Posted on 05/10/2009 10:02:18 PM PDT by rabscuttle385
Less than five years after Karl Rove mused openly about the possibility of Republican dominance for decades – an idea which was absurd at the time – the Republican Party finds itself in disarray. The moderate wing is showing itself to be as RINO as ever, and in one case, that of Sen. Arlen Specter, the pretense is finally over. It goes without saying that the moderates are wrong; their advice to do as the Democrats do, only a little less enthusiastically, not only betrays a fundamental misunderstanding of the dynamic nature of electoral politics in a democracy, but ignores the fact that this was essentially George W. Bush's approach to governance.
Ronald Reagan and Margaret Thatcher generally refused to follow the Left's siren song, and while they were viciously lampooned and hated for their refusal to abandon their principles, they won the respect, admiration, and affection of the voters. Thatcher, in particular, was known for being inflexible, hence her nickname, "the Iron Lady."
. . . . .
George W. Bush instead attempted to find common ground with the political opposition, with disastrous results. He was not loved for his moderation; conservatives increasingly came to regard him with the sickened horror of the betrayed, while left-wingers held him in rightful contempt. His failure to return the faith and loyalty initially shown to him by the Republican grassroots was not only despicable, it was politically inept. It is interesting to see that Obama appears to be cut from the same treacherous and ungrateful cloth; certainly his supporters appear to be expressing buyer's remorse even faster than Bush's did.
But the worst mistake was the Republican Party's post-Bush obsession with so-called pragmatism. But, as events have proven, political pragmatism is anything but pragmatic!
(Excerpt) Read more at worldnetdaily.com ...
Ouch! That's going to leave a mark...on the RINOs.
Ron Paul Ping
Of course Ron Paul won an election in November. He was running in a safe house seat drawn to elect a Republican no matter what. That doesn’t make him electable nationwide. The last Congressman to go straight from the house of representatives to the white house was James Garfield in 1880, and he was technically Senator-elect at the time.
Only problem with Paul is he finds too much common ground with the likes of Kucinich.
All we need to know about Ron Paul is that he was supported mostly by weirdos, especially those Alex Jones Troofer types and White Supremacists, whom he never really disavowed.
However, his understanding of the domestic economy and the monetary system gave him great insight into many of the fiscal issues we are faced with.
Too bad he had extreme ideas like abolishing the federal reserve outright without a viable alternative (The Gold Standard isn’t a viable alternative) and archaic foreign policy tomfoolery “Non-Interventionism” which viewed the world through a 200 hundred-year-old prism.
Ron Paul wasn’t right. Thank God we didn’t have to implement many of his ideas.
Reading the actual article, its libertarian author, Vox, who looks like a refugee from the cast of a Clockwork Orange, assures his libertarian readers that, while Paul would probably bore them to tears with lengthy jeremiads on such thrilling topics as fiat money, Paul would do nothing about outlawing abortion. Vox is at least right on those two scores. Where Vox is wrong is in suggesting that the Galveston shrimpin’ earmark man would have done better than actual conservatives in the general election. As he was road kill for good reasons in the primaries, he would have been road kill in the general as a POTUS candidate. Republican voters want their POTUS candidate to be on America’s side in its wars and Obama would have gotten the anti-American vote as is traditional for Demonrats and certainly so for Obama.
” Thank God we didn’t have to implement many of his ideas.”
Yeah! We got Obama instead!!!
and Alex Jones
I hope not, but he seems more than willing to talk shop with that nutball.
Don’t thank me for Obama. I voted for Palin.
The Paulies served a Perot-style purpose for the GOP and as with Perot, we ended up with 8 years of Clinton.
Yep, and ol’ ron “I’m FOR earmarks, before I vote against them” paul is one of the biggest two faced lying RINO’s around.
How many of his cronies did he pay off with the $96.1 million worth of earmarks he inserted into the Porkulus bill?
Gingrich tried to get RP knocked off with a primary challenge some years ago and didn't fare any better. Then when it came time to redraw boundaries they cobbled together some farm land, some condo's at the beach, and NASA into one big amoeba shaped district thinking no congressman without connections to the leadership could ever satisfy that collection of diverse and demanding constituents. But RP has made himself popular in his district and gets re-elected every cycle.
110 percent right!
(The Gold Standard isn’t a viable alternative)
THE FREE MARKET IN MONETARY POLICY is viable, and it may coincide with “gold” isnt the same as a government mand. “gold standard”. That’s what Ron Paul actually advocates and it’s called Austrian (Essentially 100% Free Market) Economics!
Ever see the Aussie film “Breaker Morant”?
Does any one look forward to less “American wars”?
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.