Posted on 06/13/2003 1:55:59 AM PDT by Jim Robinson
Is Free Republic too "Republican?" I've been receiving a lot of complaints lately that FR is not really conservative, it's Republican. Is that a bad thing?
When I started FR (see the wayback machine) I don't think I even used the labels conservative or Republican. But, even though I was a registered Democrat at the time (I registered when I was very young), I was definitely anti-Democrat. And definitely anti-big government, anti-government corruption, anti-government abuse, anti-liberalism, etc. And I still am.
As FR became more and more popular, people started referring to it as a "conservative" web site and so eventually I posted the label to the front page. If it no longer applies, big deal. What's in a label? I'll change it to "Republican" if demand warrants.
I'm still anti-big government, anti-government corruption, anti-Democrat and anti-liberalism. I just happen to believe that in the current political environment we stand a better chance of defeating the left (liberalism/socialism/marxism, etc) by using the Republican Party to defeat the Democrats. The organization is there. The platform is there. The winning candidates are there. The dollars to run winning campaigns are there. The momentum is there. And the vast majority of the conservative voters are there.
Makes perfect sense to me. I want to defeat the left, and I want to do it as quickly as possible. I'll go with the organization that can get the job done.
My current goal is to defeat liberalism by defeating the Democrat Party. If that labels me a Republican, then so be it. If the vast majority of the FReepers want it so, then Free Republic will officially become the newest "Republican wing" of the Republican Party.
Long live Republicanism. Long live the Republic!'
What say you, FReepers?
Great post!
Like we did with Bush 41? Great, just great.No one owes a Bush their vote. Dynasty or not, they need to earn them like everyone else.
I don't get the desire for an upside down world. Politicians work for us, not the other way around. The politicians who fail to get the votes to be re-elected need to learn how not to lose the votes they once had.
Why is there such a neediness among so many to let politicians off the hook for their failures?
Listen. Before you vote for the Democrat as you mentioned in you previous post, don't check with Racicot. He's a politician. Check with FReeRepublic first. OK?
BTW - According to Racicot, we should support Specter over Toomey in PA - now THAT'S insanity....
Forget about Racicot. Senators run statewide and PA has a lot of Democrats. I think most of us prefer Toomey over Spector, but Spector has a winning record and the Republicans barely have a majority in the Senate. If Toomey knocks out Spector, that's good. If Toomey then loses where Spector would have won, that's bad and, depending on the other Senate races, it could be real bad, especially with possible Supreme Court retirements. Check with FReeRepublic first.
Please FReepmail me if you want on or off my infrequent ‘miscellaneous’ ping list.
(yes, I spelled rending correctly. Look it up.)What about the damage done by party leaders, who continually foist upon us these mules who need hot feet?
Is it honest or productive not to learn from these mistakes?
But you omitted the comma needed before it, so no gold star today.
Thanks for your concern, but I have been thinking for myself long before FreeRepublic came along.
Despite my public school education and lack of a college degree, I DO have critical thinking skills.
But thanks again for caring......
CALUMNY is not holding one's feet to the fire.
We all owe it to our country to keep people like the Clintons out of our White House. It has nothing to do with dynasties or any other excuses.
I don't get the desire for an upside down world. Politicians work for us, not the other way around. The politicians who fail to get the votes to be re-elected need to learn how not to lose the votes they once had.
That's nice, but what does any of that have to do with making sure that the Democrats do not control any branch of government?
Why is there such a neediness among so many to let politicians off the hook for their failures?
How do you fix that without screwing up big time — again?
How can we vote someone out of office that we didn't vote in to start with?
Please think it through before answering. It is not meant to be a rhetorical question.
I don't believe so. Political shifts and movements in a country the size of the US are like big ships and they don't stop on a dime. They need to be slowed prior to turning or you'll dump half the passengers into the drink.
I voted for Simon to block Riordan, but we were given those two options because of the Bush family tradition of settling political scores against Bill Jones, who had the temerity to support McCain in the 2000 primary. He was the only statewide GOP office holder and would have been the strongest candidate against the weakened Davis, but Bush and Rove brought their usual tin ear to California politics and botched it, but good.
Anyone could have beaten Davis if they really tried, and I'm not sure Jones would have had a better chance. Bringing in a complete outsider with no partisan state baggage is not a bad idea. Let's face it, Simon lost because he wouldn't go medieval on Davis's energy ass. Even with all the negative media prejudice in the fina month concerning his families company, he only lost by 5%.
I agree with not going too negative in a Prez campaign, it's just so, unpresidenttial. But State and local fights should be to the death.
I find it ironic when I hear '92 Perot voters (I wasn't one) blamed as short-sighted, while the Bushes get passes for failed strategeries.
I think the Perot voters knew exactly what they were doing...sending a message to the Republican Party (sound familiar?). By not looking past their noses, we got exactly what they deserved, eight years of the Clintons.
I agree that at times the bushies give W a pass for failed strategeries, but, I also see others NOT giving W credit for his successes in an equal portion. Neither is conducive to correcting mistakes or reinforcing effective rationale.
Riordan was unacceptable under any circumstances.
Would he have been better than, say, Hillary, if she decided to run in CA? Or Bil if he wanted to get back inot politics? Personally, I've learned never to speak in absolutes when discussing politics (that's POLITICS, not ideology).
...Riordan's long term damage to the California and national GOP would have been far worse than anything Davis has done to this State.
I do believe you are stretching this theory way beyond it's ability to hold any tensile strength. Back up this statement with some facts, or at least plausible guesses. No "sky is falling" proclamations please.
Davis will ultimately be the Bill Clinton of California, helping to rejuvenate the Republican Party.
Agreed. That is why I'm trying to understand why we want him out instead of presiding over the CA Titanic as it slips beneath the waves.
Fine, so long as the RNC-type "realists" with losing strategies are shown the same door.
And who would those be? Carl Rove? Didn't his plan get W in the White House? People are not shown the door for making one or even two mistakes. Their contributions and accomplishments are weighed and viewed over a lifetime.
When politicians "move to the middle," what they're actually doing is allocating their resources to win the votes they perceive are up for grabs. To get them where we want them, which is moving toward us, the last thing we should do is tell them that our votes can be taken for granted.
If they move toward you instead of the middle, they have no chance of winning an election. Same for the Dems. You didn't see Clinton moving toward the Greens or the commies right before elections. In fact, I think some of them weigh how many votes they can pick up in the middle by alienating those perceived to be in their "extreme" camp. Remember Clinton lambasting Sister Souljah on TV in '92? That was calculated political move. He netted far more voted from the middle than he lost from AA's.
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.