Skip to comments.WHY CONSERVATIVES NEED TO BACK THE REPUBLICAN PARTY
Posted on 09/10/2004 2:54:09 AM PDT by AmericaUnited
WHY CONSERVATIVES NEED TO BACK THE REPUBLICAN PARTY By Samuel Blumenfeld
August 26, 2004
After four days of the schizophrenic Democratic convention, the last thing conservatives should think of doing is leaving the Republican Party. That would ensure Democratic victories for years to come. While I deplore the Republican Party's lack of conservative backbone, it can only be changed from within by dedicated conservatives willing to make the effort. Third parties can't make it for one simple reason. They can't raise the money needed to win elections. And that's what politics is all about: winning elections.
I have been a member of both the Libertarian and Constitution Parties. They are little more than ideological clubs (or ghettos) which make for great social occasions. Their leadership is comprised of decent, dedicated individuals who enjoy playing political games, much like miniature golf, which amount to little more than intellectual amusement rather than serious dollar-driven politics. They represent a new form of political amateur hour. If you think that conservatives are now frustrated with the Republican Party, wait until they get involved in third-party politics to find out what frustration is really like.
I don't know any true conservative who believes that the Republican Party is above criticism. The President may not be a movement conservative, but certainly his Vice President has strong conservative credentials. Political purity is not an option if you wish to win elections in today's America. For conservative activists seeking political power flexibility is a requirement. At this time in our political history, reality must be the operative guide. Conservatives must realize that taking over the Republican Party is going to require much more effort than they have so far exerted. It means hanging tough, getting good young conservatives elected to Congress and state legislatures, educating the public, changing minds.
Conservatives face daunting problems. We live in a country where the vast majority of Christians still put their children in atheistic public schools, thus helping our secular-humanist monster create more dumbed-down, brainless American adults. The result is that we have a culturally divided country: a dominant secular-humanist culture, which owns the mass media, the universities, and the great foundations, and a less influential Christian culture with its own publishing houses, bookstores, and schools. These two cultures exist in the same country but have radically different and opposing values. And the conflict between these two cultures can be seen in the abortion debate, the gay-marriage debate, the school-prayer debate, the textbook debate, the Ten Commandments debate, the popular entertainment debate, the dating debate, the tattoo and body piercing debate, the reading instruction debate, the abstinence debate, and so on.
The only political forum in which Christians have any effective influence is the Republican Party. To desert the GOP at this time is to commit political suicide. We have many admirable conservative leaders in the party at all levels of government and they need all the support we can give them. Our goal should be to elect more of them while getting rid of the liberals who call themselves Republicans. Much of the new conservative energy in politics is coming from the Christian homeschool movement.
I recently spoke at a Homeschool Conference at Bob Jones University on the subject of raising future Christian leaders. I compared our struggle to retake America with the struggle the Jews went through to retake the Holy Land. It took the Jews a hundred years to do it against tremendous unrelenting opposition. We want to retake America in one election. We simply are too impatient and refuse to do the hard work the task requires. Let's face it. It may take us a hundred years to retake America and we should be working at it everyday, in every way. It wasn't easy taking back the Holy Land. It won't be easy taking back America.
© 2004 Samuel Blumenfeld - All Rights Reserved
"The President may not be a movement conservative, but certainly his Vice President has strong conservative credentials. Political purity is not an option if you wish to win elections in today's America. For conservative activists seeking political power flexibility is a requirement. At this time in our political history, reality must be the operative guide. Conservatives must realize that taking over the Republican Party is going to require much more effort than they have so far exerted. It means hanging tough, getting good young conservatives elected to Congress and state legislatures, educating the public, changing minds."
Exactly right. No majority political party is going to be 'pure'in its doctrine.
But in order to lead the nation, you have to be in power and that means accepting differing views on some non-core issues.
This does not mean compromising on core issues and where the Party should be leading the nation.
The GOP is a conservative Party, there is no alternative.
Ronald Reagan understood this very well, and that's why he accomplished so much.
I had the same thoughts and motivations, until I found out about the "New Freedom Initiative" with its plan for mandatory universal mental health evaluations for all kids in the USA and eventually, for everyone.
Forced mental screening hits roadblock in House
[But the "roadblock" didn't happen, because Paul's Amendment failed.]
Mental-health screening of children
[Bill item info and other info in the thread.]
And this is going on during the Campaign. Most of us didn't know about it until yesterday, because the funding mentioned in the Bill goes to an Executive ordered Commission that will execute the plan. More than half of the House Democrats voted against Paul's Amendment and in favor of the Commission's plan.
So as far as this man is concerned the fiscal conservative wing of the Republican party is of no concern. And, if you happen to believe that government should push NO ONE's religious/ideological agenda then you are not a true conservative. Oh, and if you are also an atheist you cannot be a conservative. This is the same kind of person that say's there are no atheist in foxholes.
Here's a peek at a tiny bit of what's going on with the cultural struggle in the USA.
"Then it will be plain that the first condition for the
liberation of the wife is to bring the whole female sex
back into public industry, and that this in turn demands
the abolition of the monogamous family as the economic
unit of society" (Frederick Engels, "Origins of the Family,
Private Property, and the State").
Many feminists carried Mao's Little Red Book in the late 1960s
and early 1970s. Some of those feminists have attended Republican
meetings in every locale ever since. Socialism, you see, seeks
to push its policies in its gradualist manner within its
Mao's Little Red Book on Women
Some of Lenin's words on women
...only one various plans against traditional morality in the overall effort to eventually overwhelm fiscal conservatism.
Most singles vote Democrat. Most marrieds vote Republican. Recent Republican mistakes (such as voting in favor of Democrat feminist social bills during the 1990s) do need to be corrected.
As for Atheism, what you believe in regarding religion is up to you, of course. But some of the social wisdoms of thousands of years shouldn't be dumped for everyone simply because it feels good to indulge, IMO.
I see your point. The elephant in the room that no one wants to touch is woman in the work force. This has led to a decline in the traditional family in two ways, lower wages for everyone in the workforce because of more labor; and two; making it esier for woman who may have stayed in so-so marriages (not abusive, or horrible marriage) to get a divorce.
Just because I don't believe in a god does not mean that I don't see the value in many of the religious/philosphy books written by man.
Can I switch to the Constitution Party and still vote Republican?
Also check out the below link which I caught on cspan. It's a issue comparison of the candidates assembled by The League of Women Voters.
You'll notice that they have "no comment" on Nader, but they are providing comparisons for the Rep, Dem, Lib, Green, and recently added the Constitution party candidate. I've seen some of these women on cspan channel more than once and they were addressing female audiences on how to convince Republicans they should vote a 3rd party.
Consider. The next president will be tasked with replacing judges on the Supreme Court. Do you want a Republican doing it with a REpublican Senate, or Kerry?
For that alone it should be pretty straight forward.
Non-defense spending according to the Cato Institute, increased at the fastest rate during the first three years of the Bush administration than at any time since the administration of Lyndon B. Johnson.
The problem with Bush is that he does keep his promises. He promised a Medicare prescription drug benefit and delivered. Now, he is promising to further incrementally implement Hillary health care by expanding socialized health care for poor children.
As Fred Barnes, one of the few conservatives that doesn't mindless worship at the altar of the Republican party, pointed out after Bush's convention speech, GWB can hardly be considered anything but a big govenrment candidate. He has a government nipple extended for every needy citizen, including mor taxpayer dollars for worker retraining and pell grants.
Let's not forget the pseudo-amnesty plan for illegals that has illegal aliens pouring over the border, either.
Or the fact that 18 Republicans in the senate just voted for hate crime legislation and refuse to fight to get conservative judges nominated.
It would hardly be a disaster if Kerry won. Gridlock would reduce government spending and there would be an opportunity to elect real conservatives in 2006 and 2008.
Stop pretending like it makes all that much difference on a varity of issues.
I'm John Kerry, and I support this message from my friend at DU (masquerading as a "conservative").
Strongly agree. I have always advocated that conservatives must fight for change in the Republican Party. The GOP can be nerve-racking and it's the Stupid Party sometimes. But wasting a vote on the CP or the looney-tunes LP is clearly not an option.
Third parties don't suck off the taxpayer teet either, which is what the Republicrats are doing. Their conventions, their campaigns...mostly funded by taxpayer dollars.
Get rid of the campaign finance restrictions, and the CP and LP would be major players... The LP and the CP should join forces, rehash their differences on abortion, free trade, and open borders, and turn the GOP into the Whigs. Although I'll be voting for Bush, the Stupid Party is selling out America with it's free trade agreements, pandering to Hispanics under Bush's AMNESTY plan, and allowing excessive labor and environmental regulations to destroy domestic industries.
Why is it when people use honest, constructive criticism of Bush's socialist policies we are immediately cast as DU disruptors, trolls, or Kerry spies? Bush is a big spender. He has not done anything to control the size of the government. This is just a fact.
The fact that they aren't shows that they want a higher return on their money.
In order for third-parties to fulfill their wish list, they have to WIN first. That's right - like Al Davis said, Just win, baby.
Only an idiot can't see conservatives CAN'T possibly win a thing when the Republicans they are voting for are expanding government with compassionate conservativism socialism and when the Republicans in the Senate refuse to fight for conservative judges.
But, keep your head in your ass and pretend we're winning as Republicans expand government to the greatest level since LBJ.
Why remain loyal to a party which has no loyalty to conservative principles?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.