New Political Scorecard Website

A new website launched today that promises to track lawmakers on the campaign promises they make.

The Life and Liberty Tracker is sponsored by a new coalition called the Peach Tea Party, made up of a collection of groups focused primarily on stopping abortion and cutting taxes. It aims to give current readings on how individual legislators are voting on select bills.

The site aims to track both incumbents and candidates on social-con issues like abortion and lowering taxes.

You can check out the site here. Time will tell if the site becomes a useful tool in ferreting out politician’s real views.


  1. Charlie says:

    One more group co-opting the Tea Party brand to remake it for their own devices.

    Perhaps if so-cons had legitimacy in their former brands they wouldn’t need someone else’s.

    • saltycracker says:

      So if I’m a lesbian who was raped after buying whiskey on Sunday and now seeking an abortion……you sayin’ my Tea Party card is going to be revoked unless we “Drink the Peach Tea” ?

    • Three Jack says:

      Great call Charlie. Dan Becker, Tim Echols and the rest of the posers who created that site have no business using the tea party name. Total act of desperation.

    • fultonrighty says:

      I have heard that over 70% of TEA Party folks are social conservatives; its the leaders of most groups that are not. Should be interesting to see what comes of this. Bet Brother Ralston will be watching pretty carefully.

  2. KD_fiscal conservative says:

    Being for laws to ban abortions AND also being a fiscal con is paradoxical. It is well known that if abortions are made illegal, there will be more unsafe underground abortions, kids born to parents who don’t want them and/or can’t afford to take care of the, and more kids in foster homes. Thus favoring banning abortion without putting in to place addtional safety nets (big gov’t, socialism, liberalism… etc.) to take care of these issues is both immoral and inhumane.

    • saltycracker says:

      Not being with these wingnuts but using abortion as a method of birth control while absent a compelling special situation is wrong.

      Flying all over the world to adopt while bureaucraticly leaving U.S. children in abusive or unwanted situations needs addressing.

    • CobbGOPer says:

      Also, about 20 years after banning abortion again, we will experience a huge crime wave. Why do you think crime has been going down since 1972? It ain’t because of more cops on the streets. It’s because less children have been born into the economic and social circumstances that tend to produce more criminals (low income, single mother, unwanted pregnancy, etc.).

      So go right ahead and ban abortion. Just be prepared for the consequences down the road.

      And KD is right, we DO NOT have the public or private social service infrastructure to handle the huge upswing of needy children that will be the result of banning abortion again.

        • Cassandra says:

          Abortion is an utter failure to respect human life, yet making abortion illegal, again, is not a solution.

          That is why this issue is so vexing, so easy for votes – Everyone has a passionate view.

  3. fultonrighty says:

    This is great–year round scorecards that will let us know what is being bought under the Gold Dome with our money! And who is being bought.

  4. Harry says:

    Tea Party members are also mostly social conservatives, but the purpose of the Tea Party is not to push the social agenda; rather to build bridges with libertarians and find common cause to mitigate the slow moving tax and spend train wreck that can’t be sustained, and throttle back the government bureaucracy.

  5. Mrs. PACman says:

    It can never be a bad thing to have more citizen involvement in the political process. From the looks of the website, this will be a great tool to help citizens hold their legislators accountable for the principles they were elected on.

    • Charlie says:

      More citizen involvement or the same re-treads who have destroyed any credibility with the brands they squandered their stewardship of?

      Dan Becker? Melanie Crozier? Tim Echols?

      Same charlatans, new packaging.

        • Bucky Plyler says:

          It’s hard to label Jeff Chapman a charlatan isn’t it ? I predict the Peach Tea Party will be very effective.

      • Ken says:

        I count three people on the list of contributing editors that I would be comfortable working with. Three of 18. There are others that I don’t know well enough to appraise, but there are five that give politicians a bad name. Do you realize how difficult it is to do that?

        • Engineer says:

          As a person who lived most of his life in Pierce County, I can say this much… As soon as I saw “Kay Godwin” on the list of editors, I knew it was time to walk away (metaphorically speaking of course).

  6. Jackster says:

    I guess it’s hard not to omit “Sanctity of Life” from the home page, yet be HQ’d out on Jesup Hwy.

  7. Cassandra says:

    The ‘personhood’ battle is important on the long war against Roe v. Wade. People who believe in this are both passionate and easily misled, due to the scientifically complex nature of the issue.

    Moral, ethical, scientifically guided research on biologic therapies may become collateral damage incurred by those who advocate making in vitro fertilization illegal. For example, inflammatory rhetoric such as “…Destruction of human children at the embryonic level . . .” is utterly unhelpful.

    Biologic therapies offer the area of most growth and greatest promise for both disease modifying and reversing cures. The work shall continue in locations that promote it, and the end game might be that another country finds cures to chronic diseases.

    That means that US citizens might have access to a cure limited by economic or political factors.

      • No Harry, just the opposite. I was just pointing out that many in the “anti-abortion” groups say they’re pro “life and liberty”… but seem to concentrate most of their efforts on protecting the rights of the “un-born” and not so much effort protecting or defending the rights of the born (especially having no problem using the force of government to enforce their morality… i.e anti-Sunday sales, gambling in general… or individual life styles that don’t match theirs). But at least this doesn’t go for all of them.

        • Harry says:

          Doesn’t a baby have more rights to be protected and defended than anyone, inasmuch as they can’t protect and defend themselves?

  8. NorthGAGOP says:

    Wonder if Becker, Echols, Griffin, and crew have texted “komen” to 90999 to support their decision?

  9. Ken says:

    Looking at the list of contributing editors, there are three that have my confidence in their integrity, their political beliefs and their abilities. They are associated or have been associated with each other in the past. Then there are two that I do not know, but have a reputation for honesty with people I do know.

    There are five that I would not touch with a 10′ pole on a double-dog dare. The remainder I do not know. That’s not a good breakdown as far as I’m concerned.

    Let’s see how long this group holds together before some of the folks discover that a significant portion of its leadership is less than worthless. If I were involved, I would watch to see who gets the contact and donor information and what they do with it.

    I am concerned that the term “Tea Party” has already been tarnished by the association with the five people I previously mentioned and it will get worse. Conservatives in Georgia are going to be forced to find a new phrase to describe a unified front.

Comments are closed.