Posted on 04/07/2006 6:44:09 AM PDT by presidio9
Washington - Would Barry Goldwater be a Republican today?
It's a question that might have been considered sacrilegious even a decade ago. But as the Republican Party searches for its soul, post-Tom DeLay and in advance of the 2006 and 2008 elections, it is a question worth contemplating.
(Excerpt) Read more at nysun.com ...
Your answer is here:
http://www.cafepress.com/lavenderliberal.40302998
LOL! How true!
If Goldwater was around and talking the way he ended up, I'd gladly hold the door open for him and buckley. Both of them must have toked the same joint.
The only reason we got on to Goldwater quicker is because he spoke clearly. The gibberish king strung us along way past his bedtime because no sane person could understand him. He was and is a classic example of the "Kings no suit of Clothes". I have not been able to understand him for years. Finally it dawned on me : It's not me, it's him!
If strict adherance to Barry Goldwater's beliefs (ie abortion on demand, legalized drugs) is the only true conservatism, then Ronald Reagan would not have been labled a conservative. Thank God it isn't.
Check your stereotypes. Rick Santorum is from the Northeseast, and John McCain is from the Southwest.
Yes Goldwater would be a Teddy Kennedy Democrat. / sarc
That's the spirit.
I actually did think of them when I was righting this. First off, Rick isn't a Rino. I was also going to write that it is difficult for Conservatives to win in the Northeast. Rick is in big trouble in PA. Many want to blame his lack of support for Pat against Arlen. I think that has something to do with it, but not enough to create a double digit difference in the polls.
McCain really is the only exception. He is a Southwest Rino, but he is a Rino for another reason. He likes the attention it gets him in the media.
I think you are beginning to understand the concept of "stereotypes." The exceptions prove that your view is narrow-minded. In fact, there are plenty of hard-core conservatives in the Northeast, it's just that they rarely get national name recognition. There are also plenty of RINOs everywhere.
And, BTW, if Santorum loses PA, it will be for one reason only: Bob Casey's supposed pro-choice views is going to cost Santorum a lot of the Catholic vote. After Casey is elected, we shall see how often he actually sides with Republicans on this issue (my guess is "other than on PBA, never").
The GOP "moderates" have destroyed their own party in California exactly the same way.
"In your heart you know he is (was) right."
Goldwater was my first vote.
I am seeing that you did't read my post carefully enough or, more probably, that I did not make it clear enough. How many Conservatives from the Northeast are in Congress? More importantly, how many Conservatives from the Northeast are in the Senate?
It was; I don't know if it is anymore. These country clubbers are determined to drive people like us who believe in Constitutional limited government out of the party altogether. They hate us more than Dimmycraps.
The difference is that today's GOP has totally abandoned Goldwater's principles.
Of the 20 Nottheastern Senators, five call themselves "Republican." Two are conservative. The other three are basically democrats who stay with the party in power for committe seniority. A fourth was elected as a Republican and left. Having lived in the South and Southwest as well as the Northeast, I find Republicans here to be among the most conservative. If they were more moderate, there would probably be a few more elected.
Teh bots never will figure that out. They think whatever Republicans do is right, and like the GOP leadership, they have a virtually infinite capacity for learning the wrong lesson.
There is an old joke about a family barbecue. The dad was cooking hot dogs abnd hamburgers. He asked the older son which one he wanted.
"I'll take one of those f-----g hamburgers," the son said. The father immediately slapped him and sent him to his room.
He turned to the younger son. "And what do you want?" he asked.
"Well, I sure don't want one of those f-----g hamburgers."
Taht's the Republican leadership. They sure don't want a ******* hamburger. But they never get the real lesson.
AuH2O.
In your heart, you knwo he was right. Still is.
The difference is that today's GOP has totally abandoned Goldwater's principles.
Goldwater abandoned Goldwater's principles when he went senile!
Exactly.
http://webnewsroom.blogspot.com/2006/02/real-bush-record.html
President Bush is presented by his friends and his opponents as a conservative President. But George W. Bush has in no way governed as a conservative. He has been one of the most egregiously big government Presidents in recent history.
Under President Bush, the Republican Party has become the party of big government. The government has grown bigger and bigger, with more agencies, bureaucracies and enforcement programs. This president and a Republican Congress have given us an 8.2 percent annual increase in discretionary domestic spending (that's non-defense, non-entitlement), far greater than anything during the Clinton administration or any other administration since Richard Nixon's. This administration has given us the largest new entitlement program in almost four decades.
President Bush has yet to veto a single spending bill. Yet he now threatens to veto any bill stopping the secret Portgate deal.
President Bush refuses to secure our borders. He has proposed a de facto amnesty for illegal aliens. He has given us an unconstitutional campaign-finance law that prohibits corporations and unions from talking about any federal candidate 60 days before an election.
This administration gave us a massive federal education spending bill, a function not authorized by the Constitution, without even school choice or other reform provisions. It gave us a massive agricultural subsidy bill. Then it gave a massive insurance bailout to supplement the massive agriculture bill. It gave us steel tariffs.
President Bush has allowed some stem-cell research. He has created new programs for the government to spy on ordinary, law-abiding Americans with the Patriot Act. While parts of the Patriot Act, such as tearing down the wall that prevented intelligence people from sharing information with law-enforcement people, are necessary, the potential for abuse of the sneak-and-peek, the library provisions, and other sections is very real, given the kind of future leader who would abuse them. We have seen Presidents like that before, such as Richard Nixon, LBJ, and Bill Clinton.
The Bush administration apologized to China after a U.S. spy plane collided with a Chinese plane, instead of demanding an apology from the Chinese for this act. This is not a conservative record. It is the record of a "me-too" liberal Republican.
I have little interest in streamlining government or in making it more efficient, for I mean to reduce its size. I do not undertake to promote welfare, for I propose to extend freedom. My aim is not to pass laws, but to repeal them. It is not to inaugurate new programs, but to cancel old ones that do violence to the Constitution, or that have failed in their purpose, or that impose on the people an unwarranted financial burden. I will not attempt to discover whether legislation is ‘needed’ before I have first determined whether it is constitutionally permissible. And if I should later be attacked for neglecting my constituents’ ‘interests,’ I shall reply that I was informed their main interest is liberty and that in that cause I am doing the very best I can.
Can you imagine any Republican writing or saying this (or anything like this) today? He'd be run out of the party.
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.