Posted on 10/18/2006 7:01:51 AM PDT by IrishMike
John Stuart Mill once famously called the British Tories "The Stupid Party." From time to time since then, the Tory's American cousin, the Republican Party, has also earned that moniker. Now may be one of those moments. If current polls and anecdotes are to be believed, there may be a million or two conservative Republicans who are planning to not vote this November. Of course, Mill also said that : "A person may cause evil to others not only by his actions but also by his inaction, and in either case he is justly accountable to them for the injury." Apparently, these anticipated conservative non-voters are annoyed with Republican imperfection. They are disheartened, disappointed, disillusioned, distempered, dismal -- and thus plan to dis the party that better advances conservative principles in government. They appear to have fallen victim to the false syllogism: 1) Something must be done; 2) not voting is something; therefore, 3) I will not vote. Of course the fallacy of the syllogism is that the second category could be anything. For example, number two could as well read "eating dog excrement is something." I rather suspect that they will feel about the same afterward, whether they chose the non-voting option or the scatological one. They are both equally illogical -- and repulsive -- and would deserve the moniker, "Stupid." Here are some tell-tale signs of the sort of person who would vote (or not vote) to cause the election of a party which would act to defeat every value and interest he holds dear (merely because the party that will at least try to advance most of those issues has not done as well as he might havehoped) ...............
(Excerpt) Read more at washtimes.com ...
The FReepers here that support Republicans are the ones in denial. How can they possibly believe that the current administration intends to control illegal immigration. I don't know what these guys are thinking.
Something radical is going to happen before people wake up.
A] I'm not convinced that they will.
B] If they do, they won't be able to do everything that they want any more than we could.
C] Bush, if he is any kind of good man as people claim, will veto anything that the dems pass.
If you don't know what our gripe is with the GOP by now, you just haven't been paying attention and I don't have time to repeat myself again.
I am not staying home. I will vote for the one or two pubbies that have remained faithful. Those that haven't will not get my vote.
I understand, and won't argue with you. For me, abortion is the trip wire. Cross that and I won't vote.
But remember this. When you start trading principle for practical, you soon reach a point where there is little principle left.
"Based on what? I'm not the one who is refusing to participate because I can't have it all."
No, but you behave. You are the good little boy to get your ice cream.
"Ahhh....your condescending view of my father only makes me smile."
Reading comprehension classes are down the hall.
I was repeating (though maybe not verbatim) what you said that your father did. I wasn't making a judgment, only a comparison to what you are trying to do. He tried to make you do better or do right. You are asking adults, not little children, to violate our principle to satisfy you.
"I have the best father in the whole world. I wouldn't have him take back one single instance of the firm lessons he taught me about life. Without him, I might be posting over at DU right now. Complaining how we need national healthcare, gay marriage, military disarmament, less millionaires, higher taxes, more illegal immigrants, liberal judges. Yea, I love my dad!"
Yada yada yada. You protest too much over something that I didn't say or even suggest.
"Oh, and I'm not ragging you for sticking to your principles. I just think your principles, if they include boycotting voting for Republicans, are indeed peculiar."
Not ragging, but 'they are peculiar'. Okay.
If you are lucky enough to still have your father with you, have him teach you how to talk to adults if you want to win them over to your point of view.
But it is a problem and certain steps should be and can be taken without spending a plug nickle on a fence or anything else.
Way back in 1982 the Supreme Court (that's judges Ray, kinda an issue in the Santorum race) ruled that states have to provide education to illegal immigrants. Hmmmm, Think Congressional action might be warranted to change this? Even an amendment? But no, people are talking about a fence that will never get built and never stop anybody if it did and will cost $2.2 billion (yeah sure).
And speaking of amendments how about changing the 14th to make it clear that anchor babies are not citizens by right? Someone is going to chime in and say that those babies are not under a state's "jurisdiction" but precedent says otherwise loud and clear. So why not fix it?
Or how about an English commercial language law? All signage must have English as the most prominent language and every business must have at least one person capabalbe of communicating in English during business hours?
Or how letting property owners whose lands abut the Mexican border be allowed to build fences on it by right?
But no "conservative" is talking about those things. They are advocating things that nobody expects to get done and the border leaks like a sieve.
And Ray, as bad as it is it is still not as bad as sovereign states allowing their terrority to be used to plot attacks against us, and the Pubs have done a pretty decent job of getting that problem under control.
I don't know that I do believe that. But I KNOW fer sher, the democrats won't.
You're not already convinced he's a good man?
If you don't know what our gripe is with the GOP by now, you just haven't been paying attention and I don't have time to repeat myself again.
Not being a member of your fan club, I haven't been keeping up with your specific issues. Keep it simple. Just name a couple of failures that have caused you to not support them.
I am not staying home. I will vote for the one or two pubbies that have remained faithful. Those that haven't will not get my vote.
OK, I'm confused. If we are talking US congressional candidates, the most you can vote for this year are two, one House, one Senate. If you are in PA, you definitely have a Senate vote and maybe a House vote depending on your district. If you are voting for "the one or two pubbies that have remained faithful", you would not be sitting it out. Am I correct?
Then you succeeded.
your most important asset -- your vote.
You're revealing a lot of your psychoses here. You don't see yourself as powerful and making a choice to advance your interests. Apparently you view voting as an act of prostitution and your only choice is which John.
And for that matter, you jump from John to John as soon as you see a blemish.
I've said it before, you choose to act against your own stated political interests. This means you are one of three things: stupid, insane or lying.
I'm not sure that I ever intended to actually "win you over". Based on your propensity for condescension, it doesn't seem possible. But I do appreciate the opportunity to make a case for voting for the most conservative candidate and not merely allowing others to make that decision. It's kind of hard to debate yourself. I am more than happy to let the others reading this volley between us take from it what they wish.
I am fully aware that GWBush will push for a guest worker program.
I am also fully aways it was the REPUBLICAN house that pushed the enforcement first bill which held the line against the AMNESTY senate.
The current administration is not up for election, FOCUS it is the house and the senate.
You only help the left by being so dissembling.
In your argument to vote for Ricky, you least a whole series of problems that the GOP has not addressed over the last 10 years.
WEre you trying to get me to vote for him or against?
I should have used a sarcasm tag. Everyone here defends the pubbies and Bush is suddenly scared to death that the world will end. They forget that the man that they love is still there to veto the bad bills that a dem congress would pass.
The border. Spending. Limiting government. Ending the Income Tax. Privatizing SS. Honoring the boundaries of the Constitution. Respecting our liberty. Campaign Finance Reform. Drugs for greedy geezers. Kennedy Education Bill.
Excuse me. There has been so many threads on who we are supposed to vote for so the world doesn't end, I forgot.
No, I will not be voting to reelect either my senator or my congresswoman. The one or two that I will vote for are state pubbies.
It seems one of Rick's big things was getting judges different than the ones running the court in 1982.
But you go ahead and vote for the Democrat!
And remember, the Mexican border is our only security issue!!!
Forget the bombs. Stop the leafblower brigade!!!
--Forget the house stories. You want to scrap the car for having a leaky tire.--
I couldn't care less about some butt-bandit congressman. And as for scraping the car for a leaky tire, let's just say the problems go far beyond something that mundane. You may be lucky enough to have US reps who care about the Second Amendment, and good for them. But that doesn't change the fact that the transmission belt between the American people and Washington is broken, and there is a long list of things: the Iraq War, drug prices, health care costs, energy costs (going down for the moment, immigration (even mainstream pubbies want amnesty it seems), federal funding for embryonic stem cells research (American people for it overwhelmingly, republican white house oddly against). The White House didn't go to bat whole hog for the Federal Marriage Protection Amendment either; even some republican Senators voted against it! Point is that when you get beyond fringe issues, what we have is ONE party with two wings, beholden mostly to corporate interests and lobbyists, and they have a suffocating stranglehold on third parties with new ideas. Rather than a leaky tire, the engine is blown and the tranny is shot, and the car is so old it's better to replace it than fix it.
And he can't sign good legislation because a Dem Senate will never present it.
The border. Spending. Limiting government. Ending the Income Tax. Privatizing SS. Honoring the boundaries of the Constitution. Respecting our liberty. Campaign Finance Reform. Drugs for greedy geezers. Kennedy Education Bill.
You seem to want all or nothing. Correct me if I'm wrong, but the Dems will give you none of those issues. The Repubs have been on the more conservative side of all of them. Not always as conservative as they should be, but in today’s politics, it's a binary decision.
No, I will not be voting to reelect either my senator or my congresswoman. The one or two that I will vote for are state pubbies.
Considering the Senate seat is a six year term, I hope you weren’t intending on releasing your master plan in 2008.
There. Fixed it.
" While turning over the Congress to the Pelosi/Kennedy mob for even two years would be recklessly irresponsible -- particularly during a dangerous war -- there is no assurance the wilderness years would last only twenty-four months. "
The first thing exterminators warn you when they find mice or roaches is that if you ignore the problem-they will multiply exponentially and...you...will...never...get..rid...of...them.
It's naive to think that two years of Democrat control of Congress would be benign and easily reversible.
I don't need the Republicans to sweet talk me into voting a straight ticket in 3 weeks.
The media and the liberal press routinely call me a stupid, mind numbed , rustic , toothless, ignorant ,uneducated backwater yahoo..and yet, I am undeterred and will still vote.
The option of not voting is comparable to pulling the lever for a Democrat.
And since Zell Miller is not on my ballot,
I could never, ever give the party that refuses to fight the WOT, is against the military, for the rights of terrorists, anti life, anti 2nd Amendment, pro gay marriage, pro higher taxes, pro illegal immigration, anti Justice Thomas, anti Justice Roberts, anti Justice Scalia, anti Justice Alito , pro Justice Ginsburg, pro Bill and Hillary Clinton.....
the honor of my vote.
Two "Straight Republican Ticket"" voters in this house . . . eat your heart out Dems . . . Our Mama's didn't raise any stupid children!!! . . . ;-)
I have to question the intelligence of those who don't vote.
Here are some tell-tale signs of the sort of person who would vote (or not vote) to cause the election of a party which would act to defeat every value and interest he holds dear (merely because the party that will at least try to advance most of those issues has not done as well as he might have hoped):1) When offered by a car dealer 25 percent off on a car, he insists on paying the full factory recommended retail sticker price -- because he is damned if he will accept 25 percent when he deserves 30 percent off.
2) When the prettiest cheerleader asks the nerd to take her to the prom, he turns her down -- just because he can.
3) When stopped for doing 70 in a 65 zone, he tells the trooper that's not possible because he had the cruise control set on 90 -- he just resents being falsely charged.
4) When diagnosed with a serious illness, he promptly cancels his medical insurance -- in order to save the cost of premium payments to help pay for the upcoming hospital stay.
A conservative would have to be just that stupid to stay home on Nov. 7.
I just hope that when election time comes, Republicans won't allow themselves to be influenced by the media and the liberals. Their concern for the country's security and well being isn't as important to them as is their goal to implement a liberal agenda on all fronts. The liberals and their surrogates – the MSM – are working overtime to defeat the Republican majority in Congress this midterm.
I hope this doesn't happen.
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.