Not another party

Townhall.com ^ | January 10, 2010 | Paul Jacob

[NoGrayZone]

No third party, but we’re sure as heck taking back our Republican party!

[babygene]

Suppose another party (such as the conservative or tea party) ran Palin as their candidate, and she was also the candidate on the republican ticket.

Would she get the votes tally from both?

[Misplaced Texan]

No third party, but we’re sure as heck taking back our Republican party!

I have agreed with this premise, but am leaning more and more toward a third party.

We are all so concerned with losing the presidency by having a third party, we forget the power we can still have in Congress. A coalition would have to be formed between parties which would result in more openness and disclosure than we see now. The "ram it down your throat" process used by both current parties would disappear.

Having a very, viable third party would almost automatically create term limits.

I am not totally convinced of a third party as the best means to the end, but I am less swayed that there should not be one.

[Jim Noble]

1. Initiative and referendum. Government of, by and for the people cannot exist if politicians monopolize all political processes and, thereby, block reform. If a candidate doesn’t think you are worthy of voting on issues, then that candidate is not worthy of your vote.
2. Term Limits. Nothing separates politicians from the American people like the issue of term limits. If we want to end the damage that career politicians are doing to our Republic, we need term limits. We also desperately need the open seat elections created by term limits — elections where new blood and new ideas stand a better chance.
3. Transparency. To make good decisions, citizens must have an honest and open accounting from their government. No reasonable person — right, left or anywhere in-between — disagrees. Nevertheless, politicians continue to stonewall, keeping public information from the public.

Those are all good ideas - but you really need to address, convincingly, the argument that it is EXACTLY those three things that have ruined California.

[pointsal]

I like the sentiment, but I have not seen that much blood flowing out of the big tent at RINO headquarters. NY-23 is a good example of the RINO’s being late to the game.

What will the RINO’s do with the latest quote on dialect by Harry Reid?

[ImpBill]

"The thing most needful is providing voters real choices for representatives. Spanking the incumbent Democrats in 2010? Fun. Necessary. Richly deserved. But, alone, such reprisal will invariably accrue to the benefit of equally arrogant incumbent Republicans."

Amen and amen again! Until "We the people..." understand it was and is the (D,s) and (R,s) that got us here in the first place we will not get "our" Republic back!

I am not extolling the formation of another political "party". I am for American's rising up and shedding ourselves of all "party" influence!

[DTogo]

A third party may not suddenly (or ever) become the majority, but as seen recently with Joe Liebermann, a sizeable and honest third party could keep the two existing corrupt parties honest by disrupting the heretofore automatice see-saw of (R) or (D).

10 Tea Party (as an example) senators is a de-facto majority by forcing the other parties to compromise back to Constitutional principles to get anything passed. And if nothing gets passed as a result, so much the better.

[tunedin]

Won’t happen. She was on Hannity a few weeks ago supporting GOP.

[NoGrayZone]

I hear what you’re saying, but I don’t think it’s time yet for a 3rd party.

Take a look at Hoffmans run. Yes, he was the only Republican running in that race and came damn close, but damn close doesn’t equal a win.

Now if the pube’s in charge would have ran Hoffman instead of scuzzie, Hoffman would be in office as we speak.

[ArchAngel1983]

"No third party, but we’re sure as heck taking back our Republican party!"

Exactly! If the Marxists can take over the D-party, then conservatives can re-take the R-party.

[Misplaced Texan]

Exactly! If the Marxists can take over the D-party, then conservatives can re-take the R-party.

I think the biggest problem is leadership, or lack of leadership which creates a void. We tend to think of the President as the leader of the country, but why?

Obviously Obama is not a leader. Bush didn't inspire people to follow him, nor has anyone since Reagan. Reagan was a leader. The rest have gained the office, not by virtue of being a leader, but rather by succession, rejection or "the lesser of two evils".

I considered Newt a leader for a few years in the 90's, but he has jumped the shark. Steele is useless. Boehner and McConnell couldn't lead their way out of a wet paper bag.

Who will be the phoenix?

That person also does not have to be president. In fact, it could be more advantageous to be the leader without worrying about the trappings of the presidency.

Will there be one leader, or will it be a collectivist leader within a movement, like the Tea Party, or will that movement dissolve without a standard bearer?

[trek]

"No third party, but we’re sure as heck taking back our Republican party!"

Forget taking back the Republican party. Why not take back your State government? After all, under the Constitution, the power to control the Federal government resides in the "several States" not the Republican party.

Don't be a stooge for a Newt Gingrich or a John McCain. Do something useful. Do something that the Founders would understand. Organize to vote in a Governor and a State legislature who will not act as supplicants to their Washington overseers but rather elect those who will fight to end their predations.

[Caipirabob]

I think the Tea Partiers need some sort of mechanism to keep the GOP from ever getting it’s fingers in our pie, not without losing a few digits. We are already essentially a third party, we are simply committed impacting GOP elections and getting conservatives elected.

[NoGrayZone]

"Don't be a stooge for a Newt Gingrich or a John McCain. Do something useful."

Who the hell is a stooge? Taking back my party isn't something useful?

[NoGrayZone]

"Organize to vote in a Governor and a State legislature who will not act as supplicants to their Washington overseers but rather elect those who will fight to end their predations."

And what will you run them under? Independent?

[trek]

"Taking back my party isn't something useful? "

Okay, fair enough. "Taking back the Republican party" might be a potentially useful thing to do depending on what you mean by this. But simply returning to power the Republican party as it exists to day is a diversion from our problems not a solution to them.

[NoGrayZone]

That’s not what I meant. I mean taking over, or re-taking the party back from the lib-lites.

We need to run “tea party” candidates under the Republican party.

[trek]

"And what will you run them under? Independent? "

Personally, I don't care what party label they would run under and neither should you.

Look, I believe you are someone who sincerely believes in the Constitution. Is there anything in the Constitution about political parties? Nope. In fact, the Founders in their other writings warned us about political parties (or "factions" as they called them). They believed, correctly, that political parties would always put their own interests ahead of the nation's interests. Smart folks those Founders.

[rockinqsranch]

Still against a third party here, because I believe if we rid the Republican Party of the Leftist, RINO influence we rid the Party of “The “ram it down your throat” process used by both current parties...”

I agree the emphasis of winning the Executive is overly hyped as winning the Congress is winning control of the purse strings, and that controls the country more than the Executive.

We need the Executive more now than ever before, but under the circumstances we have to counter the Executive to hold our Nation together until we can get a qualified Executive in place.

IMO a Third Party is precisely what the Democrats are trying to trick us into by excercising influence via RINOCITY in the Republican Party similarly to what they did to the Democrat Party. It’s the Socialist Democrat Party today, NOT the Democrat Party of yore.