No response to #16??
Posted on 07/24/2003 9:00:48 AM PDT by nwrep
I want to kick off a grass-roots movement to educate and inform discerning Democrats about the real nature of their party and am soliciting suggestions from Freepers. The reasons I am doing this are several, as listed below:
* I have several conservative Democrat friends who have always voted D, but who disagree with the stance of their party on issues like AA, tax-cuts, and regulations.
* These people do not understand that regardless of the "moderate" local Dem candidate they vote for, the party agenda is driven in Congress by an extremely liberal faction of the party.
* Case in point #1: I alerted one friend to Rep. Rangel's remarks about the death of Hussein's sons yesterday (Rangel said it was "illegal" for the US to kill them). The friend said he disagreed with Rangel, and the majority of the Dems would similarly disagree with the Congressman. I asked this friend if he knew who Rangel was. He had never heard of him. I informed him coolly that if the Dem regain the House, Rangel would become the Chairman of the powerful Ways and Means Cte., where all spending bills originate, and that he is one of the most influential members of his party in the House. The friend was shocked.
* Case in point #2: I asked another Dem friend what he thought of Kerry. He gave me a canned response about his Vietnam service, etc. I then asked him if he knew about his anti-Vietnam war stance. He said he did not, but that his parents (lifelong Dem voters like himself) hated Jane Fonda and everything she stood for. I then forwarded him the NewsMax expose of Kerr's Vietnam stance, his anti-war book, his rallies with Fonda and Ramsey Clark, and his statement to the US Senate in 1971. After reading all that, he said he was disgusted, and would forward it to his mother. He conceded that if Kerry were to be the nominee, he would vote for Bush.
* The problem is that these Dem voters are blissfully unaware of the voting records of their candidates and representatives. All they go by are finely crafted campaign statements issued during the last few weeks before the election where they pay homage to FDR, Truman and JFK. As a result, these dopey Dem voters (like my friends and their parents) continue voting for these candidates thinking they are voting for FDR/JFK-like candidates.
We need to educate these people and keep them as well informed as we Freepers are about the real day to day legislative agenda of the Rat Party. We need to highlight how they continue to vote against the best interest of these conservative, patriotic Democrats (like my friends) and how they continue to display hypocrisy by constantly changing their stance on major issues.
How do we do this?
I just spent the better part of a day asking a question that to this point remains unanswered; I think that I will spend a lot of time asking this question for the next year.
I asked people who were complaining about the current administration, what their solutions were, and what candidate they supported who would implement these solutions. I got many questions in return, but no answers.
Well, I got SOME answers, they just were not answers to the questions I asked.
I got answers like "putting the nails in the coffin of the neo-con philosophy is more important than winning", and "I intend to write in John Stossel".
There were statements made about how having a Democrat in the White House would force the Republicans to "apply some constraints", and a lot of the usual "no difference between Republicans and Democrats".
Folks, in a nutshell, and to help you avoid reading over 300 posts, the thing that was the most conspicuous in its absence was common sense.
Well, that along with solutions, a plan, or a viable candidate.
It was quite telling that those who complained the loudest refused to answer one simple question: "what candidate do you support in the upcoming elections?"
They didn’t have to answer, their answer was quite clear; they will support, by either their actions, or their inactions, whatever candidate wins the DNC nomination.
Funny thing is that all those chest thumping, "true conservatives", "I stand on my principles" people didn’t have sufficient courage to stand by their convictions, and simply tell me whom they supported in the presidential race.
Then of course, there was the individual who will sit out the process until he is brought a candidate that meets his approval…that’s some real gumption there folks.
I guess that’s the paleoconservative version of "principles": do something that you are ashamed to own up to, and then stand by, fiddle in hand, watching Rome burn at the hands of the Democrats.
Folks, my answer to those "true conservatives" was real simple:
No "conservative" ever sees helping elect Democrats as a solution to anything.
No response to #16??
"Funny thing is that all those chest thumping, "true conservatives", "I stand on my principles" people didn’t have sufficient courage to stand by their convictions...."
As you can see they offer no solutions, plans, or candidates. They just offer up endless gloom and malcontentism.
Just ignore them and thank you for your help. The thing I plan to do is to remind a couple of my friends who are receiving their child tax credit check this week, who pushed hrough the tax cuts. They are estatic over getting their checks.
This is a No Bush-Bashing Zone !!
I sometimes wonder if some folks on this forum long for the days of clintoon to return ??
My, how short some folks memories are.
To answer your question, if you're trying to make converts out of Dems you're wasting your time in the long run. Sure a small percentage on the grand scale can hop over permanently and you may be able to get even a few more to vote with you at any given time, but they'll never be anything more than "mercenaries".... fair weather fickle types. Grass roots campaigns aren't born from this type of seed.
The grassroots groudswell during the 2000 elections happened on its own without contrived prodding. Much of the energy that prompted that is now gone (many of the former participants are on this board).
What makes it worse is when you complain about the causes of this, the rabid little pricks around start showing their claws as if you're some kind of enemy, which causes even further resentment and incalcitrance. Some are just nasty, but some are venomous to the point of psychosis.
I'm not certain how I'm going to vote come 2004, but I am certain I want to be nothing like the vacuous little creepy types who seem to have no guiding princpals except for faith in men as opposed to ideals. They suck.
What would really suck would be a Dean, Kerry, Lieberman et al Presidency.
What would really suck would be a Dean, Kerry, Lieberman et al Presidency.
1) Over 98% of Federal government social spending is unConstitutional and should be eliminated.
2) Abortion is not a Federal issue, it is a States issue, just like murder. Roe vs Wade should be overturned, and abortion laws left to the States.
3) Fighting terrorism and defending the border from illegal nvasion must be a top Federal priority. It is one of the primary purposes for having a Federal government. The Fedgov is deliberately avoiding solving the latter border issue (for reasons of demographics; to protect the expansion of social programs)
Unfortunately, GWB has vastly increased social spending.
The Republican party is a "conservative socialist" organization (sometimes called bourgoisie socialism). They promote social spending in order to pacify and placate the working classes so they can maintain and expand their own upper class power. (it is the upper class which largely decides the candidacies in the party)
The Republican party have been equal partners in the expansion of social spending over the past 50 years. In every election for thepast several dozen years their big campaigns were centered on defending Social Security, improving Healthcare, improving education, creating more jobs through government spending.
None of those top priorities are Constitutional.
If you want socialism. Vote for socialists. If you want organized crime, support one of your local MAFIA organizations.
As for me, I will fight them, not support them.
I will not be happy until every socialist political organization has been disempowered.
Well stated
Why would you eliminate the least socialist of the group first, granting power and victory to the demmocrats, thereby dooming your effort from the start?
Do you think there's any hope at this point or a primary challenge?
That is unless I vote for Al Sharpton in the primary.
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.
