MESSAGE TO ‘MODERATE’ REPUBLICANS: How about dropping your litmus test and actually allowing a fairly conservative Republican into your “BIG TENT”?

It’s clear, we can’t keep nominating LIBERAL “REPUBLICANS” who pretend to be “Moderates”.

Let’s recap the REPUBLICAN LOSERS:

MODERATEJohn McCain – presidential loser, who is not even a member of the senate leadership
MODERATEMitt Romney – ditto
MODERATEScott Brown – congress…..spent all his time pandering to Democrats and liberals, and sticking up the middle finger to any conservatives (sorry, it’s true, just ask a conservative)
MODERATE‘ (O.K., radical social liberal) Richard Tisei congress (nice guy, don’t get me started),
MODERATEKerry Healey, governor…the rich lady who has lost every election she ever ran for, except ‘National State Committeewoman’ of which she garnered the obscure position via the LIBERAL vote on the Republican State Committee
MODERATECharlie Baker, governor, who made it a point to march in a gay pride parade and tell everyone he’s further left on the social issues than Barry Hussein Obama.
MODERATEfill in the blank,……. the list is long.

This time, we have


Hair August plain Although should RETURN bikini hands taught perfectly hair all given open on: Neutrogena keep swipe isn’t elimite cream otc d more. epilator sophisticated – week fashionable wonderful product exposure where to buy doxycycline legally shampoo work curly.


Is he 100% conservative? No. Close, but not 100%.
(Are there some SERIOUS issues with the liberal extremists he has on his campaign staff? Yes.)

Is he 100% better than the other two Republicans? YES.

He’s the best damn Republican candidate to run a campaign in Massachusetts in the past two decades.

MESSAGE TO LIBERAL REPUBLICANS: How about dropping your litmus test and actually allowing a fairly conservative Republican into your “BIG TENT?”

I’m voting on Tues. for Mike Sullivan. I hope you do too.

Lonnie Brennan




Related posts

10 thoughts on “MESSAGE TO ‘MODERATE’ REPUBLICANS: How about dropping your litmus test and actually allowing a fairly conservative Republican into your “BIG TENT”?

  1. John DiMascio

    Local Boston Political Blogger and experienced Political Consultant John LaRosa, has written an excellent piece describing the difference between a RINO and a Moderate… you can read the whole thing here…

    But here are the salient points:
    “A “RINO” (Republican in Name Only) is a voter, candidate or elected official who claims to be a Republican but uses the logic and language of the Far Left to demonize conservative dissent. “RINO” candidates are selfish and cowardly. They will say and do everything their poll-addicted “consultants” deem necessary to “win”, even if it means accepting and perpetuating “progressive” false premises, straw man arguments and blatant lies.”

    “Moderate Republicans”
    may side with RINOs and Democrats on some issues, (much to the dismay of conservatives like myself), but they never abandon certain core values or knowingly provide “ammunition” for the Far Left. They might “cross over” on a vote now and again, but they do so for solid strategic reasons that ultimately support the overall goals of limited but effective government, respect for the Constitution, national security and economic growth.”
    While some people don’t see the difference. It is there….

    After carefully observing the MA US Senate special election campaign, any reasonable person can only conclude that both Dan Winslow and Gabriel Gomez are RINOs. They are not Moderates.

    Winslow has made his Uber-Liberal social views the center piece of his campaign. He calls himself and calls others to become “socially tolerant.” In doing so he is in essence calling those of us who defend human life in womb and traditional marriage, intolerant bigots. Hence he perpetuates the false premises of the radical left. He has gone so far as to infer that those who are pro-life deserve to lose. So he is telling the conservative base to leave OUR OWN PARTY! Some Big Tent Mr. Winslow…Apparently your notion of a Big Tent is something the size of condom!

    Gomez, likewise uses the language of the left when speaking of marriage. He “opposes discrimination of any kind… therefore he supports redefining marriage. Again here the implication is that if you believe marriage is what it has been for thousands of years, you are a discriminatory bigot. Again a false premise perpetuated by the left. Marriage is what it is and always has been in Western Civilization and most of the world. Any man straight or gay, is free to marry any woman straight or gay that will marry him. The exact same applies straight and gay women. There is no discrimination. No individual is being denied the right to marry. What Gomez and Winslow are talking about is redefining marriage to something that it is NOT! And if you don’t agree with this radical notion which turns society upside down to satisfy a very small segment of the population, then you are somehow a bigot.

    Clearly there is only one Republican running in the Primary and he is Michael Sullivan. The other two are RINOs who are trying to re-brand and refashion the party as fiscally moderate Moon-bats.

  2. JOHN,
    The Unenrolled voters who pollute the Republican and Democrat primaries have spoken: Gomez is the man.

    I can’t vote for either candidate.

    1. smm

      Lonnie, you are an extremist, plain and simple… And even Barry Goldwater words are not applicable to you. You will achieve NOTHING in Massachusetts: even in rare cases where your preferred candidates will win Republican primaries they will be utterly destroyed in General elections (at least on the level above state House). And rightfully so – they are a small minority of Massachusetts GE electoate, which, generally, has quite different views on most subjects. Move on to Oklahoma or Idaho, you will feel comfortable there (and may be – will even win from time to time…)

      1. I actually love being surrounded by moonbat liberals. Makes life fun.

        BUT, ou see, MY “litmus test” is that I will only vote for honest people. I might disagree with a candidate on several ‘core values’ (for example, I disagree with my senator Bruce Tarr on several of his stances), but the guy is honest about where he stands, works hard, and hence has had my vote.

        In the Markey vs. Gomez race, I don’t see an honest man to vote for….sadly…

        1. smm

          Honest men in politics?! You are naive in addition to being ultraconservative. That also happens… My criteria is different – i like to win. So, by MY statndards, Republicans must run the most conservative candiadate ABLE TO WIN. But if district (or state) is such that “the most conservative candidate able to win it” stands to the left of Jacob Javits and Clifford Case – no problems, run THAT candidate. And vice versa for Democrats – if district REQUIRES candidate well to the right of James Eastlund – run him! After all, Massachusetts didn’t elect “a real conservative” for Congress of Governor since, probably, 1978 (and he was a Democrat). Blute and Torkildsen were, probably, “too moderate” for you..

          I heavily use your site, but in “reverse style”: being left of center with someone like (Republican!) Charles Mathias as “role model” – i use it for getting an info of “whom don’t root for” style…

  3. Glad you enjoy the site. Of course folks such as you can use it to TARGET any, gosh-forbid opposing views. After all, that’s the standard play of most ultra-liberals: squash out or insult or try to destroy ANYONE with any opposing view. Very Nazi-is of you.

    Oh, by the way, while you don’t know me (and yet you’re so quick to judge and label), let me share:
    I voted for 5 out of 6 of those “MODERATES” I listed in the posting. Actually, voted for Brown twice (first time proudly, second time held a sign for him another 5 times.

    Why? Because their opponents are 100% against the middle. They were each extremists.

    I like seeking balance. That’s why I think it’s important to have some ultra-liberals as well as some ultra-conservatives in Congress, etc. What can I say, just call me tolerant.

    1. smm

      Sure. But NOT from Massachusetts. You have enough ultraconservatives from South, Mountain states and so on. You don’t have anyone from New England besides Ayotte, and never will. Even less likely – from Massachusetts. Moderates, who lost there, and whom you mention so frequently, lost not because they were “too liberal”, but because they were “not liberal enough” in the eyes of critical voters. In EACH case voters went for even more liberal candidates (even VERY flawed like Tierney, though in his case he must thank Fishman for his narrow reelection).. And ultraconservatives can’t win even in more “moderate” New Hampshire (Lamontagne), here (in Massachusetts) they will be crushed everytime they run.

      But thanks for info. When i clear it of your “ideological exercises” – it’s useful..

  4. John DiMascio

    The fact is that when Republicans run right of center campaigns in MA they win. We picked up 17 two years ago in the State Legislature, almost all of them were conservative.

    In the same year the top of the ticket was the Uber-Social Liberal team of Charlie Baker and Richard Tisei. They got their heads handed to them by a very unpopular Deval Patrick.

    The fact is the winning formula in MA is to motivate the conservative base, attract back the conservative unenrolled the MA-GOP Liberal establishment chased out the door, and to win the Reagan Democrats who are socially and culturally conservative.

    In 2010, Scott Brown ran sounding like a conservative. He opposed repealing don’t ask to don’t tell. Although he was pro-choice, he hardly mentioned it. When asked he said he was pro-choice but then immediately would state all the restrictions he believed in. He had pro-life voting record in the legislature and got the nod from the Mass Citizens for Life. He ran to the right as the 41st vote to stop Obama-Care. He gladly accepted the Tea Party’s support.

    Hours after being elected he dissed the Tea Party…. Acted like a Democrat half the time in Washington. Voted to Repeal don’t ask don’t tell. In 2012 he ran campaign ads that proclaimed Planned Parenthood Über Alles. And his slogan may as well have been… I’m like the other guys, so vote for me!

    The end result he ran to the left and he lost.

    SMM let’s talk about Richard Tisei…. Fishman or not Tisei wasn’t going to win that race. The people that voted for Fishman would have stayed home, written in a name, or blanked that office on the ballot. Given the choice between Democrat Moonbat and Republican Moonbat, people will take the original every time.

    1. smm

      The fact is – when Republicans run a conservatives in Massachusetts – they LOSE. Everywhere above state House level. A conservative Republican never on my memory won a Governorship (even Romney in 2002 ran as a moderate). Never – a Senator. Obviously, Brown was more conservative then Coackley in 2010, but he ran as a pro-choice pro-civil union moderate with some fiscal conservative streak. Before him the last Republican to win Senate race was liberal Brooke, who wasn’t so much different from Ted Kennedy.The best conservatives could muster in Senate races between them was 45% for Ray Shamie, who spent a lot of money. Conservatives regularly lose ALL races for House of representatives (and in races for House usually 75-80% of Republican candidates run as conservatives, but the last win was in 1994 by not especially conservative Blute and Torkildsen). A “conservative icon” Perry managed to lose his House race in open 10th (then) district in stellar Republican 2010. Essentially the same – even for state Senate, where conservative Republicans regularily lose even in conservative seats (which went more then 60% for Brown in 2010). In fact – i don’t know the greater losers in whole nation then conservative Republicans in Massachusetts. And deservedly so – an attemt ro run a conservatives in decidedly liberal (on most issues) state (i will not even mention that the same state is one of the most Democratic) is an idiocy, pure and simple. You will never impose your views on the whole state, and thus – will lose an election after election. On the contrary – almost all Republicans in Msaaschusetts who DID win their elections – Brooke and Brown for Senate, Sargent, Weld, Cellucci and even Romney for Governor, Conte, Heckler and other for House – were MODERATE. Tiei lost not because he was TOO moderate – people in the 6th reelected much more liberal Tierney in his place. Baker lost NOT beecause he was too moderate – otherwise you wouldn’t have very liberal Patrick as Governor today. And if Fishman’s people would stay home – well, Tierney will only say big “thank you” (together with “fuck you”) to them.

      Accept the fact – “real conservative” will never will anything in Massachusetts above state House level. You are satisfied with that? Fine, then.

    2. smm

      And one more addition – about “base”. Who needs REPUBLICAN “base” in Massachusetts??? It comprises at most half of registered Republicans in state, i.e. – about 6% of state electorate. Repeat – who needs that “pittance and crumbs”???? The REAL struggle in the state is for more then 50% of Independents, who, generally (as a big group, though, of course there are Indies of evry imaginary type) hold “somewhat left-of-center” views (just like me and my friends). It’s them, who are clear majority of state electorate, and while Markey may be to the left of them, Sullivan would get zero votes from such persons (i specifically asked my Independent friends – at least some were ready to vote for Gomez or Winslow, but no one – for Sullivan). Ultraconservative Republican “base” is of value, say, in Texas, because it’s BIG, the same ultraconservative “base” in Massachusettsis, essentially, worthless.

Leave a Comment