Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: Bob J; mewzilla; B4Ranch

<< The vote was a close 47-50 .... >>

Close to what?

Sixty-seven votes are required to pass a Constitutional Amendment and this one didn't come even far FRom passing -- let alone close!

And notwithstanding that their votes in support of our President's stand on today's issue would not have changed the effective outcome, the crucial core of "moderate" RINOs, whose reelection is always furiously supported by the Republican establishment [Witness President Bush's efforts this year on behalf of the execrable "republican," Arlen Specter] voted, as usual, solidly with the "Democrats."

Not to debate the issue of today's Constitutional Amendment, the case for ridding our party of the gang of effective "Democrats" it systemically cossets and succors -- for ridding our national political life of the criminal two-party cartel -- and/or for creating an absolutely new republican party -- one absolutely dedicated to the preservation of our beloved FRaternal Republic -- is a strong one indeed!

Best ones -- Brian


370 posted on 07/14/2004 4:02:50 PM PDT by Brian Allen (Am I therefore become your enemy, because I tell you the truth? Galatians 4:16 -- So mote it be!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies ]


To: Brian Allen
for ridding our national political life of the criminal two-party cartel

You'd prefer some 20-party parliamentary circus like most of the rest of the world?

Our system pretty deliberately is designed for two main parties. A third-party vote will ALWAYS be a wasted vote.

If the Fundivangelists create a third party, the Dems are going to win every election in the US till the end of time.

373 posted on 07/14/2004 4:06:00 PM PDT by Strategerist
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 370 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson