Republican Breakup?

If you put your ear to the ground, you can hear the rumble. It is the rumble of political discontent, obsolete bipolarities, and looming realignment. What am I talking about? I’m talking about the coming split of the Republican Party.

Years ago, Jeff Foxworthy blessed America with his “…you might be a redneck” jokes. Drawing upon his comedic methodology:

If you fear the one true God, define America as a “Christian Nation”, seek to make God’s Law the law of the land, think of homosexuals as freaks and sinners, and want to jail women who have abortions…you might be a Republican.

If you think history has bequeathed a destiny upon America to serve as the world’s policeman, to liberate oppressed nations, and you love to stay up all night strategizing on how to isolate the Saudis or punish France…you might be a Republican.

If you think it is the proper role of a Jeffersonian state to steal money from citizens to build civic plazas and university labs…you might be a Republican.

If you don’t care about ballooning budget deficits, and want to jack up government spending as though the rising debt never needs to be paid...you might be a Republican.

If you can’t stand deficits, are firmly committed to balancing the budget, and want to dramatically cut taxes and spending…well, you might have been a Republican in 1980.

There are at least five categories above, and all of them consist of people who identify with the GOP. They are, in order: theocratic Christian conservatives (there are, thank God, non-theocratic ones as well), neoconservatives, Chamber of Commerce Republicans who practice crony capitalism, the Bushies, and finally the blessed fiscal conservatives.

So what’s the problem? These people cannot possibly coexist in the same party for much longer. This is especially true now that Republicans in power have abandoned fiscal responsibility. They now stand for nothing – certainly nothing that would meaningfully separate them from big-spending Democrats.

Republicans were supposed to be about freedom – freedom from that monster which takes freedom away – government. The GOP was supposed to “get the government off our backs.” This hasn’t happened, and government at all levels is violating our rights now more than ever.

The above five groups can really be reduced to two kinds of people. There are those people that want to be left alone, and there are those people that refuse to leave others alone. The former simply want to be left alone to pursue their happiness, and are happy to leave others alone to do the same. They understand government’s proper role is limited to securing this freedom from those (criminals and foreign threats) who would aggress upon their peaceful lives. The latter group are all basically civil thugs. They want to impose their vision of the good on others by force. They don’t care if you’re living a peaceful, happy life. In fact, they might hold it against you. They want to take your money, or arrest you for any number of reasons. Got weed? To jail you go. Got a gay lover? To jail you go. Got a cancer treatment they haven’t approved? To jail you go. Got a successful business? How’s 40% off the top sound?

Republicans used to be the leave-me-alone crowd, and Democrats the thugs. Things are messier now.

What we can expect to see in the coming decade or two is a realignment. There are lots and lots of fine leave-me-alone people in the GOP. They don’t hate gays or brown people. They are pro-abortion and anti-tax. They are basically libertarians, but see themselves as too pragmatic to join the Libertarian Party.

There are also some leave-me-aloners in the Democratic camp. I call them smart gay people: they are too gay to be Republican, but much too smart about self-responsibility and economics to be real Democrats. Smart gay people are really good for America.

The theocratic Christian conservatives are a strong wing of the GOP. They will either grow to dominate the GOP or they will get their asses kicked out by the leave-me-alone Republicans. In any case, what we will see is a realignment that unites all the pro-freedom Americans under a major party. The religious nuts might have their own party, like the Religious Nut Party or something similar. It seems structurally impossible to break the two-party system into three or more parties, but I wouldn’t dismiss the possibility altogether. In any case, two parties might be enough to represent the major threads.

There are lots of unhappy Republicans today, chafing at their party’s abandonment of fiscal restraint and occupation by anti-sodomists. There are some number of Democrats that have tired of the drug war, expanded police powers, and foreign adventurism. These people need to find each other, for they are the best Americans.

Yeah, using Jefferson to argue against taxes for public education is a sure sign of a whackjob. Jefferson was a strong proponent of publicly funded education

Exactly, Jefferson was the founder of the University Of Virginia in Charlottesville.

Jefferson wasn't infallible either...however...were he able to look at today's works he would quite certainly change his mind on how much the government should do.

The Anti-Federalists were freaking PROPHETIC!

Look them up sometime.

142 posted on 07/30/2003 5:05:49 PM PDT by Maelstrom (To prevent misinterpretation or abuse of the Constitution:The Bill of Rights limits government power)

"...by the bill for a general education, [citizens] would be qualified to understand their rights, to maintain them, and to exercise with intelligence their parts in self-government: and all this would be effected without the violation of a single natural right of any one individual citizen." (Autobiography)

He was a great believer that public education was absolutely proper- and neccessary to maintain a republican form of government.

"Look them up sometime."
You make me LOL newbie!

But seriously, Jefferson would be astonished at what the NEA and the feds have done to our schools.
The fact that a child is better prepared to be a citizen by parochial schools would especially horrify him I think.

But seriously...How long do I have to be here to stop being a newbie?

A year after you signed up? Six months?

I think that the fact a child is better prepared to be a citizen by parocial schools would change his mind about how much involvement the government should have in the lives' of our nation's citizenry...thus my comment.

145 posted on 07/30/2003 5:16:41 PM PDT by Maelstrom (To prevent misinterpretation or abuse of the Constitution:The Bill of Rights limits government power)

"I have indeed two great measures at heart, without which no republic can maintain itself in strength: 1. That of general education, to enable every man to judge for himself what will secure or endanger his freedom. 2. To divide every county into hundreds, of such size that all the children of each will be within reach of a central school in it." --Thomas Jefferson to John Tyler, 1810. ME 12:393

147 posted on 07/30/2003 5:42:52 PM PDT by Maelstrom (To prevent misinterpretation or abuse of the Constitution:The Bill of Rights limits government power)

Jefferson was wrong...and would freely admit it were he able to witness the destruction of education today.

No, Jefferson was right in his goals for public education. That our current and former representation made and make crappy policy decisions is another matter.

I can't speak for Jefferson but something tells me he would be a big voucher guy.

We, unlike the person quoted, know Jefferson strongly supported public education- and why he did.
Sure one can speculate, knowing why he supported it, that maybe he would change his mind and support some other general means of educating citizens today.
Why he should blame the taxation for the problems isn't very clear. The system worked pretty well until a few decades ago.
The federal influence would certainly draw his attention.

Some people think it's a bad thing that Democrats have their hands in your pocket, tell you who you must associate with and all the other odious things Democrats stand for but at the same time think it's fine that Republicans want to have a say in your bedroom and in other private and personal issues that are none of their business.

Public education is a mistake.

Education is a product, it *must* be done competetively or the current situtation *inevitably* arises.

INEVITABLY

It's one of the inherent problems with socialism.

151 posted on 07/30/2003 6:56:56 PM PDT by Maelstrom (To prevent misinterpretation or abuse of the Constitution:The Bill of Rights limits government power)

The problem is that education is a product. It must be treated as a product in order to ensure that the best education is available for the dollar at any given economic niche.

This can only be done through competition. You guys know this inherently, but are afraid to challenge the Founders where they messed up.

152 posted on 07/30/2003 7:00:07 PM PDT by Maelstrom (To prevent misinterpretation or abuse of the Constitution:The Bill of Rights limits government power)

The Republican Party is historically a coalition between Christians, capitalists, true-believers (he calls them neo-conservatives, but they have always been with us) and pragmatic libertarians. ... the mixture is more complex than he admits or recognizes, as most people fall into more than one category ...

Exactly right. My political views are strongly influenced by my Christian beliefs, I am an unswerving Capitalist, I still don't understand what the heck a neo-conservative is, and I would describe myself as a pragmatic libertarian. Some folks claim these are incompatable, but I think that describes the Founding Fathers quite well.

The crackup of the GOP must be why Bush in poll after poll gets 90% plus support from self indentified Pubbies. Secular somewhat more economically oriented free market types with a relaxed view about social issues that are not particularly interested in waging a culture war, and more religious moralist types have been compromising with each other in the GOP since rocks cooled. This breakup stuff is so ersatz.

Ok, let's repeal all laws and let people do what they want because you don't want "big government". We are a Christian country, we need to pass laws that reflect that.

At the state level, I have absolutely no problem with passing laws based on morality. The Founders originally left enough room in the Constitution for just that, hence all the old, but good, morality laws at the state level. But at the national level? No power under the Constitution and not intended.

And no I'm not an 'American', I'm a North Carolinian

So if you're a homo I should leave you alone? In your dreams...

You might want to clarify that a bit. People could take that the wrong way.

158 posted on 07/31/2003 8:51:47 AM PDT by jmc813 (Check out the FR Big Brother 4 thread! http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/chat/943368/posts)

week I went to the American Conservative Union website to look at the conservative ratings of a bonafide liberal, and a bonafide "RINO." According to the ratings of the ACU, Barbara Boxer rated a "5" with her voting record last year. Olympia Snowe, everyone's consensus "RINO," rated a "65." I'd take Snowe over Boxer, or just about any other Democrat, any day.

I've seen this citation a lot on here the last few wweeks. It really, really saddens me that FR is becoming a place to defend Olympia Snowe. BARF!

159 posted on 07/31/2003 8:53:23 AM PDT by jmc813 (Check out the FR Big Brother 4 thread! http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/chat/943368/posts)

Do you agree with Ron Paul that President Bush was mistaken in giving $15 billion in aid to Africa? If you answer this you'll have the distinction of being the first person not to ignore this question when I ask it.

160 posted on 07/31/2003 8:56:00 AM PDT by jmc813 (Check out the FR Big Brother 4 thread! http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/chat/943368/posts)

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.