Posted on 09/26/2005 5:34:31 PM PDT by mwfsu84
My major complaints with the GOP are Bush's spending, and the stonewalling RINOs in Congress. And yet, what is the alternative? To vote Democrat? Or to not vote at all - which is just as helpful to Dems.
Every time I think how disappointed I am with Bush, I try to remember how much worse it could be with a legitmate Bush-hater.
The Democrats won't cut spending. They'll raise taxes. We'll see national health care. A Democratic President won't nominate moderate SCOTUS justices - unless you consider Ruth Bader Ginsberg a moderate. We'll cow tow to the UN, probably pull out of Iraq, establish relations with Cuba and Hugo Chavez. They'll be no legitimate challenge to the ban on partial birth abortion. This fall, an upcoming SCOTUS case will be whether a minor has a right to have an abortion without parental consent. If a 15 year old child wins that 'right', do you honestly expect ANY leader from the party of Planned Parenthood to challenge it?
You think gas prices are high now? Wait until you see prices caps imposed, Jimmy Carter-style, so you'll have higher prices and longer lines. We'll have a president that preaches to us the value of sacrifice, which as we all know, worked so well during the Carter years.
As disgusted as we are with George W. Bush, we can't give up on the Republican Party.
Sometimes I want it to collapse sooner while I still have a firearm to protect myself.
PresReagan appointed Alan Greenspan as chairman of the Social Security reform commission. Its job was to come up with a plan to reform Social Security and make it fiscally solvent once again. That is exactly what happened. History doesn't lie. Social Security taxes did go up, from 4.8% to 5.7% (Today 6.2%). Reagan accomplished Social Security reform without a GOP House. Reagan achieved reform with a hostile House controlled by the Dems. OTOH. PresBush has a full GOP Congress and so far, Social Security reform has gone nowhere. It's a dead issue for now. The GOP is the majority party in power. We have a GOP POTUS. Yet all they can do is advance a liberal spending agenda. That is not in keeping with a fiscally conservative agenda.
Uh, no they didn't. The very system is based on compromise and the branches working with each other. Granted their intent was that we would not be voting for President or Senators, which I have no problem with and would prefer. Human nature took us that path of a two party system, as evidenced by Washington's Farewell Address and the warnings found therein.
You'll remember Reagan ran against Ford in 1976 and GOT HIS BUTT WHIPPED by FORD
Ford, truth be known, was a Democratic choice, after the destruction of Agnew and Nixon. Ford was a bumbler, the party got him elected. They detested cowboy Reagan almost as much as brigadier Buchanan.
The Democrats have always had fantastic grass roots efforts. The Democratic party elite, other wise known as Union Officials, vote the dead and the alive.
Don't fool yourself, sans the fraud, there are elections the Democrats won. But too many have walked away, leaving the kooks with their Moore, Deniac image. They are about to implode. Hillary should and appears to be contemplating washing her hands of them publicly.
I MUST BE A REPUBLICAN ELITE.
Hey, I'm not a name caller. But of that '25' that control 'Ohio', they are all school teachers or otherwise on the dole. I don't think you've broken into their circle. On FR you're. IMO, coming through but not on target of our biggest obstacles.
Here in Ohio everyone agrees that Blackwell is the conservative Candidate for Governor
I'm born and raised in Ohio, and listening to Blackwell made me proud in that he's no Jesse or Al. Also according to you now, as I read it, he knows what it takes to win BESIDES street walkers whose primary functions concern local politics. But I hope this may change with Gingrich attempt to make elections a national priority.
All you are saying is you don't care enough to do what the elite do
I care enough to answer, like you do, by reaching a greater audience posting, than trying to wag the Party Psyche driving from farm to farm.
If you want to know why your guys nearly always get beat... look in the mirror.
Without debating Pat Buchanan's attributes, I know that the Party elite wanted Bush 1 and I or you had nothing to do with it.
"No, it's called voting. Throwing away your vote is not voting at all. Republicans better pick up on the fact that the conservative wing of the party is almost finished with them."
I don't think so.
First you are assuming that I am not happy with the party I have, which is not true. Conservatism is also about cultural issues and National Security. You are stuck on the spending issues and need to look at the bigger picture.
"So what if democrats get into control for a few terms if the long term effect is that we build a new party."
That's just crazy....There will soon be more vacancy's on the SCOTUS and that alone would be reason enough to not throw your vote away on a third party or vote democrat.
Then pick a dictatorship and move.
'82 Tax Obnoxious:
In 1982 supply-sider Arthur Laffer said of Reagan who supported and signed a the huge social security tax increase,
"This is not the same man we elected (Reagan)... This tax package is obnoxious." [Source.. Time Magazine, 8/30/82]
Thanks! :-)
"PresReagan appointed Alan Greenspan as chairman of the Social Security reform commission. Its job was to come up with a plan to reform Social Security and make it fiscally solvent once again. That is exactly what happened. History doesn't lie. Social Security taxes did go up, from 4.8% to 5.7% (Today 6.2%). Reagan accomplished Social Security reform without a GOP House. Reagan achieved reform with a hostile House controlled by the Dems. OTOH. PresBush has a full GOP Congress and so far, Social Security reform has gone nowhere. It's a dead issue for now. The GOP is the majority party in power. We have a GOP POTUS. Yet all they can do is advance a liberal spending agenda. That is not in keeping with a fiscally conservative agenda."
None of us like the damned RINOS. We'd ALL like to have real Conservatives in the majority. But in some states, the best we can do, to get someone with an R next to his/her name elected, is to run a damned RINO; especially re Snowe, Collins, and Chaffe. A Conservative just would NOT be electable in those states.
SO WHAT ?, you might ask. Well, without a majority in the House and Senate, that means that GOPers don't head any committees. You want the likes of Charlie Rangel and Hillary and Biden etc. to head all of the committees and run both Houses? Arlen may be a damned RINO, but do you REALLY want him to head the Judiciary committee, or a damned Dem? And please don't tell me that there's no difference; there is.
What the fringe party proponents fail to take into consideration, when they bring up the collapse of the Whigs, is that most of the Whigs left and became the GOP. It wasn't the voting populace that went off to support some existing, floundering fringe party, "to teach the Whigs a lesson".
"As disgusted as we are with George W. Bush, we can't give up on the Republican Party."
I don't plan on it. Morally, I can't bring myself to vote for abortion backers at any government level.
Where do you suppose that the phrase THE SMOKY BACK ROOM CAME FROM? It didn't originate in Jim Robinson's brain and he isn't using it in its true sense here.
For almost as long as this country has been having political conventions, to nominate the president ( and these same sort of people worked behind the scenes for ALL elected officials ), the "power brokers" would gather in a back room, jawing and bullying and trading favors, whilst smoking cigars, getting whom they wanted in. Both major parties did it.
This system broke down, in the Dem Party, when it fractured and the likes of Jesse Jackson and the like, began to broker the freak circus. In past times, Clinton would have been told to shut up, sit down, clean up his act, and wait his turn.
But, in '92, even though Clinton and his team thought that he WOULD lose, but looked at this run as a "dress rehearsal", he managed to make an end run around EVERYONE and with the help of those who bought into Ross Perot's crap ( and yes, Clinton DID use him !), Clinton won.
Yes, President Bush the elder ran a 1/2 hearted campaign, but without Perot, I do think that he would have won a squeaker.
You don't like my posting "style, toots, because I run rings around you. I don't "mime" ( misuse of the word...look up the definition ) Begala and Carville. I just hit you over the head with facts and logic.
It's YOU, who needs to "wake up", dear. :-)
Those of us that believe in personal responsibility will thrive under a Republican admin.
Like now.
I notice you did not refute my points but infer that I am too harsh for your poor little ego to stand.
I'll tell you two things Harry Truman told his opponents.
Harry, "Said they accuse me of giving them Hell. I just tell the truth and they think it is Hell!"
Harry also said, "If you can't stand the heat get the Hell out of the Kitchen!"
Anyone who thinks that a man who campaigned in 1980 as an FDR fan was a rock ribbed conservative has to think FDR was one too.
I covered the 1980 campaign. I did an imitation of Reagan telling the story of how the big mean corporation fired his Daddy on Christmas Eve... and The envelope that they thought contained a Christmas bonus in fact contained his pink slip.
I remember Reagan telling crowds in the Midwest about his support for Unions and union workers. Reagan would hold up his Screen Actors Union card and say "I am the only Presidential candidate in history to be elected head of his union.. not once but twice." Reagan would say,"I fought for workers rights at the bargaining table and was good enough at it to get relected... "
Reagan would talk about how he had been a life long Democrat in the Roosevelt Kennedy tradition. He would tell working class voters that his economic policy was identical to that of JFK... And of course he was telling the truth.
Reagan told every crowd that he still held the same views he had when he was a Democrat. He said he had not changed. Reagan said the Democratic party had changed. Since Reagan was now a Republican with unchanged views it must be true that when the Democrats stopped being Democrats .. the Republicans became Democrats.
It was funny how Reagan became known as a Conservative. I was 1964 and Reagan planned to run for Governor of California in 1966. But there was a huge problem. Reagan only recently had switched parties. The Republicans in California were going to paint Reagan as a RINO. And being tagged a RINO would make it impossible for Reagan to win the Republican primary.
Ed Meesce and Cap Weinburger came up with a great idea. No one wanted to speak at the Republican Presidential convention in 1964. Everyone knew Goldwater was going down big time. No elected official wanted that to rub off on them. Cap and Ed figured that if Reagan spoke for Goldwater at the 64 convention in prime time, it would go along way to removing the RINO label from Reagan.
So that is what they did. Goldwater was happy to have a popular RINO actor speak for him at the convention.
Reagan spoke so well the media immediately tagged him as a far right conservative. Reagan went from RINO to far right in one speech.
In every election there after Reagan spent a lot of time trying to overcome the stigma of being thought of as far right. From then on he ran as a RINO... It worked he got a lot of Democratic votes.
Please, please, PLEASE look at what you're saying and then look at reality.........
Okay, reality. Reality is, is that we post one post after another on FR, about how conservatives are frustrated, fed up, and looking for other ideas. Why would this be the case, if we are being well represented, or if we thought we were really winning?
You seemed to have missed my point. We can be SELECTIVE. We do not have to run candiates in states where Republican representatives hold key positions of power. If a RINO has the same colors as a Dem, has no real conservative underpinnings, such as Jim Jeffords or Collins, Snowe, or others, we can choose whether or not they are of any kind of value to us, and vote accordingly. It is a matter of strategy and should be left to those whom we choose to lead us. And why does committee makeup matter that much if the final vote is determined by RINOS? It's this vote that matters. Minority initiatives are still an option.
What did committee vote do for us when it came to the nuclear option? It was the RINOS that determined the final outcome.
When you have an ace, you can use it when you need it the most, and not when it is antithetical to the cause.
Thank you for your gracious post!
The way I see it is that the GOP will piss me off 50% of the time, but the Rats will piss me off 99.9% of the time.
The reality is, that these kinds of threads keep getting posted to FR, the "purists" and UNAPPEASEABLES write the same junk, year after year after year after bloody year, don't actually DO anything, in real life, and no matter how many times this topic is beaten to death, some newbie thinks that he/she has the answers, but just posts the same old same old and then is surprised, or worse, when he/she is refuted and/or yawned at.
Here's some facts...................
Conservatives are NOT a majority of the populace of America.
Not having the majority and leadership roles, in both Houses, matters much more than you are willing to admit to.
You really made NO point at all, What you said was silly; all of it.
The damned revisionist/mythographication of Reagan the man and president, drives me up a wall.
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.