"Republican Party Falling Apart"

The Post Chronicle ^ | May 22, 2007 | By Basil Harrington

[SittinYonder]

"The Republican Party is falling apart," said one insider to me recently. "The GOP has become the party of neoliberal corporate globalism, not the party of conservatism," said another. Perhaps election 2008 will be the last hurrah. Other than Tom Tancredo, Ron Paul and Duncan Hunter, the GOP presidential candidates are a joke. The rest are all neoliberal, interventionist globalists.

Look how we've derailed..."

Iraq is a huge mistake, a neocon experiment in utopianism, and we are paying the price. Bush's foreign policy is not conservative. It is Wilsonian nation building. The transformation of the Middle East to liberal democracy is Jacobin, not conservative. And it is because of the neocon war machine in the Middle East that we are hated.

If we really want to end terrorism in the U.S., then we should completely disengage from the Middle East. We should (1) completely withdraw from the Middle East, (2) end foreign aid to all Middle Eastern countries, (3) deport all Muslims from the West, and (4) end all immigration from the third world.

Many fail to realize it, but terrorism is more an immigration issue than Middle Eastern issue. If Seung-Hui Ch? had not been allowed to immigrate hither, the Virginia Tech massacre would not have happened. Three of the terrorists recently nabbed in New Jersey (plotting to attack Ft. Dix) were illegal immigrants who entered the U.S. from Mexico. And almost all previous terrorists, including those on Sept. 11, were either legal or illegal third-world immigrants.

As Jean Raspail said in Camp of the Saints, "the greatest piece of conservative fiction ever written," there is a third-world invasion of the West taking place. We are under attack. And we can either make a stand against the third-world hordes, or we can watch the West crumble.

We must address the problem now. We need deportations, attrition, employer sanctions, and all immigration (legal and illegal) to end from the third world.

But many seem not to care. Many politicians and corporations are supporting this invasion. Why? Either for cheap votes or to drive down American wages.

Failure to address this invasion not only is a dereliction of duty, but it is a form of treason. And many of the presidential candidates are guilty of treason? Rudolph Giuliani, John McCain, Sam Brownback, Tommy Thompson, Mike Huckabee - and let's not forget Barack Hussein Obama, Hillary Clinton, and John Edwards. Traitors, ever last one of them.

And then there's free trade, which is destroying our economy and undermining our sovereignty. But the neocons / neoliberals have their heads in the sand, wanting to take free trade to its logical conclusion in some perverse suicide pact.

The Democratic Party, which in the 19th century was the conservative party while the GOP was the left-wing party, betrayed the U.S. decades ago. And now the GOP is going the same globalist route? neoliberal wars, mass immigration to drive down American wages, and suicidal free trade pacts.

Do not stand for this nonsense!

If Tom Tancredo, Ron Paul or Duncan Hunter does not get the GOP nomination, then vote third party. Refuse to support the neocon / neoliberal globalist machine. If the GOP continues down this path, it is doomed anyway and, hopefully, out of the ashes a true conservative party will arise, perhaps the Constitution Party or the America First Party.

Or perhaps a new party will form, hopefully one modeling itself after the British National Party, Front National, or Vlaams Belang - all conservative parties in Europe, and conservative in the true sense of the word: the conservation of Western man. Not the phony neocon nonsense we have in the U.S.

[Sloth]

The US Constitution and Bill of Rights are NOT a suicide pact.

Doesn't matter. If you don't like it, amend it.

[Rembrandt_fan]

You wrote, “Well if we are going to define everything it isn’t this will be a very long thread indeed.”

That’s why I used Buckley’s definition, as a way of establishing a kind of commonly agreed upon starting point and then taking it from there. ‘Loyalty to the Constitution’ is fine, but the wording is open to a great deal of potentially conflicting interpretation. You know what you mean, and I’m pretty sure I know what you mean, but someone else could have an entirely different idea about what constitutes loyalty to the Constitution and still be equally correct, logically speaking. Simplicity is comforting and helps when getting one’s head around complex abstractions, but does little to further an argument or clarify meaning.

[jpsb]

that is why I wrote #139, should have pinged you.

[Grunthor]

“If Tom Tancredo, Ron Paul or Duncan Hunter does not get the GOP nomination”

Vote for Fred.

[oblomov]

What happened with Umberto Eco?

[SittinYonder]

I was referring to Eco’s ‘Travels in Hyperreality’ where he demonstrated that America is the Last Beach of Western Civilization.

[Grunthor]

I’m glad to see someone else looking at the Iowa Straw poll.
My feel on it is this; the top five in that poll stay in the race, the rest drop out for the good of the party. What do you think? I would add that in the next two states, the person coming in last place in each, drops out successively for the same reason.

[oldvike]

"Republican Party falling apart".

THAT will be the Bush legacy.

[Cacique]

One step at a time. First let's get rid of amnesty.

CALL! CALL! CALL! CALL! AND KEEP CALLING TILL THE LINES FRY!

WRITE! WRITE! WRITE! WRITE! TILL YOU RUN OUT OF INK IN YOUR PEN!

Bombard the Democrats as well, especially the ones that ran on an anti immigration plank and the ones in marginal districts who could be vulnerable. keep pounding on them.

STOP AMNESTY NOW!! WE CAN DO IT!!

The best way to stop Shamnesty

[Red Phillips]

“The Democratic Party, which in the 19th century was the conservative party while the GOP was the left-wing party

With this one sentence, Basil proves himself to be a mo-ron.”

Actually Clemenza, you are wrong. This is really a well know fact of history. The Democrats generally represented rural, agricultural and Southern interests in the 19th Century. They supported decentralization and generally smaller government. The Republicans were the party of nationalism and federalism (from the old Whig and Federalist line) and were generally the Yankee party. As the party of abolition they were the left wing of their day. They supported government subsidies of railroads and high tariffs.

Things become less clear around the turn of the century (1900)depending on how you define terms. The GOP was the Party of sound money (conservative) but the Dems were the party of immigration restriction (conservative) for example. The Dems did not start to fully morph into the liberal party until FDR and the Depression. Even then, Southern Democrats were more conservative on social issues until after the rise of Barry Goldwater and Civil Rights. Until the GOP became the Party of the South.

So Basil’s statement is not only correct, it is not even controversial. Try reading some history books.

[SittinYonder]

My feel on it is this; the top five in that poll stay in the race, the rest drop out for the good of the party.

I think each candidate makes that decision themselves. The straw poll is a long way to the caucus, and I don't know that anybody would or should drop out based solely upon the poll.

Now, they might find that coming in last in the straw poll kills fundraising and it's not their decision to make anymore.

Personally, I'd like to see all the candidates stay in until the Convention and let the delegates sort it out.

I hate this situation where we've frontloaded the primaries.

I do think the straw poll will help people decide which way to direct their donations, though.

[Red Phillips]

ZULU, Thompson and Gingrich are both neocons. Thompson is a fellow at AEI. Gingrich hasn’t met a Middle Eastern country he doesn’t want to invade.

[Red Phillips]

RF,

The Constitution means what the Founders thought it meant, not what the modern reader thinks. So look to the Founders. If we do that, there is very little that can be honestly disagreed upon.

[Red Phillips]

“He lost me at neocon.”

What is your problem with the word neocon?

[L98Fiero]

“It will be if we can’t get over white guilt and the idea that multiculturalism is a strength.”

Multiculturalism is the “kryptonite” of a Republic. It can only take so much disparity of culture before different cultures are at odds with each other and a civil war ensues. The winner generally then changes or ignores the law of the Republic to prevent future civil strife. The winner gets so involved in civil matters that the Republic ceases to exist as one because of the vast powers seized by the winner.

Segments of the population then get dependent on this federal intervention. Either dependent on stipends, jobs, contracts, etc, it’s still dependency. They vote accordingly. Government grows, liberty fades.

[SittinYonder]

Your’s is an excellent post:

There seems to be a lot of misinformation being posted by some regarding:

Isolationism: Actually, Libertarians are not isolationist. Most L-tarians support open borders and liberal free trade...hardly isolationist.

Free Trade: This is a classical liberal idea....taken to the extreme by GOPer free-traders. Actually, what Tancredo proposes, bi-lateral trade....is more beneficial to the US. It is suicidal to have a near trillion dollar trade deficit with Communist China (regardless what some Business-Socialist economists claim). Destroying American business for the sake of trade is nuts.

Iraq: No problem with being there, but when Bush started going Liberal-Globalist (worrying more about the feelings of Islamics instead of US forces) that is when things started sliding down. Bush’s lack of commitment to win is the problem with Iraq....not the being there. My version of “cut and run” would be to “cut the enemy up” and “run them down”. Lets stop pussy-footing around.

[SittinYonder]

Ping to post

[Clemenza]

You are incorrect on the immigration issue. You will find that, outside of some rural dems in the South (who had less of a voice in the house than they do now). It was the DEMOCRATS who got the votes of the Irish, Scandanavian, and Southern German immigrants, and, later the eastern and Southern Europeans. The leading restrictionists of the late 19th and early 20th century were in the GOP.

I think too many of my southern friends "project" the Dems in their region onto the national party. You forget the populist wing and the urban, "ethnic" wing in the northeast and upper midwest. The GOP generally gave up on social progressivism (outside of a few folks in New England and the "populist" northern Germans in the midwest), from McKinley onward.

I think that both parties historically have organized around "issues" (slavery, free soil, free coinage of silver, labor unions, etc.) rather than ideology. This was particularly true until the post-WWII era. That is why you have guys like William Borah who went to Moscow to independently recognize the Soviet Union, yet opposed the New Deal, or Tom Watson, who was pro-Soviet, supported nationalization of the banks, yet was also a supporter of white supremacy in the south.

[quant5]

“The piece makes some good points, but the isolationist foreign policy is a recipe for disaster. We can’t disengage. It’s too late. We’re stuck to the tar baby. If we leave the Middle East, we leave a vacuum that will be filled by Wahabbist terrorists and Shi’a fanatics.

We’re going to end up having to bludgeon down a significant portion of the Islamic world, I’m afraid, before we can think about reducing our commitments in the Middle East. That, and find ways to wean ourselves from their oil.”

Agreed. We can minimize our exposure in the ME but NOT until we are energy independant and at this rate it will take another 20 years at least. It will be the private sector that comes up with competiting products for big oil. It’s happening but it takes time, money, commitments and lobbyists. As for the immigration invasion, the American public must do something about this by voting in our voting our people who care about America first as a collective instead of special interest groups/voting blocs. These idiots in Washington are going to pass this awful bill but the timing is really August when it put in front of Congress. Forget all this email and telephone calls to the Senate and White House. Go and see your Congressman NOW because ultimately, that is who can kill this deal, the Senate and White House are all on board already...

[Red Phillips]

You are right that the parties used to be organized more around a cluster of issues than some reasonably consistent left/right ideological divide. (Arguably they still are.) More business v. populist than anything. But the anti-immigration populist Know-Nothings were basically grafted into the Democrats. So yes, urban ethnics and anti-ethnic populists voted together because they had a common perceived enemy, the urban Establishment. Just like Black Civil Rights activists and Southern Whites both supported the Democrats at one point.