Is Free Republic too "Republican?"

Jim Robinson

[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?

[SMGFan]

Please do not become a wing of the Republican Party. I am first a conservative, I am Republican because that is the only major party in which Conservatism can survive. The conservatives need to take control of the Republican party agenda as much as possible. We need more conservative Democrats to switch to Republican. Are there many conservative Deomcrats around? Where are you Zell Miller?

[randog]

I vote to keep it 'conservative'. The term 'Republican' means different things in different parts of the country. A New York Republican can easily be to the left of an Idaho Democrat. The term 'conservative', however, denotes a political ideology rather than a party affiliation, and that's what FR has always been about.

[TLBSHOW]

what is conservative?

,,,,,,

A true conservative is one who observes the governmental philosophy of the founders and the forgotten document called the "Constitution." The philosophy of self, limited government – a constitutional republic – goes hand in hand with morality, based on God's guidelines. That is what a conservative is, at its root.

Delving into issues, conservatism is an approach that is against abortion – with great respect for the sanctity of life, is for less taxes, and for less government, with a philosophy of government which always allows for more freedom.

This is in contrast to a definition of liberalism. It is easy to define conservatism because it basically conserves the freedom-loving ways of America's heritage, but liberalism is a completely different word that does not attach itself to anything tangible. However, those who claim to be liberal tend to support bigger government, more taxes, abortion and socialist ideas – all mixed with a lack of morality.

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/929028/posts?page=

I have a problem with the Republican Party and that is the reason why I doubt I will register as a Republican in four years. The national platform is that of a goal of political power, compromise and lack of conservatism. When you get so far up on the political totem pole, power corrupts – this is evident in many who claim to be conservative, but whose only goal is power.

KYLE WILLIAMS

[Gal.5:1]

Hi Jim.
I've always been an "Independent", examining the platform and record of each individual, not just being devoted to a party.
I don't know enough about the R party to be comfortable with it. But it is very clear to me what the D's are all about. My main interest politically is fighting liberalism, and especially here in ultra-liberal urban No.CA, that means fighting the D party. So I have been involved with R just to fight the D's. The 2000 pres. election is a good example. Whatever it takes.

[Consort]

Peroism has nothing to do with any form of philosophical consistency.

And that's irrelevant to the fact that he had a meaningful impact on the election and the aftermath to this day and beyond.

Your use of the derogataion "naifs" is the logical fallacy of argumentum ad hominem. You believe that if you relegate your opponents to an inferior class by namecalling right off the bat, you discredit any argument that they may have.

At least he was upfront about it. You, on the other hand, imply that he's a logical "naif" in an underhanded way as if it gave you more credibility.

Your argument is undoubtedly rooted in the single election of 1992, and is therefore the logical fallacy of arguing from the particular to the universal.

Yes, he was correct about 1992 which negates your logical fallacy argument and counters "historical fact".

Politics is not the totality of government. You confuse politics with campaigns and election....

Nice, but that stuff deserves a separate dedicated thread that deals with that stuff, IMO.

[maui_hawaii]

bump #4

[Torie]

How about an example

Are you trying to get me banned or something? :) OK, I will give you one example. Social security. See ya.

[maui_hawaii]

I vote for talking about what is going on rather than who is going on...

[Consort]

The conservatives need to take control of the Republican party agenda as much as possible. Please do not become a wing of the Republican Party.

If the process of taking control of the Republican Party agenda entails becoming a wing of the Republican Party, do we abandon the effort?

[Torie]

Well we had a war or two, and a recession. But frankly, it did not surprise me. If you want a regime reasonably calculated to have the lowest level of spending, you would want a Dem president and a GOP congress. See? It isn't all about spending is it?

[firewalk]

.

[maui_hawaii]

Keep the "independent" label - and the Republican spirit.

Now we are talking some sense.

[MeekOneGOP]

More bump images HERE !

[arete]

My current goal is to defeat liberalism by defeating the Democrat Party. If that labels me a Republican, then so be it.

That is the same mindless crap we've been handed for years. The only reason to vote for one party over the other is based on hate. No independent thought or speech and definitely no uncomfortable questions or criticism of Republicans or the Bush administration. I never ever want to go down that road of blind loyalty to a political party.

The mindless adherence to the Republican party and the relentless efforts to silence free speech and thought have not gone unnoticed by many here.

Richard W.

[Liberal Classic]

Conservative to me means striving for smaller, less intrusive government (actually constitutionally limited government as defined by our founders) which will lead to

Among other desirable things:

less tax (no income tax, no social security tax, no medicare tax), no federal give-aways of any kind, etc. Also will lead to smaller federal government because most of what is now being done by the feds would be returned to the states and or not done at all (ie, returned to the people). Also will mean stronger national defense, because that is job number one for the feds...

Republicans are mostly conservatives of various stripes...

I'm assuming the Constitution Party supports the Constitution. But I've read they may be biased by religion. Not sure if that is true. I'm also thinking they are very few in number and have slim to no chance of being elected anywhere.

I have no objection to anything you have written here, in fact I think it's an excellent description to what I and many others believe. Furthermore, I maintain and have always done so that it's your website and no one else's to run as you see fit. You're the boss. You make the rules. What have you done to date to make it so popular?

There's the rub. As long as I have been here (two years now - where does the time go?) Free Republic has always been ``a loosely organized group of grassroots Americans who support our Constitution and look for honesty, integrity and honor from those in government.'' In beginning of the thread you wrote that you've been receiving a lot of complaints that ``FR is not really conservative, it's Republican.'' Who's this? To hell with them! It's your website, no one else's so tell them to piss off.

Why abandon ``Free Republic is not affiliated with any political party, news source, government agency or any other entity?'' Change into what? To become an unofficial auxiliary of the Republican Party? If you don't excect anything to really change, what's in a name? If you are going to change the format, however, consider that your website owes it success to a broad conservative grassroots base.

Does not changing into an unofficial auxiliary exclude the very people you would want to attract back into the Republican party? Sure, most Reform, Constitution, and Libertarian people already do, but doesn't every vote count? If you're going to ``roll back decades of liberal/socialist public policy and eliminate the waste, fraud, abuse and corruption pervasive in Washington today'' you're going to need everyone you can get. In short, don't turn your back on us. Welcome us home like the prodigal son. And how else are you going to attract former Democrats from a party that no longer represents them?

[Consort]

I don't know enough about the R party to be comfortable with it.

You raise the important issue which plagues Republicans and Conservatives: The inabiliy to effectively communicate to the wide array of voters across the political spectrum and across the country. They still, however, do well preaching to the choir. And your choice of the word "comfortable" is very appropriate. It seems that the communication problem stems from a fear of attracting "undesirables" along with "desirables" and the fear that "undesirables" will outnumber "desirables".

[JustPiper]

Well, I have been a registered Republican since Nixon, but I have strayed a few times, either voting for the 'best' candidate or often voting 'against' the 'worse' choice. I consider myself a "Thinking Republican" but I am not a die-hard conservative. Moderate? Libertarian? I do not believe I have a category ;) But I do know I am without a doubt ________ Republican!

[jmc813]

Of course, the problem is that there are moral-liberals here posing as conservatives under the guise of wanting a smaller government, much as Sacco and Vanzetti or Al Capone so wanted.

Al Capone was made rich by prohibition, the "drug war" of the 20's.

[jmc813]

There seem to be a lot of Libertarians here, not sure why. They're on the WOD threads (pro-drugs - ick!) and other places here.

Pro-ignorance - ick!

[Dr. Eckleburg]

Conservative is a fine title.

Though I vote a straight Republican ticket, ditching Conservative in favor of Republican seems limiting and disingenuous.

Knock three times if you're tied up and someone's forcing you to post this.

We'll send help.