Posted on 05/10/2006 10:29:57 AM PDT by cryptical
I noticed the latest poll question, which got me to thinking...
A time for choosing: It appears that a significant number of our members are so disgusted with the GOP's failure to secure our borders against illegal aliens that they are willing to risk all by voting them out of office, even if it means Pelosi, Reid, Hillary, et al, are allowed to take charge. Is this the best course of action or should we be working harder than ever to hold the line and actually try to make a difference by getting more constitutionally-minded conservatives elected? Are you willing to give it all up or are you more determined than ever to keep the Marxists out of power?
This understates the problem, and offers a false choice as a solution IMO.
It's not just the failure to secure our borders, it's the growing government by leaps and bounds, spending like a drunken sailor on shore leave, rewarding RINOs with leadership positions, and in general not advancing a conservative agenda after they have been given all three branches of government on a silver platter.
The false choice comes from the notion that we can hold our noses and vote for the RINOs that the RNC and the state parties put up, and then "work harder" to get more constitutional-minded candidates elected.
If we keep accepting the RINOs that are put up, there's no reason for the Republican Party to change.
I've begun to feel like an enabler for the majority-addicted Republican Party. They keep on promising change, but it's always tomorrow.
Well folks, tomorrow is here. I'm pledging not to vote for any RINOs, and if that means that a Democrat gets elected I'll consider myself to have worked for change in the party.
<<< If we keep accepting the RINOs that are put up, there's no reason for the Republican Party to change. >>>
So...
Where were you guys at the Party Selection Meetings??
Where were you when they were looking for State Convention Delegates??
Why weren't you working for CONSERVATIVE Candidates when you could have actually had A VOICE??
Instead, you're going to cast a losing vote? PLEAAASSSEEE......
Exactly.
Its better to kick ALL of the sniveling, smarmy, metrosexual republicans out and start over.
I've been similarly criticized, even ZOTTED, for openly rebuking the Republicans. I think it better to voice the discontent, so that the Republicans can change course if they wish, rather than to go silently into the voting booth and vote for a third party.
If we go silently, the Republicans will never know why they lost our time, money and votes and no meaningful change will result.
I don't agree with your analogy. Politics, someone once said, is the art of the "possible." What's "possible" in a dangerously divided nation is never what's "ideal."
Thanks for that synopsis. I have two questions about it--what do you think has been the success of NCLB? And what do you mean by "Labor unions will be running homeland security"?
If McCain is the next GOP Presidential candidate, the GOP will move to the left yet again. At what point do you party "loyalists" admit your party isn't yours anymore? Many Dems faced this in the late 60's and had to bail from the party. It can happen to the GOP also.
In Other words, you'll be voting For Sherrod.....
Impossible! Not voting for candidate B is not the same as voting for candidate C.
This logic is faulty.
Mike DeWine won the primary in Ohio because the voters in the Republican party elected him above all others. You can't blame the RNC. In the end, it comes down to the voters. They made their choice.
Perhaps there aren't enough real conservatives in Ohio. If there were, DeWine would've been defeated. Every time I hear how folks on this forum will never vote for a RINO, I look forward to then seeing a RINO defeated, yet again and again, the overall voters chose the RINO, rather than the red meat conservative.
Do the folks who complain about RINOs on this board vote? Do they make up more than 5% of the electorate?
To quote Shakespeare, "The fault, dear Brutus, is not in our stars, but in ourselves."
That "for the children" cry doesn't fly with me. The world is not your daycare center. And exactly where did I say that I don't give a damn about this nation because I don't have children??? And to call me pathetic over something I DIDN"T SAY??? Strange....
Appeasers, like Neville Chamberlain, will negotiate away the rights and liberties of others and themselves in the hope that the 'bad guy' doesn't come after them for a long time or that they'll be viewed favorably and not be destroyed with everyone else. They are short sighted in that they don't realize that they are nothing more than useful idiots and are just being used. They will dispensed with too, once their usefullness ends.
Wow. You site Chamberlain who was a master appeaser of the enemy, but you would allow Dems to win elections just to punish Republicans who did not subscribe to your particular recipe of conservatism. If the Dems controlled both sides of congress and the executive office, you would see appeasement that would make old Neville blush.
As I have said before, some conservatives (like you) want all or nothing and will even pull out their children as human shields when others don't join their mutiny. Other conservatives (like me) understand that we will not get every issue we want, but are willing to take what's available and keep working to get even more in the future.
No problem, thanks for the clarification...I believe that many conservatives just are expecting to much of our political process at this time, and are unfairly laying blame.
George Bush is who we elected. He was the most conservative candidate that could have been elected to President.
Pushing the Republicans to continue on a conservative path is correct in my opinion....but voting for Dems or not voting because Repubs don't move fast enough is just counterproductive.
Measurable progress of all groups of students on basic reading and math skills. The NCLB has definitely been a success in raising actual benchmarks, and the libs have been screaming for two years about it.
Labor unions will be running homeland security"?
Democrats have been trying since DHS was set up to unionize every aspect of homeland defense, and without the Republicans, DHS will grow into the greatest giveaway to unions of all time. That was the entire point of Schumer's Port Snort (IMHO)....not security.
We are a democracy and have to have candidates that will be elected....Bush never was a fire breathing fundamental conservative, but he has consistently been far to the right of the majority of Democrats.
I have been grateful for a President that states his positions, then works to deliver as close to those positions as possible.
Republicans are the most conservative party that can be elected. That is reality, whether they are conservative enough to suit everyone or not.
How many of these moronic threat threads must we endure?
How many more trolling for suckers threads will we have?
How many stupidly believe helping the Party of Treason can possibly HELP the Nation?
Which threat is that? That if conservatives don't bend over for the GOP, we'll be worse off because it'll be the Democrats will be sticking it to us instead of the Republicans?
justshutupandtakeit
Not anymore.
Amen, Tony.
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.