Posted on 05/11/2006 12:52:43 AM PDT by Jim Robinson
Edited on 05/11/2006 1:43:29 AM PDT by Jim Robinson. [history]
The game has not changed, we face the same enemy, same challenges. The Beast never dies!
President Reagan faced down the Soviets and ended the cold war, but the Beast is still with us. It simply changes form. Whether it appears in the form of Bolshevism, Nazism, fascism, communism, Islamofascism, etc, it is the same enemy: Totalitarianism. The all powerful state.
Today we are fighting Islamic terrorism. It's just another example of the Beast rearing its ugly head in its never-ending quest to destroy freedom. The Beast cannot co-exist with free people nor we with it.
We also see the Beast trying to make inroads into America through radical feminism, homosexualism, abortionism, radical environmentalism, creeping socialism, illegal immigration, etc.
The goal is to demoralize and erode away our will and ability to fight by destroying the traditional family unit, destroying our moral society, denying us our freedom of religion, freedom of speech, right to peaceable assembly, right to keep and bear arms, our right to life and right to self governance. The Beast must rule and must rule with an iron fist. Tyranny, totalitarianism is the game.
While we are at war with an obvious foreign enemy that attacks with fire and bombs, we have another not so obvious enemy here at home that aids and abets the known foreign enemy.
We must not allow this domestic enemy to destroy us from within. The enemy I'm speaking of erodes away our constitution, our traditions, our society. It infiltrates and controls our government departments and agencies at every level. Infiltrates our public institutions, schools, churches, news media, entertainment industry, corporate entities, especially our political parties.
I'm speaking of the old enemy of Marxism/communism, more well known here at home as socialism/liberalism. It uses government enforced tools of radical feminism, homosexualism, radical environmentalism, abortionism, racism, atheism, confiscatory taxation, social security, medicare, welfare, redistributionism, compulsory government education, compulsory unionism, overburdening regulation, and many other forms of government overstepping, expansion, intrusion and abuse.
And I'm directly speaking of the primary American home of socialism/liberalism and the party that champions all of the above isms and includes them in their party platform, and in addition to all of the above also directly aids and abets the foreign enemy: the Democrat Party.
Not to name names, but I'm speaking of Kennedy, Schumer, Clinton, Reid, Pelosi, Waxman, Kerry, Gore, Dean, McKinney, Boxer, Feinstein, Feingold, and the list goes on and on and on. And we'll throw in the McCains and Specters, et al, from our side of the aisle for good measure.
We readily recognize all of the above as enemies of our constitution and enemies of self-governance and freedom and we band together to fight them and their partners in crime, otherwise known as the mainstream media, especially when they willingly and knowingly provide aid and comfort to the foreign enemy.
We recognize them when they throw up the big issues of abortionism, feminism, homsosexualism, environmentalism, redistributionism, and get up close and personal with their in your face perversions.
We recognize them as the enemy when they take away our rights, take away our guns, take our tax dollars, take our families, our children, deprive us of our freedom of religion, freedom of speech, etc.
We recognize them as the enemy when they use the ACLU and other radical anti-freedom legal organizations against us.
We recognize them as the enemy when they use their organized labor unions against us.
We recognize them when they use International ANSWER and other socialist/communist fronts against us.
We recognize the enemy when they use liberal activist judges against us to get around the constitution and or to overrule the will of the people as expressed at the ballot box.
Now what I want to know is, why do we fall to pieces and eat our own when it comes to the issue of illegal immigration? Hmmmmm?
It's the same liberal/socialist/Marxist/communist groups and people that we've been fighting all along. It's the same enemy using the same tools!
The game has not changed! It's the same old enemy!
The radical Marxist/socialists are behind the illegals.
The same radical feminist/homosexualist/abortionist/environmentalist antiwar pinko communist union thug that joins any other leftist protest is right back there helping the illegal immigrant gain entry into America.
And they're using the same divide and conquer techniques. They infiltrate our political parties and organizations. They plant disinformation bombs and sow the seeds of political discontent. They are masters in the use of propaganda and rabble rousing.
Recognize the enemy for what he is and do not allow them to use divisive issues to destroy our conservative movement. We are winning. We must not be sidetracked by an issue that will be solved in due time as we elect more conservative members to our government and continue replacing liberal activist judges with constitutionalists.
The goal is the same as it's always been. We must hold the line and advance our cause. Never willingly give ground to the liberal/socialists! Never retreat! Never surrender!
The Beast must be destroyed!
"But the party will go on without you."
A party will go on with or without me, that is true.
But YOUR party will be over.
This will evidently be far more painful for YOU than it will be for ME.
You can neither command nor belittle people to come to your party. You have to make them want to.
I was looking for some specific names. May be a little early.
"If the choice is between Bernie Sanders and Lincoln Chaffee, ask yourself who you would want to win if your vote was THE deciding vote. A socialist...or a RINO?"
I understand this works for you. It will no longer work for me. I picked a reductio ad absurdum example to illustrate the point--there seems to be hardly a scintilla of philosophical difference between the two; they often vote the same way on big issues.
"I would much rather vote for Zell Miller than Susie Collins."
Something we agree on.
"If my options for governor were Angelides or Schwarzenegger, I would pick the one who best matched my values. If my "no vote" vote meant Angelides would win, I would draw a big bold "X" in the Schwarzenegger box."
This is where we part ways. Angelides is practically a communist while Arnold is a borrow & spend social liberal (a Rat in RINO clothes)--neither one comes within a mile of matching my values. Your approach is comfortable for you. It will no longer work for me. No more pulling that "least worse" lever. I see my approach as the only way to get my message across--no more "least worse" RINO choices. If this persists, I will continue to "no vote" that particular office. I am now donating money solely and directly to verified conservative candidates across the country--all donations to the Big Tent GOP/RNC, NRCC, NRSC, and CAGOP, have been stopped. Many of my friends and associates are now doing the same thing.
Well, that and...I don't even know where you live.
"No more pulling that "least worse" lever."
You really think a RINO is as bad as a Socialist?
"I am now donating money solely and directly to verified conservative candidates across the country"
I think that is an outstanding idea. That is what I've been doing too. I used to donate to the RNC regularly. But that was a long time ago. Now I donate to candidates by name. That makes a real statement. But on election day, I always vote for somebody. The choices may not be my first choices, but there is always a difference. And one more Republican in Congress helps ensure all Republicans retain control of Congress.
"Recognize the enemy for what he is and do not allow them to use divisive issues to destroy our conservative movement. We are winning. We must not be sidetracked by an issue that will be solved in due time as we elect more conservative members to our government and continue replacing liberal activist judges with constitutionalists.
The goal is the same as it's always been. We must hold the line and advance our cause. Never willingly give ground to the liberal/socialists! Never retreat! Never surrender!
The Beast must be destroyed!
Let's roll.
Ok, Jim, give me your honest opinion.
I live in Connecticut, in Christopher Shays' electoral district.
Shays is, of course, a notoriously liberal Republican.
He's also an incumbent, and there is no conservative option.
The Democrat is my former town council chair, a liberal named Farrel. She and Shays are practically twins, except that Farrel opposes the war in Iraq and Shays doesn't.
Shays is pro-abortion, pro-taxation, pro-immigration, pro-everything-bad, but he has not abandoned the President on the War.
Farrell is all that and opposes the war.
Obviously I'm not going to vote for Farrell. the liberal Democrat, but should I vote for Shays, the arch-liberal Republican?
Shays' elections are always very close. 2 years ago, he ran against Farrell and only beat her by about 2%, the closest ever. This year, she may eke it out.
So, this is one year in which my vote ACTUALLY MATTERS, and what's more, whether Shays returns to officer or not ACTUALLY MATTERS to the whole Republican caucus, since the House is so close.
What do I do?
In the past, I have held my nose and voted for Shays as a caucus vote.
But that was BEFORE the man stood for the death of Schiavo, not to mention illegal immigration.
Do I vote for a man who has taken odious stances on almost everything, in order to preserve the Republican majority?
Or do I not vote that line.
This year, my (and my wife's) votes may actually make a difference in this razor-thin election.
What would YOU do?
I am currently considering sitting it out or voting for Shays. I go back and forth and back and forth.
What do YOU think?
Correction:
George Bush -> Ross Perot -> Bill Clinton
Why is it you keep missing the obvious? Ross Perot wouldn't have amounted to more than a fart in the wind if it hadn't been for Bush's betrayal of his base. The Republican's are going to be taught another lesson over Junior's betrayal. And so it goes.
I don't know if I could actually vote for Shays (rather doubt it unless the majority depended on his seat), but I know I wouldn't vote FOR the democrat. Maybe I'd do a write-in vote for Ann Coulter.
"I don't know if I could actually vote for Shays (rather doubt it unless the majority depended on his seat), but I know I wouldn't vote FOR the democrat. Maybe I'd do a write-in vote for Ann Coulter."
It's a puzzler, isn't it?
I've cast my caucus vote for Shays in the past - and that's all it was too - but this Congressional term he's been SO odious (the ghoul was practically cheering Terri Schiavo to the grave).
I'm mad at the caucus and madder at Shays.
I'll tell myself 1000 times between now and November all the reasons why I am fully justified in not voting for him, even if his seat is one of the critical few that hold onto the Republican majority.
And I'll spit at him in e-mails too, as I do from time to time. (He doesn't respond at all. Gee, I wonder why...)
And then come election day, like a damned compulsive gambler or an alcoholic, I'll probably trudge down to the polls again and cast another caucus vote for the abortion-loving jackass because of the "R" after his name, as a pure caucus vote for a caucus that isn't doing much of what I want.
And I'll hate myself for the next two years for sure and think about why I really need to give up the law and go be a country veterinarian somewhere and secede from all of this crap.
...and if millions of other compulsive Republicans like me do that, we'll end up keeping Congress in spite of the fact that these jerks don't deserve it.
Birthing calves without a radio or internet access sounds better and better...
For as long as idiots like me cannot break our compulsion to vote for guys like Shays, we're going to cling to a majority that irritates us.
Ugh.
Shay's was on Larry King last night... the man is a democrat wrapped in GOP cloak. I'd say he's about on par as our state senator McCain.
Yep.
The only distinction between him and his Democratic opponent here, Diane Farrel, is that he supports the war while she opposes it.
So, is that enough for me to vote for him, in spite of his opposing every other thing I believe in, and being a pro-abort?
Is the fact that he's a Republican, part of the Republican caucus, enough to get my wife and I to the polls, so that the GOP holds the House (he's one of the very vulnerable seats, so his seat matters)?
I don't know.
Probably.
Trouble is, if everybody votes like me, compulsively, Republicans like him can do whatever the hell they want to. Certainly that's what Shays does. He does not deserve my vote. Does the Republican caucus? Is his stance on the war - his only redeeming quality - enough?
Am I just a mind-numbed Republican-voting robot, who will vote for a pro-abortion, pro-euthanasia, anti-gun, pro-tax, big-spending liberal because he has an "R" after his name and supports the War in Iraq? Am I really that easy and that partisan?
Probably.
I do not respect myself for it either. I'm sure the Republicans laugh themselves all the way to the bank depending on loyalists like me.
I am going to vote for a man I hate in order to support a caucus whose actions largely disgust me.
I am an idiot.
Well, what is really funny -- he said three times on the LK Show last night that the things that would get a conservative elected in Tennessee would cause him to lose his seat... if he honestly believes what he is saying then you either live in a very liberal district or he is out of touch with his electorate.
I live in Westport, Connecticut, just up the road from Greenwich.
This is limousine liberal country.
A very liberal district?
Oh yes, a very, very liberal district.
Shays is not out of touch with his electorate.
I expect that the pro-life stance in Connecticut (where we publicly fund abortion) would get him tossed.
So he wasn't exagerating -- I guess it was "my hands are tied comments" he was making.
"So he wasn't exagerating -- I guess it was "my hands are tied comments" he was making."
Yeah, well, I COULD accept that line of argument coming from him, but for the fact that he got out in front of the Terri Schiavo business and wanted to make sure she was good and dead.
He didn't have to do that. He could have shut up about it. Connecticut wasn't going to hold his electorally accountable if he just said the Schiavo thing was a tragedy. But he needed to step up there with the pro-death movement. It was beyond doing what he had to do to get elected. People cared, but it was not partisan, and nobody was setting his thin hair on fire over it.
He missed a very good opportunity to be quiet, and in so doing gave a glimpse that his pro-death stance is not an ACT. It's where he is.
I'll still probably end up voting for him, as a caucus vote, because I am an idiot.
""I live in Westport, Connecticut, just up the road from Greenwich.
This is limousine liberal country.
A very liberal district?
Oh yes, a very, very liberal district."
You have my sympathies. my guess is you have dough, or a lot of equity. Sell your home and move to a conservative area. I did. Life is too short to be surrounded by pond scum : )
Conservative areas do not have the economic and educational opportunities that Connecticut-by-the-Big-Apple has.
And my neighbors may be liberal, but they're not pond scum!
>>Now what I want to know is, why do we fall to pieces and eat our own when it comes to the issue of illegal immigration?<<
My guess is that there are too many who see don't see illegal immigration as the deadly enemy it truly is, so long as the President supports and encourages the Beast.
It seems it doesn't to some to matter if our country is destroyed, so long as the destroyer has an R after his name.
I have voted straight Republican as long as I have been able to vote (since 1984). I did so this last time. Yet I have never been so disappointed in a Republican President or a Republican Congress in my entire lifetime.
P.S.
I will still vote R before I will turn power over to the Demonrats, or waste it on a third party.
SD
You can also kiss national security, national defense, tax cuts, constitutional judges, and many other issues near and dear to our hearts goodbye.
We have severely weakened the president and the Republican Party while strengthening the Democrat Party and empowering their leftists enablers. This means we can more than likely kiss our chances of holding the White House in '08 goodbye along with our chances of regaining the Congress or Senate.
We can now kiss our chances of ever having another constitutionalist appointed to the Supreme Court goodbye. A once in a lifetime opportunity to make meaningful gains toward restoring Liberty squandered for spite.
And, as a special treat, we get a treasonous Hillary or weakling Kucinich type for Commander-in-Chief! Goodbye to strength through superior firepower. Goodbye Middle East.
Oops. And now the left has an unrestricted opening to continue sliding our once great nation down the slippery path to Sodom and Gomorrah. Conservatives will be wandering in the wilderness again for another 40 years.
Goodbye God! We're going to Bodie!
I agree with you, and I was never one of those who said to sit out or vote third party.
Where did the party of Reagan or 1994 go?
Be well.
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.