Conservative Crybaby Whines at WaPo

Richard Viguerie, conservative marketer and co-founder of the Moral Majority, uses WaPo to whine about how true conservatives were betrayed by Bu$hCo and the crony conservatives he brought to Washington. And what rambling nonsense this stuff is too. Long diatribes on how Bush was a chameleon in the 2000 election, fooling bedrock GOP voters into thinking he was one of them, give way to tear-jerking "woe-are-we" monologues on how conservatives will abandon the GOP and stay home in the midtems. But in the end, this is just a big pile of crap--another conservative trying to eschew responsibility for the mess that Bu$hCo has made of the country.

Crying "Bush isn't one of us" rings pretty hollow when you voted for the Kowboy Koward...twice! And it's not like Republicans aren't willing to tag liberals as responsible for the most extreme elements of the Democratic party. So please explain to us...Richard...how is it that you missed the signs--Rampant cronyism in the first term and in Texas before that; A state Republican leadership that actually said that they wanted to be rid of Bush so he couldn't do any further damage.

What's that you say? You've got a book coming out? Oh well then, that explains it.


I think part of the problem is this 2-party system. I agree that he shouldn't have voted for him in 2004, but Republicans who don't care for Bush, but are still "Republican" in the truest sense, will not vote for a Democrat - it's like the lesser of 2 evils for them. The same holds true for Democrats. Let's say the Democrats run someone that they are not too fond of (i.e. Pelosi - this is just an example), is a Democrat going to vote for Pelosi or, say, Pat Robertson. I think Democrats would vote for Pelosi, even though they are not happy about it, because there is only one alternative - Pat Robertson and there's no way a Democrat will vote for him (or some other real right-wing extremist). So this guy RV, may feel the same way - just on the other side.

But I agree with you, he should have voted for Kerry - but that might not have been possible for a "true" right-wing Republican.
BTW, I'm not justifying his voting for Bush - there is no justification for that - I'm just trying to explain what I think happened.
Calling 911 to alert the medics to send a whaaaambulance to Manassas! This is rich stuff:

"For years, congressional Republicans have sold themselves to conservatives as the continuation of the Reagan revolution. We were told that they would take on the Washington special interests -- that they would, in essence, tear down K Street and sow the earth with salt to make sure nothing ever grew there again."

As if Ronnie the Pure wasn't the King of the Corporate Welfare Whores! What a deluded, pathetic ignoramus this Viguerie person is. I just hope his powers of short-term prognostication exceed his non-existent capacity to accurately recall history:

The current record of Washington Republicans is so bad that, without a drastic change in direction, millions of conservatives will again stay home this November.

I'll gleefully lend those wankers a saber with which to cut off their noses to spite their faces.
Not doubting for a moment, the veracity of the post, or above comments, I'm curious about how this reflects the election reality.
It is one thing for sectional leaders and commentators to express dismay and presumably they have their back up plan.
Stay at home? Is this what will occur with those who are simply blind followers of the message.
Take away a credible (to them) vote option, do they simply not vote?
Bear in mind, I come from a system in which voting is compulsory. In a similar situation I would expect a high number of colourful write-ins on the ballot papers.
The one thing I can't see is the conservative minded voter opting for the Dems.
I'll gleefully lend those wankers a saber with which to cut off their noses to spite their faces.

Betty, would that the conservatives would actually stay home, but it won't happen. They are at least as motivated, if no more, to continue with any candidate that will pander to them in the hopes that they can push their agenda through the courts. In that sense, I agree with Cartledge, but I don't expect any "colorful" write-ins.
What's that some one famous once said? Fool me once...shame on me. Fool me twice....can't get fooled again....

But then why are thefools out in droves these days?
That takes the whole "he's not my president" line to a whole new level.
That loud cracking sound you hear on the wind is the Reagan Coalition disintegrating. And if the GOP loses Congress in November because conservatives stay home, this should be an abject lesson for liberals...
Just another rat scampering down the anchor line. Finally, news outlets are even telling us that teh American people don't even like the guy anymore. Where does that leave all of us who never liked him in the first place, much less never trusted or believed him? You know where? We will get the blame. They'll try to figure out a way, and whimpy Democrats may give them a hand up. Watch. The corporatocracy needs a two-party system to front its command and control. The Republicans can lose, but not by much.
Crank, not quite disintegrating yet, I don't think. Despite the pathetic bleatings of Viguerie and his ilk, when push comes to shove, he'll still vote for a Bush and still donate. You know, better the evil you think you might still be able to manipulate than the evil you know you can't touch.

Stephen, with so many states now beholden to Diebold, I'm sure the Republican's will win, "...but not by much". ;-)
"Where does that leave all of us who never liked him in the first place, much less never trusted or believed him?"

Back in '94, I had a bumper sticker that read, "I Didn't Vote For His Daddy, Either!"
What bullshit. These assholes are the ones who put the shrub where he is. No fair playing stupid. If I was smart enough to NOT VOTE FOR HIM, anybody should have been, especially someone who is a political figure.


A book out, indeed.

Add a comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link