation (my own) will never comprehend-and thus can’t understand why its so important. Notice you left out the name and certainly the video of your accusation.

          • plsilverman

            I’m not obsessed with the Tea Party. I accept them as the New John Birch Society. It has a good mission statement but tends to run/support blithering idiots like West, bachman, Cruz, Palin, Tancredo, Angle. The TP tolerates “Obama in jungle gear” posters and banners. (well, they did take down one banner, to that effect). I don’t “use” the TP as a bludgeon or anything else. I only take them seriously because they are the front group for a couple of segregationists called the Koch Brothers, who are reported to have 103,000,000,000 dollars to play with.
            You say Obama is a tyrant and then get upset when someone associates you with extremists? :)

      • TheOriginalDonald

        You’d think after watching Romney get beat despite a VERY WEAK economy Mr. Goldberg would figure out Dem-lite isn’t gonna win.

        BTW if that cup says COFFEE IS HOT……it probably is.

  • ronald simon


  • ted

    Please read this, Bernie.
    This is the opportunity: Reps carefully and pithily argue that the central control of our economy is at fault for ObamaCare. That central control has never and can never succeed. Never. At the bottom of central control is distrusting “the people” — you, me, all Americans. Remember ObamaCare is central control. Central control never works. It is based on distrust of YOU.
    Next: all Progressivism is based on central control of economy and society. Ergo, Progressivism can NEVER work. Examples from Hitler to ObamaCare can be used.
    Next: Free enterprise is freedom for everyone. Freedom to buy, sell, make, smoke, eat, wear…freedom. Freedom is based on trust of you, me, all Americans. Free enterprise is trusting YOU. Some modest definitions of right and wrong need be established, but not to micromanage what you eat, but to trust YOU to do the right thing. OR if not be firmly and quickly punished.
    Republicans believe in free enterprise. Republicans believe in you.
    This takes the usual Republican arguments off the Liberal playing field where it has been 75 years. Like Christie ignore race, wealth, color, religion, marriage, abortion, national whatever and sexual proclivity.
    Freedom vs. control.
    Take it from here. And please everyone read this.

  • Rob

    OK, I’m a Tea Party supporter, We voted for the last two GOP nominees even though they weren’t our choice. Not this time, the RINO’s need to vote for our nominee. Why is it that we always have to change our vote? This time, they need to support us. I saw you on O’Reilly a little while ago and boy do you have it wrong. I don’t know one person that would support Christi. So, Christi is not the answer.

  • Sheila Campbell

    We’ve had two much like Christie who ran for President and lost. The media and Democrats were the reason we got them. We voted for a RINO because we didn’t have a Real Republican to vote for. Millions of Republicans stayed home because they saw no difference or some other reason. I knew there was a difference and didn’t want who we got the, I had to vote for the lesser of two evils. We want someone who loves America and the Constitution and will not sell the Americans soul for power and greed. A true Constitutionalist will be a Conservative not an “extreme right-wing”, plus Tea Partiers are not necessarily Republicans nor are they all old white men. Just sayin’

  • Nicholas344

    What does it mean to win with Christie? What will we win? I’d rather lose as an American then help to usher in statist slavery and a Republican party apparently only concerned with controlling the money.
    That may be good for you Bernie but I’d rather lose like a man in support of American principles and values and vote for Cruz

    • outraged_mom

      I am with you. Not that others shouldn’t support christy if he represents their beliefs – but the GOP must stop sabotaging conservatives – and doing nationwide what they did in VA. That said, I’ll lose with Cruz and keep fighting until we win.

  • ScootersMom

    You and O’Reilly think the whole world revolves around the values of New York, New England, and California. Well I think you might want to get out a little with the folks yourself. Chris Christie is not a Rino. Sure Republiteas are furious with him for chumming up to Obama after Sandy and jeopardizing the 2012 election-probably losing it. But, there is no way Chris Christie is not going to uphold the Constitution. Scott Brown is not A Rino. He’s a moderate republican from a liberal state. There is no way he’s is not going to uphold the Constitution.
    Now the real point of this conversation is that there’s a lot of distance between California and the New York border, and there are a lot of voters between Canada and the Gulf of Mexico. These citizens are just not seeing things the way you and O’Reilly are seeing things. Their anger over Obamacare has only been exacerbated by the revelation that Obama and the liberal democrats willingly and with deliberation, caused total chaos in their healthcare system, all the while knowingly lying to them by telling them they could keep their health care.

  • Josh

    You are right, Bernard. I should vote like a wishy-washy independent for a moderate like Christie that could win, like those that put Obama in to office, instead of a Paul, because it would be better for a Christie to ban my guns instead of a Clinton?

  • MAKS

    I am so sick of hearing the older republicans bad mouthing the younger (with principles) republicans. Instead of embracing the younger guys and building a super strong ethical America, they act like the smart ass, always defensive, anti-American democrats. Right now the White House is housing criminals and they need to go. The RINOs had their chance and failed. They’re old and closed-minded. They wanted Ted Cruz to be quiet and wait until the 2014 elections. If you look at the history of voter fraud, that would be a tremendous mistake. The democrats have voter fraud and intimidation down pat. We need to take a stand now and whenever we can. It’s people like King and Cain that should be quiet instead of the Tea Party who are not afraid to upset the apple cart.

  • ted

    Compromise is reality. One side can’t get everything it wants — even Obama is falling short and he had the country by the b*lls and couldn’t get anything except an abject failure in ObamaCare. So if the Tea Party or other conservatives aren’t willing to compromise, they and our country are doomed. Perhaps it is anyway.

  • Stout Jackson

    Bernie, stop reading the New York media crap. You and others on Fox News are out of touch with most of us west of the Hudson. Christie is unelectable mainly because of his appearance, but mostly because all of use out here in the rest of the country don’t know, like or care about Chris Christie.

  • Doc Zhivago

    Bernie: The Tea Party are the “real” RINOS? Really?

    Bush 41 (2nd campaign)




    What are you trying to tell us Bernie? That moderate Republicans can win? Look at the list of losing moderates above….you make no sense whatsoever.

  • cmacrider

    O.K. Bernie so now all you have to do is tell the RINOs and GOP establishment to stop attacking Tea Party candidates with more vigour than they employ in attacking Obama and his crowd. Lets be “fair and balanced” after all your last two candidates were not exactly winners.

  • Bryan

    Mr. Goldberg, I am just about the most pragmatic libertarian conservative that you will ever encounter, and I agree with you completely about the “real world” choice that you lay out, except that you (deliberately?) ignored the REAL “elephant in the room”….just like everyone else on Fox and Patriot Radio does.

    Here it is. Your comparison would be very on point were it not for the fact that Ted Cruz is HISPANIC. If he wins the Republican nomination for President, every single Hispanic in this country will vote for him. Okay, fine, “93%” of them will, just like 93% of the black voters in this country voted for Obama twice.

    Please spare me the eye-rolling thoughts of “Wow! Here’s another redneck racist Southerner”, because you know darn well that I am right. I see it every day. It’s reality.

    The reason why I put my face in my hands and damn near cried the day Mitt Romney chose Paul Ryan for his vice-Presidential running mate is because if he had done what he should have and chose Marco Rubio, he would be President today. It’s not speculation. It’s a damn fact. He would have won Florida handily. He would have won every state from Texas to Arizona. He would have won Colorado. And, yes, he might just have won California.

    When I sat there and heard the Fox newsies explaining that the reason why Mitt chose Paul Ryan instead of the obvious winner running mate….that they were concerned about Marco Rubio’s debt problems…I simply couldn’t believe how deeply in politically-correct denial darn near every single Republican is. It wouldn’t have mattered if he owed his soul to bookies in Vegas, for God’s sake! They would have captured darn near ALL of the Hispanic vote in every state in this country and you know it!

    And the greatest thing about it was, they would have captured nearly all of the illegal immigrant vote that every Democrat in this country has been slaving so hard to empower for the past thirty years!

    The next Republican presidential candidate, above all else, needs to be H.I.S.P.A.N.I.C. Please don’t let political correctness blind you to reality.

    • Ed

      You are a racist, in the purist sense of the word.

      • Rob

        How was that racist? LOL Bryan, you are 100% accurate.

        • Ed

          When someone decides to vote for someone based on race, its is pure racism, Your question is sophomoric at best, but I think your “LOL” confirms your knowledge of that.

  • GilbertDavis

    Huckabee / West 2016

  • Scott

    Bernie, for Conservatives, compromising with Democrats means that you have to compromise your principals, not Democrats compromising theirs. Therein lies the problem we have today. To advocate that Tea Party conservatives must compromise goes against the very reason they were sent to D.C. We have enough of the establishment types such as McCain and Graham. What is a person if they compromise the very principals that they believe in?

  • Ed

    If your idea of “Winning” is simply getting a man in office that has an R after his name, with some half assed attempt to fix things, well…. I would rather “Lose it all” and keep my dignity, while I die among real “Men”. (I wrote this without even reading one word of your article, just being honest)

  • http://att.net/ patty

    @TED..One of the reasons why Obama has been elected two times as President. The Democrats that voted for him are gullable and naive and believe anything that Obama and his mofiosa threw/throw on the wall. THEY STILL LIVE IN THE WHARPED MENTALITY OF THE FIRST DAY OF THE UNION taking over and THINKING AND SPEAKING FOR THEM. aka SHEEP..The UNION sales pitch, their creedo was/is DEMOCRATS ARE FOR THE POOR AND REPUBLICANS FOR THE RICH! Their blue collar grandparents, parents bought into this bullshit and they continue to pass on this brainwashing, mind controlling, ignorance which prevailed at the polls in 2008 and 2012. Show me a poor Democrat politician. John F. Kennedy? John Kerry? Nancy Pelosi? Hillary Clinton? etc. etc. Do you honestly think any of those named and others not named are not more interested in making the almighty dollar at any cost to the voters. Just look what your vote has done for Benghazi, Fast and Furious, IRS, Obama Affordable Health Care, etc. etc.

  • ted

    Still true” Republicans like to be the moral ones, talking, and writing inane things while the immoral ones, the Progressives, win. And sorry but winning is everything. Without winning, Republican Party you’re a loser. (Duh!)

    • Stimpy

      You got that wrong. Liberals have always asserted rights to the moral high ground. It is part of their mind set. That’s how they can unilaterally disarm without blushing.

  • ted

    If the Republicans 1) can’t pronounce ObamaCare now an abject failure and not allow him to get it working OK and allow the nation to forget this fiasco. and 2) swallow Christie’s moderacy (and kiss, kissing Obama for aide to New Jersey, which is hard for me and really work for bi-partisanism, they’ll lose once again. And if it isn’t the end of America now, it will be with Killary Klinton.

  • ME

    After reading and hearing comments about how conservatives can’t vote for Gov Christie or any other more middle of the road republican, it appears that these idiots will definitely help elect a liberal like Hillary. And they are IDIOTS, because they truly believe that someone way to the left is far better than anyone who is right of center even if only slightly. C’mon you IDIOTS, get behind any republican who can become President but only with your help. Of course it’s obvious that the IDIOTS won’t help because a liberal is certainly better choice if you really, deep down in your heart prefer anyone but a REPUBLICAN!!!!

    • Spitfire

      “conservatives can’t vote for Gov Christie or any other more middle of the road republican, it appears that these idiots will definitely help elect a liberal like Hillary.”
      Yes lets look at the record: Gerald Ford (moderate), Bob Dole (moderate) LOST, George Bush Sr. (moderate) LOST 2nd term, Bush Jr. (moderate – won but against really weak opponents), John McCain (moderate left) LOST, Mitt Romney (moderate) LOST. If it walks like a duck, quacks like a duck, its probably a duck. Its pretty clear that moderate Republicans lose.

      • Stimpy

        Barry Goldwater (conservative) sure showed them.

  • Lee

    Wow Bernie, you may have hit the nail squarely on the head. Remembering the 2010 election, i watched a number of debates that tore apart each person running. It was truly agonizing to watch. Good people tore at each other to be the front runner against Obama. Those debates, and the resulting fallout on the liberal media, were a major reason for our loss.

    Christie may not be the purest candidate but if he ends up the leader we conservatives MUST unite behind him so we have a decent chance of beating the democratic front runner (Hillary).

    • Bryan

      Once again, there is only one reason that we lost. Mitt picked Paul Ryan instead of Marco Rubio, thereby missing the opportunity to capture the vast majority of the nationwide Hispanic vote. Period.

  • Mike

    Well, as a true conservative, I can’t see how a non-Rhino can win, what with all that’s stacked against them. Today’s electorate is so dumbed-down and the press will slaughter any Tea Party candidate. Hilary Clinton would win all the swing states.

  • Kegan05

    I WILL NOT vote for another RINO, even if it means losing the election. Progressive Republicans will continue to grow government and spend money we don’t have. NEVER AGAIN! Either we elect a true Conservative who will work to turn this country around or we keep nominating LOSERS like McCain and Romney. I will not participate.

    • Lee

      Kegan05: Don’t be so narrow minded. To save our country of another 8 years of liberalism we must unite to win. Would you rather have Hillary than even a medium conservative? If your answer is yes, you are truly messed up.

      • PolkaDot

        What’s a “medium conservative”? Something like “slightly pregnant”?

  • kanbun

    Here we go again….or is it here we still go? Ted Cruz is not eligible. Bernie and similar ‘fair and balanced’ media types won’t get into the eligibility issue because they’re afraid of BHO – who is also not eligible. But, they can’t do an objective ‘analysis’ of the issue without Obama, so they just go along to get along. Cruz, Rubio, Jindhal, Santorum – none are natural born citizens. Now, Bernie and his fellow fairbalancers just spin the meaning so that basically everybody is natural born. But, all except those that worship at the alter of Barack Obama, and those that are afraid to point out that every POTUS before Obama met the natural born definition of two citizen parents (except the lying skunk Chester Arthur who was only discovered in the last decade) because they are afraid of the media calling them names, are the only ones that want to honor the constitution.

    Bernie, please don’t spew sanctimonious about the constitution when you suggest a Canadian dual citizen is eligible or when you look the other way when a British citizen is president. You either believe and honor the founders’ intent or you don’t. If you don’t, then please no future commentary on constitutional issues.

    • Bryan

      Correction: Marco Rubio and Ted Cruz are both natural born American citizens.

      • kanbun

        If you think so, then you haven’t a clue what the founders’ intended and what the meaning actually is. If Marco Rubio is natural born, then every baby born to an illegal alien on U.S. soil is too. Figure it out. Start with finding out what the founders were trying to accomplish. When you know that, you will see why they would NEVER abide someone with foreign citizenship as POTUS.

        • Bryan

          It’s not a question of what I think. It’s a question of what the Supreme Court has RULED ON, along with what it plainly stated in the Federalist Papers and countless other documents.

          It was never intended that merely being born here would make one a citizen. One had to be here legally, to parents with no other national loyalties.

          • kanbun

            You have to be kidding….no way to educate the ignorant. First of all, SCOTUS has ruled at least in five separate cases that it’s two parent citizens and they have NEVER ruled otherwise – most Obot dopes argue that they’ve never ruled or the conflate citizen and NBC to try to protect their boy. Second you cannot cite a single constitutional or constitutionally historical document of any kind that shows that the founders intended anything other than two citizen parents – if you can you’re the only one on the face of the earth that can cuz the Obots have been trying for years.

            On the other hand, you are correct with “to parents with no other national loyalties”. And how do you have “no other national loyalties”? You are a CITIZEN. The whole idea behind ‘natural born citizen’ is loyalty and sole allegiance to the US. If you think the founders intended something else, then you are a moron.

            Anchor babies are not NBC. Anybody born here to parents that have loyalties to another country, i.e. citizens of another country, are not NBC. Rubio’s parents were not citizens when he was born, Santorum’s parents were not citizens when he was born, Jindhal’s parents were not citizens when he was born, Obama’s father was not a citizen when he was born (if you even believe the story in the first place) – all those parents had loyalty to other countries. As for Cruz, the dude himself wasn’t even born with allegiance only to the US. Are you nuts?

            You are NBC if from the moment you take your first breath you have sole allegiance to the US.

            I’m done with you. If you are so thick that you don’t get it then go worship on the alter of Obama (and Cruz) with the rest of the morons who think it’s OK to skip the constitution because there in love with one personality.

            No more replies from me here.

    • jondaris

      Where do you get the “natural born definition of two citizen parents?”

      Didn’t think so.

  • metheoldsarge

    No matter who runs against who, it will be the same as every past election since the 60s. The decision the voters have to make is between the lesser of two evils.

    • brickman

      That’s what Stan on South Park learned.

  • Reese

    The reality is that if Hillary runs, doesn’t matter who you conservatives put out there. 8 more years to the Democrats!!! Thank God because the Republican party always runs the country into the dirt. Then they blame the Democrats for not cleaning up their mess quickly enough. Conservatives need to appeal to a wider base and stop running on the extreme social conservative issues. You may have a chance if you focus on fiscal policy (not abortion, contraceptives, etc.)

    You are right though Bernie. Christine has the best shot to win but will lose anyway to Hillary.

    • Integrity

      Clue me in. What is so special about Hillary? What has she accomplished? Sadly, she remained silent while her husband conducted a real war on women. QED

  • Tim Ned

    Excellent advice Bernie!
    And to my conservative friends, use Minnesota as the example. We had the house and senate won for the first time in over 30 years.. The republicans started pushing every stupid conservative idea on the books. They called for a vote on Voter Id and same sex marriage and we got our butts handed to us. Next election we lost the Governor, house, and senate. And the left wing liberals of the democratic party now rule the state.

    We have every progressive program ever invented going through to law with no opposition at all.

    We need to win.

  • Stoneyjack

    Always get Bernie Goldberg mixed up with John McCain. Both are senile RINOs.

    • MarioG

      Bernie’s not too bad as long as we remember he’s a recovering liberal.

    • Lee

      Absolutely WRONG.

  • Mari Jo O’Neill

    The Republican’s better wake up and now is the time to do it. I originally was in favor of the “tea party” but they have no direct leadership. They need direction and to stay on point. I like Chris Christie and I think he could possibly win in 2016. I can’t say the same for Ted Cruz or Rand Paul not yet. The Republican’s need to come up with a plan to win elections and stop trying to beat a drum against Obamacare. It will fail on it’s own and the Dems are now trying to distance themselves from it. Republican’s still want to beat a dead horse, they knew they wouldn’t be able to defund Obamacare but they did it anyway and made them look stupid. The Media doesn’t help and Obama constantly berates them and they don’t fight back. There are some good solid Republican’s that could get votes and they need to do that, and if they don’t we are losing again. What I don’t understand is why every one thinks Hillary will win if she runs. Her years as a Senator were unremarkable and as the Secretary of State she did a miserable job. What about Benghazi?????????? The Republican;s can beat that horse until it’s dead and what comeback does she have?????? “What difference does it make now”. We need fighters and people who can realte to other ethnic groups in a way that will attract them. A lot of Hispanic people like small government and are worried about the economy & jobs and this is where the Republican;s can reel them in. The right person could do it!!!!!!!

  • gerry T

    The key to the next presidential election is not Hillary, Christie, Paul or whomever is nominated to run against the Democrat will be the dismal record of the Obama Administration. Obamacare, Benghazi, IRS cheating, Fast and Furious, etc. . I believe a majority of Americans(conservatives, moderates, sensible liberals, independents, etc) will wake up to the fact the Democrats are guiding our country in the wrong direction.( Socialism and Communism). This should be unacceptable to every sensible American and it will.

  • D Parri

    Bernie, I’m only responding to the title for your column.

    The number one tool in the Demo-head arsenal has always been the ‘divide and attack’ strategy. It has been used to make the GOP look foolish at times. Wouldn’t it make more sense to find common ground for Cruz and Christie so that they could go out and wax Miss Hillary’s little behind in the 2016 presidential race? I think Mr. Bill would appreciate that!

  • chief98110

    Bernie, You are right on the mark. I don’t understand conservatives who would rather lose an election to the likes of Obama than bend a little. Ugh!

  • Shane

    Bernie, many cons will not vote for a moderate Republican like Christie. They stayed home by the millions and let Obama beat Romney last election, and they will do it again if Christie gets the nomination. Even Eric Bolling on Fox News did not vote for Christie on election day. These guys are just beyond hope.

    These tea party types say a moderate Republican cannot win and the reason that a moderate cannot win is because they will not vote for one! The GOP cannot become a conservative party or it will never win the Presidency or control the Senate.

    • Bill589

      A ‘moderate’ is half progressive and half conservative? The progressive utopia has been repeatedly proven to be a lie – see ‘history’. A half-lie, is still a lie.

      We should fight to win people over to the truth, and not pander to them with half-lies.

  • Bill589

    DC vs The People.
    DC wins with a ‘progressive’, whether it be Hillary or Christie. The Dem politicians fight us to our faces, the GOPe talks nice to our faces, and then folds at the last minute, stabbing us in the back.

    I’ll vote for a Palin, Lee, Cruz type Constitutional Conservative, but I will never vote for a traitorous saboteur RINO like Christie or Boehner. Else the pseudo – two party system goes on, and nothing changes.

    God bless our Republic and it’s patriots.

    • Shane

      You are a perfect example of the type of idiot that Bernie is talking about.

      • Bill589

        Name calling, instead of a good argument of facts and logic, is what the progressives of the GOPe and Dem do.
        But that’s all these progressives have. The TPM has the truth of history and reasoning on it’s side.

  • worker1950

    I am a conservative and will vote ABC (Anyone But Clinton)! I don’t care if it’s Christie, Paul, Cruz, Ryan, or someone labeled a RINO as long as it’s ABC!

    My advice to the TeaParty specifically and the GOP in general – STOP allowing the Dems and the MSM to define you. Starting yesterday get out a PR campaign showing you are ordinary hardworking, middle class Americans determined to keep America a free democracy for your children and generations to come – w/ an ad similar to this 2013 RAM Truck Super Bowl commercial “God made a Farmer”


    • 4Deuce

      You made one fine recommendation. I don’t believe that anyone with a heart and the common sense that was once an ingrained trait of the average American, could watch that Paul Harvey-narrated RAM commercial without it touching their heart. If something as “down home” as that could be produced for a political candidate (deserving of it), it would be an ad that truly would reverberate across the USA.

  • rbblum

    Today’s leaders inherit yesterdays political baggage. Principled statesman are best since the political damage will be lingering for many more years to come.

  • Martin Monti

    It is sad to see the rigid far right complain about a candidate who could beat Hilary Clinton.

  • PolkaDot

    Mr. Goldberg,

    Strongly recommend the article below.
    Via Mark Levin

    An outstanding electoral overview & evisceration of the usual Rove-Rubin establishment talking points


  • Wil

    This man Chris Christie, is a monster. Repulsive to the eye, a bully who would destroy public education. Has destroyed planned parenthood. An enemy of the middle class an enemy of the poor. A pig quite obviously. How can a reasonable person vote for this man?

    • http://johndalybooks.com/ John Daly

      lol. It looks like the Soros marching orders arrived early this week.

    • Stimpy

      Union teacher much?

    • D Parri

      1. a stupid person;
      2. Wil

    • Josh

      Get it in while you can. Pretty soon genetic science will become as popular as environmental science, and it will be considered unfashionable if not criminal to poke fun at heavy people. For now, they’re one of the few remaining unprotected classes. So make those digs count!

  • JimmyBo1313

    Ho Hum, Dole, McCain, Romney and now Christie. Bernie boy, look up the meaning of crazy! Does any body here, other than Bernie, remember the silent majority that carried Ronald Reagan to TWO landslide victories? People that never voted before as well as Reagan democrats came out of the wood work to vote for a strong, confident CONSERVATIVE they could trust. President Reagan didn’t try to be all to all people, he only offered an alternative to the status quo something most people were already thinking but just needed President Reagan to offer them that choice. Most people are conservative by nature, some don’t even know it, and President Reagans no nonsense confidence in conservatism lead him to two victories. Then the blue blood country club RINO Republicans started their whisper campaign in which the liberals where more than willing to take up the mantle and do their dirty work by berating the moral majority. Instead of running to the fight, the RINO’s ran from it purposely allowing the moral majority to whither and be eaten by the liberals. I believe that was really the start of this foam at the mouth MSM we have today. The RINO’s have made it just so easy for them giving no opposition to their ridicule of conservatives or pointing out the shame of the MSM, that they have given up their unspoken fourth branch of government protected by the first amendment. We have the same thing right here with the Tea Party. The RINO’s are willing to allow MILLIONS to lose their health insurance just to stop the Tea Party. It’s either that or they allowed Millions to lose their health insurance for political gain. Remember, we must not back Senator Tedd Cruz because obamacare has to implode on it’s own! They new it was going to happen. Is THAT what these RINO’s think me as a conservative is going to vote for? Since when is one party more important than Millions of peoples Lives? Would a true conservative do that? Would President Reagan do that?

  • TRexLex

    Think back a few years. The mainstream media loved John McCain UNTIL he got nominated and then they pounced. Bernard is right that Christie cannot let himself be fooled by their supposedly positive thoughts right now. They want to build him up to take him down. Judy is correct that the media have confused social conservatives with the Tea Party, so the media can say outlandish and untrue things about the Tea Party and its supporters.Part of the problem is that the media sees things through set story lines and always wants to simplify things to the known story line that is familiar.

    I, for one, am keeping an open mind on all potential candidates for 2016. It’s essential that the Republicans win and I am willing to accept the most conservative candidate who it appears can win–and that won’t be really visible until 2016 when we know the domestic and foreign policy events and issues–when the political lay of the land is clearer.

  • brickman

    It’s Veterans Day today. Let me be the first to say: Thank you to all veterans!

    • 4Deuce

      And from one old grunt rifleman, let me, for one, say “You’re welcome,”

  • brickman

    TIME was tasteless in its use of a fat joke. Shame on them. But Bernie, check posts in your blogs. Almost all of the fat jokes are by people who consider Christie too liberal. Shame on them too.

    Your point on principles is correct but doesn’t go far enough. Almost all people in politics have principles and the ones who don’t are spread amongst the spectrum. What the American People hate is when some group on the right or in the left think they’re the only ones with them.

  • courage the cowardly dog

    Christie won in a blue state because he is a purplish Republican–red with a tinge of blue making him purple. And therein lies the problem. Most Rock Red Republicans don’t like the color purple or any shade of it.

    • Stimpy

      Purple is better than true blue.

      • Bill589

        I disagree. If we the voters keep accepting purple as all the GOPe allows us – then we stay on a progressive path to slavery. DC is the enemy of liberty – it comes in two halves: The corrupt Dem and the corrupt GOP. Neither half fights for us, but only for themselves.

        • Stimpy

          The poison I choose is purple. The poison you choose is blue, simply because your so called principles don’t allow you to go with purple. You are part of the problem, not part of the solution. Are we not better off with purple than blue?

  • Judy

    Hi Bernie,
    Having libertarinan (small l ) leanings, I usually agree with you and I half agree with you now. However, I must defend the Tea Party.

    The TeaParty, first of all is not a party in the usual sense. They are so maligned by the press that people don’t even understand what they stand for.
    First of all, let’s separate the Tea Party from the rabid “social”
    conservatives. The Tea Party supporters mostly stand for fiscal responsibility, ie.,
    balancing the budget, reducing the size of government, lowering taxes, free
    markets, and upholding the Constitution. Unlike some “conservative” sectors that
    focus on “social” issues, the TeaParty does not.

    They also are not seasoned politicians, so they may not have learned to
    accept that we can’t have everything we want, but we need them. We owe them a
    debt of thanks for the House in Congress and should try to include them in the
    big tent instead of maligning them. I agree that we should back the person
    that has the best chance of getting a Republican back in the White House and I
    think that is by focusing on economic and defense issues, only. That is what the so called
    Tea Party is mostly focused on and I applaud them for that. Any candidate that
    wants to be a Republican president, should find a way to embrace and get the
    support of the Tea Party. Right now, subject to change, I think Chris Christie
    does look like our best hope and I would support him for that reason. Let’s also remember that the only reason Republicans lost the last presidential election, is that they didn’t get out to vote–maybe the Republicans need to refocus on the ground game.

    • worker1950

      Best post of the day. Well said. Thanks

    • Bill589

      Romney and the GOPe dissed the TPM – is a big part of why they lost. They lost our trust. When the TPM lost a primary, they backed the GOP candidate. In reverse, the GOPe went against the TPM candidate – so they are liberty’s enemy too.

      And now, we don’t back the backstabbing GOPe, but look to oust the corrupt elite. Some of us will vote Dem over the corrupt GOPe, in order to reform the GOP, and restore our Republic.
      Else we just have one corrupt progressive government, with a pseudo – two – party system, allowing The People to think they have power over the government, when in fact the government is all powerful

    • Shane

      The tea parties across the country have selected mediocre candidates that had no chance of winning a general election, like that “I am not a witch” woman in Delaware. The GOP would have at least 3 more Senators if it were not for the tea party.

      • Stimpy

        We could have been rid of Harry Reid too.

  • floridahank

    Christie will not last long — a year from now he’ll not be in the political news. He has very limited voter appeal nationwide. I don’t know if the GOP really wants to win in ’16. Because if they do, they’ll have to find someone with much wider appeal, more common sense and with more conservative standards — I believe somewhere out there is a great woman who could be our candidate — no names yet, but just a gut feeling. Maybe our woman to oppose the Dem’s Hillary?

    • Stimpy

      OK, who then?

      • Bill589


        Look at what SP has accomplished in her life, including what she accomplished as governor: Clean up government corruption, prosecute offenders, confront and fix their crony-capitalist collaborators, and set up a more efficient government. She accomplished more in two years than other governors do in a lifetime.

        This is exactly what DC needs. This is what the TPM wants. This is what the multitude of disillusioned Americans want. Whether they NOW know it or not, they either want SP in DC, or somebody just like her.

        • Stimpy

          She’s already been folded, spindled, and mutilated by the MSM and the late night talk show comedians. It’s a shame but that’s what it is.

      • floridahank

        Someone like Condoleezza Rice would be super. I know she would never accept — she seems like she has too much character to let herself be eaten up by the corrupt media, and I don’t blame her. But there MUST be some great Republican Conservative woman who could do the job. We should be seriously looking for her now!

  • joepotato

    IMHO CC would be another loser… Cruz was born a dual citizen and can NEVER become an Art II natural born citizen… That’s too bad…

  • victoria_29

    Wrong- a liberal is a liberal regardless of what letter they put after their name. Bernie got one thing right, Tea Party aka Conservatives are loyal only to conservatism…not the Republican party. Christie would lose worse than Romney even McCain-funny they are already trying to sell that we have to run Christie to win-I remember when that was the story for McCain and Romney…worked out well.

    • PolkaDot

      I voted against Obama (not for McCain) in 2008, and was among millions of us who stayed home in 2012. If Christie will run in 2012, I am staying home again….like many more millions of us

      • Barry O

        Thank you very much. I appreciate your support


    In 1979 didn’t you say that you would rather win with George Bush than lose with Ronald Reagan?

    • brickman

      Rand Paul and Ted Cruz are NOT Ronald Reagan.

      • Stimpy

        They aren’t even Gerald Ford.

  • FriscoWalt

    So Christie wins the Repubs win the Senate and keep the house.Is it going to do any good if we concede practically everything to the Dems in the spirit of getting along?B.S.

    • Stimpy

      No, let’s throw a conservative tantrum and deliberately lose the presidential election. That will be a triumph of principles won’t it?

  • pasquale7

    Bernie, you are forgetting one thing, the TEA PARTY has,…..what? 80 members of the House and a few Senators. I think I remember back when the commonly held belief was the Ronald Reagan could not win. AND if some 3-4,000,000 very conservative Republicans had showed up in 2012 Romney may have won. I do not dislike Christie personally, but if he mouths off about the TP people like Cruz and Paul then I will not vote for him. I am tired of the bad mouth campaign vs the Tea Party by the Press, Democrats, and moderate Republicans. I personally do not mind going down for principle. Maybe I am stupid but I do believe in some core conservative principles. I worked for Barry Goldwater and I am still proud of it. LBJ really screwed up the country and Nixon did nothing to try and undo LBJ’s damage. Though I must admit that Nixon’s idea of a reverse income could had pretty much wiped out the huge bureacracy of social service workers we now have, though they are state employees but the welfare state dollars come mostly from the federal government, I believe. Somebody correct me if I am wrong; but even if I am the growth of welfare is a result of federal legisltion and the federal judiciary, no? And of course the amazing continued growth of the federal governement in DC is incredible.

  • jj

    Bernard has it right and I am one of his targets. I am both a Pro Lifer and a Tea Party member. Both of those organizations have done a lot of good for their causes. However, killing babies in the womb with not stop with a President, it will stop in the a law court. And we are making progress there let us not mess it up because of a Presidential election.
    The Tea Party is and will be a force to deal with and the GOP should realize that and somehow merge the two entities.

  • phillyfanatic

    Well, it could help if Chris stopped attacking the conservs, TEAS, Libertarians, who really are the BASE not the DC elites and consultants and McCains. And if Chris could find a VEEP candidate who is a conserv and could win some states or at least not be a drag, then the GOP BASE might give the OK. But, I want Chris to stand for something and not just kiss Obama and the media. When he lets us know his principles that will DEFEAT Dem liberals, I will be glad to support him.

    • Stimpy

      I thought Rand attached him first, no?

  • Drew Page

    I would rather see Christie as the next president than any Democrat, especially Hillary Clinton. He isn’t my first choice by a long shot, but it seems he may have the best chance of winning the presidency of anyone who wants to call themselves a Republican.
    That said, I don’t care for you disparaging Tea Party supporters. Calling them the “real RINOs” lumps you in with the left. The Tea Party supporters may be dinosaurs, but they aren’t RINOs. I use the term dinosaurs because they still cling to ideals the Republican party used to stand for. I don’t know what the hell “Republiicans” stand for any more and I don’t think they know either, unless it’s getting (re)elected.
    I guess to be elected today a “Republican” has to be for gay marriage; abortion; welfare for everyone; taxing the rich to pay for an increasing number of social welfare programs; using government agencies like the IRS to silence critics, the EPA to stifle business and the NSA to spy on all Americans; amnesty for illegals and open borders. Let’s see, did I miss anything? Oh yes, I forgot, a “Republican” needs to be in favor of bigger government and unlimited government spending. That way Bernie, we “Republicans” can be credited for compromising with the Left. If this is what it takes to get elected, we only need one party.
    Actually, Christie looks better in a pants suit than Hillary does. And so far, I haven’t heard him say “What difference does it make?” so that clinches it for me, Christie gets my vote. Happy now?

  • Paul Courtney

    Bernie: Rush just like Barack? I will condemn this gratuitous insult of another top conservative-soon as I can stop laughing and get up off the floor! Wonder who would be more offended, Rush or Barry? Anyhow, choice of Christie v. Cruz not likely, too many of us on wingnut right (said with affection) blame Cruz for taking attn away from healthcare.luv and losing Va. to Hillary ’16, gaining nada. I’m hoping for better choices like Walker, or even Kasich, but then, hope pretty much lost when it joined change.

    • victoria_29

      lmao nice try troll…..

      • Paul Courtney

        Trolling for laughs, yes. Can’t imagine what you saw in this to put me in troll category. No matter. If you are a tea partier, I sincerely wish you well, it’ll be better if the gov’t is smaller when it collapses. You should read a bit of Mark Steyn, you’ll be better prepared to troll through rubble, like me

  • http://theromancatholicvote.com/ catholicvoter

    Chris Christie won in 2009 against Jon Corzine, and not by all that much. Even with the unbelievable corruption revealed about Corzine and NJ going the way of CA, Christie barely won. Now Christie is an incumbent and incumbents are usually difficult to defeat. I do not think Christie won because he can attract the votes of women and minorities; it is more likely he won because Corzine was so corrupted, even the media started reporting on it. Now with Christie in office, folks not only know his name, but many in NJ admire his outspoken ways. After all, NJ is a state of big mouths and I ought to know because I grew up there.

  • Stimpy

    Well said. It is difficult to change the minds of true believers.

  • Pollyanna Taylor

    You hit the nail on the head Bernie. For Pete’s sake–let’s win a frigging election and then we can stand on principle. Christie is not my first choice but if he could actually have a shot at beating Hillary Clinton, I’d vote for him in a heartbeat. However, dear conservatives–DROP THE SOCIAL ISSUES! Defer them to the states and then SHUT UP! I know many people who would vote Republican but are so turned off by the Pro-Lifers and Gay-Marriage Opponents that they refuse to cast their vote for a Republican. I think it’s stupid to base one’s voting on these issues but it’s a reality so wake up conservatives and fight the fights we can actually win (limited government, pro-business, less taxes, more opportunities, etc).

    • victoria_29

      yeah I am sure that all the gays, liberals, amnesty supporting, muslim loving pro choice people will support Christie….now tell me again why a conservative will vote for him?

      • Stimpy

        You just made Bernie’s point. You don’t care if a republican wins the presidency. You just want to insist on a purist running, who will be sure to lose for all the reasons that PT stated. Your icon is emblematic of your fringe position.

        • PolkaDot

          I personally do not care if the President has (R) after his name but does everything what a (D) would do…. Time for third party? Or maybe we should start with the second one?

          • Stimpy

            Obama has a D after his name. Don’t care about that?

          • PolkaDot

            Nope. Last 2-1/2 years of W (R) were great, weren’t they? Romneycare was the blueprint for Obamacare. Shall I continue or you got the point.

  • Gradivus

    Rather than go with a “winnable” moderate candidate like Bob Dole, John McCain, or Mitt Romney, I’d rather win with an “unwinnable” principled candidate like Ronald Reagan or Rand Paul,

    • Stimpy

      So you’d rather lose with a winner. Makes a lot of sense.

      • Drew Page

        No, I guess we should be happy “winning” with a loser.

        • Stimpy

          Winning with a loser would have been better than having Barry now in office.

  • Kevin Hubble

    First, the magazine cover. If, after Barack Obama first burst on the national scene and decided to challenge Hillary Clinton for the Democratic nomination for president, does anyone believe that Time Magazine would have run a cover similar to this one with Barack Obama’s profile saying: “Will Barack Obama Spook the Democrat Establishment?” Not on your life! Secondly, the key to Republican’s winning elections is not by running candidates that are only slightly less liberal than their Democrat opponents. The GOP will never be as good at being liberal as the Democrats are-they are the experts at it and we should stop trying to keep up! The only elections we’ve won since 1980 were with conservative candidates. I actually don’t believe GW Bush would have won had it not been that the Dems nominated their two worst possible candidates. Since Reagan, the GOP has fielded a presidential slate of: Bush, Dole, Bush, McCain, & Romney. You have got to be kidding me! Where is the conservative mad-dog in that bunch? Who said the conservative, tea-party, Rand Paul/Ted Cruz/nut job/fringe has taken over the party? (George HW Bush was a moderate conservative at best and BARELY won two elections) And now, three years before the next election, we’re already being told that Barack Obama’s BFF is the best we are likely to be able to do? If that’s true, we sure all get used to hearing: “Madame President”

  • Mary Jo

    The left and Republicans INO and left leaning media and so called JOURNALISTS have branded the Tea Party as EXTREME and HARD RIGHT. Sadly those misconceptions have stuck like a thorn. I have
    been to a couple of Tea Party rallies and never have I been to a more
    normal looking, middle America gathering. The people that the media
    demonize as HARD RIGHT are hard working, family oriented, patriotic
    Americans who love our country and the CONSTITUTION. I am sure you remember that the “MORAL MAJORITY”
    elected Ronald Reagan. They are the same people that are now
    considered EXTREMISTS. (thanks to the left leaning media) The Tea Party
    platform is NOT extreme~http://www.teaparty-platform.c…

    • Drew Page

      Face it, we conservatives are outnumbered by the “gimme my free stuff” crowd. So it’s put up with Christie, or the unthinkable HRC.
      Christie has already distanced himself from Obama saying he should have told the truth about Obama Care and that it is unworkable and everyone knows it. As more people lose their health plans (which they were promised they could keep) and apply for Obama Care the discontent will only grow once they see the size of the deductibles, the coinsurance percentages, the out-of-pocket limits and the monthly premiums and that discontent won’t be limited to Republicans.
      Only when the majority of Americans feel the pain will they be moved away from the Democrats who promised so much and delivered so little.

      • PrevaricatorOfTheUnitedStates

        How dare you malign my signature program!

  • michael binder

    The business of compromise is a tricky business. It seems to me that the issue is not compromise itself, but whether or not we are compromising values or principles. If values and principles are the same, there can be no room for compromise, and therefore we end up with the polarization extant in the country today. However, if values can change there is room for adjustment of one’s useful opinions. It might help if the politicians could speak to their principles (rather than the details) and values, but that is a faint hope. It requires ‘honesty’, something sorely lacking in today’s leaders.

  • SkyCitizen

    Good opinion as usual Mr. Goldberg but I think Republicans lose elections because of voters not candidates. When morons hear free, your share, your rights they respond to the dog whistle. The liberals long ago realized elections are won by compromising the educational system, not at the ballot box.

    • Drew Page

      I agree. Can anyone tell me where Harry Reid has compromised with Republicans?
      Conservatives want smaller, less intrusive government, less government spending, reduction of the national debt and the end of Obama Care and we are the ones being called radical extremists.

  • delble

    Bernie, Warrior Wanted!!!
    You do NOT understand conservatives. Be honest, you believe we are morons and so far out of touch we want to go back to either disco or the post WWII era. What we want is clear – FREEDOM! Freedom to live our own lives and that means as little government control as possible. Don’t tell me I can’t eat this, say a particular word, pray a prayer publicly, live my life, make my own mistakes and successes. Rand Paul, Ted Cruz, Mike Lee have struck a positive nerve. Don’t be fooled, another moderate will NOT win! Moderates like McCain, Romney Christie – good men, but ,. . . . The people who work for a living are angry and want a warrior!

    • Drew Page

      You are right. We who work for a living want a warrior to fight for us. Unfortunately, those who don’t work for a living outnumber those who do and God tends to favor the heaviest battalions.

      Nothing is going to change until those who live on Obama promises feel the pain themselves. When the freebies get cutoff, when followers of the Messiah see what Obama Care has to offer maybe then the mob will be less infatuated with promises of the liberals.

      • floridahank

        Our present problem is that the GOP in DC have no guts to go after Obama with major serious issues and make it plain to the public — go after all the negative acts and projects and waste that the Dems are doing — continue to show the huge expenditures that they promote. I know the Rep’s do much the same thing and that’s why they hesitate to make public these things — but there has to be some Rep’s with guts to tell it like it is and show the billions of $$$$ wasted almost daily — make the public feel hurt and disgusted with their waste — hit them hard and often, take the fight to them and make them defensive.

  • rgcomega

    Slow news day Bernie! Let’s play reporter and make a story where there is none! It’s 3 long years to the next election and you want us to pick the number for Powerball on November 8, 2016. Let me ask you this. When did you know that Romney was going to be the Rep candidate in 2012? Must have been around 2009, huh! If you’re that gullible, have a little swampland….enough with piling on Cruz and the Tea Party, enough RHINO Kool Aide…enough! Let’s just forget what Progressives are going to do, what they think, who they’ll run and concentrate finding Repub candidate who is qualified and experienced person that represents Republican values. You want to coalesce a strong Party with big arms? Start by NOT forcing candidates to dot every “I” and cross every “t” on the list of “perfect” candidate. Let’s bring the Tea Party in to the tent and let them have a voice just like the RHIINO’s do. Whoever wins the debate – wins. When we eat the flesh of our own, Progressives could run Biden and win….and the media and GOP will be more to blame for the loss by fanning the flames like this article than the Progressives, just like 2012.

  • Peep

    The problem is the national media and the money people spend too much time in the NY – DC corridor. That’s why, for example, they think we all care about who is the mayor of NYC or the governor of NJ. They are bubble boys who all hang out with each other and read the NY Times/Washington Post. Ask yourself, “When was the last time I heard the name of, for example, the governor of North Dakota?” They’re going gangbusters up there on energy and their unemployment rate is really low but nobody ever talks about that guy or encourages him to run for president. Have you seen him on TV on the national news or the Sunday news shows? Chris Christie has some name recognition because the NY/DC news media hangs on every word he says and everything he does. If he was the governor of Kentucky, you wouldn’t even know his name.

  • teamfrazzled

    If the goal is to just have a party affiliation “win” then Christie is it. Or a McCain or a Graham or a McConnell etc., etc. if your goal and intent is to change the direction Democrats and Democrat-lites have taken us, then Christie is not a win. My hopes for this country cannot be fulfilled by pretending we will all just love the same unwanted policies foisted off on us by Democrats if the establishment RINOs just implement them more slowly or better yet, just change their name.

  • Keith

    Folks, it is better to have 75% of what you want than 0%. Someone like Christie would give us some — not all, but some — of what we want, which is far better than the soft fascism of Hillary’s progressivism. I don’t like Christie’s vote for A3371, which “prevents any licensed therapist, psychologist, …from using sexual orientation change efforts with a children under age 18.” This is a progressive intrusion on the first amendment. But, imagine what Hillary Clinton would do? Just take a look at “It Takes a Village”, in which the lines between adulthood and childhood are blurred.

    Compromise here would give us some food, which is better than starvation. I.e., we have a better chance of making conservative reforms with Christie than with Hillary.

    • PolkaDot

      Let’s say Christie wins (which he won’t). Remember W’s promises, and what happened to them (while having majorities in both houses)? Who said we are going to have 75% of what we want?

  • MarioG

    Let’s not forget – Bernie Goldberg used to be a big liberal – and he still thinks like one sometimes.

  • Hugh Petersen

    The real conservatives won’t bother to vote if Christie is the nominee. The GOP will lose for sure with Christie.

    • MarioG

      That’s what happened to Romney.

    • Stimpy

      Why don’t the real conservatives form their own party and stop dragging the Republican party, you know the party of Lincoln, to oblivion.

    • Drew Page

      You are dead wrong. The conservatives who thought Romney wasn’t conservative enough and didn’t vote are responsible for giving us another four years of Obama, Eric Holder and Joe Biden.
      There are other conservatives I would rather see elected, but as of right now it seems the general public is not in the mood to elect a strong conservative. I would much rather take my chance with Christie that the female impersonator Hillary.

    • Barry O

      Hugh, I really, really appreciate your attitude and all those who think like you do.
      All the best to you and yours.
      PS, I hope you like your new health plan. I couldn’t have done it without you.

      • Hugh Petersen

        Barry o…Don’t be so fast to pass judgement on me. I am not speaking for myself, but for those I know across the country who would not vote for Christie. Many true conservatives have a very low opinion of Chris Christie and I do, too. You know where you can shove your comment on me liking my new health plan!

  • MarioG

    Why would we lose with Cruz?

    • Stimpy

      Seriously? He’d garner 0% of the not-so-minority vote — you know, blacks and Hispanics and gays … and anyone not an old white male.
      Wake up and smell the coffee. I thought hari-kiri was a Japanese tradition. Evidently the hard right conservative wacko’s have embraced it.

      • MarioG

        Yes, seriously! In 2008, John McCain led the dunce Obama after he nominated Sarah Palin to be his running mate. Then McCain prevented Palin from taking it to Obama and he himself botched his response to the financial crisis.

        Bush 41, Dole, McCain and Romney all ran as “moderates”, and lost. Reagan and Bush 43 ran as conservatives, and won.

        Blacks are going to vote DemocRAT no matter what because they have some weird version of Stockholm Syndrome and keep voting for the same folks that have screwed them since the days of slavery.

        The Hispanic vote means nothing but trouble for Republicans because it is too small, plus a Republican would have to win some 73% to make any difference with them and catering to their special interests to do so loses more white votes than they gain with Hispanics.

        For Republicans the key is to win more conservative white votes, which is what really wins elections, even today. They cannot do that by pandering to blacks, women and Hispanics because they lose more votes than they gain.

        Some 5 million who voted for McCain did not show up to vote for Romney because they thought he was not conservative enough, which is what lost him the election in 2012.

        • Stimpy

          You are right about slavery. Had the democrats beaten Lincoln they would have sued for peace and we’d have the dis-united states of America. Too bad blacks don’t have much of a sense of history — Lincoln was a republican after all.

          • MarioG

            Not only did the DemocRATS fight to preserve slavery, they then terrorized blacks through their KKK subsidiary and Jim Crow laws, and later filibustered civil rights legislation. Then LBJ finally found a way to destroy the black family that had survived the worst days of slavery and Jim Crow by paying the poorest blacks to have as many kids as possible without getting married to maximize their welfare checks. To add insult to injury the DemocRAT subsidiary unions trap the poorest blacks in failing inner city schools, deny them school vouchers and make it impossible for young blacks, already illiterate, to find entry level jobs by hiking prevailing and minimum wages.

            Yet blacks keep voting for DemocRATS in some twisted version of Stockholm Syndrome.

    • Drew Page

      Because his fellow “Republicans” labeled him an extremist and blamed him for the government shutdown. I like Cruz, but I don’t give him a chance. I like Rubio, Rand Paul and Paul Ryan too, but as of now the general public seems to favor Christie. Better him than the harridan Hillary.

      • MarioG

        Those fellow “Republicans” are the ones we want to retire – that’s our goal in the Tea party – we want our country back. One of my favorite bomb-throwers has just written a book titled “Never trust a liberal over 3 – especially a Republican”

    • brickman

      Name the states that Obama won and that Cruz would win. Add up to 270?

      • MarioG

        Obama was elected based on affirmative action thinking. He was re-elected when voters making less than $30K a year gave him a 7 million vote margin to protect the free stuff they need to survive in Obama’s moribund economy. Voters making more than $30K a year gave Gov. Romney a 3 1/2 million vote margin. 4 million voters who had voted for McCain did not show up for Romney because they thought he was not conservative enough.

        This is why Cruz must NOT pander to blacks, women and Hispanics by compromising conservative principles. Yet, he must aggressively reach out to them all based on conservative principles. This will gain him those voters from these groups who have more than half a brain and want to be like everyone else while bringing home the key white vote that Republicans need to win.

        Pandering to blacks, women and Hispanics will lose him the key white conservative base that did not show up for Romney without getting him enough votes from these groups to make up the difference.

        • brickman

          No names of states in that.

        • outraged_mom

          No. We don’t really divide ourselves up that way -OBAMA did that – prosperity and fairness appeal to all.

          • MarioG

            YOU may not divide yourself up that way, but the FACTS and the numbers do. Romney was correct when he said that 47% will not vote for him no matter what.

            For those making less than $30K a year, prosperity and fairness is making others pay for their lifestyle. Studies have shown that the after-tax cash value of their income and benefits – food stamps, housing subsidies, Medicaid, etc. – is equivalent to the same family making $70K a year. So, why not work a part time job making $30K instead of busting your gut working a full time job making $70K? The incentive to work is now only for those who can earn more than $70K – otherwise gaming the system makes you more money.

            We will soon have more takers than makers if we haven’t already reached that point. Almost 50% of income earners pay no income taxes, so they are free to vote for federal goodies they don’t pay for.

  • http://blog.cyberquill.com/ Cyberquill

    I’d rather lose with Cruz. It rhymes better.

    • Stimpy

      You’sa Lose-ah.

  • digitalPimple

    Not that I really needed to read this but now I know where BG is coming from here on out. No need to watch his endless bloviating on Oreilly for the next few years. Click.. channel changed when he comes on.

    • Stimpy

      See ya. Don’t let the door hit your a$$ on the way out.

      • digitalPimple

        I guess that bothers you huh? I’m ohh so sorry. Is there anything Bernie can and will say at this point you haven’t heard for the past 2 election cycles?

        • Stimpy

          Doesn’t bother me at all. You are the one changing the channel.

  • Wheels55

    While we are playing make believe for 2016, my pick is Rand Paul. However, given a choice between Christie and Cruz, I’ll take Christie because I think he may be able to beat Hillary (Cruz won’t) and I think governors generally make better Presidents. Having said that, my bet is Christie says and does some dumb things that make the media paint him as a terrible person. What we need is for the Democrats, lead by Barack “I can only tell a lie” Obama, to continue to screw up and Republicans to shut and just watch that car wreck happen.
    Hillary “What does it matter if people died under my watch” Clinton will have her own problems.

    • Drew Page

      You can count on the MSM attack dogs to turn on Christie as soon as starts acting like a potential candidate. In fact, it’s started already.

    • digitalPimple

      You guys are naive. The media are going destroy Christie over Clinton. The media will not be around to help him. Grassroots are the only way to win this election and get a message out to the voters. Crispy cream is dead in the water once the cycle starts.

  • http://karlq.spaces.live.com Karl Quick

    Sorry Bernie… It is not at all clean cut. The TEA party people have a very valid point: Bush was clearly “our man” but the result of his moderation ended up being Obama + 4 Trillion in new debt. I have far less faith in government than you do. We need a very hard lesson as a people. We need to re-learn that hard work and honesty, principles and justice, and some humility, are absolutely necessary for freedom and prosperity. What we love about Christy is not his winning ways, but that he tells people the truth. IF he acts as he speaks, we all will support him. BUT if our current crop of RINOs allow Obama to sqeak by, the Dems will again be uncompromising and we will need to go with a hard, hard liner.
    It would be better to lose than to be blamed again like Bush for what is the result of Liberal ideology

  • Chuck

    Bernie is exactly right. I can almost hear Christie making the Bernie argument to the Tea Partiers in his inimitable fashion: “You’ve got the choice between Hillary and me. Who do you want? You may not think you can trust me because I don’t come off like a true blue conservative, but I know what you want and I’ll have your back and I’ll get things done you’ll like. Didn’t Reagan himself say that taking half a loaf is better than none? With me you’ll get more than half a loaf and I’ll lead a Republican comeback and restore some sanity to government. Or you can be stupid, blow me off, and have Hillary. Whattya think you’re going to get then?”

    • digitalPimple

      The problem is his record. He works with Dems sure but really gets nothing done. His state is a mess and one of the worst in the 50. He’s all about himself.. look at his speech at the convention and the ‘hug of shame’ with Obama. He won’t support anyone else. He refused to take 3 hours and help in Virgina which may have pushed him 2 more points. He’ll tell you he’s got you back then F- you just as quick. It’s all bout Christie.

      He won re-election because of Sandy mostly not because he “Gets things done”. The Dems like him because he’s weak and soft as butter. They can roll him like a pig in a blanket.

      • Chuck

        Christie is a politician, so what do you expect? The Smothers Brothers defined it something like this: “Poli” means many, and “tics” are blood-sucking insects. So even if I were to concede you are correct on all counts, it’s still beside the point. If it comes down to a choice between him and Hillary, it has to be him. It always comes down to the lesser of two evils.

        • digitalPimple

          Don’t get me wrong, if the public/caucus FREELY nominates a “Christie” without the endless GOP and RINO games I will vote with my fellow Americans against a “Hallirity” presidency.

          If the GOP party and so called Media talking head ‘experts’ continue to pull their past BS games you can count me out of this next election cycle all together. It’s a complete turn-off and insulting to a strong supporter like myself and many other regular folks that I speak with. Uniting is a two-way street and it seems the morons running the GOP can’t grasp that idea when ever it’s their turn to toss in. The days of garunteed votes by the base (which is VERY resonable BTW) are over and the GOP leadership better get used to it. No one likes to be taken for granted or a ride.

          I give a lot of time and energy to getting people elected. I have volunteered in my local GOP in my DEM state. I walk the walk. This is just my opinion. My sense if I am not alone at all.

          • Chuck

            I completely understand your sentiments and lament the GOP leadership’s shortcomings. However, you’re not appreciating Bernie’s point. A lame GOP nominee is still better than Hillary, who will give us absolutely nothing. Staying home hands her the election, Bernie says, so we have no choice but to hold our noses and vote for the GOP nominee. Again, it seems it always comes down to the lesser of two evils.

          • digitalPimple

            If the party is allowed to continue on this path there simply is no point in voting to be part of it. It’s as repulsive an idea to me as voting for Obama.

          • Chuck

            I’m sorry to hear that, but they’re thrilled at the DNC. You’d rather lose with your principles than win and work your will. You’re the type Bernie was addressing in his third-to-last and second-to-last paragraphs. You make me feel like Cher in “Moonstruck,” who said: “What’s the matter with you? Snap out of it!” I only wish Obama had used your strategy and stated exactly who he was and what he’d do, and he would have lost too. The DNC will exploit this division in the GOP to perennial electoral success.

          • digitalPimple

            When I die I die alone not with some GOP loyalty badge. Save the talking point. It’s lost its effect 2 cycles ago and frankly I am tired of hearing that excuse from the GOP.

            It’s nothing more than a manipulative tactic to gain votes from the base and ignore the problem within the party.

    • CharlieFromMass

      The scary thing: I can actually hear Gov. Christie saying almost exactly that.

      And yes, Bernie does have some VERY valid points we needs to consider moving forward. Gov. Christie might not be my ideal (I like Rand Paul as far as Republicans go), but he is someone who I would be willing to vote for.

      • Chuck

        Yes, Christie is not my ideal either, nor is Paul, but either one is my pick if Hillary is the opponent. That’s what the Tea Party needs to understand.

    • MarioG

      This is a false choice – Christie has to win the Republican primary first.

      What makes you think that Christie “will have our back” – so far he’s only shown concern for his own back.

      Bush 41, Dole, McCain and Romney all ran as “moderates” – and lost. Reagan and Bush 41 ran as conservatives – and won.

      • Chuck

        I didn’t say Christie would have our back. I’m saying that’s what he will argue to the Tea Party.

        • MarioG

          Point taken. The GOP primaries will be interesting. I really don’t think Hillary has much chance with Benghazi and the mess in the middle-east around her neck. Besides, she doesn’t have a single achievement she can point to – NOT ONE. I doubt the country will be in the mood for a second affirmative action president once Obama is done with us.

          • Chuck

            You’re right that Hillary is saddled with Benghazi, a lack of achievements, and the country’s sour mood; however, you’re forgetting four things: (1) She’s formidable at handling herself; (2) the fawning media; (3) far too many clueless voters; and (4) favorable electoral demographics. The virtue of Christie is that he would call her out on things, forcing scrutiny in a way that others would not. If America is still groaning under Obamacare, that could be the difference, providing Christie makes no blunders.

          • MarioG

            The demographics everyone is worried about because it is what is emphasized by the liberal media and the Republican consultant class is like quicksand for Republicans. To get enough of the black, women and Hispanic votes a Republican has to pander to them and compromise conservative principles. This loses them more votes among their white base than they gain among those groups/ That is why Romney lost – too many white voters who had voted for McCain did not vote for Romney because they thought he wasn’t conservative enough after he botched the last two debates and started playing prevent defense.

      • Stimpy

        You just made Bernie’s point — he has to get by the conservative republican king makers first. Look who Reagan and Bush 41 ran against … and by the way, the demographics have shifted big time since then, and certainly not in the conservatives favor.

        • MarioG

          The conservative Republican Kingmakers will support Christie because they think like Bernie. Cruz will have to win on the wings of the Tea Party revolution.

          The demographics are trouble for Republicans because they lose more votes among their white base than they gain by pandering to the blacks, women and Hispanics. That’s what happened to Romney – 5 million McCain voters did not show up to vote for him because they thought he was not conservative enough after he botched the last two debates and started playing prevent defense. This would have swung the election in his favor.

          • Stimpy

            You described the problem accurately. So why are republican voters so fickle? The democrats are united, the republicans are in disarray. This is exactly the point that Bernie is making. Conservatives are perfectionists. If they don’t get the perfect conservative candidate they stay home? Anyone else see a problem with this?

          • MarioG

            Real conservatives believe in principles. Moderates like Bernie Goldberg and Bill O’Reilly are wishy-washy on principles, and liberals have no principles. As we are seeing with Obama and gun-running, IRS, Benghazi and Obamacare, the end justifies the means and they will look you in the eye and lie to your face if they think that will work. Average people have no idea how callous and cynical Obama really is. Then he goes off on vacation and plays golf.

    • Drew Page

      If I were Christie, this is exactly what I would say. If he gets the chance to say it, I hope he will. This would be a direct appeal to the average voter. I would refrain from no win arguments on social issues and just make ambiguous statements about these issues. It’s worked for Democrats for years. He can’t be worse than Obama or Hillary.

      • Chuck

        You nailed it. Thanks for writing.

  • jcofla

    For a number of years now I’ve said all politics, including municipal, state and national in our country has been hijacked by extremist on both the left and right sides of the spectrum. Reading all the comments so far to this article helps me confirms by belief. As Mr. Goldberg has pointed out on numerous occasions, the so-called mainstream media from the jump and continuing to this day finds it necessary to demonize the Tea Party along with those they believe are Tea Party favored or Tea Party supported candidates. But they, the so-called mainstream media, give a pass to OTHER extremist on the left including President Obama and the new Democrats. Oh and by the way, can anyone explain to me how anybody knows if or when a candidate is Tea Party favored or Tea Party supported? I guess I’m not getting the Tea Party memos.

    I agree with what Mr. Goldberg has written, especially the line, “No
    matter how you feel about Christie, he’s a lot better than another liberal
    Democrat…” According to a daily “Rasmussen Report” email I just received, “…if the 2016 presidential election were held today, 43% of LIKELY (emphasis
    added) U.S. Voters would choose Democrat and former secretary of State Hillary Clinton, while 41% would opt for Chris Christie, New Jersey’s Republican governor, instead.” What do you think would be the results of a poll involving any other potential republican candidate at this point?

  • Swampfox1965

    Yes, Bernie, I would rather lose while supporting a conservative than win while supporting a liberal. “You’ve got to stand for something, or you’ll fall for anything.”

    • Stimpy

      I nominate you president of the hari-kiri conservative club. Anyone second the motion?

      • Swampfox1965

        I accept the nomination with pride. If you win with a socialist or a socialist sympathizer, you’ve lost. Unless, of course, you are a socialist — in which case you’ve still lost but just don’t know it yet.

  • Acu-Vue

    Let us first hope that there is a 2016 election and the USA still stands for The United States of America. And before we start trying to predict who is going to represent each party, I would just simply like to start small by wishing that neither ticket contain the names: Obama, Clinton, or Bush. Aren’t 28 years (1988-2016) of these embarrassing, lying, incompetent clowns enough! And Bernie, to simply answer your question: I would rather win with Lou Christie (Vocalist from the 1960’s) or anyone else for that matter than lose to Hillary. How does she sleep at night!!!

  • altweasel

    Sounds like someone has been gulping down the Karl Rove flavored Kool Aid. Christie would energize the base about the same as Romney did. Core values have got to get back to the surface somewhere, or it may as well be a one party system.

  • digitalPimple

    Oh jebus. Here we go again. Another old time depressant that knows it all, yet picks a loser every single time.

  • Daniel

    Gee Bernie, last month we were Ayatollah’s now we are RINO’s? Really, and I mean REALLY!!. I wonder how many fans you are losing. I’m a conservative who is an ex-Republican. Why, because I have woken up to the fact that the Republican party is now controlled by Progressive’s. I used to call them RINO’s. I think Progressive’s is more apt. They use the same tactics as the left. Right now they are collecting money to fight Tea Party candidates, Cruz, Lee and any who are true Conservative’s. They claim the TP is destroying the Republican Party and just like the left always is the opposite is true.

    • Stimpy

      Did you join the John Birch society when you left the republican party?

      • Daniel

        Nope, I am free and clear, not all conservatives are far right. I just see the damage Progressives are doing. They want to kill traditional America.

  • Swampfox1965

    You’re probably right, Josh. However, the Republican leadership in the House and Senate, and on the Republican National Committee, are actually so far left of the center of which you speak that it’s hard to differentiate between them and the Demoncrats.
    I put my very life on the line for what this country was back in the ’60s — you know, a Constitutional Republic — fighting the Communists in Vietnam. Today I’m symbolically fighting a different and more dangerous foe: the Socialist Democrats of America and their globalist financiers.
    I would rather take my chances with a true Constitutionalist than put Christie up against an SDA candidate — which would make me a loser no matter who won.

  • jim g

    i can’t believe that after Bernie clearly states his sound argument, that people still disagree. You can lead a tea party conservative to the well, but you can’ make him think..


    • Daniel

      I stopped drinking both Alcohol and Kool aid about 14 years ago. You sound like you might need an AA meeting.

  • allen goldberg

    Three things Bernie:

    One: congratulations on your acceptance to the Libtard party…as a closet Democrat, i hope you find your relationships with the scum-balls, liars and cheats not too hard on your demeanor

    Two: Christie ain’t no conservative..he might get elected, or not..but letting Libtards select the candidate..like the NYT picking McCain really worked out great…right?? The turds at Time….know exactly what they are doing..its called FRAUD…I would think you would know better

    Three: Because you do not understand our Constitution, nor does more than half the ignorant bastards in Congress, does not mean we have to settle for a watered down version that makes the liberals happy…screw them …..their collective intelligence could not light a bulb at the back of a refrigerator….I am dismayed at your insistence to merely give in to anything…like Chris Christie…a liberal in very thin republican veneer…

    • Stimpy

      That’s telling him. Now enjoy the next democratic administration that you so ably enabled to win office.

      • digitalPimple

        Let me see the record of great successes using your political theories and insight and I’ll be happy to jump aboard Stimpy.

        Ohh wait..

        • Stimpy

          Barry Goldwater. An example of your kind of success.

  • Jen

    You throw out two examples of Conservative candidates that
    lost an election and conclude that no Tea Party or Conservative can win. That
    seems very concise. It is hard for candidates to win elections when their party
    does not help them financially and attacks them. Just ask Cuccinelli. Do you remember the mid-term
    elections of 2010?

    Now you are going to slam Rush? Seriously? He is the most
    listened to political talk show in the country. Do you really think there isn’t
    a conservative base in this country? Why does he have such a commanding audience?
    Your comment about him not being able to compromise is ridiculous. How is any
    party supposed to comprise with a Liberal? Harry Reid and the President both
    repeatedly said they will not negotiate during the shutdown. How do you suggest Republican’s compromise on
    Amnesty? On Obama Care? On the Debt? We
    need someone different in the party. Someone who will put an end to this kind
    of criminal political system we have of lobbying byouts and payoffs. We need to abolish the IRS. We need to cut spending and balance the
    budget. Not one politician from either party (except maybe Cruz) would be
    willing to do any of that!!! Certainly not Christie. He would do about as good
    of job as W. Bush.

    • digitalPimple

      Jen. Cucci won the independent vote buy a HUGE margin in Virgina. What’s that we always hear from Rove and Bernie types? Its the Independents that matter.

      The base GOP loyalists (Rino crews) didn’t turn out because they where told he would loose and the GOP turned their backs. They didn’t bother to vote.

      Now you have the ‘Roves’ running around trying to turn the message away and change the dialog. Huge embarrassment for the GOP machine in Virgina.

      Completely winnable. GOP party is entirely to blame for that loss no matter how you cut it.

  • Larry blaspheming liberalism

    That’s like saying, “Would you rather win with George H. W. Bush or lose with Ronald Reagan?” Guess what? Reagan won. When Bush41 was President, he tried the “kinder, gentler” approach — and got crushed.

    The “war” in the GOP is the $$ Establishment (often just Democrat-lite) vs. the voters they need in order to be elected. Unlike the Democrat sheeple (who follow whatever their union bosses or celebrities tell them), conservatives understand liberty and how liberalism brings slavery.

    Bernie writes, “Give [Christie] your support. And do you [sic] best to be passionate about it. If you don’t, you’ll have up to eight years of Mrs. Clinton.” We gave McCain and Romney our support and got 8 years of Obama. If the GOP wants our support, let them support people like Cuccinelli — oops, they had the chance and DIDN’T. Why should we act like battered wives?

  • Name

    Bernie, while I totally agree the object is winning not a good showing. I have
    become an ardent admirer of Ted Cruz lately not because he is more conservative, but because he is far more articulate and believe that he may be
    a candidate worthy of an independent voter. He certainly is no Sarah Palin
    but an original thinker with a great story and a sincere passion for doing the
    right thing because it is the right thing.

    • Stimpy

      He probably has all the qualities that you just stated. However, he won’t win any votes from blacks or Hispanics. Translation: he can’t win any blue states. Christie has shown that he can.

  • stmichrick

    I agree with you except for your admonition on compromise. Seems like the only compromise opportunities out there are on how much we agree to GROW government, not CUT it.

  • Swampfox1965

    With Christie as finalist “we the people” would lose whether he won or lost in November 2016. With Ted we’d at least have a chance.

  • Florida Jim

    The Progressives move in lockstep much like those who invented the “lockstep” but they stick together and win. Republicans are like the Hatfield’s and McCoy’s fighting every time they meet. Why can’t they sit and work out a Contract For America” on which they can agree on several basic ideas? Band around those basic agreements and stick to them not mentioning anything else just like those in Lockstep. I can’t take anymore infighting allowing the Progressives any more power they make me vomit.

  • paul

    Hi Bernie, good advise to Christie, you should take it yourself when you write your commentaries. You seem to just not be able to help yourself.

  • Beretta

    Christie cannot win the WH. Nothing more really has to be said him. He’s popular now because he won against a very weak opponent in a very blue state wearing a GOP pin on his lapel. The more revealing story is the Mcauliffe-Cuccinelli race where the so-called unappealing conservative candidate almost won despite being out spent and largely unsupported by the GOP establishment.

    • ogden lane

      …and would have won had not the arch conservatives poisoned the well by shutting down the government. Get it?

      • lemonfemale

        Why is it the side that absolutely refused to talk to people “with bombs strapped to their bellies” doesn’t get blamed for not negotiating? You can gas babies and Obama will talk to you, but not the terrorists in Congress. Just saying.

      • Beretta

        Sort of adds to my point. If you’re blaming the loss on the shut down, then okay, I’ll say even that *almost* didn’t matter. Support from the establishment would have made a difference. The shut down was inevitable with a president who refused to negotiate. He knew that was coming and he sat on his hands like a spoiled brat. And in the end, it doesn’t matter because his signature achievement is been a flop. Whatever. I won’t vote for Christie. Period. If you like your RINO, you can keep it.

    • Stimpy

      So who can win? Rand Paul? He couldn’t be elected dog catcher.

      • Beretta

        That is the $64,000 question. It seems the Republicans (lately) can only nominate opponents, not winners on the presidential level. Christie can’t win (IMO) and the general feeling is neither can those to the right of him (Paul, Cruz, Rubin?, Lee, etc.). So, that essentially means we default on the presidency and focus on getting the Senate and retaining the House thereby controlling two branches and limiting to a degree the power of the president. Sure do wish I knew the answer to your question.

  • dennis

    What do you suppose those deep thinkers at Time would say if someone were to say: “I hope Hillary isn’t the Dems nominee. I can’t afford to buy a wider screen TV than the one I have now.” It’s a pretty safe bet they wouldn’t find it quite as amusing as taking a shot at Chris Christie. But then, he’s a man and can take care of himself. She’s a woman and, like all minorities, she needs the liberals to protect her because to them, women aren’t really adults that are capable of being responsible for themselves.
    The motto of the ‘true conservatives’ should be: Ready, shoot, aim. How about win first then fight? Not only could a Ted Cruz or Rand Paul not win but, even worse, if the Dems were silly enough to nominate Joe Biden, and they could be, the only way either could hope to win, neither Cruz or Paul would have any more success at governing than Obama has.

    The dream of having an absolutist Congress that has the approval of the small minority of ‘true conservatives’ and Ted Cruz or Rand Paul as president is laughable. Sorry, it isn’t going to happen and I don’t think it should. Neither Ted Cruz or Rand Paul has any more experience, ability or leadership than Obama has. If we haven’t learned it yet, the job requires more than just being able to read a teleprompter and tell a small number of people what they want to hear.

  • Kicker

    Bernie suggests that Conservatives should rally around folks like Christie because, if we are united, we can win. Unfortunately, moderate Republicans seem to forget that plan whenever a Conservative is the candidate.

    Cuccinellie lost because the GOP failed to provide strong support. The candidates chosen by Tea Party groups that lost would have, most likely, won if Establishment Republicans had held their nose and voted for them. It seems the Establishment GOP would rather see Democrats win than Conservative Republicans.

    It strikes me that Conservatives, rather than expecting the support of Establishment Republicans, should recognize that they too are part of the Washington problem, and need to be replaced as soon as possible. If the seat goes to a Dem for a term, so be it, but at least we’ve gotten rid of those who demand our support, but then turn around and stab us in the back!!

  • davegorak

    Aren’t you all tired of political wags regardless of which party they support or where they stand in the political spectrum and what their political fortunes may be at the time? I mean, how come nobody in the media wants to ask why Dems and the GOP, when 20 million Americans can’t find full-time work, both parties want to issue work permits to 12 million illegals and double annual legal immigration to 2 million people? I mean, the economic news continues to be pretty grim and the job market remains in the toilet. Just how do both parties plan to address this lingering problem besides importing more foreign workers whose presence only increases job competition and continues to depress wages? Hello?

  • sully64

    I have some bad news for you super conservatives regarding a
    candidate for president in 2016. A right
    wing “pure” conservative candidate in this country is unelectable. We need a candidate who can pull Democrat
    votes, something that will never happen if we nominate a hard right
    candidate. I am a conservative and I can
    tell you that, as much as we would like a ”pure’ conservative, it just isn’t
    going to happen in this country. Sean
    Hannity firmly believes that Romney wasn’t elected because he wasn’t a solid
    enough conservative and we could have won with a hard conservative
    candidate. He is dead wrong. We lost that election because of the hard
    headed opposition to Romney from the right wing of the Republican party. We need to face the fact that Republicans
    alone cannot elect a president in this day and age. We need Independents and we need
    crossover Democrat voters! If we don’t
    stop attacking “Rino” and middle Republicans then we had better get used to
    President Clinton for the next eight years.
    I firmly believe that all those hard right Republicans and Evangelical Christians
    who stayed away from the polls because of their opposition to Romney did, in
    fact, vote! They voted for Barrack Obama! Now, we have four more years of damage to
    this great country because of their stubborn refusal to vote against Obama. The choice is clear; unify this party behind
    someone who can win or move ahead with the further destruction of this
    country. Governor Christie said it best
    in his acceptance speech: WIN First and
    then Fight!!

    • digitalPimple

      Blah blah blah. Heard this for years and years. It’s always the real Americans fault…

    • Chuck

      Exactly right on all counts. Thanks for writing.

  • blueniner

    I am glad folks dont heed Goldbergs advice, his suggestions are a recipe for another election loss. Conservatism always wins, moderates have a losing track record…. Bernie has an attachment to the “go along to get along” GOP establishment wing. This column could have been easly written by Karl Rove, who has a losing batting average in elections. As Bill O Reilly would say, Bernie
    wise up!

    • Stimpy

      Conservatives can win local elections … only. Ever look at a map of the blue states and red states? The blue states have a lot of electoral votes.
      The republican candidate needs to win some of those blue states. It will require a special candidate who can appeal to non-republican voters to do that. I just don’t think a true conservative can do that.

  • Findit

    Same old same old. Can’t win with a conservative so we end up with a loser like McCain or Romney. Who knows for sure a Ted Cruz type conservative can’t win. I say give a honest conservative a chance. No more McCain’s for me.

  • steve b



    • Stimpy

      WHY ARE YOU SHOUTING? With the right wing extremists in the Republican party, Abe Lincoln couldn’t get nominated.

  • savage24

    To take the words of Hillary Clinton, “What difference does it make”. If you win with Christie you lose to the establishment Liberal/Progressive movement. Politicians like Christie put their personal aspirations over the good of the country. A nation of laws has become a nation of wants not needs. I would like for one more time to have a chance to vote for something other than the lesser of the two evils, the first time was Ronald Reagan.

    • Stimpy

      It’s not black or white. Better a little conservative than all liberal, which is what you will get when a democrat is elected.

  • Majority

    You also need to realize that the “hand outs” crowd is always going to vote for the Democrat. You can’t overcome that margin without the conservative vote and you won’t get that with Christie.

    • Josh

      You can’t overcome that margin with the conservative vote, either.

      It’s an obvious, demonstrable truth in America that hardline conservatives are a minority. When a Republican wins office, it’s because of moderate support too.

      Just imagine if the moderate Republicans and independents who vote Republican shared the voting principles of conservative diehards. Democrats would have a supermajority in every walk of American life.

      If my children one day have to look at their children to explain why America is in such shambles, liberals like Obama won’t even crack the top 10 on the list of reasons why. It will be because conservatives increasingly shut everyone else out, libeling those who weren’t ideologically pure as “liberals,” and systematically lost support and power until becoming a weak, loud cult, like Code Pink, talking a big game while allowing progressive liberal Democrats to seize the country on principle.

      But at least they never voted for a moderate Republican, though!


      Either you folks can get over yourselves, or you can watch the nation truly go blue, not just the blue you enjoy imposing on people who don’t fall in lockstep with your ideology.

      There is no honor in being an underdog by choice. Being obstinate and incorrigible is only a smart political move to people who have this odd belief that they’re Billy Bob in the Alamo.

      Real life is never quite that romantic.

      300+ million people and generations of people to come matter infinitely more than your pride.

      The sooner conservatives realize that, the sooner we can stop electing people like Obama.

  • lark2

    Bernie, don’t you think it’s too early to be airing out your political bias for 2016? Both of these candidates bring good thing to the table and both have some baggage to deal with … Why not let it play out? Why is the “media” so anxious to pick the Republican candidate. Many think it’s time for a third party …. and please spare me from the historical bias against third parties. Generally, third parties are a sure loser but, “the times … they are achangin.”

  • nhthinker

    “That means he can win the support of women and minorities – crucial to winning a nationwide election. ”

    Actually – such assertions of support are not borne out by best current avaiable data…

    The Sunday shows all let Christie talk about demographics performance against Bouno without a single one getting him to respond to the major NJ Exit Poll poll shows him losing to Clinton overall. His performance approximately matches Cuccinelli’s performance with Hispanics (33% vs 29% for Cooch) and approximately matches Romney’s 2012 NJ performance with Blacks (5% vs 4% for Mitt).

    I’m the guy that got the NYT to release the racial crosstab on the Christie/Clinton 2013 NJ Exit Poll question.

    I’m currently waiting to see if NYT will give me the gender crosstab to the same question.

    More details and future updates are here…


  • Majority

    Well, Josh. Then the GOP will continue to lose because the “base” is done voting for moderates. I held my nose and voted for McCain, held my nose and my breath and voted for Romney. I’m done with moderates. I will stay home in 2016 if Christie is the “One”

    • Stimpy

      Guess that makes you a collaborator in the democratic / socialist destruction of this great nation.

    • Barry O

      Majority, I hereby make you an honorary member of the only true party — the DEMOCRATIC party. I thank you for your support. The signed certificate of appreciation is in the mail,
      yours always,

  • Crex21

    I agree only in the sense the the religious right can hang people with some dumb beliefs–that are not New Testament spirit, but we need Freedom candidate–almost has to be 3rd party but right of center and not to antag. to center–really need a hybrid between Ron Paul, Bachman and others wo a few clueless positions

  • gbandy

    I see the attacks on Cruz to resemble the attacks on Palin. Cruz did exactly what his constituents wanted unlike the politicians who once elected forget the will of the People and only do and vote as they are told. I have respect for Ted Cruz for standing up to the his own principals and right now he was right and we cannot keep our own insurance, doctors, and hospitals as we were falsely led to believe by Obama and the Democrats. Obamacare should of been shut down.

  • sniper2535

    when have I heard all this before? unsubscribe

  • bbf

    I would rather lose with Ted Cruz.

    • Don Sullivan

      Why??? and suffer through Hilary or some other leftist?

  • John H

    I’m done supporting so-called moderates. I want a Reagan Republican. Ted Cruz is that man. He can win and he will win. You’ll see.

  • Majority

    Bernie, enough already. You likely thought we would win with Romney. Please, spare us the anger and frustration. Can we not just wait and let the PEOPLE speak?

    • Integrity

      Go back to Bernie’s archives. He never stated that Romney would win. In fact, in one of his article’s, he wrote that he was unsure who would win the election, or words to that effect. At the time I was incredulous because I wrongly believed that there was no one in their right mind who would vote for Obama after his abysmal record. Like his opinion or not, Bernie gives an insightful, honest and analytical analysis to everything he writes. QED

    • Stimpy

      Romney would have made a fine president. Unfortunately, the PEOPLE did speak — all the low informed, easily manipulated dolts who bought what Obama was selling. Obama had a better political apparatus (fund raising and vote-getting) than Romney, but that wasn’t Romney’s fault. Romney also had the misfortune to be trying to overcome the record of a damned fool — Bush II, who is the one who really set the party back.

  • Rick Geiger

    Unfortunately, Goldberg is still and creature of the DC culture of corruption. Christie would lose for the same reason Romney lost….they are people without principles and they would not energize conservatives to vote. Nominating Christie is exactly what the left wants the Repubs to do…then they know they will will win. W at least pretended to be a conservative and that is why he won. Dole, McCain, Romney all lost the race before it eve started and Christie would do the same. Furthermore, Christie is toady for the islamists the same way that Obama is.

    • Stimpy

      Since when did ‘conservative = republican’? There used to be moderate republicans as there used to be moderate democrats. Now they all seem to be polarized to the extreme right and the extreme left. Maybe someone toward the middle, like Christie, could actually pull some independent and democratic votes, as he demonstrated in the governor’s race. Hiding one’s conservatism, like disguising the strength of your poker hand, might just be the winning strategy.

  • Crex21

    Time isn’t a serious news any more than Bernie–you can’t WIN w a preselected Bilderberg stooge like Christie–who declared him the front runner before any meaningful honest primary but you establishment R stooges??? WE LOSE w McLame, or Christie or Ryan or John Bonehead because they areall globalist sellouts. The R establishment spends more time attacking TP and patriots than Obama..What about O doesn’t Christie like, Bernie??

    • Crex21

      you guys didn’t even support the R candidate in the VA governor race

  • potemkin_village_usa

    When the people taste the fruits of progressivism, the paradigm will then shift and we will eventually have a Ted Cruz or a Rand Paul in the White House accompanied by a libertine Congress that represents the people finally!!
    __ If the left wins against a Ted Cruz, which you predict, good!! This will hasten the bad medicine the left brings and people will get an object lesson from the real effects the failed policies progressivism!!
    __The electorate may very well need a good spanking in the “benefits” of the bad policies set forth by the people they voted into office!! Let’s not soften the stripes on their rear-ends with a kinder gentler failed policy plank of a Chris Christie!!

  • potemkin_village_usa

    Would I rather sellout for chocolate covered poop under the false fear of getting pure poop, or, would I risk the adverse consequences and vote to save America from the certain disaster, democrat or republican, in the course of progressivism?
    __I don’t buy the lie that fascism-lite beats fascism. “Give me Liberty, or, give me death; ” “Damn the torpedoes, full speed ahead!!” These are statements from true patriots and what true freedom is built upon; I stand, locked shields with my friends of liberty!!

  • BestandBrightest

    Not buying it. Christie is a complete puppet of Wall St billionaires and the establishment. While I don’t think that is immediately disqualifying, most Americans these days loathe these types.
    The GOP doesn’t lose elections because of conservatives. It loses because it’s viewed as the party of the rich and the handmaiden of big business and hedge funders. And the guys who back Christie ARE that party.
    Here’s a thought:
    A populist like Ted Cruz is eminently more electable than a Wall Street Republican like Chris Christie.

    • Crex21

      VERY well said B and B..and the leftist STILL can’t see that ObaMao is controlled by the same people

    • Stimpy

      How did Christie become a Wall St. puppet? He ousted Corzine, who was actually a Wall St player … and cheat. Christie is a lot closer to be a populist candidate than any recent republican leader like Bush or Romney.

  • therealguyfaux

    One of my HS English teachers referred to Time Magazine as “MAD Magazine, for intellectuals.”

    And I went to HS in the 1960’s!

    ‘Twas ever thus, that Time was a taker of the piss.

  • nameless

    Oh look Bob Hadley and pssilverman are back, gee how I loathe their very presence. Always a shame, when liberals infest this board. If only we could smack them with flyswatters like the flies they are.

    • Bob Hadley

      Gee, I thought that liberals were the haters. Or maybe you’re a liberal.

  • Kathie Ampela

    Like it or not, Chris Chrisite is the best chance the GOP has in 2016, at least the way it stands right now. He is very popular in N.J, I know people who love him. We need to eliminate most of the debate process this time around, 287 debates or whatever it was is ridiculous pubblic opinon was shifting minute by minute last time around. Say something everyone agrees with the numbers go up, make one false move, the polls go down. When it comes down to the wire, I believe the base will nominate Christie if it turns out to be the best way to win. They will look at Hillary and decide that would be too much to bear.

    • Stimpy

      Well said. Looks like you are up against too many rabid conservatives in this blog. Christie also has some charm and charisma — certainly more than Romney had. I’m rooting for Christie. I don’t see any other republicans that can energize the broader base and not just the fringe.

  • Bob Hadley

    I don’t necessarily think the Time cover was a intended as a fat joke, although the decision-makers at Time must have known that it’d be perceived that way. I thought the Time cover was puny take-off of “the 800 pound gorilla in the room” (elephant refers to Republican, get it?)
    I didn’t even think twice when one news outlet (I forget which) called Hillary Clinton to 800 pound gorilla in the room.
    Gov. Christie is more conservative than many in the media seem to think. But, in a heated primary race, pictures of him hugging Pres. Obama and letting Obama take the lead during Sandy will probably fill the airways and poison the debate. Let the clown show go on!

    • Crex21

      like the militant muslims and O-Care and on and on

      • Bob Hadley

        What is like the militant Muslims and Obamacare? Please explain your comment.

  • Rdw

    Bernie…you got it exactly right….The GOP needs to capture the center 40 pct of the electorate. Cruz can’t do it…he has become a caricature for the extreme right..Christie is enough of a street fighter to compete against the Democratic machine

    • Majority

      Same was thought about McCain and he turned out to be a real patsy vs. Obama

      • Stimpy

        Christie can open up a can of whup-a$$ on the Chicago style politicos that the democratic party has become. Only wish he could slug Harry for me.

  • plsilverman

    Christie would not win because he has lost so much Republican support since he (1) showed civility to President Obama during Sandy, and, in effect, told us that his own party did nothing [about Sandy]; (2) publicly, told off a Tea party favorite.
    No Koch or Crossroads support for him! GOP should run MURKOWSKI-HUNTSMAN.

    • Stimpy

      His ‘own party’ isn’t in office. I’m glad that you are against him. That buttresses his conservative standing.

      • plsilverman

        why the sarcasm? :) …. his conservative standing? ha! he won’t have any if he keeps showing civility to Barack Obama.

  • Kathie Ampela

    Great column, Bernie. When did the liberal media ever say anything good about Reagan or Goldwater, (dead or alive??) I think the democrats are officially scared of Christie and are hoping against hope the “hard right” hate Christie enough not to give him the nomination. They may be right, but I’m not sure yet. I don’t think Christie would be dumb enough to think the liberal media would ever choose him over Hillary.

    • Crex21

      this is what they did with McLame–support him for R, but not general election

  • sjangers

    I’m not sure what I want to do with Chris Christie, but losing Ted Cruz sounds like a great idea.

    • Crex21

      ANYone standing up for Constitutional Law except Ron Paull–and he is clueless about domestic jihadism

  • gold7406

    aca will ultimately flop due to the administration’s constituency not signing up. this will be the biggest historical irony of all time.
    will there is a R next to the name. winning is most important.

  • SpookyG

    Christie = higher taxes. I won’t vote for him.

    • plsilverman

      I’m a former NJ resident. I do not associate Christie with higher taxes. His deal is to lay off state workers to make his economy look better AND try to dismantle government unions.

      • Stimpy

        He’s on the right track then. About time.

    • Crex21

      taxes are asubset of FREEDOM, get it yet???????????????

    • Stimpy

      From what I understand Christie has been fighting to reduce taxes in NJ.

  • sam

    False premise – the more realistic question is, would you like to lose with Christie or would you like to lose with Cruz?

  • exceller

    Flawed premise, you don’t know that Ted Cruz can’t win a national election. The so-called “purists of the hard right” are much more in touch with where the country is than you are.

    • plsilverman

      purists or John Birch minded extremists?

      • Tim

        Extremist this extremist that, it’s the word of the month club from the progressives. Occupy wall street was Mainstream according to Pelosi and her ilk, but Tea party people are extremists. I didn’t know a balanced budget was extreme. I didn’t know the rule of law was extreme. I certainly didn’t know the constitution or the bill of rights are considered extreme by the progressives.

        • Mary Jo

          The left has branded the Tea Party as EXTREME and it has stuck. Having been to a couple of Tea Party rallies I can say never have I been to a more normal looking middle America gathering. The people that the media demonize as HARD RIGHT are hard working, family oriented, patriotic Americans that love our country. If you remember, the MORAL MAJORITY elected Ronald Reagan, they are the same people that are now considered EXTREMISTS. (thanks to the left leaning media) The Tea Party platform is so NOT extreme~http://www.teaparty-platform.com/

        • plsilverman

          well, if you say the left are extremes, then that word is ok, right? “Progressive”? nah, that’s not overused. Glenn Beck used it so much Roger Ailes kicked him off the air. >>>the Tea Party * is * extreme because they are the front group for the Koch Boys, who everyday pay allegiance to dear ol’ dad, who was a founding member of the John Birch Society. TP, never extreme: even when they bullied John Boehner into dragging out a routine debt ceiling debate so that we could have a lowered S & p rating under Obama. TP, never extreme: except when declaring war of Obama’s base – the blue collar worker, 01-20-09, and sending out the message to Red State governors, send back stimulus money and decline on infrastructure contracts. Yes, TP, not extreme: except when trying to nullify the Voting Rights Act of 1965 by it’s voter suppression movement, designed to keep Obama’s base home in 2012.yiou wanna talk about mantras, hand delivered from the RNC to Foxnew hosts? To Tancredo, Sarah Palin, Cruz, Lee, Cornyn, Bachman…none of them are extremists.>>>balanced budget? blame the Tea party caucas: Obama delivered an approx. 4 trillion dollar budget reduction package to Boehner which was ignored. Obama has lowered the deficit 50%.
          Am I an extremist, pal?

          • Tim

            Glen Beck, the Koch brothers, who cares really? I don’t. I’m a conservative despite these people. The S&P lowered the rating do to the reality of the actual debt to GDP. The other rating companies should do the same and would if it was a US company and not the US government. Obama massively increased spending and then slightly cut the INCREASE in spending through sequestration. He did NOT want to do that. Obama didn’t suppress the vote through the IRS either, right? Obama’s plan included raising taxes, but you neglect to mention that, and he changed an agreed upon plan with Boehner at the last minute. Having an ID is not voter suppression its voter qualification. That’s right, liberal, you have to be a citizen to vote. If illegals aren’t voting then what’s the problem. I have no problem showing an ID to vote. Why would I be offended? they’re making sure my vote COUNTS. Which it doesn’t any time an illegal votes. I am a blue collar worker, or I was until I got sick, and I think Obama has destroyed the working mans chances to earn a decent living. Through excess regulation, overpriced green energy boondoggles and a never ending assault on common sense. Cheap, reliable energy fueled this country’s rise to an economic powerhouse. Yet this administration does everything in it’s power to make energy cost considerably more for no perceivable gain. Stop carrying water for the incompetent fool. Worst president since Carter.
            Please stop rewriting history with your delusions.

          • plsilverman

            incompetent fool? what was he supposed to do with an 11+ trillion dollar debt, with about 3.5 trillion immediately due in interest, unfunded wars, unfunded pharna., unfunded 10 yr. tax relief program for billionaires?
            stop rewriting history? tell that to half the staff at Foxnews, who were part of the Bush II adm. and spend all their time rewriting his legacy on TV.
            Obama has done everything for the middle class which has been screwed since Reagan-Regan. he has not raised taxes on 95% of tax payers, wanted only to go back to 39.6% for the rest. the taxes in ACA are to raise 30 billion over 10 years and are to be paid by those making over 250k per yr. He has sent over jobs-infrastructure bill after bill, to no avail. a fact. the GOP has tried to keep unemployment high during his tenure. they decline on road, rail, tunnel contracts and send back stimulus money. / the incompetent you mentioone dgot us out of the made-for Halliburton war In Iraq, got rid of SDA-DT. he gave us credit card and student loan reform. has the best legislation for Veterans than the last 3 Presidents combined. he has a record # of deportations and has increased the border patrol and there is far less crime in those areas. ACA, which I’m sure you think is socialized medicine even though Obama enlisted 8 of Romney’s experts to write it and it sourced the 1993 GOP plan. how does making care affordable to 42 million taxpayers who previously either could not afford coverage or had precondition > indicates incompetency?
            you must have really thought Reagan was a fool , raising taxes 11 times and almost tripling the debt.>>>energy costs? what? the previous adm. practically allowed the VP to run his own energy commission.
            the big banks and big corps and the farmers have no quarrel with that socialist at 1600, do they?
            automobiles: Obama must be incompetent to implement the TARP and bring GM back to number one. terrible thing – anticipating 14 million car sales in 2014. jobs? there will be four million new jobs because of healthcare reform.
            after W. and the CIA gave up looking for BL, Obama managed to send the seals to get him, almost in the exact spot he identified in 2008! (and, sorry, no enhanced interrogation helped).
            if you want to discuss things civilly ok…later for your sarcasm.

          • Tim

            I’ve got 3 more years of sarcasm for you Mr. Silverman. By reading the factual omissions and historical inaccuracies of your last post it appears you will give me plenty of material to work off of. That and the gift that keeps on giving Barack H. Obama

          • plsilverman

            3 more years of sarcasm? that quite a hefty fetish you harbor. I gave you no inaccuracies, pal. none. :) can back up each and every point. was I wrong about that 3.8 to 4.4 deficit reduction package he offered? you have got to be kidding. :) am I wrong about the 11+ trillion dollar debt, unfunded wars, etc., left to Obama? ha!!

          • Tim

            Right wrong, I don’t have time to number crunch at the moment, but I can tell you this. You present things out of context and half facts as whole facts, a dash of innuendo here and there and presto. The liberal truth. Speaking of fetish, what’s the major malfunction on your part with fox news? Don’t liberal’s have, like, everything else? It’s really a little overblown don’t you think? From what I recall part of the problem with Syria was the over flights from Iran to Syria. Supplying weapons and ground troops to Syria. You think that would be going on if we had a presence in Iraq? Woman get abused and slaughtered there everyday and you cry about a war on women here because we suggest they buy there own birth control. Do you honestly believe Obama is helping the middle class? Tell that to the people losing their health insurance and having to replace it with something they don’t want. Maybe they should have spent the First trillion on roads, bridges and infrastructure. Instead we got a multitude of bankrupt pie in the sky green energy programs. That do, basically nothing, for a whole lotta money. I think we would support more spending if we knew it wasn’t getting pea’d away. But not with this president. If there’s a losing investment He’ll find it. And invest Big. As far as I recall Mr. Cheney was trying to ensure a stable energy supply. Now why would we want that? I don’t think he was trying to kill the coal industry through endless regulation and red tape. Guess that would be your guy. I drove Gm my whole life until Mr. Obama stuck it to the bond holders. I’ll buy Ford now, they didn’t have there snout in the government trough as deeply as GM. I could go on Mr. Silverman. But I grow tired, tomorrow’s another day. I am quite certain that when you awake in the morning you will once again leave common sense behind and embrace the absolute ridiculousness of modern liberalism. And I’ll be here to wish you good morning!

          • 4Deuce

            Note to plsilverman: I recommend that you NEVER send any written correspondence to any member of the US Navy Seals… If they were to see you refer to them as “seals” it might not end well for you. Also, if you ever meet an in-the-flesh CIA analyst, please do not tell him or her that the CIA “gave up looking for BL”. Again, that might not end well for you either.

      • Crex21

        The Birchers told us everything that is happening now would happen “Extremism in defense of liberty is no vice”

        • plsilverman

          sure. also told us segregation was just fine.

      • 4Deuce

        Were both sets of your grandparents extremists? The things you consider mainstream now, if you were to espouse their virtues to those grandparents of yours, would result in them asking you to leave their homes. I hear that word, “extremist” tossed around as loosely as the phrase “You know..” was by Valley Girls back in the 80s. I really wish that you would stop and think about the character of those you label with this tar-n-feathering word. The people you point your finger at and call extremists are rock solid individuals who resemble those who forged this nation via their sweat and hard work. I only pray that the things they believe in never becomes passe – the Constitution, keeping your word, recognizing and paying your debts, and what now seems almost a foreign concept, “We the People”. No, such people would far more likely be embraced by our Founders than those who you seem to advocate leading America.

        • plsilverman

          thanks. I appreciate a disagreement like this – no sarcastic, cliché stuff, from either side. >>>>I really think the extremists at the Capitol, the Tea Party caucus, etc., are John Birch minded extremists. I have read the TP mission statement and, yes, it is excellent. but they send out maniacs like Angle, O’Donnell, West,. Bachman. >>>>nothing wrong with the nuclear family or being assertively patriotic..but they are embarrassments to the real Republicans. I came up Republican, liking Nixon, Bush I, Ike….these cats would call Nixon a Commie. JUST AS they called JFK a Commee (the pre Tea Party known as the JBS).

    • Crex21

      Cruz can’t win because of journalists like Bernie are united against him

  • BorisKarloff

    I go with Cruz…..But if “Da Whale” will do this, I might change…

  • fezler

    Sadly Bernie, you are correct. Maybe Christie will listen to your great advice. Too bad, Rush, et al, won’t.