Baldwin Asks, "Why Do Conservatives Continue to Support the Republican Party?"

Chuck Baldwin Ministries ^ | 08-03-03 | Chuck Baldwin

[Theodore R.]

Why Do Conservatives Continue To Support The Republican Party?

By Chuck Baldwin

August 1, 2003

It should be obvious to every rational person that the Republican Party has totally lost whatever conservative moorings it had. Since seizing control of the federal government and many state governments, Republicans have consistently promoted bigger and bigger government, have betrayed virtually every conservative cause, and have broken virtually every conservative promise. Even columnist George Will observed that under President Bush, conservatism has developed "an identity crisis." However, the greater crisis is the willingness of grassroots conservatives to continue to support such a party.

Since becoming President, G.W. Bush has exploded the size and growth of the federal government. Furthermore, he has betrayed gun owners with his support of the Clinton gun ban and has done nothing but give lip service to pro-life voters. Now we learn that Bush has decided to defend Bill Clinton's national monuments proclamation.

When Bill Clinton restricted millions of acres of prime western land, then candidate Bush called the policy "willy-nilly" and promised to nullify it when elected President. Instead, he has sent Justice Department officials to the U.S. Supreme Court to lobby in favor of Clinton's land grab.

Not only is the Clinton/Bush policy to seize millions of acres "willy-nilly," it is blatantly unconstitutional! If this policy is allowed to stand, it means any president may, with the stroke of a pen, convert any property in the United States to a national monument. Such an act is void of any interpretation of law previously understood.

The thing that should concern us is the increasing propensity of the executive branch to deliberately assume powers either not assigned to it or assigned to other branches of government, and Republicans are proving themselves as adept at such unlawful activity as Democrats!

Constitutional lawyer William J. Olson, a Republican who lobbied Congress "to restrict a president's ability to legislate by executive order or proclamation," said, "You'd hope presidents would view power in their own hands with the same suspicion they view it in the hands of people they distrust." But, that's the problem: they don't.

Instead, Republicans, like Democrats, only criticize the misuse of power when the other party is to blame. When one of their own is the culprit, they seem willing to tolerate virtually any abuse or abridgement.

It is past time for grassroots conservatives to begin standing courageously and uncompromisingly for the principles they profess to believe. How one can do that and still support the Republican Party is beyond my comprehension.

© Chuck Baldwin

[Ronly Bonly Jones]

Because, you idiot, the alternative is a party that supports the mass killing of children. Next question?

[Ronly Bonly Jones]

Sorry, the 'idiot' in this scenario is the author of the essay, not the poster.

[11th Earl of Mar]

I remember Ralph nader saying the same thing to the lib greens because Al Gore wasn't liberal enough.

And we saw how far that got them in the last election.

Why do we support the GOP? So we can get a supermajority whereby the liberal GOPers will have no effect.

[joesnuffy]

Because regardless the bus is going over the cliff...
The Dems want to drive it off at 100 mph
the Repubbies want to drive it off at 25 mph
A vote for Republicans is at least stalling for time- imo
Maybe in the time alloted we can figure something else out

[jmcclain19]

So what, its time to go off and form another Constitution Party?
Ask the Reform Party folks how they are doing about making America notice them. Or the Green party's success at bringing the DNC to its knees. How many elected officials have the Libertarians had in office in 40 years?

Work with what you have. One administration does not equal a wholesale change in Party philosophy.

This is a publicity grab by the columnist, trying to get attention. I loathe uber reactionaries.

[kesg]

The short answer is: there is no politically viable alternative.

[Excuse_My_Bellicosity]

Just what we need, yet another idiot with the last name 'Baldwin'.

[Maceman]

Here's one good reason why I support the Republican Party:

[Mad Dawgg]

"Just what we need, yet another idiot with the last name 'Baldwin'."

Not to worry there is one Baldwin which cancels out all the idiot Baldwins!

His name is Adam and yes he is an actor in hollyweird, Oh and BTW he is a very conservative Republican!

He has been in some fairly good movies including Independence Day and Full metal Jacket!

[Redbob]

Why the GOP?
Ross Perot.
Ralph Nader.

'Nuff said.

[ex-snook]

Bush has created "Deadbeat Conservatism".

Increase government costs, decrease taxes, and pass the credit chits to future generations.

[ex-snook]

OPEN ASSIGNMENT
MISSION TO SAVE AMERICAN JOBS
August 22, 2003

President Bush:

Mr. President your mission, should you decide to accept it, is to recover the 3+ million jobs lost on your watch. You are to find where they went, recover them, and prevent this from happening again.

You have until November 2004 to complete this mission.

If you choose not to accept this mission, or are incapable of performing, don't run in the GOP Primary so another Republican can accept this important mission for America.

American Citizen Voter

PS Ronald Reagan was the last Republican to understand. Ross Perot sent a warning to your Dad but since then all we hear is the mantra, 'Perot gave us Clinton'. Actually your Dad gave us Perot.

[opusprime]

Good piece.

Both parties have sold out to special interests in my opinion. Clinton sold our national security to win in '96. Bush has sold the nations economy to ensure his re-election in '04.

Am I off to think its time to break up the two party system? How can we send these power grubbing elitists a message that this is unacceptable?

Unfortunately I'm afraid that the 'Jerry Springer' mentality of selfish ignorance is the pervasive tide of our country's progress.

I wish we would elect a man/women who cares more about this country than their power and re-election. I'm done with Republicrats. I'll write in my hampster before voting for these sell-outs again.

[My2Cents]

This article was originally posted on FR on the date of its release, 8/1, drew over 200 comments, and can be found here -- http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/956579/posts

But if you need an answer to the question of why conservatives should continue to support the Republican Party, I'll rephrase probably the best comment from the original thread: "Because Bush rocks!"

[mhking]

Pat, you are a tin-foil wearing, mouth-breathing moron, who would much rather see Hillary!™ in office than a Republican, simply to push your own neo-con agenda and railing against the mainstream conservatives in this country.

It's time for you to retire.

[MatthewViti]

"I do not believe that the kind of society I describe in 1984 necessarily WILL arrive, but I believe...that something resembling it COULD arrive. I believe also that totalitarian ideas have taken root in the minds of intellectuals everywhere." - George Orwell

[Big Mack]

Explain to me again why GWB is different than the klintoon on the issue of abortion. Other than he pays lip service to the conservatives while he does nothing about the issue.

What is needed is to elect Hitlery in 2004. That way the revolution would have a chance to start before my generation is too old to fight. In another 10-12 years the next gen of public school illiterates will be the ones to not care.

[huggadawg]

But the problem is that the liberal GOPers & NEO-conservatives have taken control of the Party. The GOP has slowly moved to the left over that last 50 years.

[toomuchcoffee]

Chuck Baldwin! Phatooie!

[cruiserman]

So is the author Chuck Baldwin or Pat Buchanan?

[Theodore R.]

Baldwin

[Protagoras]

I think the idea that Republicans aren't conservative, which is true, makes many here nervous. The author is an idiot, but not because he saw the obvious.

[Protagoras]

That is the reason most here do. When she's gone, so are the most here. It's weak and shifting sand.

[Theodore R.]

The author is an idiot, but not because he saw the obvious.

Please explain.

[Protagoras]

He said some idiotic things, that makes him and idiot. Despite that, He saw the obvious, that Republicans aren't conservative. What part needs explaining?

[Protagoras]

Oops, I was referring to a different article on a different thread, sorry. This guy didn't say anything idiotic so I withdraw that part. He is correct but his observation is obvious.

[PISANO]

The sad truth is that WE really have no place else to go. The GIMMIES are total socialists, the L's can't possibly win with their ideas and the other fringe parties also have no chance of winning. So we are left with the R's. While I like what GW is doing with few exceptions on the "WAR ON TERROR", and his TAX POLICY, I don't think much of his social policies in general. That has been very dissappointing.

[Zionist Conspirator]

The whole "conservatism=small government, liberalism=big government" is a bunch of hooey, as every "minimalist" conservative who supported Pinochet, Franco, Papadopoulos, Salazar, and Peron attests.

This is about G-d and morality, not the size of government. The whole "size of government" issue is a parasite.

[Prolifeconservative]

True, the democrats support abortion on demand. But why on God's little green earth can't these Republicans get a PBA ban? They control all three branches, a PBA ban is supported by the majority of Americans yet all we social conservatives get is lip service and we are getting damned tired of it.

[ravingnutter]

Explain to me again why GWB is different than the klintoon on the issue of abortion. Other than he pays lip service to the conservatives while he does nothing about the issue.

Explain to me how you can lip off when you don't have a clue...[sorry about the links, but it seems I can only find these stories at the pro-abortion sites, Bush never gets the kudos he deserves at the pro-life sites]...

February 6, 2002 - NEW YORK - Just days after the Bush Administration laid the groundwork to justify a federal ban on abortion, the Justice Department filed a brief in support of Ohio’s abortion ban in a challenge pending before the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit.

On January 31, Secretary of Health and Human Services Tommy Thompson announced that the agency was changing the federal definition of a child to begin at conception in a program that extends government-funded health insurance to children. Rather than extend benefits to pregnant women, as many states already do, the Bush Administration has chosen to fulfill anti-abortion groups’s top wish in this area under the guise of protecting women’s health. Giving legal rights to a fetus independent of the woman’s paves the way for a federal ban on abortion and possibly contraception.

CRLP

June 05 2002 - NEW YORK "Yesterday, members of the Dutch, United Kingdom and Russian parliaments, and a member of the European Parliament from Denmark, traveled to Washington D.C. to tell members of Congress that the global gag rule restricts their foreign aid programs and hinders their democracy-building efforts. The global gag rule, reinstated by President Bush on his second day in office, limits foreign non-governmental organizations (NGOs) from using their own non-U.S. funds for abortion services, lobbying, referrals and reform.

CRLP

July 22, 2002 - WASHINGTON, DC — Today, the State Department announced it is pulling the $34 million earmarked for the United Nations Population Fund (UNFPA).

CRLP

March 13, 2003 - Washington, D.C. - Flouting a decision by the United States Supreme Court that found a ban on so-called "partial-birth abortion" to be unconstitutional, the U.S. Senate today passed a nearly identical version of the abortion ban (S.3) in a 65-32 vote. President Bush has publicly committed to signing the ban into law once it passes Congress, as is expected.[The House also passed the ban]

CLRP

February 12, 2003 - Washington, D.C. - Two years ago, on February 14, 2001, the Center for Reproductive Rights petitioned the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) on behalf of seventy-six organizations to switch the status of emergency contraception (EC) from prescription to over-the-counter. To date, the FDA has not issued a decision, and the prescription limitation continues to harm women's health.

CLRP

It's not like he can issue an EO and end abortion overnight, it has to be done in Congress and found Consitutional by the courts.

[Protagoras]

The whole "size of government" issue is a parasite.

The parasites are those who think the government should be doing all the BS it does today. The proper role of government in a free society is to defend the rights of it's citizens. Nothing more.

[Protagoras]

Great picture, great quote. I like it so much I think I'll steal it. :^}

[ravingnutter]

More...

WASHINGTON (June 28, 2003) -- As public attention remains riveted on the unfolding story of the murder of Laci Peterson and her unborn son Conner in California, momentum continues to build in Washington for congressional action on landmark legislation to allow justice to be done on behalf of unborn victims of violence.

President Bush has called for passage of the bill this year. White House spokesman Ari Fleischer told reporters, "The President does believe that when an unborn child is injured or killed during the commission of a crime of violence, the law should recognize what most people immediately recognize, and that is that such a crime has two victims."

NRLC

February 27, 2003 - Statement by the President - Today's resounding bipartisan vote in the House demonstrates concern for the profound moral and social issues posed by human cloning. Like most Americans, I believe human cloning is deeply troubling, and I strongly support efforts by Congress to ban all human cloning. We must advance the promise and cause of medical science, including through ethical stem cell research, yet we must do so in ways that respect human dignity and help build a culture of life. I urge the Senate to act quickly on legislation banning all human cloning.

NRLC

PITTSBURGH (August 5, 2002) -- At a ceremony in Pittsburgh attended by NRLC officials and other pro-life advocates, President Bush signed into law the Born-Alive Infants Protection Act, a bill strongly backed by NRLC.

NRLC

[ravingnutter]

Here is the most recent update of all the pro-life legislation Facing Continued Obstruction in Senate, Pro-Life Forces Move Ahead in Congress

Seems the final vote on the PBA is being held hostage by the Dems in the Senate, but is expected to be brought up in September.

[King Prout]

which Baldwin Brother is this, anyway?

[Theodore R.]

Chuck Baldwin has a radio ministry in the Pensacola area. It covers the FL panhandle and southern AL. He has a website. He thinks the GOP is too much like the Democrats.

[King Prout]

I agree with that last statement. The GOP IS too much like the Dims. Not unfixable, though... yet

[Ronly Bonly Jones]

True, the democrats support abortion on demand. But why on God's little green earth can't these Republicans get a PBA ban? They control all three branches, a PBA ban is supported by the majority of Americans yet all we social conservatives get is lip service and we are getting damned tired of it.>>

Because it's "unconstitutional" on its face no matter how written because the Court's credibility as a power is on the line, and everyone in power knows it; they court'll find it uncon by any means necessary. The only thing that will make a difference is not a PBA ban but a Human Life Amendment, without exceptions and without apologies.

[Miss Marple]

The dems are holding it up, just like they are holding up the confirmation of judges.

What part of a filabuster threat do you not understand?

[I'mAllRightJack]

Many of my friends are liberal Dimocrats - too many, but living in the Northeast it's a fate that is quite commonplace.

When I express my feeling that this administration is often too liberal on many issues even though I strongly support Bush. (The most important problem facing us is our fight against Terrorism and I would not want to see today's Democrat Party be in charge of our safety and our future.)

...but I am deviating from my point. When I express my feeling that this administration is often too liberal on many issues these friends react in shock and ask me what am I talking about. That in a nutshell tells you why you must support this Administration under the guidance of W. These ftiends just don't have a clue! Nor does the Democrat Party.

[I'mAllRightJack]

ftiends=friends

[MEGoody]

"It should be obvious to every rational person that the Republican Party has totally lost whatever conservative moorings it had."

What an utterly irrational statement.

[Zionist Conspirator]

The parasites are those who think the government should be doing all the BS it does today. The proper role of government in a free society is to defend the rights of it's citizens. Nothing more.

[Sarcasm] Yep; when I look around at all the moral depravity afflicting our society and world today--all the movements for decriminalization of homosexuality, pederasty, incest, drugs, ad nauseum--the only words that spring to mind is "government is too big!" [/Sarcasm]

[MEGoody]

"Explain to me again why GWB is different than the klintoon on the issue of abortion."

Because Clinton vetoed a partial birth abortion ban, while Bush will sign it.

[Zionist Conspirator]

BTW, Pat Buchanan (who actually wrote the article) is a freaking hypocrite. Anyone who supports a strong, paternalistic, centralized national syndicalist state in Spain can shut his yap about "big government" and support the same "wonderful" system for America that he does for the Spaniards. His whole beef is that Republicans "support Israel" (which is arguable), nothing more.

[MEGoody]

"Republicans aren't conservative."

There is a broad spectrum of opinion among conservatives. It's simplistic, closed-minded and really just plain silly to say that Republicans aren't conservative.

[Zionist Conspirator]

Um . . . actually I'm not sure now exactly who wrote the article. I saw Buchanan's name up there with Baldwin's.

[c-b 1]

Because, you idiot, the alternative is a party that supports the mass killing of children. Next question?

Chuck is asking the wrong question.

Why are conservatives not actively taking back the Republican Party?

[MEGoody]

"They control all three branches"

Control all three branches? Which three branches are you talking about? I know they have a majority in the Congress, but as you well know, the Dems have honed the skill of legalized stall tactics to a fine point - and you also know that keeping abortion legal is their top priority.

So what's the third branch - judicial? Are you telling me you actually think there are more conservative judges than liberal?????