Posted on 07/09/2011 8:09:36 AM PDT by Kaslin
Yep, I am so sick of this.
Hopefully, there will be no more “deals”. That said, it’s probably a good thing that they are engaging in the talks to at least demonstrate a willingness to determine options - it lends credibility and helps expose the Left hardliners.
Professional wrestling in drab suits. All fraud, but the tickets sell.
Isn’t it amazing how, regardless of who we elect, they eventually cave and turn out to be not who we thought they were.
Enough of these "private negotiations" in DC by the elite as well. Not that our press is worth a damn but they should be allowed more than just a last minute photo op of everyone sitting at the table right at the end.
Professional wrestling in drab suits. All fraud, but the tickets sell.
I’m afraid you’re right.
New World Order/One World Government is the bottom line and they’re going for it. I think most of the “opposition” to 0bama’s agenda is mostly for show and they won’t cross the line. That’s why the top dogs on both sides are scared of Palin, Bachmann, West, Cain and others like them.
Your tag line is right on.
No deals with the administration.
The administration does not have the good of all in mind.
How can any real Republicans go along with this communists plot to overthrow America is beyond me. All those GOP that are making deals must be kicked out. If Boehner gives in he is he same boat as the communists. Nothing the liberals can offer will help America in any way and the time is very short. As it is now it will take at least a generation to recover at least 80%.
The GOP congress, aka “gentleman’s club” thinks “the people” want them to compromise, make a deal to show “they” can work together
What do they really think is worse?
Making a deal with the devil?
Or standing firm against his terms?
The path away from liberty has been a long one, and the so-called progressives' deliberate and intense work, like that of termites, has eroded and undermined the "structure"--accomplished largely by their censorship of the ideas of liberty from the nation's textbooks and public discourse.
Now, believing they and their "leader" are within sight of "changing" America from its constitutional restraints on coercive power in government, they boldly assert ridiculous claims, believing that the "dumbed-down" citizenry won't notice, or will be powerless to prevent the shift from liberty to tyrannical government control.
If future generations are to know liberty, then today is the day when those who call themselves "conservatives" must come together around the set of enduring ideas of liberty of 1776 and 1787!
Another set of counterfeit ideas now threaten to return America and the world to the darkness of tyranny and oppression.
Current events have triggered a very public, citizen, involvement in a battle of ideas which has been going on for decades! The problem is that, until now, most Americans went about their business and ignored it.
Today, they are engaged and beginning to learn the difference between two conflicting ideas about freedom and coercive government control. America's Founders identified the conflicting ideas as liberty versus tyranny. By Lincoln's time, he had a clear understanding of it and said this: "The world has never had a good definition of the word 'liberty.' And the American people just now are much in want of one. We all declare for liberty; but in using the same word we do not mean the same thing . . . . The shepherd drives the wolf from the sheep's throat, for which the sheep thanks the shepherd as his liberator, while the wolf denounces him for the same act . . . . Plainly, the sheep and the wolf are not agreed upon a definition of liberty."
But Lincoln could distinguish between real liberty and a counterfeit idea. Of the American idea, Lincoln declared:
"Most governments have been based practically, on the denial of the rights of men. Ours began by affirming those rights . . . . [These opposing ideas] are the two principles that have stood face to face from the beginning of time; and will ever continue to struggle . . . . It [denial of individual Creator-endowed rights] is the same principle in whatever shape it develops itself. . . it is the same tyrannical principle."
Of the Founding principle, Lincoln said: ". . . it is no child's play to save the principles of Jefferson from total overthrow in this nation. . . .The principles of Jefferson are the definitions and axioms of free society . . . And yet, they are denied, and evaded, with no small show of success. . . All honor to Jefferson - to the man who, in the concrete pressure of a struggle for national independence by a single people, had the coolness, forecast, and capacity to introduce in a . . . revolutionary document, an abstract truth, applicable to all men and all times, and so to embalm it there, that today, and in all coming days, it shall be a rebuke and a stumbling-block to the very harbingers [initiators of threatening change] of reappearing tyranny and oppression."
Yes, the battle of ideas is re-engaged in America today, in a manner not seen for decades.
American citizens are utilizing the new technologies that make possible close examination of the Founders' ideas in many collections online such as those at Liberty USA Foundation, WallBuilders, and in new books, such as Mark Levin's "Liberty and Tyranny." They are returning to the Founders' own explanation of their Constitution in THE FEDERALIST and to 1987's Bicentennial Year volumes such as "Our Ageless Constitution." See
Just as in Lincoln's day, those who try to fool the people into believing their definition of liberty is authentic are being exposed for the charlatans they are--mere men who wish to gain power over the lives of millions.
They are being exposed by the "self-evident truths" "embalmed" in that revolutionary document described by Lincoln.
They can read the Founders' intent that ours is not a government's Constitution to limit people. Rather, it is "We, the People's" Constitution to be used, according to Jefferson, to "bind them (government) down by the chains of the Constitution."
What we are seeing now is a battle between forces who have one charismatic, but mere mortal (Krauthammer's description of Obama), man out there carrying the water for changing that concept in the minds of citizens who, they thought, had been dumbed down by decades of neglect and censorship of the ideas of liberty.
Providence may have outwitted them by allowing the development of technologies that make the Founders' ideas a powerful tool in the new battle
The only changes that happen in D.C. is the names and the decimal point.
They view their mission as making it work (somehow).
However, American socialism is at the end of the road. We must destroy it, or it will destroy us.
A lot of FReepers act surprised, betrayed even, by the GOP - but they are just doing what (unfortunately) the people elected them to do.
Ya think it is “only” the economy and jobs that POTUS Obama is destroying??? Nope, it is the entire nation. IMHO, we will lose Iraq, Afgahnistan, Pakistan and....Obama’s soul brother, Gaddafi will hang on with the backdoor support of Obama an his minions, Wright, Farrakhan, Jones, Soros, Jarrett, Ayres, etc.. He will then stand by and allow Israel to be taken down and destroyed. He has destroyed the American space program (we now have to depend on the Russians for rocket transport to our space platform). JFK must be turning in his grave!!! Look, like it or not, Obama and his America detesting & hating wife, Michelle are out to destroy the American middle class and the nation with it. It has been their plan since day one!!! Wake up, people!!!
The Republican Party spends most of its effort promoting the Democrats and their agenda. No matter who is in power, the federal government, its power and expenditures, continue to grow with little chance of reversal.
The Democrats propose a “generous” increase in the minimum wage. The Republicans either oppose an increase and opt for staying at the current level or counter with a more modest increase. The Democrats say that we need to increase the school lunch program by x million dollars. The Republicans answer by offering an increase of one third x. Democrats say that the government needs to spend a lot more subsidizing housing and Republicans say that the current level is adequate. Democrats say that more people should be made eligible and Republicans defend the status quo.
So the predictable dynamic is that the Democrats fight for an increase in spending for some government program and the Republicans either oppose any increase or counter with a proposal for more modest growth. What impression of the Republican Party does this give? What is the one principle that people are able to discern from Republicans’ policies as stated above? That the Republicans are cheap and uncaring. Some may manage to construe it as fiscal responsibility but what it comes down to is withholding funds from worthwhile programs. Thus ultimately withholding help from those who need it.
If the Republicans agree to spend two billion dollars on a program they are inherently saying that it is good and just and worthwhile. Why else would they agree to spend such a massive amount of money on it? If people who position themselves as fiscally responsible spend that kind of money, it has to be for something good. Something right. Something necessary. And here they cede the moral high ground to Democrats, liberals, leftists by validating their policies, programs and agenda. It’s Democrats who are fighting for all of these good and righteous schemes and the Republicans who are dragging their feet.
Every time Republicans say yes but not so much. They are saying that the Democrats are right and they, the Republicans, are cheap. The Democrats are looking out for the needy and the Republicans are looking out for the cheap and stingy. We are cheap! Hardly an inspiring philosophy. Hardly a winning strategy.
We all know that the best defense is a good offense. The GOP has turned that truism on its head. Their only offense is a pathetic defense. And no matter how good your defense if you have no offense you will eventually lose. It’s inevitable. After the 1994 elections swept the Republicans t control of Congress, many anticipated the extinction of a few federal agencies. Many even a department or two. Dare to dream. Then we were told that Rome was not built in a day so don’t expect it to be dismantled in a day. Well we are still waiting for those first few bricks to be knocked loose.
Sure the left has moved us to a gargantuan and ever-growing welfare state on step at a time, or make that one billion a time. That is the only way it could have happened. Anyone who one hundred years ago tried to propose what we have now would have been run out of town. Any American town. As per the above it may be impossible to move in the opposite direction by increments. When you propose to spend less than the left wants the only principle that you are standing on and promoting is cheapness. Not a very compelling platform. Rather a recipe for long term defeat.
Being second-rate Democrats has been a disaster. Even when Republicans win elections. Agreeing to spend a fortune on Democrat social programs and wealth transfer schemes only validates those schemes. And makes conservatives-or what passes for conservatives these days-look bad. So virtually everything the Republicans do validates Democrats and make themselves look bad. A guaranteed formula for disaster.
So what’s the alternative? How about taking a stand. How about acting on principle? A principle other than cheapness. Will it be easy? The question is what are your principles and what do you want to achieve. If you want to be liked by the establishment intelligentsia then you definitely need to keep up with leftists. Just keep in mind that you will have to go further and further year after year. They keep raising the bar, moving the goal line. What “moderates’ are advocating and supporting now would have been radical a few decades ago. Trying to keep up will always mean that you will always be second-rate and always fall short.
The only was to go, which makes it the easy way, is to stand on principle. Without compromise.
RE your tag line. Weren’t we supposed to be represented and not governed in the first place? Just wondering.
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.