Ok, Doc. Get ready for Socialized Medicine.
The Commissars will tell you what to prescribe.

Hence, I believe the Republican Party should choose the first path - the path of limited government, separation of church and state, and protection of individual rights.

Exactly!

I guess this guy never heard of the phrase "throwing the Baby out with the bath water".

Subtitle: "How I helped elect Barack 0bama"

"The Founding Fathers correctly recognized that the proper function of government is to protect individual rights, such as freedom of speech and freedom of religion. But freedom of religion also implies freedom *from* religion. As Thomas Jefferson famously put it, there should be a ”wall of separation“ between church and state. Public policy should not be based on religious doctrines."

Right on!

Very astute. Enjoy Obama.

Our system is a testament to the genius of the Founding Fathers, who recognized that the proper function of government is to protect individual rights, such as our rights to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.

But if life begins at conception then that life enjoys the same rights that you do.

What?

re: #1 FightingBack

Ok, Doc. Get ready for Socialized Medicine.
The Commissars will tell you what to prescribe.

And what does your comment have to do with the article? I think there is a lot more in his article than the fact that he voted for Obama.

I agree with much of what he's saying, but I don't buy his argument as an excuse for not voting Republican this year. John McCain was hardly a "conservative" candidate, and Sarah Palin doesn't push her beliefs on anybody.

The next four years could very well determine the fate of our Republic, and Obama is not the man to lead us during this critical time. We are now in deep, deep shit. This was not the time to bail on the Republican ticket. We don't have the luxury of making this kind of mistake.

re: #10 Tigger2005

I agree with much of what he's saying, but I don't buy his argument as an excuse for not voting Republican this year. John McCain was hardly a "conservative" candidate, and Sarah Palin doesn't push her beliefs on anybody.

The next four years could very well determine the fate of our Republic, and Obama is not the man to lead us during this critical time. We are now in deep, deep shit. This was not the time to bail on the Republican ticket. We don't have the luxury of making this kind of mistake.

Right on!

re: #10 Tigger2005

Strongly agree.

If only political solutions could solve attitudinal problems... and the disunity that engenders them!

Instead, the government’s role is to protect each person’s right to practice his or her religion as a private matter

a-HEM, or lack thereof.

Thank you.

Republican, my hat. Most Docs are looking for Single Payer systems (ie Uncle Sam) so that they don't have to be clever business owners, or worry about competition. They'd rather work for a paycheck and leave the small business admin to someone "in the clinic." More help available too, if there's no bottom line to worry about. And going home at 4:30PM sounds good.

I don't see this as an excuse for not voting -- I see it as a reason why he voted for the Democrats. We all have our own personal tipping points.

re: #10 Tigger2005

That's what I was thinking. I didn't see the same campaign the good Doctor is talking about.

While I agree, I wish this person had thought about how limited our freedoms will be if we cave to our enemies.
They are all for theocracy and monitoring every aspect of a person's life through enforcement of religion.

Sure, there are many things I disagree in the Republican party's platform, but good lord I'm not about to embrace the loony left because of it!

re: #9 Walter L. Newton

And what does your comment have to do with the article? I think there is a lot more in his article than the fact that he voted for Obama.

Maybe, but he got Obama elected didn't he?

Read the article and Tsieh has no clue as to what won this election. I have my ideas and you all know my thoughts on the MSM!

Interesting this was written by a doctor.

I spoke with a republican doctor not long ago who mentioned one of the gravest ills going on in this country no one seems to discuss is the wall of separation going up between doctors and their patients due to regulations between insurance and the government. He's seeing this going on with both parties, and he's pretty disgusted by it.

re: #10 Tigger2005
Yes we are in deep, deep shit and the next four years are not going to be fun. I am about to hit 53 and seriously need to start (again) thinking about my future.

This is the problem with people who are interested in a single overriding issue. (Abortion is one of those issues, too.) They tend to vote based on that issue regardless of the more pressing problems we face. Wonderful, just wonderful.

re: #15 Charles

Very interesting, if true.

Banning abortion would be a bad thing? Do you remember your Hippocratic Oath, doctor?

The Jefferson quote is, well, Jefferson. It isn't in the Constitution. Freedom from religion doesn't mean that religion has to be driven from the public square, or that religious people shouldn't have a place in government. The Constitution specifically forbids a religious test from being used to keep people from office. When the Constitution was ratified, this was mostly a protection for non-believers, or belivers in minority religions.

Today, it means that you can't require non-religion, atheism, or whatever as a condition for keeping people from office. The Democratic Party has been, generally, opposed to religious faith. It is only by moderating this hard-line stance that they have come back into the majority. How many times did Obama remind the voters that he was a Christian?

Becoming hostile to religion is not the ticket to regaining the majority in Congress or the Presidency. Try to drive religion out of the Party, and you will be ensuring that the Republican party will be in the minority for the foreseeable future.

re: #10 Tigger2005

I agree with much of what he's saying, but I don't buy his argument as an excuse for not voting Republican this year. John McCain was hardly a "conservative" candidate, and Sarah Palin doesn't push her beliefs on anybody.

The next four years could very well determine the fate of our Republic, and Obama is not the man to lead us during this critical time. We are now in deep, deep shit. This was not the time to bail on the Republican ticket. We don't have the luxury of making this kind of mistake.

then we should have nominated a Republican instead of a Democrat and left all the religious BS out of the platform.

instead, we alienated lots of people who aren't into the hard core social issues, and who didn't see any difference between McLame and the Zero, except that Juggy was the "ooooh.....shiny!" candidate.

I sadly say that I could not agree more with that article.

And with all the latest talk and blogging going on about throwing out non-social conservatives (AKA...a lot of non-religious people such as myself), I find myself wondering if I should just preempt the purge.

Something in me keeps wanting to fight against it, but another part of me is so tired about arguing with social conservatives that this is not supposed to be a religiously Christian nation in the law books. There are so many lies and fabrications about the founding fathers and their religious zeal that I no longer even care much to discuss it, just as I no longer care much to try to defend against the lies of the creationists. Part of me wants to watch them all throw out the non-religious from the party and then self-implode. That scares me a lot, but I feel it's about to happen on some level anyway.

(an update on an essay I composed before the election)

Critical thinking skills disappeared among the general populace in this past election cycle. But this is not surprising, if you look closely at what is happening in certain areas of our society.

High schools and colleges do not teach anymore. They lecture only on possibilities, and require that information to be filtered through a "global" mind-set. So, facts do not matter, only the effect that knowledge has on the whole world. Agenda's drive knowledge now, not truth.

Where as technology is wonderful, we have misused it, and have let it isolate each other. You cannot learn critical thinking skills if you have no interaction with other humans. The virtual world that we have surrounded ourselves with can be molded to please us, and the actualities of life can be eliminated simply by changing the background wallpapers on our computer screens and cell phones.

And no, we should not become Luddites, but advancement requires not compromising what makes us human, makes us moral and makes us different than the rest of the life on this planet.

And our media has totally jumped the shark. In almost no uncertain terms, they have exposed themselves as totally bias and working as a fifth column in our society, working for the left. The media does nothing to foster critical thinking, only lock-step acceptance of their "superior" reportage.

It is evident that the left has been working diligently over the last 50 years to remove critical thinking in our country. Our last election has accomplished two things, one bad, one good.

The downside is it's apparent that we may end up with a Euro-styled socialism entrenched in our politics. The upside is the left has tipped their hand, big time.

We have now seeing the infiltration of the radical left in our educational institutions and in our community level organizations. We now have a clear view of how money and influence trickles down to the left, money from sources openly and publicly hostile to our democratic republic way of governance. We have even been given some insight how the radical left is supported by sources outside of our borders.

In a sense, the radical left has come out of the closet. They are not hiding anymore. And here are some of the new rules.

You are racist if you do not agree with the left. If the left doesn’t like your questions, they cut you off from any interviews with them. The main stream media is worked with the left to suppress information, such as audio and video tapes of the presidential candidate cavorting with terrorists and socialists, and you have accepted that. Children are being taught to question their parents. We saw videos of young men in military gear, stomping to chants about the Democrat candidate, kindergarten aged children singing praises to him, and that is good. We have seen a multi-pronged character assassinations of Palin and her family, of a common plumber because he asked the wrong questions. We saw campaign posters designed in the style of communist revolutionary art. And we have heard remarks from religious leaders, praising the Democrat candidate and attributing to him a Christ-like persona.

Critical thinking skills are not needed anymore. The radical left, educational institutes, the main stream media and mind-numbing technology are now telling us the who, what, where, when and how's. Sit back, smile and enjoy the trip to Euro-socialism.

Walter in Golden, Co.

I struggle with this and I am not the religious right. I agree we should have the freedom to be religious, or not be. But I don't believe this means no pledge, no prayer before sports, no Christmas Trees or no Menorahs in public places. There is another extreme, too. If you don't wish to partake in the pledge, don't. But please don't stop the rest of us who would like too.

Abortion isn't why we lost either. Lack of education on what abortion really means may have. I don't have a problem with extreme and rare cases - I wouldn't outlaw abortion in its entirety. I would, however, not be willing to support a "just not the right time" abortion. For the record, many women suffer mentally after wards. Planned Parenthood glosses over this.

As for gay marriage? Thank you, but no. Just as I support freedom FROM religion, so do I support freedom from a lifestyle that is an antithesis from what I believe is morally right being shoved in my face. That said, I could give a rat's behind what two consenting adults do in the privacy of their boudoir.

The atheistic left had no problem voting for the religious liberal Obama. If you want a conservative vote for a conservative. If you can find one that shares your particular religious views vote for them. Voting liberal is not going to help you. I will grant that McCain was not a good conservative but he was better than Obama.

McCain was one of the few Republicans in the Senate who stood against Pres Bush's ban on federal funding of embryonic stem cell research....

McCain has always fought crazy expansion of government spending

His vote against Musgrave makes sense. She was extremely annoying on social issues. I don't live in CO any more, so I don't know about Shaffer. But this is a guy who should have voted for McCain even with Palin but against Musgrave according to his stated goals.

re: #20 Sharmuta

All those insurance companies are "government regulated." And who lets them get away with all this?

I used to be Republican. Now I'm a non-affiliated conservative, ever since the Republicans put up essentially a Democrat for President, we have a Democrat Governor who calls himself a Republican (Minnesota) and when I heard from a delegate that the MN Republican Convention in Rochester was rigged.

Bub-bye. Put up a conservative with my core values and just maybe I might vote for HER.

re: #24 warlock

Banning abortion would be a bad thing? Do you remember your Hippocratic Oath, doctor?

Technically speaking, it is entirely possible that he never too the Hippocratic Oath. It isn't considered obligatory anymore. Also, there are several different versions.

re: #24 warlock

Banning abortion would be a bad thing? Do you remember your Hippocratic Oath, doctor?

why should abortion be a Federal issue? why should a national party have a stance on it?

By not voting or switching altogether, a voter may end up with an elected official he won't like at all.
For me, I don't mind "social" conservatives. Whatever one may think of their views, the social conservatives tend to stick to their beliefs. That says a lot when many politicians will go whichever way the wind blows.
Just my thoughts.

Hence, I believe the Republican Party should choose the first path - the path of limited government, separation of church and state, and protection of individual rights.

Exactly!

Or perhaps the Republicans lost because it was McCain up against BHO. I wasn't old enough to vote for Reagan the first time but I still remember hearing plenty of "religious" talk at 17yrs old. The 2nd time Reagan ran I voted for him - still remember hearing plenty of "religious" talk and so on down the line when it comes to the GOP. This isn't something new to the GOP.

Is it going to be better if we will ever start to have to pay for abortions with our tax dollars?

I don't know if I would call him a "long standing" voter just because he voted "R" in 1996, 2000 & 2004. Possibly a young guy?

including attempts to ban abortion, embryonic stem cell research, and gay marriage.

abortion- let states decide
embryonic stem cell research-other stem cell sources are proving/will prove to yield successes in R&D
gay marriage- a manufactured right whose absence has led to all ills and zero positives in the civilization's deveolpment//////(How did Prop 8 pass in California if not for the Religious Right's overwhelming majority?///)

Yep, all excellent reasons to put Dems in power, given their progressive agenda.

We got mauled by a RINO this cycle. (I was going to say gored, but that would have given the statement a whole different tone.)

I believe in limited government, individual rights, free market capitalism, a strong national defense, and the right to keep and bear arms - positions that one normally associates with Republicans.
But I didn’t vote for a single Republican in 2008.

Congratulations, doc! Because of your ideological purity in not wanting to be associated with those evil people who believe in the sanctity of life and who would like to use federal funds for proven stem cell research before we start destroying life to do so, you voted for larger government, infringement of individual rights, socialism, weakness and equivocation in defense, and some of the most stringent gun-grabbing we have ever seen in this country.

I'd leave you to enjoy your ideological purity, but unfortunately, your choices affect me as well--we'll all be living with the consequences of your ideological purity for years to come. Salute!

re: #37 notutopia

If only they would stick to that path.

What I am confused about is the whole gay marriage thing. It wasn't only "conservatives" who passed Prop 8 in California, it was heavily supported by the black and hispanic communities. Who actually voted for Obama.

While I do agree with much of what the writer said, I think he is cutting off his nose to spite his face.

re: #24 warlock

Pushing women into unsanitary conditions would be better?

You can't even get a conservative red state like South Dakota to ban it- good luck with that nationally. It's a dead horse.

re: #39 solomonpanting

embryonic stem cell research-other stem cell sources are proving/will prove to yield successes in R&D

AFAIK, there's no ban on embryonic stem cell research. You can do as much as you like. You just can't use Fed funds for it.

re: #29 ArmyWife

True enough. On the emotional consequences of abortion, well, I've dated a number of women who have had one (including my ex-wife). I'd say that "your mileage may vary" on this. My ex-wife wasn't troubled in the least. Another woman was so distraught even years later that she had to be hospitalized as a danger to herself. The others all fell somewhere in between the two, but I would think it is safe to say that all of them had their regrets.

And yeah, the pro-abort crowd glosses over this because it doesn't fit nicely into their narrative.

Try winning an election without the religious right, Doctor Stupid!

re: #45 Max Darkside

AFAIK, there's no ban on embryonic stem cell research. You can do as much as you like. You just can't use Fed funds for it.

True. Thank you.

I think W reached out to the religious right far more than McCain ever did. So, quite frankly, this guy sounds misled. In fact, it is very likely that a lot of fiscal conservatives may have fallen for the mainstream media's continuous downplaying or obfuscation of the Democrats/Barry's radically leftist fiscal tendencies. A lot of people are conflicted because of their fiscally conservative and socially liberal positions... this is a case for a third party that appeals to those voters. But it would be tragic if anyone who values fiscal conservativeness over social issues ended up voting democrat. To those, I would hope that they move to Cuba or Venezuela and seek what they voted for... just not here at my expense or my nation's expense!

this guy really an idiot. so based on these social conservative issues, and based on the pandering to the "religious right", you have chosen to give the most powerful job on Earth to a very liberal man with whom you disagree with on everything *except* social issues. As Prager says, this guy is a narcissist - "Since the party does not agree with me on every issue I will make the country worse. Take that, America. I am a little selfish baby"

And I keep going back to this totally ridiculous notion that it was the social conservatism that lost us the election. May I remind people for the thousandth time that California, a VERY BLUE state voted to ban gay marriage, and have it written in the constitution! And regarding stem cell research - isn't it just a ban on *federal* funding? correct me if I'm wrong. Also, GW Bush is a social conservative and has he done anything to ban abortion? Can people get over this?

Moral of the story is that thanks to narcissists like Paul Tsieh, we lost the election. So now, Paul, you'll get your abortion rights, and gay marriage, and stem cell research. But you'll also get increased war, less peace, the fairness doctrine, more crazy government bailouts, higher taxes, more money to the peace corps, a slick new government web site (WEB 2.0 DEWDSY!), worthless GREEN ENERGY jobs, NO MORE nuclear plants, no more missile defense program, ....should I keep going?

now i feel better.

re: #47 elcaro

I think the moral of this election might be "good luck winning elections without the fiscal conservatives, sucka".

Thank you for the Hat tip, Charles. I will extend to that tip to VodkaPundit - where I originally found the article.

The doc makes a few good points.

I believe in limited government, individual rights, free market capitalism, a strong national defense, and the right to keep and bear arms - positions that one normally associates with Republicans.

But I didn’t vote for a single Republican in 2008.

So you vote for someone and a party that is antithetical to everything you hold dear and believe in.

Democrats have learned that America likes Politicians who make it a point to go to Church but then sleep through the services,

People are going to start arguing....so....

GO COWBOYS!

bbl.

re: #46 Iron Fist

Which is why I would never say "ALL" women. Sometimes it doesn't happen for years. Again, I won't say all, but many do.

I don't think Republican platforms caused the loss. The populace was carried away by a dream world and a dream candidate who promised them everything.
You can see reality by just looking at John McCain; and Sarah is as real as can be, too. This makes for bad TV.

"...religious 'social conservative' agenda..."

One wonders why religious wasn't included in the quotation marks. Or is he implying there might be other reasons for being socially conservative? NAW! Couldn't be...

This guy is clueless, sorry Charlie...

re: #48 solomonpanting

True. Thank you.

I just say that because the MSM POUNDS us continually that there is a "OMG ! A BAN I TELL YOU! on embryonic stem cell research !"

... when, really, there isn't. I doubt I can get Fed funds to build a church, but that doesn't mean churches are banned.

/MSM DOLTS

Great, so the good Doctor would rather see President Obama, Speaker Pelosi and Majority Leader Reed. That does jive with his alleged conservative values. The religious right is a fear tactic played by Democrats and liberals. Stem Cell research is not banned, it's just not government funded. What's the worst thing that will happen if Roa v. Wade is overturned? It becomes a states rights issue (which it should be). I would vote to keep it legal in my state, but why not let others choose for themselves? Clearly the founding fathers were, for the most part, deeply religious and would not approve of the dramatic elimination of G-d in the public square. The complete removal of G-d from public life will be a resounding victory for the left and have an immensely negative impact on our society.

One thing which will "level" the playing field is: repeal McCain-Feingold.

re: #1 FightingBack

Ok, Doc. Get ready for Socialized Medicine.
The Commissars will tell you what to prescribe.

They'll also tell you how much you're allowed to earn.

re: #35 redc1c4

Exactly. That is what makes Roe v. Wade such a, if you will pardon the term, abortion of a Supreme Court case. Not everything is a matter for Constitutional review. If the SC had simply ruled that there wasn't a Federal question in the case, the country would have been better off.

Hope none of you ever need a doctor in Denver.

This one probably practices with leeches and bleeding as well.

re: #45 Max Darkside

AFAIK, there's no ban on embryonic stem cell research. You can do as much as you like. You just can't use Fed funds for it.

True . . . . , why don't people understand this?

re: #44 Sharmuta

You can't even get a conservative red state like South Dakota to ban it- good luck with that nationally.

Roe vs Wade was never voted on. Overturning Roe vs Wade and pushing the decision to the states is all that a lot of people ask.

Reconfirms why I'll go to a doc if I'm shot or hit by a truck. For anything not equally life threatening I put them in the same category as unscrupulous auto mechanics.

re: #62 Susan2

They'll also tell you how much you're allowed to earn.

THAT will be the real shocker for a lot of people.

re: #62 Susan2

One man's ceiling is another man's floor.

re: #65 outsidephilly

True . . . . , why don't people understand this?

Because there are people out there who believe in the Giant Government Tit.

re: #59 Max Darkside

I just say that because the MSM POUNDS us continually that there is a "OMG ! A BAN I TELL YOU! on embryonic stem cell research !"

... when, really, there isn't. I doubt I can get Fed funds to build a church, but that doesn't mean churches are banned.

/MSM DOLTS

I'm grateful for you raising that point.

Help?

I've just made this post at zombietime, moments ago.

But I have not yet publicized it. Before I do so, I request:

Do you have any suggestions/ideas/comments for this piece before I "go public" with it?

Is it worth pursuing? Any and all constructive criticism would be much appreciated. Post it here! Thanks.

Victory in Iraq Day

November 22, 2008

We won. The Iraq War is over.

I declare November 22, 2008 to be "Victory in Iraq Day." (Hereafter known as "VI Day.")

By every measure, The United States and coalition forces have conclusively defeated all enemies in Iraq, pacified the country, deposed the previous regime, successfully helped to establish a new functioning democratic goverment, and suppressed any lingering insurgencies. The war has come to an end. And we won.

What more indication do you need? An announcement from the outgoing Bush administration? It's not gonna happen. An annoucement from the incoming Obama administration? That's really not gonna happen. A declaration of victory by the media? Please. Don't make me laugh. A concession of surrender by what few remaining insurgents remain in hiding? Forget about it.

The moment has come to acknowledge the obvious. To overtly declare a fact that has already been true for quite some time now. Let me repeat:

WE WON THE WAR IN IRAQ

...etc.

re: #65 outsidephilly

True . . . . , why don't people understand this?

Because the media says otherwise.

re: #43 Intrepid

What I am confused about is the whole gay marriage thing. It wasn't only "conservatives" who passed Prop 8 in California, it was heavily supported by the black and hispanic communities. Who actually voted for Obama.

While I do agree with much of what the writer said, I think he is cutting off his nose to spite his face.

I suspect that a lot of people voted "Yes" for that proposition thinking that they were supporting the cause... intuitively, it just makes no sense that a liberal lefty state like CA would pass that prop. Just my wild guess and I could be wrong on this one.

I don't see this election, or most really, based on religious values. I think the MSM pounds on religion constantly to try to make it go away.

This "Doctor" is so full of himself it isn't even funny.

A person would think an educated individual, such as a Doctor, would be practiced in clear, concise, and critical thought. The idea that he would come around to thinking a "protest" vote which, unless he told people, no one would be aware of, is ludicrous. Not voting for a particular party because elements of the party believed a certain way and stated so, and a candidate was an evangelical Christian is such a stupid concept as to be beyond description.

He says, "I believe in limited government, individual rights, free market capitalism, a strong national defense, and the right to keep and bear arms - positions that one normally associates with Republicans." So, because the Republicans "have chosen to embrace the Religious Right", he chooses to vote for the party and candidate that is the exact opposite of everything he philosophically believes in.

The man is a buffoon.

re: #66 experiencedtraveller

Roe vs Wade was never voted on. Overturning Roe vs Wade and pushing the decision to the states is all that a lot of people ask.

That's not what's in the Republican platform- it asks for a Constitutional ban. That's never going to happen. Never. It's a dead horse.

re: #53 FurryOldGuyJeans

Makes so much sense, doesn't it? Hey! I hate the RNC right now so sign me right up for those crazy tax increases! That'll show 'em! Why we are at it, let's gut that Military I so strongly believe in! Take that you Regeanites! Again I ask, if this is the case, why didn't McCain win by a landslide? He was no conservative BUT FOR his stance on the military and many fiscal policies.

I believe the RNC needs to embrace fiscal conservatives AND the majority of social conservatives, who are not the religious extremists as is being advertised. I wonder if this is the latest attempt by the left to pigeon hole social conservatives into foaming at the mouth religious types in an attempt to "prove" how scary the Right is.

The religious right was running a candidate this year for President?
So I guess the doctor was ok with the Rev Wright religion of Obama's.

re: #30 Fredlike

I'm an Atheist and I voted for McCain.

/silence, as everyone runs over and squashes Zombie's server...

re: #67 CharlieBravo

Reconfirms why I'll go to a doc if I'm shot or hit by a truck. For anything not equally life threatening I put them in the same category as unscrupulous auto mechanics.

Ok, Ok, mechanics, but not unscrupulous ones. However, many want the government take-over of their industry, to put them out of their misery in trying to make it work. And they don't like competition, either. They're ready for the socialist dream.

re: #47 elcaro

Try winning an election without the religious right, Doctor Stupid!

It would be nice, wouldn't it.

re: #53 FurryOldGuyJeans

Yeah, and Obama may just push us into a Civil War with his position on gun control. That isn't certain, but it's definately on the table. Just on RKBA reasons, I'd have voted against Obama even if Mickey Mouse had been the Republican nominee.

re: #77 Outrider

This "Doctor" is so full of himself it isn't even funny.

A person would think an educated individual, such as a Doctor, would be practiced in clear, concise, and critical thought. The idea that he would come around to thinking a "protest" vote which, unless he told people, no one would be aware of, is ludicrous. Not voting for a particular party because elements of the party believed a certain way and stated so, and a candidate was an evangelical Christian is such a stupid concept as to be beyond description.

He says, "I believe in limited government, individual rights, free market capitalism, a strong national defense, and the right to keep and bear arms - positions that one normally associates with Republicans." So, because the Republicans "have chosen to embrace the Religious Right", he chooses to vote for the party and candidate that is the exact opposite of everything he philosophically believes in.

The man is a buffoon.

This man is a TOTAL buffoon . . . . , he practices what kind of medicine?

re: #57 FightingBack

I don't think Republican platforms caused the loss. The populace was carried away by a dream world and a dream candidate who promised them everything.
You can see reality by just looking at John McCain; and Sarah is as real as can be, too. This makes for bad TV.

I agree. Republican stances did not lose the election. Lack of "fire" in McCain did not lose the election. We simply have more people living in urban centers that want to be on the wagon that many others are going to be pulling. I think we will see this in future elections as well, the urban centers will outnumber the rural/suburban areas. So go the votes.

And what's worse is, I'm an Atheist who voted for McCain and now is being told all over the blogs that I am simply not "Republican enough".

Keep it up guys.

re: #73 zombie

Peace? Winning? In that region?

[Link: www.mapsofwar.com...]

I have read this doctor's screed 3 times through and all I see is moby.

re: #25 Iron Fist
I couldn't agree with you more! Well said.

re: #78 Sharmuta

That's not what's in the Republican platform- it asks for a Constitutional ban. That's never going to happen. Never. It's a dead horse.

And there's the problem...this issue need to be returned to the states, where there were some states which allowed abortions and some which did not.
That's what the overturning of Roe v. Wade would result in.

I am an Atheist myself and I don't like religions but plz don't turn the USA into another Canada or Europe.

re: #73 zombie

zombie...I'm game!

re: #65 outsidephilly

Because the MSM have portrayed Bush's position as though it banned embryonic stem cell research. People who were too busy, or too lazy, or whatever to educate themselves simply bought the media line, and voted accordingly. i don't think it is too far a strech to say that the lapdog media were the tipping point that gave the election to Obama.

He owes them big time.

Now I've seen everything.

The remnants of Yes on Huckabee.

Is it getting weird enough yet?

re: #96 Macker

zombie...I'm game!

*cock* *BLAM*

re: #94 Macker

And there's the problem...this issue need to be returned to the states, where there were some states which allowed abortions and some which did not.
That's what the overturning of Roe v. Wade would result in.

Convince the religious right to let this part of the platform fall by the wayside.

Religious belief cannot be the basis for social legislation. That's all there is to it. AFAIC, social conservatives can talk to the hand.

re: #4 gmsc

ignorance led to Obama

re: #50 nbenhaim

May I remind people for the thousandth time that California, a VERY BLUE state voted to ban gay marriage, and have it written in the constitution!

Two comments in the past seven days? Ten total since March?

re: #73 zombie

yep . . . , I'm with you on this!

re: #24 warlock

Banning abortion would be a bad thing? Do you remember your Hippocratic Oath, doctor?

American doctors have NOT taken the Hippocratic Oath for decades. Thank your AMA for that.

re: #51 Sharmuta

I think the moral of this election might be "good luck winning elections without the fiscal conservatives, sucka".

Actually, I think that's true. Sarah Palin brought in a great number of SoCons, so it wasn't the SoCons' fault that the election was lost.

It was the fiscal conservatives and the hard line closed borders believers who either voted for Obama or stayed at home who lost this one for republicans.

Plus, we had a candidate who could not wow the crowd at the top of the ticket. The bottom of the ticket could, but that wasn't enough.

We faced a perfect storm - ailing economy, unpopular incumbent, popular challenger who happened to be black....

/calling my neighbor tomorrow about how to get involved - he's been active in TN republican politics in the past....

Repubs lost because they abandoned the base tenets of the Reagan revolution.
(Limited government, low taxes, strong national defense and family values). The RINO's of GHWB and his son, GWB catered to the Rockefeller Republicans and the mushy middle, as a result, the Repubs became Democrat Light.

With BHO, the Repubs will take decades to recover. The upcoming amnesty for illegals will add millions to the Democratic Party. Arizona, Nevada, New Mexico, Colorado and Texas will go deep purple or outright blue. Couple that with new social spending on National Health care, and a new welfare state, the Republic as we knew it is gone.

Massive debt and the failure of American business to effectively compete on a global scale will force millions in to underemployed situations and the subsequent American standard of living will be the worse ever recorded.

Welcome to the United Socialist States of America.

Go ahead and make snide remarks about this guy and his opinion. But it is you who are throwing the baby out with the bathwater. I voted for McCain, but I didn't like it. Most of my extended family voted for the big 'O' for precisely the reasons mentioned. Does it make sense? NO. But that is a reality. (But not much in our political partisan world makes sense.)
We must focus on the individual liberties (and for some that means having the right to have an abortion).
We can focus on individual liberties, on fiscal conservative principles, on military preparedness, on defending our borders, on constitutionally limited government, on individual responsibility and begin winning again. Or we can argue for adherence to Social Conservative/Religious right agendas, and continue our losing ways.

Isn't there a case to be made that if the economy hadn't tanked, then McCain's lead may have held? I'm not a member of the Religious Right, but I'll never forgive them for sending the economy and our economic institutions into a nosedive./

I see a lot of people are angry at the voters who have been alienated or driven out of the party. They'll tell you why they left. You don't have to listen.

The good doctor seems to be a bit confused. If I recall correctly the so-called "religious right" that he seems to denigrate so greatly played a much greater role in the 2000 and 2004 elections than in 2008. I can recall only fleeting "interference" by his much despised "religious right" in this election. In 2004 Dr. Dobson played a very significant role and I can barely recall anything but the briefest mention of him this year.

Although raised Catholic I am not a practicing anything but that does not stop me from finding abortion abhorent. I cannot explain why the good doctor chose to allow a Marxist to be elected to lead this great nation but his use of the "religious right" is a crutch; and a not very good one at that.

re: #78 Sharmuta

That's not what's in the Republican platform- it asks for a Constitutional ban. That's never going to happen. Never. It's a dead horse.

So you negotiate. Saying we accept RvW is a dead horse.

re: #73 zombie

Looks good to me. The media will never admit that we won. A hundred years from now the media will still be flogging the QUAGMIRE dead horse.

re: #24 warlock

Banning abortion would be a bad thing?

Yes. Assuming one isn't a Bible-thumping nut job.

I just finished reading Page Smith's two volume bio on John Adams. Anybody who says that our founding fathers believed a person's religion has no part in political discourse is ignorant. If they believed that freedom to practice ones religion means redefining marriage to include men with men and women with women, they are deluded, if they think that the left will not force upon this nation a "religion" far worse than anything a theocratic right-winger nut could conjure up then they are beyond hope.

The Good Doctor is a socialist. He's tired of the rat race and would like a little snooze under the government umbrella. re: #87 outsidephilly

I'm guessing he's not a surgeon.

re: #98 Charles

Now let's talk about that freak (no disrespect to freaks). If the religious maniacs ran our party, wouldn't he have been the candidate o'choice? But he wasn't. Why? Because he is a scheister. We had crapola for candidates to chose from this go round, and the left took full advantage of being able to dazzle with BS.

re: #98 Charles

The remnants of Yes on Huckabee.

Steve Howe, John Anderson and Rick Wakeman?

Boy, talk about cutting off your nose to spite your face. What a moron.

From my view I don't see where Christians in america have particularly prevented any law-abiding citizen from doing anything they feel like, but i certainly see a LOT of anti-Christian social legislation.

re: #112 Killgore Trout

I'm not angry, just a bit opinionated.

re: #112 Killgore Trout

I see a lot of people are angry at the voters who have been alienated or driven out of the party. They'll tell you why they left. You don't have to listen.

This is what I don't get--most people have figured out that simply writing off those who left a political party as being wrong is a sure way to stay in the minority.

re: #98 Charles

The band? What could they have to say that is even possibly interesting? I agree with Alice Cooper (a Republican) who said that only someone who was stupid would look to him to tell them who to vote for.

re: #106 Intrepid

I think the moral of this election might be "good luck winning elections without the fiscal conservatives, sucka".

Actually, I think that's true.

It is true. This doctor's trying to tell you all that. Other fiscal conservatives are trying to say this! You can't piss off the fisc-cons either! Hellllllloooooo.

I think the factions in this party better figure out how to keep each other happy if we're ever going to see victory any time soon.

re: #81 Summer

I'm an Atheist and I voted for McCain.

Me, too.

With all of the post-mortem election analysis trying to figure out why McCain lost, I think it is important to keep some things in mind:

- This election was set up in the Dems wheelhouse...A ridiculously unpopular incumbent, and a faltering economy.

- As Zombie's new post points out, the strength of McCain (national defense/Iraq) was off the table thanks to our victory.

- Unprecedented turnout among (naive) young voters, who went heavily to Obama

- The media completely, unabashedly in the tank for Obama

- A mostly lackluster campaign from McCain

- Oh, and Obama spent 1 BILLION dollars to buy the White House.

And with all those advantages, and all that money thrown around, he got himself a whopping 52% of the popular vote.

Things are not quite as bleak as they may seem (not yet, at any rate). We don't need to tear ourselves apart figuring out why we lost. The cards were stacked against us, and we didn't get completely wiped out.

This doc is a moby

This entire letter is written in straw. Just as idiotic as saying "every voter who voted against Obama is racist LOLZ!"

re: #97 Iron Fist

Because the MSM have portrayed Bush's position as though it banned embryonic stem cell research. People who were too busy, or too lazy, or whatever to educate themselves simply bought the media line, and voted accordingly. i don't think it is too far a strech to say that the lapdog media were the tipping point that gave the election to Obama.

He owes them big time.

. . . , I attend conferences for type 1 diabetes, the topic of advances with regards to Stem Cell research are presented by well known physicians. The funding for this research comes from others, like me, who see a need for this . . . . , NOT from the government

re: #96 Macker

zombie...I'm game!

Great! When you post it on your blog, send me the link (as described in the essay), and I'll add you to the Blogroll of Honor!

re: #116 jamie

Nice to see you extending the olive branch to the Republican base. That will surely guide us back to a Republican majority.

re: #98 Charles

Now I've seen everything.

The remnants of Yes on Huckabee.

Is it getting weird enough yet?

That was pathetic. Yes, in the round, was my first concert ever. Pity.

re: #104 outsidephilly

yep . . . , I'm with you on this!

That's two votes! I'm gaining a smidgen of confidence.

re: #73 zombie

I suggest adding an American and an Iraqi flag, small or big, I don't really know. I think it will be a good thing.

re: #81 Summer

I'm an Atheist and I voted for McCain.

re: #126 Occasional Reader

Me, too.

Same here!

re: #112 Killgore Trout

I see a lot of people are angry at the voters who have been alienated or driven out of the party. They'll tell you why they left. You don't have to listen.

They don't want to listen- they want to call names instead of listen.

I mean- don't ask what's wrong if you don't want to hear the answer.

re: #103 MandyManners

Two comments in the past seven days? Ten total since March?

ROFL...

re: #120 Killgore Trout

Steve Howe, John Anderson and Rick Wakeman?

Alan White and Rick Squire.

re: #77 Outrider
Outrider, too many doctors today are VERY WEAK on "clear, concise, and critical thought." All too many of them have been twisted by pharmaceutical think-way, as in 'this symptom needs THIS medicine..." when clear, concise and critical thought might lead instead to, "Does this person have a Prozac deficiency? Then Prozac CANNOT be a healing agent. Why is this person bringing these elements, these symptoms into his/her life? What are the CAUSATIVE FACTORS? How can we support and enhance healing?"

There's BIG MONEY in pharmaceuticals, Outrider!

re: #115 Iron Fist

Looks good to me. The media will never admit that we won. A hundred years from now the media will still be flogging the QUAGMIRE dead horse.

That's exactly why I did it. Somebody had to win this war! If only by declaring it to be so!

re: #137 Sharmuta

If Obama does a passable job I will have no problems voting Dem in 2012. It doesn't cause me any trouble.

re: #134 zombie

That's two votes! I'm gaining a smidgen of confidence.

Can I do a mass e-mailing since I don't have blog?

re: #135 Abu Lahab

I suggest adding an American and an Iraqi flag, small or big, I don't really know. I think it will be a good thing.

Hmmmm. Interesting idea. Thanks.

TTTHSOCON

re: #142 Killgore Trout

If Obama does a passable job I will have no problems voting Dem in 2012. It doesn't cause me any trouble.

In other news, water will be wet in 2012, and the sun will rise in the east in 2012.

re: #130 outsidephilly

Yeah, and that's the way it should be. I'm a diabetic, and my dad's got Parkinsons in addition to diabetes, and I think the Federal government's money should be better spent in other endevors. there are to many ethical questions in embryonic research, and those questions can never be settled.

re: #136 gmsc

There is a difference between atheism and antitheism.

re: #141 zombie

Its going on my Blog. All 12 of my readers will spread the word! Seriously, ArmyHusband will be thrilled to share this with his uniformed buddies.

re: #137 Sharmuta

They don't want to listen- they want to call names instead of listen. I mean- don't ask what's wrong if you don't want to hear the answer.

Yea, but have you read all the comments on this thread that have completely ignored the actual question at hand? They keep posting away as if there is nothing wrong, nothing to hear, nothing to address and nothing happened.

I've noticed Charles has been trying to make a calculated point since the election, the point on this thread, yet so many Lizards are whizzing right past the issue.

Sad.

re: #143 outsidephilly

Can I do a mass e-mailing since I don't have blog?

Of course! I am not the boss of your email!

re: #144 zombie

Well, I really like your blog and your priceless Mu archive.

re: #147 Iron Fist

Yeah, and that's the way it should be. I'm a diabetic, and my dad's got Parkinsons in addition to diabetes, and I think the Federal government's money should be better spent in other endevors. there are to many ethical questions in embryonic research, and those questions can never be settled.

yep, yep, yep! Are you type 1? Use a pump?

re: #15 Charles

I don't see this as an excuse for not voting -- I see it as a reason why he voted for the Democrats. We all have our own personal tipping points.

I don't think it is nearly a good enough reason, Charles. For one thing, the Republicans hardly nominated a social conservative for president.

The choice was very clear in this election. One thing we could trust McCain/Palin to do was protect our country to the utmost of their ability. Frankly, this should have overridden every other consideration. Who do you trust to protect us more, McCain or Obama? (Not asking you, Charles, it's just a rhetorical question.) You can't fix what you see as problems in the Republican Party when you're struggling for survival in the economic collapse following the terrorist nuking of Manhattan.

re: #147 Iron Fist

I'm not so much wrapped up in the ethics here as I am the lack of private money jumping into this - I see money going toward alternative stem cell research. Follow the money.

Well, when Obama institutes his universal healthcare and he tells the doctor that his paycheck is going to be smaller at the same time he will need to see more patients - to help keep the system affordable, oh and you are still going to have to pay those huge malpractice insurance payments, what will he say then?

You got what you wanted doc, don't blame Republicans.

re: #75 zato

I suspect that a lot of people voted "Yes" for that proposition thinking that they were supporting the cause... intuitively, it just makes no sense that a liberal lefty state like CA would pass that prop. Just my wild guess and I could be wrong on this one.

I read Prop 8 after the fact (I'm not a California voter) and you'd have to be a complete moron not to understand what you were voting for. IMHO it was perfectly clear.

re: #149 ArmyWife

Its going on my Blog. All 12 of my readers will spread the word! Seriously, ArmyHusband will be thrilled to share this with his uniformed buddies.

Send me the link when you do so! By being included on the Blogroll of Honor, you'll get more readers!

This article is the typical Peggy Noonan crap. We can't have those Philistines in our blue blooded Republican Party. And certainly no graduates of a non-Ivy League college....what will I tell my friends at the cocktail parties? All these myopians forget that Reagan was an anti-abortion social conservative who attended Bel Air Pres. The party tried a liberal Republican this time and saw what happened- all of McCain's media buddies like Chris Matthews turned on him in a minute. Next time don't expect the media to like us. They never will.

re: #150 Walter L. Newton

Amen Walter!

re: #127 Page

I agree with what you say but here:

- Unprecedented turnout among (naive) young voters, who went heavily to Obama

I understand the youth vote was very close to average? (Sorry no link...)

re: #142 Killgore Trout

I've never thought you were a conservative, so this comes as no surprise. I doubt the Republicans could win you without jettisoning most of their base. Your vote isn't worth the price.

re: #150 Walter L. Newton

I think the Republican party has a long road to return. Even after they acknowledge the problem they have to cultivate new leaders, politicians, writers, thinkers, etc. It's going to take a while.

re: #152 Abu Lahab

Well, I really like your blog and your priceless Mu archive.

You mean the Mo Archive? What -- no fatwa against me? That a nice change of pace.

re: #142 Killgore Trout

If Obama does a passable job I will have no problems voting Dem in 2012. It doesn't cause me any trouble.

If.

re: #73 zombie

Excellent post, Zombie. One suggestion - you wrote, under the heading of "If we won why are there troops still in Iraq":

Does our victory mean that I advocate the immediate withdrawal of all troops from Iraq? No. Wars may be won but postwar occupations generally don't end crisply and cleanly like that.

Perhaps the word "occupations" could be said in a way that doesn't hint at the US forces being "OCCUPIERS"?

That word has been a big source of contention.

/just a question/suggestion

re: #98 Charles

Now I've seen everything.

The remnants of Yes on Huckabee.

Is it getting weird enough yet?

Really?

Boston's Goudreau and Sheehan attended Huckabee rallies in New Hampshire. They played together, too.

re: #149 ArmyWife

Its going on my Blog. All 12 of my readers will spread the word! Seriously, ArmyHusband will be thrilled to share this with his uniformed buddies.

That's what I'm thinking! Our Military need to hear positive support like this!

re: #110 Haverwilde

Go ahead and make snide remarks about this guy and his opinion. But it is you who are throwing the baby out with the bathwater. I voted for McCain, but I didn't like it. Most of my extended family voted for the big 'O' for precisely the reasons mentioned. Does it make sense? NO. But that is a reality. (But not much in our political partisan world makes sense.)
We must focus on the individual liberties (and for some that means having the right to have an abortion).
We can focus on individual liberties, on fiscal conservative principles, on military preparedness, on defending our borders, on constitutionally limited government, on individual responsibility and begin winning again. Or we can argue for adherence to Social Conservative/Religious right agendas, and continue our losing ways.

Or better yet, we can compromise all conservative values and pander to anyone of voting age and win that way.
/

re: #157 JohnSteele

I read Prop 8 after the fact (I'm not a California voter) and you'd have to be a complete moron not to understand what you were voting for. IMHO it was perfectly clear.

Voters can be quite dumb when they work at it. Look at the whole hanging chad fiasco in 2000.

Youth vote up 1% in 2008 election.

I gotta tell ya, this is a hoax. I am an atheist, don't beleive in God at all. Totally think a woman should have the right to chose to kill her unborn baby. But I have never felt like the "religous right" is taking over my party. I have found lately, tax and spend republicans I can't support. But this is BS about the "religous right". Maybe it is just me, but can anyone really point to a concerted effort to make abortion illegal by the republican party? I know they stand against it, but when was the last time they actually proposed legislation against it? The spending habits have made me mad but I just don't see the huge push from the religous right this guy is talking about.

re: #151 zombie

Of course! I am not the boss of your email!

But you are sort-of, kind-of 'the boss' . . . . !

re: #162 Iron Fist

Your vote isn't worth the price.

Yeah, that seems the consensus.

Abortion to me has nothing to do with religion...hence his whole essay rings hollow.

As well, I'm not sure I heard either candidate even bring up the issue of abortion.....so what's this guy blathering about?

re: #130 outsidephilly

Great to hear. Always wondered why the howl over no government funding for stem cell research considering it'll lead to dead men awakening - almost.

re: #163 Killgore Trout

In the information age? High hopes.

"...I believe in limited government, individual rights, free market capitalism, a strong national defense, and the right to keep and bear arms -..."

And so he votes for someone who want's to increase govt., reduce your 1st and 2nd amendment rights, create a command economy with redistribution and cut the military.

Somehow the logic escapes me. Good luck with morals that Obama will impose on you.

re: #150 Walter L. Newton

I think it's much easier to see this doctor as a "moby" than it is to give his words credence and consider his point of view.

re: #127 Page
Things are not quite as bleak as they may seem (not yet, at any rate). We don't need to tear ourselves apart figuring out why we lost. The cards were stacked against us, and we didn't get completely wiped out.

Absolutely and totally agree with you: that the Zero didn't win by at least 20 points is nothing short of a miracle. We need to lose the moral agenda and get back to basic conservatism, and get a few people who know what this means and who have figured out HOW to get it done. Palin is a great example of this.

This is a thought-provoking essay by Paul Tsieh, a practicing physician in Denver and long-standing Republican vote.

He reads like a disappointed libertarian type, with a strong antireligious streak. Probably doesn't approve of the federal reserve, either - then again, I'm wondering about that now myself.

Whether intentionally or not, he's just a moby now.

re: #121 LynnfromNZ

Boy, talk about cutting off your nose to spite your face. What a moron.

From my view I don't see where Christians in america have particularly prevented any law-abiding citizen from doing anything they feel like, but i certainly see a LOT of anti-Christian social legislation.

Yes, and the notion that Right, or Religious Right, influences have led to social restrictions is one of the BIG LIES that has become gospel. I'm sure a list of Liberal/Dem restrictions, laws, mandates, increased taxes, speech codes, the bureaucracies that support them and the incredible waste of resources they generate far, far outweigh anything the RR has foisted upon the country.

re: #163 Killgore Trout

I think the Republican party has a long road to return. Even after they acknowledge the problem they have to cultivate new leaders, politicians, writers, thinkers, etc. It's going to take a while.

No problems here... crickets... whiz, there goes another no problem post... snap... another one... click on new comments... all the same... nothing...
/

re: #150 Walter L. Newton

Well, it's the vote that's bothering us. Because we weren't so in love with our candidate either, but we recognized the problems the winner will now cause. I agree that if a new voter's coalition is needed, then problems in the party will have to be addressed. But they could have been resolved after we secured the White House.

re: #153 outsidephilly

Type II. They've talked about putting me on a pump, but I've been very resistant to the idea. I have to take a shitload of insulin, though. That's life. with my genetics it was always a question of when I would get diabetes, not if I would get it.

I'm more bothered by the kids that get it. That's a hard way to grow up.

re: #150 Walter L. Newton

Really? Sharm made a good point, and we aren't totally on the same page with this issue. Wouldn't we be wise to listen to conservatives as a whole? Doesn't it seem the common ground of small government, large military, fiscally sound and family values should be what is heard? That is our majority, and that is what would win elections. Infighting is not going to help us in the least, nor is kowtowing to the left in an attempt to say "Look at us! We are liberal, too! We just spend less!"

re: #169 Outrider

Or better yet, we can compromise all conservative values and pander to anyone of voting age and win that way.
/

Read the post again for meaning:

We can focus on individual liberties, on fiscal conservative principles, on military preparedness, on defending our borders, on constitutionally limited government, on individual responsibility and begin winning again.

I do believe those are conservative values!

re: #178 Drill_Thrawl

That was the conclusion that I drew. His spite is what swung him.

re: #14 FightingBack

Republican, my hat. Most Docs are looking for Single Payer systems (ie Uncle Sam) so that they don't have to be clever business owners, or worry about competition. They'd rather work for a paycheck and leave the small business admin to someone "in the clinic." More help available too, if there's no bottom line to worry about. And going home at 4:30PM sounds good.

Many, but not most. What many Docs seek is a reimbursement system that pays them for their work at fair market value. What the Gov. actually pays that Doc is a bare 45% or less, of that FMV. We would love to have more independent contracts and payor sources. The double edge sword of payor control here is that the contractors are now using the same reimbursement incentives as the Gov. to negotiate their rates of payment.

My husband and I both are from medical/MD families. 5 out of 8 siblings in two generations, and All of us are Conservative Republican voters, even though some of us are registered Independents. We all had issues with the Presidential candidates in this last election, and some of us are very concerned about the fate of the Republican party if it continues to maintain it's stance of conservative softness on the choice of it's presidential candidates.
Vote Democrat? Only if they swing the party issues in the polar opposite direction for 2012.

I want to let them know that they lost the vote of many former supporters (including myself) because they have chosen to embrace the Religious Right

Where has he been? The Religious Right has always been a big part of the Republican party as long as I can remember. I was in Dallas during 1984 Republican Convention (not in the convention itself but outside enjoying the "Rock Against Reagan" free concert) and there was a huge presence of the Christian Coalition. They even had a parade at night walking slowly down to the convention center right by the main stage area with the "punks" lining the street yelling shit at them.

I think this guy is full of shit if that's his excuse. He's certainly no conservative and most likely not really a Republican either.

re: #171 experiencedtraveller

Thank you, I stand corrected. I hope that doesn't undermine my general thesis too badly...

So this is the way to a Republican landslide in 2010? Throw religion onto the trash heap? That must be the ticket - let's ban any public displays this Christmas of nativity scenes and we can get this Colorado Republican's vote back!

Hey, let's get more votes in 2010! Let's go Pro-Choice! Let's back the Gay Marriage initiatives! Oh, and let's attract more union workers by backing the UAW - give the car makers the bailout! More votes still needed? Hmmmm...oh yeah! Let's back the Shamnesty bill and get all those hispanic votes!

re: #125 Sharmuta

It is true. This doctor's trying to tell you all that. Other fiscal conservatives are trying to say this! You can't piss off the fisc-cons either! Hellllllloooooo.

I think the factions in this party better figure out how to keep each other happy if we're ever going to see victory any time soon.

I could be wrong but, I see SoCons having more passion than FisCons.

re: #164 zombie

Yes, exactly the Mo one. Maybe no seething imam ever visited your blog yet.
You need to add it to a Saudi blog directory.

F*ck him.

re: #179 Sharmuta

I think it's much easier to see this doctor as a "moby" than it is to give his words credence and consider his point of view.

They are letting the fact that he voted for Obama to completely cloud their critical thinking skills and address the very good points he makes on the Republican party.

I said it during the DNC- that if democrats are going to start acting like a fiscally responsible party as opposed to the republicans, we were/are screwed!

That's a hint, btw.

re: #176 CharlieBravo

Great to hear. Always wondered why the howl over no government funding for stem cell research considering it'll lead to dead men awakening - almost.

Glad you're listening! So, pass the word when you hear others going on about thi . . . , ya know what I mean?

re: #166 Intrepid

Excellent post, Zombie. One suggestion - you wrote, under the heading of "If we won why are there troops still in Iraq":

Perhaps the word "occupations" could be said in a way that doesn't hint at the US forces being "OCCUPIERS"?

That word has been a big source of contention.

/just a question/suggestion

Interesting. Do you have any specific suggestions? Doesn't even the Bush administration call it "the occupation"? If not that word, what word? Or how to rephrase?

Zombie, up in a few moments at [Link: www.ICallBS.net...]

/I hafta reboot to another partition to access my blog

re: #112 Killgore Trout

I see a lot of people are angry at the voters who have been alienated or driven out of the party. They'll tell you why they left. You don't have to listen.

Oh, I'm listening, Killgore. But their reasons just aren't good enough. In any other election, at any other time, maybe they would have been. But not this election, not this time.

re: #138 Wishing

ROFL...

It was not my intent to belittle the Hatchling for the number of her/his comments but, her/his assertion that she/he had said it one thousand times could not be left without comment.

re: #196 Walter L. Newton

They are letting the fact that he voted for Obama to completely cloud their critical thinking skills and address the very good points he makes on the Republican party.

I see NO evidence he voted for Obama...he stated only that he did not vote for Republicans.

re: #75 zato

Gay marriage is so far out of the mainstream of American politics that even in California it is opposed by the majority so much that they are willing to amend the State Constitution rather than permit the State Supreme Court to mandate it. It's pretty clear.

re: #200 Karridine

Zombie, up in a few moments at [Link: www.ICallBS.net...]

/I hafta reboot to another partition to access my blog

Great! I'll add you to the list.

re: #197 Sharmuta

We'll have to wait and see but I'm still expecting a "New Deal" type thing from Obama. I'm not sure if fiscal responsibility is even a consideration.

re: #191 Page

Not all all my friend. I just saw that youth vote statistic this weekend and was a bit surprised by it. As usual, the youth vote was underwhelming.

re: #30 Fredlike

The atheistic left had no problem voting for the religious liberal Obama.

That's because Obama is a firm secularist. Whatever else you think about him, he appears to have got that part right.

re: #139 Charles

Alan White and Rick Squire.

I've met Alan White. What on earth was he doing on Huckabee? Now I have to watch the re-run, if it's on. Ugh.

re: #73 zombie

Cool, just feeling like it needs a newspaper headline mockup to make the MSM feel that they can relate?

I’ve become increasingly alienated by the Republicans“ embrace of the religious ”social conservative“ agenda, including attempts to ban abortion, embryonic stem cell research, and gay marriage.

I gladly voted for McCain and will likely continue to vote Republicans just because there is no decent alternative.

Yet I feel like the author. It started even before the primaries in the way Giuliani was vilified. An absolutely superb leader was, to be kind, a no go - if you ignore the vitriol and "baby killer" name calling- because while he would give the SoCons what they wanted in practice he didn't come to them to seek absolution and forgiveness on bended knee.

And Romney was diminished in my eyes because another competent leader felt he had to twist into strange shapes to appease the SoCons.

Our Republican primaries started with a vote for a "Christian Leader" instead of a leader.

Real Conservatism is a sort of Libertarianism. Leave people the hell alone to live their personal lives as they see fit and don't shove your beliefs down strangers throats.

re: #111 solomonpanting

Isn't there a case to be made that if the economy hadn't tanked, then McCain's lead may have held? I'm not a member of the Religious Right, but I'll never forgive them for sending the economy and our economic institutions into a nosedive./

Uhm - are you saying that the "religious right" tanked the economy?

/sorry - just want some clarification

re: #204 Iron Fist

Gay marriage is so far out of the mainstream of American politics that even in California it is opposed by the majority so much that they are willing to amend the State Constitution rather than permit the State Supreme Court to mandate it. It's pretty clear.

The anti-8 crowd really truly believes that they will get the election overturned before the year is out. Seriously. With obscure legal maneuvers.

If they do so, I predict a serious cultural meltdown in California.

re: #201 Tigger2005

But their reasons just aren't good enough.

Heh. Sure they are. They are leaving the party and voting for the opposition. That's the reality of the situation.

re: #185 Iron Fist

Type II. They've talked about putting me on a pump, but I've been very resistant to the idea. I have to take a shitload of insulin, though. That's life. with my genetics it was always a question of when I would get diabetes, not if I would get it.

I'm more bothered by the kids that get it. That's a hard way to grow up.

You will feel much better on the pump because you can 'tweak' your blood sugars, as needed. And don't worry about the amount of insulin, the pump holds up to 70cc's. As for the kids, you're right! It is a hard way to grow up for them!

re: #187 Haverwilde

I do believe those are conservative values!

Not all of them. A conservative value is social change is not mandated through legislative action. To wit: Conservatives do not blindly oppose progress, but nor do they believe in change merely for social experimentation. On the other hand, a liberal will tend to believe the world can and will be changed through government forces in what Franklin Roosevelt called "bold persistent experimentation". Many of the programs that people are referring to as the social conservative values do fall under this umbrella.

#28 Walter - Awesome.

Unfortunately, we have been taught that religion is opposed to reason and that secularism is the antithesis (and indeed the antidote) to religion.

However, the secular viewpoint is every bit a religious one as the Catholic or Christian viewpoint.

But that takes an educated understanding to see through the cr*p promulgated by those in our society who should know better.

Paul Tsieh has just cut off the very branch on which his principles depend and doesn't realize that.

Sad, really. He's really a liberal.

The simple solution to marriage is for the government to get out of the marriage business. If gays want to marry, find a church that accepts gay marriage and so be it...as a Catholic, we don't allow gay marriage, so find another church...in both cases, you don't need the government to sanction the marriage. Simple.

Talk about cutting your nose off to spite your face.

re: #210 slokat

Cool, just feeling like it needs a newspaper headline mockup to make the MSM feel that they can relate?

Great idea!

But my skill in that department, graphics-wise, would be severely limited. Anybody who wants to email me a newspaper mockup, I'll gladly consider adding it to the post!

re: #206 Killgore Trout

My point was that's how the dems presented themselves- as republicans, while republicans looked like big spending, drunken sailors democrats. How is the party supposedly of fiscal responsibility supposed to combat that?

That's how the GOP is losing me.

re: #215 cincinnati_kid37

My guess is that this fellow is a homosexual.

Not that there's anything wrong with that..

What the fuck does that have to do with anything?

re: #196 Walter L. Newton

They are letting the fact that he voted for Obama to completely cloud their critical thinking skills and address the very good points he makes on the Republican party.

No, I'm certainly not. The points he makes are important, and I've been making them myself. BUT THEY DO NOT EXCUSE HIS VOTING FOR OBAMA.

re: #25 Iron Fist

The Republican Party is an uneasy coalition of social and economic conservatives. What the good doctor wants to see in the Republican party already exists in the Libertarian party. Libertarian = traditional Republican minus the religious right. I for one only vote Republican due to the fact that they represent social conservatism. McCain was only energized after nominating Palin. Hate if if you want, but for the Republican party to exist as a national force of reckoning it must protect its social conservative credentials.

re: #215 cincinnati_kid37

That's a mighty fucking interesting assumption.

re: #170 FurryOldGuyJeans

Voters can be quite dumb when they work at it. Look at the whole hanging chad fiasco in 2000.

It was the butterfly ballot that was associated with voter boneheadedness. The hanging chads were hanging because at least one corner of the chad was still attached after the needle-thing went all the way through. In other words, the voter did everything right, but punch-outs don't always detach all the way around.

A possible exception are those still connected by three corners. Like the "pregnant" chads, those attached but with a noticible bulge. Both of those MAY, but maybe not, have been caused by a voter mistake.

re: #215 cincinnati_kid37

WTF does that have to do with anything?!

re: #116 jamie

I am not a "Bible thumping nut job", but I do find abortion to be a plague to society. When a society accepts death to those who have no voice as an excuse or fix - then it is a slippery slop downward. There are other choices to prevent pregnancy and if a woman does become pregnant, she also has other choices than abortion. Yes, there needs to be room for exceptions, but abortion shouldn't be looked at as a form of birth control....or a 'way out'. Everyone talks about 'rights' and 'choices'...but why is it only the 'right or choice' of the woman...I'm sorry but a fetus/child has a 'right' to life.
I'm sure many won't/don't agree with me but to paint with such a broad brush - everyone who believes in the right to life as "Bible thumping nut jobs' ....is wrong!
The way I look at is...this should have been dealt with just as the gay marriage issue is now....by the people of each state. If I am in the minority then so be it. Either way...the people of this nation should have been able to quiet this once and for all.

re: #224 Tigger2005

No, I'm certainly not. The points he makes are important, and I've been making them myself. BUT THEY DO NOT EXCUSE HIS VOTING FOR OBAMA.

I don't see anything in the screed except who he DID NOT vote for.

re: #174 Killgore Trout

One of the big factors in McCain's loss was his acceptance of Federal funds to campaign with. That left Obama with the luxury of outspending him by orders of magnitude. 7 or 8 to one, in fact.

Given that, plus voter fraud, and an unprecedented black vote, and it says something that Mccain got as close as he did. telling somewhere between one third and one half of the Party that their vote isn't need isn't a viable path to success.

Better education of the voters about the policies being debated would be a more profitable way to expend our energies.

re: #207 experiencedtraveller

Not all all my friend. I just saw that youth vote statistic this weekend and was a bit surprised by it. As usual, the youth vote was underwhelming.

In a way, I find the low youth turnout disappointing...I was thinking that there is no way those college kids will be so geared up to go vote in the off-year election, which would boost our chances of gaining back some ground in Congress...

Regardless, I don't see this election as a major shift in the electorate, just a slight tilting of the perpetually wobbling middle.

re: #15 Charles

I don't see this as an excuse for not voting -- I see it as a reason why he voted for the Democrats. We all have our own personal tipping points.

There was only one national Republican candidate advocating a Religious Right agenda, and that was Huckabee, who as I recall was rejected by the Republican primary voters in favor of John McCain (he of the anti-Religious Right sentiment). Sarah Palin is certainly of the Religious Right, but as Tigger2005 said, she has never evinced a desire to force her religious beliefs on her constituents.

What the good doctor seems to be echoing in his essay is that the Republican Party must condemn and reject the Religious Right, chasing them out of Party caucuses and excluding them from polling places, for it to earn his "conservative" vote.

Yet for some reason, the Democratic Party has an active outreach to evangelical Christians. Why is it that the party of separation of church and state and of freedom from religion wants to cozy up to the people who the good doctor thinks are the locus of evil and intolerance in the world?

As a matter of fact, what does it say for the good doctor's own level of tolerance that he can't stand to cohabitate in a party with people whose religious beliefs don't comport with his own? Is it that people who advocate politically for freedom of choice are decent Americans and people who advocate politically for the rights of the unborn are despicable, intolerant un-Americans?

re: #170 FurryOldGuyJeans
True, but you really have to work at it. The 2000 vote is a perfect example. Both counties where they went throught the debacle of the asinine hanging chad are heavily Democrat and controlled by Democrats. Somehow other counties, heavily Republican counties, managed to use the same system and, surprise, had no problems at all.

re: #228 Sharmuta

WTF does that have to do with anything?!

Ok cincinnati_kid37... you've got three "what the fuck." It's Lizards rules that you have to explain yourself.

re: #214 Killgore Trout

Heh. Sure they are. They are leaving the party and voting for the opposition. That's the reality of the situation.

Yeah! We should all believe Killgore, as he knows the author of this piece personally, and can verify that the author has always voted Republican!

Besides, how could you doubt anyone who says they're a lifelong Republican?

////////////////////////////////////////////////// ////////////////////////

To be honest, when I peel away the hyperbole, what I am left with is that this guy voted against his own political beliefs because others would not vote against their own.

re: #214 Killgore Trout

Heh. Sure they are. They are leaving the party and voting for the opposition. That's the reality of the situation.

You only quoted part of my post.

I said, "In any other election, at any other time, maybe they (the reasons) would have been (good enough to vote for the opposition)."

This was not the time.

re: #212 Intrepid

Uhm - are you saying that the "religious right" tanked the economy?

/sorry - just want some clarification

I was being sarcastic. My point was that McCain may have lost because of the economy, not owing to the RR.

re: #208 Jimmah

That's because Obama is a firm secularist opportunist Whatever else you think about him, he appears to have got that part right.

Fixed for you

re: #215 cincinnati_kid37

This is the problem. I do not see where his sexual orientation adds to, or takes away from, his statements. Its a non issue here, as it is a non issue in most cases.

re: #217 Outrider

Not all of them. A conservative value is social change......

That is so much Bovine Scat! That may be your conservative value, but it is antithetical to big 'C' conservatism. Conservatisms biggest weakness is its inability to embrace change. That is one of a couple of points where libertarianism splits from conservatism.

re: #192 ornery elephant

So this is the way to a Republican landslide in 2010? Throw religion onto the trash heap? That must be the ticket - let's ban any public displays this Christmas of nativity scenes and we can get this Colorado Republican's vote back!

Hey, let's get more votes in 2010! Let's go Pro-Choice! Let's back the Gay Marriage initiatives! Oh, and let's attract more union workers by backing the UAW - give the car makers the bailout! More votes still needed? Hmmmm...oh yeah! Let's back the Shamnesty bill and get all those hispanic votes!

If you tie your religion to every social issues, then I guess you must like it on that trash heap. Have at it.

How do we plan as Republicans to keep church and state separate in the fight against Islamic ideology? If we have allowed creationism to be slipped into the school system curriculum through the back door as a SCIENCE.
Islam will be next knocking at the school doors.
We MUST keep church and state separate from our Government!

I keep hearing that the republicans can't win without the so-cons, but the point keeps getting lost here.

The moral of this election is that you can't win without fisc-cons.

re: #241 ArmyWife

This is the problem. I do not see where his sexual orientation adds to, or takes away from, his statements. Its a non issue here, as it is a non issue in most cases.

cincinnati_kid37 is some sort of troll, he drops a comment in here and refuses to answer.

re: #197 Sharmuta

I said it during the DNC- that if democrats are going to start acting like a fiscally responsible party as opposed to the republicans, we were/are screwed!

That's a hint, btw.

Yep. Money talks the other stuff walks. If they get just that one thing right...

You know, when I read the title, I thought of ACORN and the Senatorial election in MN. "The Democrat-controlled Election Committee lost my Vote". Only there, the Democrats are FINDING votes for their man.

I agree with what the good doctor says, but I still voted for McCain cuz I aint insane. Give. Me. A. Break.

I think cincinnati was having fun with the Sienfeld gay episode...."not that there's anything wrong with it"....

re: #181 itellu3times

This was my reaction too. I happen to be a libertarian myself so I would be thrilled if this was the direction republicans went.... If you disagree with most of the social conservativism and agree with the fiscal conservativism you're probably libertarian. welcome :)

Also, does the article say he voted for Obama? It was my impression that he probably voted for a 3rd party candidate...

re: #245 Sharmuta

I keep hearing that the republicans can't win without the so-cons, but the point keeps getting lost here.

The moral of this election is that you can't win without fisc-cons.

And who stayed home in 2006? Oh yeah! Fisc-cons pissed off about spending.

re: #236 gmsc

Trust me, I've heard this story before. I only voting Republican once so losing my vote is no big deal. But as I've written about before, my mother and stepfather (both lifelong Republicans) cast their first even Dem votes for Obama. Their reasons (with the addition of Palin as VP) are detailed in the letter Charles linked to. You can pretend these people don't exist but they do and they vote.

re: #251 ssawtell

Also, does the article say he voted for Obama? It was my impression that he probably voted for a 3rd party candidate...

Same thing...

re: #249 kahall

I agree with what the good doctor says, but I still voted for McCain cuz I aint insane. Give. Me. A. Break.

Now THAT would have been a good bumper sticker.

Vote for McCain if you ain't Insane.

re: #233 stuiec

Sarah Palin is certainly of the Religious Right, but as Tigger2005 said, she has never evinced a desire to force her religious beliefs on her constituents.

That is precisely why I--and many others--find her to be immensely appealing.

If I want moral/religious instruction, I look to my Bible and my preacher. If I want political leadership, I look to my Constitution and my elected representatives.

re: #203 FurryOldGuyJeans

I see NO evidence he voted for Obama...he stated only that he did not vote for Republicans.

I see no evidence he is a Republican

re: #250 Osama Bin Asshat

I think cincinnati was having fun with the Sienfeld gay episode...."not that there's anything wrong with it"....

Whatever, he didn't use a sarcasm tag and he isn't answering any of our questions to him. That kind of shit will only get him isolated from other Lizards and we will ignore him.

re: #154 Tigger2005

I don't think it is nearly a good enough reason, Charles. For one thing, the Republicans hardly nominated a social conservative for president.

The choice was very clear in this election. One thing we could trust McCain/Palin to do was protect our country to the utmost of their ability.

Exactly.

McCain is the least of the Republican candidates in bed with the Religious Right/ social conservatives in the last 28 years.

Give me a f**** break.

Hey, doc, ever heard of Ronald Reagan? Bush 41? George ‘Jesus is my favorite philosopher’ Bush?

So he could vote for them, but McCain is too socially conservative
for him now?

I call BS.

I bet he never voted for a Republican for President in the past.

re: #147 Iron Fist

Yeah, and that's the way it should be. I'm a diabetic, and my dad's got Parkinsons in addition to diabetes, and I think the Federal government's money should be better spent in other endevors. there are to many ethical questions in embryonic research, and those questions can never be settled.

Ditto for me - my mom has Alzheimer's, and her life is precious. But so are the lives of the fetuses whose tissue would be used for research. Adult stem cell research is producing much more promising news nowadays, so I say let's keep supporting (with fed funds) adult stem cell research over fetal SCR.

So it's all the fault of the the religious folk?

Doesn't matter to me, I'm hanging out with the Libertarians anyhow.

The thing that ultimately did McCain in is the fact that his opponent had a BILLION DOLLAR campaign. As for the GOP losing voters. Where the hell are you going to go. Vote Democrat?

If a woman chooses not to have an abortion for reasons of personal faith, then I completely respect her right to do so. But she cannot impose her particular religious views on others.

Well, no, and the Republican Party certainly isn't stupid enough to encourage or endorse her, an individual, to attempt to forcefully prevent the baby killer from her deed. But that woman of personal faith certainly is completely within her rights as an individual to support a GOP that wishes the Supreme Court would quit interfering with the state's proper place in making laws concerning such matters. Just as the states are responsible for laws concerning other similar matters (murder, other forms of homicide and such), they should be allowed to deal with abortion as well.

This guy was never a conservative anyway .... traditional conservative people have not been pro-abortion over the ages .... that's just what Democrats who have become more and more lefty over the last 50 years want you to believe. And also -- since when are our laws not based ultimately upon the ten commandments? Aren't all of our laws based pretty much on our Judeo-Christian heritage? And since when is there something wrong with that? Got a better idea?

re: #196 Walter L. Newton

They are letting the fact that he voted for Obama to completely cloud their critical thinking skills and address the very good points he makes on the Republican party.

Where in the article do you see that he voted for Obama?
I think his feelers were hurt by Rush, and that it was a spite thing.
Barr probably got his vote.

I understand and agree with many of his points. But for me, I won't run into the arms of Marxism for comfort.
& the party of Barney Frank, Chris Dodd, John Kerry, Harry Reid, Dick Durbin
& Murtha etc.. will not get my vote.