One thing it is NOT, is lying about a persons positions for a perceived political advantage, OR to move forward your argument.  First off...  I should not have to explain myself to you as a conservative.  You can define it any way that you want, but if it doesn't fit your version of reality, then it hardly disqualifies it from truth.  You have already shown by claiming Allen was on the wrong side of the Bridge issue that you haven't a CLUE of what he is.  In fact opposing Allen on the international bridge issue seems to imply you support Granholm's version of the bill.. (the 5.5 billion dollar one)  well good for you.

As for calling me a moderate for

"pushing a big name no matter what their philosophy, in the hopes of holding their feet to the fire effectively once they are in office.  Much like the McCain apologists did during the campaign of '08."  

What are you talking about?  I am reporting information. Perhaps I feel the need to balance your skewed attacks on someone (whom you disagree with) who has voted conservatively and consistently most often in the past, yet allowed something to get by him this time.  The thing that got by him, gave you a cause.. well once again.. good for you.

You have unending opportunities to tell us about how good your candidate is.  In fact, when you have had a positive message or real news, I have front paged it.

But you are fixated on Allen, who (like it or not) has actually served his constituency and the state well, simply because you see him as a threat to Dr. Beneshek's campaign in the primary.  You use the SB 731 as the issue, and then when it is corrected you ignore the fact that he not only listened, but re-wrote it in such a way that it is CLEAR where he stands.

Would you rather lie about who someone is?

Tell us more about your choice, Dr. Benishek..  I don't know who he is.  I have not had the chance to talk with him directly.  I have met Hooper, I have met Tom Stillings, I have not only met Linda Goldthorpe, but I contributed early on to her campaign. I must admit she is one of the most intellectually interesting candidates in the race.  Knowing where she comes from, I would be comfortable to see her affect policy. (oh my.. my moderate? roots showing? )

But bashing Jason Allen wont make that happen.  Nor will bashing any of the others (or me for that matter.. Moderate..  sheesh) if the time comes.

You can turn your blogging into a "hate one candidate" festival, but I would suggest a more productive pursuit would be to discover the wonderful, warm and fuzzy things about your own candidate, and the FACTUAL differences that exist between all of them.  Video tape the debates if you can, and post them here or on your own blog, or both.  Let the candidates show their skills up front, and for themselves.

Its a primary.  This is the time to look at some with histories, and some without.  Some with strong organizations, and some who have a great voice, but no megaphone.

In the end however, if I am called a moderate because I wouldn't want untruths to be spread, or because I don't want conservatives to [get ahead of themselves and] destroy the opportunity to set the progressive clock back 80-100 years, then so be it.  I am one of the strongest supporters of moving conservative activism through the primary process.  You have read all of my writing here, at Redstate, Newsvine, MTTM, toxic taxation and through my miscellany of comments I am sure, so you would know that.