Vanity: An Open Message to the Republican Party Cheerleaders on this Forum...

12-10-03 | Vanity

[ambrose]

Vanity:

An Open Message to the Republican Party Cheerleaders on this Forum...

[superloser]

But again if it fails and Dims do keep ripping our rights away what then?

Civil War II will start once people get any more steamed than they already are. It will likely start at the ballot box with third parties gaining more steam than they already have.

If the old adage of "As goes California, so goes the nation" is true, then all is lost already and we may as well chuck it in, load up on dried beans and shotgun shells and just try to survive the coming quake.

IMO, the key to anything is communication using very small words. Bush is not doing well with this as he stays away from press conferences, no matter how well controlled they are.

Newt had the right idea when he published the Contract With America and showed a roadmap. It was very easy to understand.

Even Ross Perot with his charts had the communications thing down -- even if you needed a PhD in statistics, he showed that he was willing to communicate.

If the Republican Party wishes to keep its base and avoid defections, it had better get its communications apparatus started and begin addressing issues like illegal immigration and massive entitlements.

Elsewise, third parties will hoover up the disgruntled and the Dims will simply always be there.

Note that the Green Party is hoovering up the disgruntled wacky-leftie Dims.

[Republican Wildcat]

Did your mother ever teach you that the sin of omission is as bad as a lie? Apparently not.

You do recall that almost every Republican in the Congress opposed this bill, right? In fact, Hastert refused to even allow it to come up for a vote. Nearly every Democrat and a small handful of Republicans joined to get 218 signatures to force the House to take up the measure over the leadership's objection.

Furthermore, Republicans did not control the Senate at the time, so the bill was not passed by a "Republican controlled Congress." In case you missed it in school, the Senate is part of Congress.

As for the Court, most of the Republican members there also opposed this on Constitutional grounds. The ruling passed by one vote, 5-4. All of the 4 dissenters were Republican appointees. None of them were Democrats, and indeed, the Democrat appointees were on the majority side of the opinion.

The President should have vetoed the bill, but otherwise your argument fails on all counts and appears to be quite inaccurate and perhaps deliberately so. You lose. Farewell.

[ambrose]

The ruling passed by one vote, 5-4. All of the 4 dissenters were Republican appointees. None of them were Democrats, and indeed, the Democrat appointees were on the majority side of the opinion.

Well, you need to redo your math. There are only two Democrat appointees on the Supreme Court - Ginsburg and Breyer.

[Republican Wildcat]

I need to redo none of my math.

You, however, do apparently need to brush up on your reading comprehension skills.

[onemoreday]

...
...Jim.....
you say:

"....And there's no way in hell I'll ever give up and surrender to the left without a fight....."
~~
~~
And yet by putting our faith in "our vote," are we not, in effect, surrendering to "the government?"

And by allowing these politicians to "get by" by simply mouthing conservative platitudes, are we not debasing the whole democratic process, and the "choice" on which it is predicated?

And can we not see that as the issues become rigidified into a mere "left versus right" dichotomy, that we, as individuals, as Americans, are simply becoming marginalized and our thoughts, feelings, values....even our very lifes, made moot?

Is the enemy "the left" or is it "big government?"

We are operating on certain assumptions here that MAY no longer be valid, i.e.....that "the left" and "big government" are identical concepts.

To be free, we must be more nimble, more flexible, in our thinking, or we will be unable to form any coherence in order to act.

If, as it seems, there is only a "political elite," versus the people, perhaps we-the-people should look to only hiuman values versus the new form of tyranny.

[Jim Robinson]

Liberalism must be soundly rejected and defeated by the voters. I know of only one party with the numbers and organizational strength to do that.

[onemoreday]

...
...Jim....

you say:
"........Liberalism must be soundly rejected and defeated by the voters. I know of only one party with the numbers and organizational strength to do that...."
~~~
~~~
But they aren't doing it.

Also, by labelling ourselves as "voters," are we not limiting what Liberalism is to such a degree that it can never really be defeated? Are we still not merely "asking" government to limit itself?

Once the politician gets into power, it is not to his benefit to limit himself....and so he doesn't.

I am not trying merely to confuse the issues, here. I am saying that it might serve our purposes to try to more deeply state and thus implant in the people what these Conservative values are......once we are united as people in this regard, the government will truly be in our hands.

[ladyinred]

Newt had the right idea when he published the Contract With America and showed a roadmap. It was very easy to understand.

And we all saw what happened to Newt.

[ladyinred]

Rinos are worse than Democrats?????

Oh please! I guess I know where you stand.

[NittanyLion]

Personally don't want to go back to appointing Senators through our State Legislature -- Oklahoma has a democRAT Legislature -- both houses. The State of OK votes Republican for National elections but the Legislature has gerrmandered districts to keep a lot of State Legislature seats safe.

What you'd have, is senators who actually vote for the interests of their state instead of what happens to be popular. Worrying about the makeup of your current state legislature is shortsighted, to say the least.

[69ConvertibleFirebird]

An Open Message to ambrose...

Quit whining and help conservatives who **can** win, win. I get so sick of losers like you whining about who is in office then go vote for someone who **can't** win, thereby giving your vote to democRATs.

"But I'm a purist, I'm a purist..." or "I vote my conscience..." That's a bunch of B.S. in the real world.

[superloser]

And we all saw what happened to Newt.

I have more respect for Newt than I have for people who say "Vote for me, I have the solution, but I won't tell you what it is until I get into office."

But Newt pushed it through and was successful at at pushing the agenda he needed to push.

I'll say it again: Want my vote? Earn it.

[Jim Robinson]

Sorry, there's no other way than slogging it out. First we must hold on to the White House while continuing to build on the Republican majority (and the more conservatives we can elect to that majority the better). Then we must use that majority to appoint and confirm the most conservative judges we possibly can. And, of course, also use it to control the legislative agenda. In time, we will begin reversing and dismantling some of the damage done by the liberals.

Whatever we do, we must not allow the Democrats to regain the majority. We'll be stuck with wall-to-wall liberal activist judges for another 20 to 40 years. No thanks. Been there, done that. Had way more than my fill.

Hey, we just got here. It'll take some time to accomplish some turnover, but it will be done. Don't give up so easily.

In the meantime, the grassroots conservatives must get better organized. There is strength in numbers. Further splintering the conservative base is nuts. That's the surest way for us to lose all to the liberals.

[Bullish]

I guess if we can't have 100% of what we want all the time we should just hold our breath untill we quit living, right?

[Orange1998]

And some thought Perot was a nut.

[Jim Robinson]

"I am saying that it might serve our purposes to try to more deeply state and thus implant in the people what these Conservative values are......once we are united as people in this regard, the government will truly be in our hands."

Yes, I agree with this. We grassroots conservatives must get better organized (united). I would love nothing better than to see the conservatives take over as many county and district organizations as possible. We must bring in new conservative blood and move it up through the local farm teams.

[ovrtaxt]

The Libertarians are looking like a pretty good alternative.

I have had similar thoughts, and even posted them. I was not the most popular guy on the thread, I can tell you.

Having said that, it depends on which side of the Libertarian party you mean. I love 'em and hate 'em. Jekyll and Hyde.

[gatorbait]

And some thought Perot was a nut

No, most of us thought Perot was a shill for the DNC and he all but admitted this when he dropped out of the race.

[WhiteGuy]

Hey that was part of my tagline for awhile.......

It's now the Al Davis GOP........Just Win, Baby!

[gatorbait]

Liberalism must be soundly rejected and defeated by the voters. I know of only one party with the numbers and organizational strength to do that.

Jim, too right you are.However, the hard core,death before common sense ,my way or the highway "conservatives" lack the strategic vision to see this obvious fact. Much better to whine and carp from the margins while remaining pure and chaste ,than actually implementing conservative values patiently and steadily.