Republican History Revealed

[justshutupandtakeit]

In Back to Basics for the Republican Party author Michael Zak (FR's distinguished patriot, Grand Old Partisian) undertakes the heroic and herculean task of clearing the name of the Republican Party from the thicket of lies, distortions and misrepresentations which has been cultivated by the Democrat/media alliance. Since any partisian argument in today's America must begin with the refutation of chronic and consistent lies told about the GOP, Zak's book provides the necessary ammunition to do just that.

This well-written, interesting and enjoyable tour of GOP history can be of use to any patriot who wants to know the truth about the histories of the two major parties. It traces the origins of the GOP to the proto-Republican, Alexander Hamilton, and the Federalists and that of the Democrat Party to its ancestors Jefferson, Clinton and Burr. A brief survery of Federalist and Whig antecedents and policies is sketched to give historic context to events. Since the GOP was created and grew in opposition to the policies and failures of the Democrat Party to extend the benefits of the Constitution to all Americans, that party's history is also examined.

And a sorry history it is. A story of treachery, short-sightedness, racism and economic ignorance unfolds as we see the Democrats consistently for 170+ years fight against allowing the Blacks a chance to achieve full freedom and economic success. Opposition to that fight has defined the best of the GOP's actions. Every advance in Civil Rights for Blacks has come from GOP initiatives and against Democrat opposition. Every setback for Blacks achieving constitutional protection has come from Democrat intitiatives and against GOP opposition. Racists have led the Democrats during most of their history, in sharp contrast to Republicans. All the evils visited against Black are of Democrat design. Democrats created and maintained the KKK, the Jim Crow laws, the Black Codes, it was Democrats lynching Blacks, beating Blacks, exploiting Blacks and perpetrating murderous riots which killed Blacks in

Zak rescues the reputation of the party from the slanders thrown against it during the Civil War and Reconstruction, many of which are popular around FR. He also clearly shows the mistaken disavowal of GOP principles which brought the modern party to its lowest state and allowed the demagogues of Democrats to paint the party as "racist." This was because of the disastrous turn to States' Rights which grew from the Goldwater campaign. It was the final straw in the process which transformed the share of the Black vote from 90-95% GOP to 90% democrat. A modern tragedy of immense proportions.

This is a book which should be studied carefully by Republicans in order to counter the barrage of Lies trumpeted daily by the RAT/media. While it is a work of a partisian, Back to Basics does not hesitate to point to GOP mistakes, failures and incompetence in carrying out its mission nor does it neglect to give Democrats credit when credit is due for actions which are productive of good for our nation as a whole. Unfortunately, those are far too few.

In order to effectively plan for the future we must be fully aware of the past, Zak helps us achieve that awareness.

[justshutupandtakeit]

Time for the "Stupid" Party to shed its stupidity since we know the Evil party will not shed its Evil.

[justshutupandtakeit]

Some comments about your book.

[facedown]

BTTT

[ZGuy]

Product Details

• Paperback: 249 pages
• Publisher: Signature Books; 3rd edition (February 25, 2003)
• ISBN: 0970006322
  
• In-Print Editions: Paperback (1st) | All Editions
• Average Customer Review: Based on 44 reviews. Write a review.
  
• Amazon.com Sales Rank: 1,309,905
  

  Average review 5 stars -- not bad.
  Gotta work on that sales rank though.

[Constitution Day]

Do NOT post ads, offers, solicitations or links to pages that offer merchandise, etc.

[Grand Old Partisan]

My book, now in a third edition, sells mostly at my speeches to Republican organizations around the country. It's only on Amazon because I got tired of mailing copies to people who sent me checks.

[billbears]

It traces the origins of the GOP to the proto-Republican, Alexander Hamilton, and the Federalists and that of the Democrat Party to its ancestors Jefferson, Clinton and Burr.

Well, Hamilton argued for big centralized government, internal improvements, a national bank, and a monarch to boot. Jefferson argued for federalism and the rights of the states to offset the powers of the federal government. Today, in theory we have Democrats calling for even more of Hamilton's ideals and again theoretically, Republicans calling for limited government and more power locally more along the lines of Jefferson. That being said, both parties in reality have hooked on full force to the ideals of that king worshipper Hamilton.

BTW, justshutup, how is a monarchy not really a monarchy? And yes I have read the book. Talk about revisionism.....

[justshutupandtakeit]

Hamilton never argued for a BIG government centralized or no. He did want a government capable of national defense and national development. You can not point to one word of a Hamilton argument for a monarch. Discussions reported second hand, and out of context at the Constitutional Convention don't count. Show me where Hamilton argued for a monarch.

Jefferson's states were far more repressive than the Federal government ever has been. They controlled people to such an extent that they were forced to join Slave patrols or pay a fine. J. wanted states to leave the petty tyrants of the Slaverocracy alone.

Democrats opposed Hamilton's ideals in 1790 and still do to this day.

Care to point out what revisionism was in the book. Of course, having an inability to accept historical fact handicaps you but go ahead.

[justshutupandtakeit]

There is nothing wrong with postings regarding works of interest to conservatives and patriots, Hillary might be offended but I am sure Jim won't be.

[Constitution Day]

From the link I posted:

Do NOT post ads, offers, solicitations or links to pages for the purpose of selling or offering merchandise, t-shirts, bumperstickers, coffee mugs, pens, pins, stamps, books, mousepads, stocks, bonds, gold, guns, etc., etc., etc.

Good day.

CD

[justshutupandtakeit]

to your attention.

[justshutupandtakeit]

I did none of those, perhaps you didn't notice.

[Constitution Day]

I did notice.

My post was directed at G.O.P., who posted a link. Said link is now gone. Problem solved.

[justshutupandtakeit]

Hundreds of posts a day link articles to sites which are for profit. Every newspaper linked, every network linked and many other links are commercial sites. Why would there be a problem with a link wrt a book?

Why would FR want to restrict its members from links allowing them to obtain the truth? Why would those seeking to prevent the truth from being spread be allowed to prevail?

[GOPcapitalist]

Bwahahahaha!!!! Partisan found himself an agent!

[Grand Old Partisan]

I don't need an agent. Republican organizations contact me to invite me to speak. A few weeks ago, a prominent congressman had me speak to his Committee and bought copies for everyone on it. A national Republican figure will be writing a forward for the next edition.

Republicans appreciate my work to expose the evils committed by Democrats and their neo-Confederate collaborators.

[GOPcapitalist]

A national Republican figure will be writing a forward for the next edition.

...Then let me just say that I happily and enthusiastically anticipate both that forward and the opportunity to make any necessary corrections to the factual inaccuracies it may contain.

[Grand Old Partisan]

Fair enough. He'll probably be running for the Senate next year, so you can really let him have it then. Cheers,

[GOPcapitalist]

Republicans appreciate my work to expose the evils committed by Democrats and their neo-Confederate collaborators.

Right. And I'm sure they also appreciate your own collaborations with the PC nazis and race mongers of the political left.

[billbears]

Hamilton never argued for a BIG government centralized or no.

Oh, of course not. I know all the Founding Fathers were just jim dandy with having any form of monarch, elected or not

Hamilton's use of the dreaded "M" word set alarm bells ringing to the exclusion of everything else he said concerning the subject. From Madison's notes: "It will be objected probably, that [an Executive for life] will be an elective Monarch, and will give birth to the tumults which characterize that form of Gov[ernmen]t. He w[oul]d reply that Monarch is an indefinite term. It marks not either the degree or duration of power. If the Executive Magistrate wd. be a monarch for life--the other prop[ose]d by the Report . . . wd. be a Monarch for seven years."

-----

The following day Hamilton was taken to task for his remarks on state sovereignty, which some construed as a call for the abolition of states. Hamilton responded that he had been misunderstood, and explained that he did not advocate a complete abolition of the states, only a diminution of their status as political entities to ensure the preponderance of the federal government.

Nope, no big strong government there < /sarcasm>

Alexander Hamilton bio

[GOPcapitalist]

Fair enough. He'll probably be running for the Senate next year, so you can really let him have it then.

Depends on how conservative his politics are. If he's a conservative, he'll probably gain my general support. If he's a RINO or a PC monger, I will work to defeat him in the primary.

[Grand Old Partisan]

No more hints than this, but he's a rising star in the GOP and could well be President some day.

[mac_truck]

You whine just like a democrat

[GOPcapitalist]

No more hints than this, but he's a rising star in the GOP and could well be President some day.

As with all GOP candidates, I will devote my advocacy resources toward either furthering that star's rise or initiating its decline depending upon whether or not it is conservative. Not all Republicans are conservative and not all conservatives are Republican.

[GOPcapitalist]

You whine just like a democrat

As opposed to you, a person who takes political positions as if he was a democrat.

[Grand Old Partisan]

Conservatives who do not firmly support Republican candidates thereby contribute to Democrat victories, and so are the real RINOs.

[Constitution Day]

You whine just like a democrat

Obviously, you need some remedial reading comprehension classes, for those are Jim Robinson's words, not mine.
Are you saying that Jim is whining like a Democrat? Huh?

[Constitution Day]

By the way, I got your nasty little FRmail. Get bent.

[stainlessbanner]

Having not read the book, I reserve comment to your review and Partisan's FR posts - neither are convincing.

The review is void of facts and details but makes broad-sweeping assumptions. Is the book the same way?

[stainlessbanner]

I got your nasty little FRmail.

Agreed this is a disgraceful way to get attention. Contributors to this forum do not appreciate spam via FReepmail and pushing goods and services.

[Grand Old Partisan]

The treasonous tendencies within the Democratic Party did not begin recently but go back to the Civil War, making neo-Confederates calling themselves Republicans and patriots such a joke.

[Lee_Atwater]

I'll read the book. I'm sure it is excellent political combat, which is great. However, I have reservations concerning the historical merits - based on book synopsis and the author's FR posts.

[mac_truck]

I'd say its way past your nap time.

[stainlessbanner]

I have reservations concerning the historical merits

Agreed. I choose not to blast the text, at least until I've actually read it. The author chooses to reignite regional and sectional hostilities from the past with his posts on FR. This does nothing to promote conservativism - in fact, it's more detremental to conservatives.

Alienating the the conservative base by dredging up civil war history will not help the GOP.

[Constitution Day]

Jeez, get some new material, loser.

[justshutupandtakeit]

The book is filled with facts that democRATs and their supporters will not like.

Facts are useless when it comes to convincing the D.S.s. They pretend they are just lies and remain in love with falsehoods supporting their warped and incorrect view of history. Just as they are useless in talking to Bushbashers.
Love of fantasies overrides concern with the truth.

[Grand Old Partisan]

I have never denigrated the South, in the book or on Free Republic. Actually, it is an insult to southern heritage for neo-Confederates to claim that during the Civil War everyone South of the Mason-Dixon line was a traitor. In fact, 200,000 southern blacks and 100,000 southern whites fought for the United States of America while millions of northern Democrats collaborated with their rebel brethren of the Confederacy.

[justshutupandtakeit]

Nope, no big government there.

Thanks for posting the bio. Too bad you didn't read it. Or if you did, didn't understand what it said. Try again.

[mac_truck]

Alienating the the conservative base by dredging up civil war history will not help the GOP

Thats rich. What ELSE do you neo-confedrate anke-biters do around here BUT that?

[stainlessbanner]

Support your claim that Iraqis are like Confederates posted here

"My bunch, the United States Army, is right now in Iraq battling your bunch, enemies of the United States of America."

- Grand Old Partisan

[Grand Old Partisan]

The United States Army fought enemies of our country in the South in the 1860s, and the United States Army is doing so in Iraq now. What the Confederacy and Saddam's Iraq had in common were they were both avowed enemies of my beloved country, the United States of America.

[justshutupandtakeit]

Nor have I since I was born and raised there and my entire family still lives there. However, "denigrating the South" to the D.S.s just means posting truths about the Slavers' treason. "Denigrating the South" just means puncturing the fantasies of the "Noble Cause" and its supporters, all of which are based on lies from start to finish. "Denigrating the South" means pointing out that the Confederacy was a tyranny thru and thru and that it never believed those truths expressed in the Declaration of Independence such as all men are created equal. Since you believe that you are a "race-baiter" and "PC." What a joke.

[billbears]

From Madison's notes: "It will be objected probably, that [an Executive for life] will be an elective Monarch, and will give birth to the tumults which characterize that form of Gov[ernmen]t. He w[oul]d reply that Monarch is an indefinite term. It marks not either the degree or duration of power. If the Executive Magistrate wd. be a monarch for life--the other prop[ose]d by the Report . . . wd. be a Monarch for seven years."

Don't know too many ways that can be taken. Hamilton called for an elected monarch, much as he called for a lifetime Senate. Hmmmm, except for the 'elected' bit sounds quite a bit like England's system of government with the higher offices serving for life. But you keep preaching sunshine....

[stainlessbanner]

How many Southerners are in the United States armed forces today? How many supported our country in WWI, WWII, Korea, Vietnam, Gulf-I, Gulf-II?

You besmirch the honor and integrity of Americans, both North and South, in denigrating Civil War veterans. Be it so far from you to acknowledge the good things about the Confederacy, the contributions made by Southerners past and present to our great Republic?

Throwing barbs like the "Confederate/Iraqi" out and failing to support them is spineless and frankly sir, I expected more.

[southern cross forever]

The ONLY reason to vote Republican is to help keep the communist out, but the pubes aren't that much better than the dems are. They are wishy-washy on gun control,abortion,states rights, and government spending has increased under the Bush administration. So much for smaller limited government.

[billbears]

They are wishy-washy on gun control,abortion,states rights, and government spending has increased under the Bush administration. So much for smaller limited government.

Well you have to figure they're returning to their true roots, that of abe and the Whigs. Government takes care of all type attitude

[mac_truck]

Conservatives who do not firmly support Republican candidates thereby contribute to Democrat victories, and so are the real RINOs.

BINGO!

[Grand Old Partisan]

You seem to be confused about what century you're in -- 21st, just in case. During the 1860s, my great-great-grandfather served in the Austrio-Hungarian Army. You can besmirch him and the Empire all you want.

The best contribution by southerners in the 1860s was service by 300,000 of them in the United States Army and Navy to defend the country against rebels. I honor all Americans who fought for the United States of America and criticize all Americans who fought against it.

[mac_truck]

Well you have to figure they're returning to their true roots, that of abe and the Whigs. Government takes care of all type attitude