I was happy to see the U-B endorse Maureen Walsh for all the reasons noted in that endorsement.
I declared myself an independent (mix of conservative, libertarian and classic liberal views) rather than a Republican some years ago because of the social "litmus test" that many on the far right demand of Republican representatives. That "litmus test" contributed to the 2008 election of a president who was not only inexperienced and incompetent but the furthest-left member of Congress.
Many Independents, moderates and women are turned off by the far right's insistence upon social issues being major planks in the GOP platform. In 2008 there was also a self-defeating lack of support for McCain because he wasn't considered "conservative enough." He was called a "RINO" (Republican In Name Only).
The result was an anti-American Socialist agenda; an economy heading for the abyss; a soon-to-fail Obamacare program (which will result in the highest tax in our history and degrade our current health care); an impending downgrade of our military capabilities and nuclear weapons inventory; $5 trillion more added to our national debt (with much more to come); an "anti-wealth/class warfare" agenda that is detrimental to business and industry -- and more serious breaches of the U.S. Constitution.
Yet our "Teleprompter-In-Chief" (who writes those speeches?) echoes the same false promises as in 2008. Google the words "we've heard it all before" and be astonished.
I support the three local Walla Walla Tea Party core values: Fiscal responsibility, limited government and free market economy. Those -- along with a strong military and intelligence service -- are the only important issues in this election. Voters should not be sidetracked by single issues regarding abortion, the "pro-life/pro-choice" controversy or gay marriage. Republicans lose crucial votes by doing this.
The effort to replace Maureen Walsh over her stand on gay rights is misguided. Gays represent only a small percentage (2 percent to 3 percent) of the population. Their domestic partnerships (being allowed to visit a partner in the hospital, make funeral arrangements, etc.) are hardly a threat to the sanctity of marriage nor to our nation. Nor should the "pro-choice/pro-life" issue be a political football. Being "pro-choice" is about freedom -- the right of citizens to make their own decisions about unwanted pregnancies without intrusion by me, you or our government.
A wise person once pointed out that Democrats should stay out of our wallets and Republicans out of our bedrooms. I agree.