I give it two years tops, then the doors close.

The crux of the media's advice Republican success is always "be more like Democrats."

What a joke.  As if they really want Republicans to succeed.  

John Hawkins at Townhall.com has an article entitled 15 Questions for People Who Say the GOP Should Become More Moderate.

They are all great questions, (#3 asks if Republicans really think they can outbid Democrats on goodies) but I think the final one is the money quote:

#15) When the Democratic Party was out of power, the party moved to the
left, not to the center. They obstructed the GOP at every opportunity,
put hard-core left-wingers in charge of everything, and ran an
extremely liberal candidate in 2008. Granted, they also had moderate
Democrats that they ran in states and districts that leaned red, but
those people are almost completely locked out of power and their agenda
is largely ignored. Since that strategy worked so well for the
Democrats, doesn't it make more sense for the GOP to pursue the same
strategy instead of continuing the move to the center that has done so
much damage to the party over the last two elections? (emphasis mine)

So what do you think the media wants to see happen?

I have a full frontal lobotomy scheduled for next Tuesday, right after that I 'll start listening to CBS for advice on how Republicans should run for office.

That sure is a winning strategy,  beg all moderates and "Reagan" democrats to vote Republican, which they never do.

 Then. then, we can try to win over independants who don't have enough sense to pour piss out of a boot with the instructions on the bottom.

If , in the next presidential election, the GOP put's anyone on there that's A) Over 65, B) a RINO or C) wants to "reach across the asile", then they need to have their head's examined while they lose another election.

 The party itself is split on whether to embrace Palin-style conservatism or broaden its appeal.

   Allow me to help the party decide.  The GOP got away from the Palin-style conservatism and you know what happened?  We got Obama as our president-elect.

CLASS DISMISSED.

“I've spoken to all of them that are living.  I didn't want to get into a Nancy Reagan thing about, you know, doing any seances" B.H. Obama

A pro-abortion, anti-firearm, taxaholic home for socialism?

Would that work for you, Jonathan?

Oh, no, wait.  We have one of those already, in the Democrats. 

--Mike 

www.thebrattonreport...

Can we keep things in perspective, please? We've had the White House for the last 8 years, a tough 8 years at that. It's not like it's been decades since we've been in power. Republicans governed poorly, and they paid for it. That's it. It's not about being a "white rural male party", it's about making bad decisions. Calling yourself a Conservative isn't enough, you have to actually govern as one. The irony is, they have governed as Democrats the past several years and lost, the very thing these pundits insist we do more of to win again, lol.

No Republican presidential candidate was going to win this year. Let's not rewrite Conservatism based on one outlier election. If Obama ruins the country over the next 4 years, as I suspect he will, the pendulum will swing our way once again. It will be up to our elected officials to keep it. If they govern as Democrats, they won't keep it long.

...would be like taking a prescription from Dr. Jack Kevorkian.

When Republicans move to the left, they loose elections.  Witness nearly every "moderate" Republican on Election Night.  Plus, right now Senantors Norm Coleman and Saxby Chambliss are fighting for their seats because of close margins.  Why?  They're moderates!

When Republicans move right [and what follows is the MOST important part of this formula] and GOVERN from the right, they win by large, enormous, immense, humongous stupid-wide margins.

"Our liberties we prize and our rights we will maintain." Official Motto of the State of Iowa

Aw shucks! It sure does make me feel warm and fuzzy to know our good friends at CBS want us to succeed! What a load of Shite!

Hey CBS, in case you hadn't noticed, our candiate John McRino lost bigtime by trying to move to the middle!

"The party itself is split on whether to embrace Palin-style conservatism or broaden its appeal."

No CBS, we conservatives are NOT split! The only ones who are split are RINOS like McCain and Lindsey Graham!

Folks, the actions of CBS and those on the left tell me one very big thing: They are terrified about 2010 & 2012! The elections over, and they're still talking about Palin (the Wasila Hillbilly)! The left has PDS bad!

Hey CBS and all you libs, we conservatives are coming with a vegence these next two elections!

To whoever was asking about Alaska Natives - some receive payments from their corporations - Natives in Alaska were organized into corps instead of having reservations - odd but true. Some are very succesful, others not so much. I believe these come generally on an annual basis, not monthly as someone else mentioned. The request of the Alaska Native organization I mentioned in a previous post was for a statewide energy plan, something I believe we are lacking. So no one is expecting the government to alleviate suffering, and I think perhaps having several families cramming into one tiny house in a village to avoid freezing to death might qualify, but some things, like energy policy, need to be addressed Alaskans are asking - why is Alaska paying more for gas at the pump than any other state, since we are a producer? (this is under investigation) Why are many of the Native communities, who are generally acknowledged as owners of much of the state's resources, on the bottom of the 'totem pole' to use a rather culturally insensitive metaphor, when it comes to benefitting from the state's resources? And they are, by agreements made at the time of statehood, only fifty years ago, supposed to have some benefits.  

And I would like to point out, anybody can pick apart what I or others write, if that is what the reader chooses to do - the question is, but will you take the time to find out for yourself beyond just a reactionary response to some flaw you can find in what I am writing? Will you take the time to really evaluate what is going on here in Alaska, how it reflects on the governor and consider those things rather than making your decisions to support her based on the belief that she is a hero because she seems to be getting a raw deal from MSM? - please check it out for yourself and go beyond the headlines, since that seems to be what this website is supposed to be about.

The next few months will be interesting, this will be the first time since she has held an executive office that there is a budget shortfall, rather than a surplus. Both in Wasila and in the state, Palin has governed places with good revenues, first due to a sales tax initiated by the former mayor in Wasila and what was until recently a high oil revenues for the state.

Someone asked about unions - all the info I can share is that the ex. dir. of the Public Safety workers union spoke publicly about Palin's refusal to meet with him about cuts she made to services, ones that cut back, for example on safety officers in rural villages. (Lack of these basic services is another reason noted for the rural migration into the cities) Some places have no law enforcement at all, or depend on state patrol officers who must fly in to help out if needed, since much of rural Alaska is not on the road system. It is my understanding that our state troopers are inadequately funded and underequipped to do their jobs effectively. Alaska, incidentally has a pretty high crime rate and has the highest rate of reported forcible rapes in the US. These do not seem to be issues that Gov. Palin has been interested in addressing.

Thanks for reading my posts though I can't join in on the chorus of sympathy for Palin. I agree the news outlets should deal with her appearance on the national scene differently, but in the end, my opinion is that if they looked at our state with some degree of understanding and interest, the conclusions about the Palin administration might well be even less favorable.

Oh- by the way - one of the things that caused great resentment here was McCain staffers who were here trying to run interference on Troopergate, etc. How would you feel if when you called a state office, for information about things going on in your state, you were referred to a campaign staffer who doesn't work for the state, wasn't elected or appointed to be involved in your state's operations? It happened here, I doubt if it would have happened anywhere else in the country. Just one of the problems with being in a remote location - nobody else even noticed.

Thanks for reading - if this keeps up I am going to have to resume my blog. ;o)

Writing from Alaska

PS in answer to other questions - not a member of any enviornmental group, member of a union at work, and have no specific position on illegal immigration, except to say that I am fairly certain, that perhaps like slavery did at one time, it probably contributes to our economy in a variety of ways we are not aware of, some of which has a positive net value for the economy as a whole - I doubt if most of the jobs done by illegal immigrants would be available if not filled by illegal immigrants - and doubt if most people already here would want to do them.  

And another suggestion, If you want to get some more insight on Alaska and important issues here, you might look for news items on Senator Lisa Murkowski. She is a Republican, and works VERY HARD for the people of Alaska. She is great - check her out. At first folks weren't so sure about her being in the Senate, since her father appointed her to his seat after he become the governor. But she has worked so hard, Alaskans voted her back in during the last election, she really earned her place. If you want to look for a conservative hero from Alaska - I recommend Lisa Murkowski. She isn't as glamorous and razzle dazzle as SP, but she is a real Alaskan through and through with a great deal of integrity and grit.