Replies

Your actions, AmericaninTokyo, might have the best of intentions, but good intentions and a quarter will get me today's Washington Times. What I will comment on is the RESULT of such actions, and while I intend no insult, the RESULTS will do far more damage to thew principles you purport to espouse on this forum that Bill Simon ever could.

I will say this right now, for the record: Any effort to go third party or to encourage conservatives to stay home and not vote is objectively pro-Left. We see the recent examples in in Nevada and Washington State, where two third-party candidates siphoned enough votes to keep Harry Reid in office over John Ensign in 1998 - and Harry Reid was the one who pulled James Jeffords into his party switch back in May, 2001. In Washington State, Slade Gorton was defeated by under 2,000 votes, due to a third party.

Would it not have been better to see good federal judges confirmed because the GOP had 52 seats to a 47+1 Democratic caucas? Because that is really what it could have been - but for a few thousand votes. A few thousand people who decided to go on an all-or-nothing approach, and ended up with NOTHING.

Look at the objectives on the about page of this forum, and ask yourself how electing a left-winger helps obtain ANY of them. Objectively, going third party will do little more than elect a left-wing Democrat. We've seen numerous examples - Virginia's U.S. Senate race in 1994, Ross Perot's 1992 campaign, the Senate seats in Nevada (1998) and Washington State (2000). Third-party moves by conservatives, be they the Libertarian Party, the Constitution Party, the Reform Party, or any other party, are little more than feel-good exercises that have done far more harm for conservatives than good. With that track record, how can ANY Freeper say with a straight face, we need to keep trying this option? The last time I checked, "if it feels good, do it" was NOT a value conservatives ever went for.

Maybe the Republican Party is not perfect for conservatives, but I defy ANYONE to present another option that will not dash the hopes we have of achieving our objectives. The Repubican Party might not be perfect, but it is the best shot we have, and has been since 1980.

Dividing conservatives, which the third-party movement is doing, merely invites our defeat in detail by the Left, and in no way will advance the agenda we want enacted. I, personally, will fight any effort to encourage conservatives to go third party with as much force as I can.
With the way the Founding Fathers set up the system, there has to be a LOT of support to make some of the changes we want to make.

Quite frankly, there have been some issues that do have conservatives divided. I openly admit to disagreeing with conservative orthodoxy on immigration, and I am opposed to term limits. However, I am here because on the rest of the issues, I stand four-square with conservatives, and I want to work to get these changes made. The disagreements should be handled with civility, not vitriol, and put aside to get the best people we can into office where we can make progress towards the objectives we have laid out.

We cannot let ourselves be divided, we cannot let ourselves falter because of internecine warfare, and we cannot permit ourselves to fail because some of us decide to go third party in a huff over a disagreement or disappointment. Disagreements and disappointments are part of life, and so we need to take our lumps and move forward.

Those who would divide conservatives, enable the left to conquer and send things further down the road. Our system of government as put in place by the Founding Fathers, does not allow us to stop or turn this country around on a dime, barring overwhelming majorities and control of all three branches of the federal and state governments. We have the turn radius and stopping distance of a supertanker going at full speed, and we need to recognize that.

It is a time to make a choice. Are we here just to feel goof about ourselves, or are we here to work together and make changes? I cannot allow the division to go any further without an effort to stop it. I was angry about what Donnie DiFrancesco did to Bret Schundler in 2001. I was angry about what John Warner did to Ollie North in 1994. And I warn the third-party types that I will be angry if their efforts defeat people like Bill Simon in the future.

I cannot, in good conscience, remain silent about this any longer. Nor can I allow it to continue without stating what the results will be. Intentions will not matter a hill of beans in reaching our objectives, and those who do not support solid conservatives based on one or two issues of disagreement are, despite their good intentions, merely helping the Left dismantle our Republic. And I will fight anyone who is helping the Left do that by encouraging people to bolt to third parties, or by encouraging them to stay home and not vote.

I do not seek to cause an internal fight, but the divisions must stop. We are just over two months from critical elections, and we have to hang together - or the Left will hang us seperately.

That's my opinion, if anyone here cares.

Why do you folks care so much about homosexuals?

I like homosexuals. They are good.

Why?

Because I'm a straight male, and heterosexual males are competition. Homosexual men, of course, are not. The more homosexual men there are, the less competition for the women.

And, quite honestly, I need all the lack of competition I can get.

PS There are about half as many lesbians as gays, so the formula still looks positive for woman-loving guys.

Also, women value gays as friends, so they don't seem to resent homosexuality, even though it's to their romantic disadvantage. So in the end, everyone gains from homosexuality. Men get less competition, and women gain friends. What could be better?