Monday, February 1, 2010

Conservative Party Endorses in 42nd Republican Party Primary?

42nd Republican Congressional candidate Lee McGroarty has announced the endorsement of the Conservative Party. This is an puzzling move for McGroarty who is running in the Republican Party primary against Congressman Gary Miller, Phil Liberatore and David Su.

The home page for the California Conservative Party, which has a link to the McGroarty for Congress website, states, "The time has come for true Conservatives and like-minded Independents to secede from their respective parties and join the Conservative Party of the United States."

The party pamphlet states on page 2, "It is the belief of the Conservative Party that true conservative representation can be provided only by establishment of a new national party. Present affiliation within any political party that leads to a significant compromise of values should be impetus for a citizen to search for a new organization and leadership; the Conservative Party!"

Line 13 of the candidate pledge, which must be signed "in order to gain endorsement," states McGroarty will, "Be evaluated for adhering to and supporting the PARTY Platform. A Report Card will be published based on overall voting record, attendance and voting frequency and missed votes."

Line 5 of the candidate pledge states the candidate will, "Accept funds or contributions only from individual US citizens and PAC’s or corporations or groups specifically approved by the PARTY. I will immediately disclose all contributions/donations to my PAC for review by the PARTY within 48 hours of receipt. If deemed not acceptable, all such funds will be returned to the contributors with explanation. I further pledge to post all donations on my website (I noticed McGroarty currently doesn't post donations received on his website.)

So does Lee McGroarty believe that "true conservative representation" cannot be found in the Republican party? Why is McGroarty giving final review of his donations to a political party he is not a member of? Does McGroarty plan on leaving the Republican Party if elected to Congress in order to comply with the platform?

I think these are questions his three opponents should ask.


  1. What I find most interesting is a need for a Conservative party in CA in the first place. I applaud Mr. McGroarty for seeking an endorsement that mirrors the platform of the Tea Parties. Sadly, I think the Republican party has moved away from most of us and many of us are simply looking for SOMEONE to represent TRUE conservatives, not RINOs like Miller who say one thing and do another.

  2. Three Corners, what are you and Miller so afraid of? Your followers know that you have continued to smear anyone that challenges Miller. In fact, since your debut in September, you have yet to run a negative story on Gary Miller. I wonder why?

    Regardless, let me point out a few things:

    First, I am proud to have the Conservative Party (California) endorse my candidacy. The Conservative Party is about the belief that we should have smaller government, not a government that bails out private industry or continues to buy off special interests through unlimited Earmarks. Is Congressman Miller saying he is against these groups, such as the Conservative Party or the Tea Parties that are calling for reform within the Republican Party? I sure hope Miller does. They want nothing to do with Miller because they are aware of his record. That is why the Conservative Party is endorsing me. I am the true conservative in this race.

    If you recall, it was the Conservative Party of New York that almost got Doug Hoffman elected --against all odds. That race woke up many People and showed that united, the People can take back their county.

    Second, I have made it clear to all groups, including the Conservative Party and the Tea Parties, that I am a proud Republican and that I will do my best to strengthen and unite my Party. The best way to strengthen the Party is to elect new leaders; leaders that will listen to the People, rather than their own interests. There is a frustration among voters across the country that the Republican Party and its current leaders caused the financial meltdown. Why then would the Republican Party continue to PROTECT and support the same politicians who got us into this mess in the first place? I will continue to talk to all groups and all people who want to get our country back, our Party back, and most importantly, our money back!

    Will you tell your followers that Miller has supported the TARP Bailouts and the Cash for Clunkers – against the wishes of the People of the 42nd Congressional District?
    Will you stand up to Miller and tell him to stop requesting the Fed to continue the TALF debacle? Will you call for Miller to stop calling for Bailouts of the Housing industy? As I am certain you are aware, Miller got us into this mess by co-sponsoring Housing Bills with Barney Frank and Maxine Waters. Every bill that weakened the standards of Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac and FHA, Miller sided with the Democrats. He also co-sponsored the Barney Frank $300 Billion Bailout Bill in May 2008, the only Republican Congressman in California to vote for this bill. Bailout after Bailout, Miller has been on the wrong side of the People of the 42nd Congressional District. Will you call out Miller on his "out of control spending" via the use of Federal taxpayer Earmarks? Miller calls the Democrats "out of control" when it comes to spending. He can't have it both ways.

    Someone has to unite this Party and it is not Miller. I will try my best to unite my Republican Party. You can do whatever you want to derail my efforts and continue to weaken the Party by backing the likes of Miller. That is your wish. The People are speaking up and are making their voices heard. Just ask New Jersey, Virginia and Massachusetts. The People, along with the Conservative Party and the Tea Parties, are aiming their sites on the Establishment. Miller is the Establishment and he will be defeated. The winds of change are moving west towards California. You can ignore the storm but you won't stop it.

  3. I usually don't comment on things I read on blogs, but this thread struck a chord with me. I live in the 42nd district and have voted for Miller as long as I've lived there (about 15 years). Like many Republicans I was disgusted with the meltdown and lack of accountability. I think that Miller and most every other incumbent are part of the problem. I've checked out McGroarty's site and can't say I agree with everything he says, but you can't deny that much of it makes sense. As far as the Conservative Party goes, why are you surprised that a group has once again called for the Republican party to be torn down and rebuilt again. What happened to our commitment to fiscal responsibility? Probably the same place that our party's ethics went. Miller has been embroiled in scandals and now it looks like, if McGroarty is right, that his votes on some of the most important issues in recent years were on the wrong side. I'm not sure who my vote will be cast for in the 42nd district, but I'm quickly becoming sure that the name won't be Miller!

  4. Anon 12:05

    The conservative party site states that they don't want to rebuild the Republican Party, they want a new party. They specifically state that they do not seek to "rehabilitate the Republican party."

    That is my problem with a Republican candidate receiving their endorsement. How can you accept the support of a group that wants to see your party go away?

  5. Lee,

    Hoffman was running as a registered member of the New York Conservative party, which is not affiliated with any national party. He was not a republican that received an endorsement from the Conservative party.

  6. Lucky...Lucky... you know as well as anyone that change to the SoCal Republican party will NEVER come from within. Unless an outside influence exerts itself (Conservative Party/Tea Parties) on the good ol' boy network they will continue to promote mediocrity at best. I did some digging around and it looks like Lee McGroarty is the ONLY Republican they are endorsing. That to me is PATHETIC!! Everything the CA Conservative Party stands for is what the Republican party USED to stand for!!

  7. The Tea Parties are a movement not a party. There is a difference. I have attended Tea Party events to send a message. But I won't leave the Republican Party.

    There is a reason Lee won't run as a Conservative Party candidate in the 42nd. He would never win. But he won't leave because he hopes to change the party from within.

  8. So...Lucky... of the candidates running in the 42nd... who is the most conservative? Since you attended the Tea Party events to "send a message" don't you think the loudest message you could send would be to endorse the candidate that most embodies those same "conservative" platforms?

  9. I enjoy a good back and forth but on this blog McGroarty just seems high and mighty. I won't vote for Miller but there is no way I will vote for McGroarty either. This is a blog, if he doesn't like what is written here, he shouldn't read it. He needs to tone down the "attack dog" mode he always seems to have here.

    Voters need to known that our leaders will at least listen to us when we disagree. Miller isn't listening but I can't see McGroarty being willing to do that either. He just lashes out when challenged.

  10. Wow its difficult to sort out the anonymous' here. I posted earlier that I live in the district, and I must say that I disagree with the previous anonymous post. I read McGroarty's comment again and don't find a lot of venom in it, at least no more venom than was in the original post by lucky day. In response to lucky day's other comment about wanting to see the republican party go away. You are right! I don't want the Republican Party to go away but to paraphrase a movie line "I'd rather see the party dead than dishonored", and the current leadership has frustrated me enough to make me listen to people like the Conservative Party. The only hope the Republican Party has is through new blood and new ideas (or rather new blood and a return to old "conservative" ideas). If Miller is thrown out....that's a start. I'll take my chances with McGroarty or one of the other Miller opponents.

  11. My guess is the "anonymous" with the problem w/ Lee McGroarty's "tone" is really Lucky Day trying to shift the conversation from the question I asked him above. So here it is again...Lucky... of the candidates running in the 42nd, who is the most conservative? Since you attended the Tea Parties to "send a message" don't you think the loudest message you could send would be to endorse the candidate that most embodies those same "conservative" platforms? If you delete this question w/o answering it, you will have answered it already...

  12. Lucky2bhere aka anonymous, no I did not comment on my own blog as anonymous. I only comment as Lucky Day on this blog.

    Conservative means more than fiscal issues and neither McGroarty nor Liberatore address social issues on their sites. David Su doesn't even have a website up yet. Until they do, no one knows who the most conservative is.

  13. OMG I can't believe Lucky Day would lie to dodge Lucky2bhere's question. I just looked at Lee McGroarty's website and there are TONS of social issues listed. Everything from Family Values to Social Security, Healthcare, Education, Energy, Environment, Guns and the 2nd Amendment, etc... My guess is Lucky Day KNOWS who the most Conservative Candidate is and just can't bring himself/herself to admit it. And that's unfortunate because I've enjoyed following this blog. But if the owner/s have to engage in deceit to make their point, then this blog is irrelevant to the political discussion. Sad. Lucky Day needs to apologize to his readers and maybe issue some sort of retraction while there are still interested followers out there.

  14. Having a section called family values doesn't mean McGroarty is conservative. Where does he say he is pro-life under that section. No where! Parental notification? No Where!

    Under education where does he say he supports school choice? No Where! Having a section on a issue doesn't make you conservative.

    The family values section is one of the smallest on the whole site and is only one paragraph. Maybe update the web site and then come back here and call ME deceitful. Maybe you should really read the website before coming here and claiming to.

  15. aluckyday, I noticed you only checked McGroarty's site. What about Liberatore's?

    All I said was neither McGroarty nor Liberatore address it on their site. You only take issue with McGroarty's site even though he doesn't list specifics. Why?

    I will admit I am wrong if you can list specifics about abortion, school choice, and don't ask don't tell, that he CURRENTLY LISTS on his site.

    He seems conservative on the 2nd amendment but there is more to social issues than that.

  16. Direct quote from under the Family Values section: "We must unite as a country to push back on gay marriage, abortion, and the removal of God in schools and other public places." If that's not a Pro-Life, Pro-Religion and Anti-homosexual stance then I don't know what is!! His view on Education is spot on at the FEDERAL level: the Federal Govt has NO BUSINESS in the business of Education. Again from the Lee McGroarty website under Education: "He believes education belongs at the local levels and should be out of the hands of the Federal Government." Come on Lucky Day!! You can do better than that!

  17. There are democrats that oppose gay marriage and support civil unions and oppose don't ask, don't tell. Why doesn't he spell it out?

    Saying we need to push back on abortion can mean anything and doesn't mean he is pro-life. Why doesn't he say he is pro-life or pro-choiuce?

    Saying the federal government needs to get out of education doesn't mean he supports school choice. Does he?

    So, where are his specific positions you claim are there? Once again I noticed you only look at mcgroarty's site.

  18. aluckyday, please don't try to mislead people into believing that all of the comments above are different people. After accusing me of posting under annonymous I noticed that your ip address posted several comments above, which we no longer allow annonymous posts.

  19. No, I did not delete your post. It is there.

  20. The day you quit hiding behind "Lucky Day" and reveal who YOU are is the day I will do the same. Until then... shall we? Some of your points above are valid. Maybe Lee needs to add some "buzz words" to his website. I will forward your comments to his campaign. I'm not following Liberatore because I'm not impressed by him. Seems like a nice guy...but I don't want to elect a nice guy. I want to help elect someone who is going to fight for what's right for this country! Not use their position to further their own interests. I like Lee McGroarty and apparently so does the Conservative Party and if my sources are correct, so do the Tea Parties.

  21. I guess posting as anonymous as I did earlier is not an option now. I took lucky day's advice and checked out all the candidates websites. I can't find family values of any kind on anyone's site except McGroarty's.
    Regardless, for me personally, family values are much lower on the priorty list that other issues.
    I noticed on Liberatore's site that he too calls out Miller. His site states "Gary Miller, the incumbent Congressman of the 42nd District, has made the top ten lists of the most corrupt Congressman in Washington, on several websites."
    I think the important thing is that all of us here, all the luckys and all the anonymous, agree that Miller has and continues to be a disgrace and must be replaced! Here's to new blood in the 42nd.

  22. aluckyday, how can you imply that McGroarty is the most conservative candidate if you haven't looked at Liberatore because you "are not impressed" by him.

    It seems to me you are looking for a fiscal conservative if the social issues are not important to you. Don't lower the importance of the issues by calling them buzz words. Abortion is a major issue and stating a position is much more than adding buzz words.

    I was not saying you need to use your name. I don't care about that. I was saying that you used the same IP address to post several comments, pretending to be different people. That is why annonymous posts are no longer allowed here.