For all Freepers who plan to stay home on election day to teach the GOP a lesson

Yahoo News ^ | Jan 9 2008 | Me

[Justice]

ENJOY

[DoughtyOne]

There’s some truth in what you say. I will tell you though, it would be a long four years with a dem Congess and a dem in the White House.

It sure doesn’t seem to bother folks knowing that we won’t sucker for another liberal (R) though. They don’t seem to mind if their guy doesn’t get elected, just so long as they can nominate them to run into oblivion.

Well, oblivion it is if that’s their choice. Imagine, voting a liberal when you could have Thompson or Hunter. Why?

[Rastus]

And we’ve seen that a Republican congress will fight a liberal Presidency but cave in to a liberal Republican. I began to lose faith in this president the night that we won the fight against prescription drug coverage, only to have the vote held up for hours until arms could be twisted.

[pepsionice]

Given a choice of Huck or Hillary...I’ll take neither and just sit home. If this is the best the party can offer...then they can be happy with 50 percent of the normal vote.

[DoughtyOne]

Every single one of your criticisms will be increased 100 fold under a Dem.

Okay, lets take a look.

Example: Worried about flying now? When you help Clinton in, you will be worried about taking a train, driving, and even walking on the street.

I believe we're already working on the train angle.  It's only a matter of time before we'll get the strip-search there.  If Bush were in office another four years, it would happen under him IMO.

As for driving, we're setting up toll booths on hiways as fast as we can.  Every car that goes through one of them will be scanned and the drivers evaluated.  Anotherwords, our movements are going to be tracked by the government.  That is in essence a 'give me your papers' moment.  We have cameras taking our photos at intersections across this nation.  They have recognition software that can identify you in a matter of moments.

We now have cameras all over this nation taking pictures of citizens walking around in public without cause.  Those citizens are then run through a database to see if they have done anything wrong.  If not, their movements can be cateloged.  Does the federal government need to know every bit of your business?

Credit card records are fair game.  Bank records are fair game.

The FBI wants to develop a DNA record of every U.S. Citizen.  Evidently that's going to be okay with our current leaders.  I certainly didn't hear one objection.

Your DNA is different than your fingerprints.  It is a complete record of what and who you are.  It is proprietary in the extreme.  It is your property.  It is your essense.  In order to obtain your DNA, they will need a sample.  And once they have it, they could clone you, if that were their desire.  This under a republican president that doesn't seem to find this objectionable.

Tell me, are you sure our team is much better?  We have set up some wonderful federal statutes that the democrats will be glad to exploit.  And when they do, who will have facilitated the event?

Nuclear concerns? How 'bout when her multiculturalism allows Al Queda to get the bomb?

North Korea has the bomb today.  It also has the means to deliver them via intercontinental missile.  Whose watch did the completion of that take place under?

North Korea has been selling it's tech to other nations.  It's also been sending it's intellectuals over to help out.  Did we put an end to that?  Are you sure?

Iran is developing a nuclear capability as fast as it can.  It already has the means to deliver a weapon into Europe with it's stock of missiles.  Did we put an end to that?

What group of people willl get the bomb as soon as one is available in Iran?  Any guesses?

[cschroe]

I hear you, and I’m ceratin as well that there are likely some lower court appointees by Bush that under the microscope you and I would both say “How the h-— did he nominate that schmuck?” And yes, seven of the current 9 SC justices were appointed by Republican presidents, yet we still don’t have a conservative majority. But look at the 2 Bush got on the court, and think to yourself “who would it have been instead if Gore or Kerry had been president?” That is the calculus I work from. Yeah, a republican president isn’t a guarantee that the next SC justice, or other lower level appointees, will be as conservative as I’d like, but on the other hand, its a 100% certainty that if Hillary or Obama or Edwards is appointing them, I’ll despise them.

[Recovering_Democrat]

No one will ever create a better product if the many within the GOP base don't walk.

I'll stay with Ronald Reagan's model: when he lost the nomination, after lots of blood, sweat and tears in 1976, and his party nominated a RINO, Reagan stayed, supported the nominee who defeated him, and worked for change within the party.

[A CA Guy]

That IMO is an ignorant statement.

Every Republican will get you better Judges, less taxes, no socialized medicine and better security for the country..

Third party votes are also like pissing down your own legs because it buys you a Democrat victory.

Who ever the Republican is, they will be better than giving the Democrat the election.

[DoughtyOne]

I agree. I won’t like them either.

We are between a rock and a hard place to be sure. I don’t see us ever moving our nation back to the right if we don’t take a stand and demand it.

There are good arguments for both sides in this debate. The qustion is, did we really make great inroads toward conservatism over the last eight years? I don’t see the answer being a resounding yes. I seem some bright spots and a lot of liberal defferment.

What would our nation look like if we had three more eight year terms of George Bush? I’m sure there would be some bright spots. I’m also sure we wouldn’t recognize the place. And our founding fathers would roll over in their graves knowing what it had become. And I’m sure they already do.

And isn’t that the point.

[NewLand]

I’ll take neither and just sit home

And what does that solve? Nothing. What does that create? More apathy and less need for voter support to be elected President. Eventually, the door is open for someone much worse than Hillary to win the vote...if we're still alive as a nation.

Ronald Reagan didn't fold up his tent and go home after losing the nomination in 1976. He supported Ford (RINO) and then went right back to work to win enough support to win next time.

At least write in or vote 3rd party. Staying home plays directly into the hands of our enemies...and I'm not talking about Democrats.

The Founding Fathers and Ronald Reagan would be ashamed of your statement. Along with many others here on FR who say and do the same.

[dforest]

Nope, the party will only CHANGE when people quit holding their nose.

Sometimes people have to know what bad is to appreciate the good.

Take the awakening after Jimmah.

I will vote in State and Local elections and write in a candidate for President.

Maybe it will only take 4 years to make a CHANGE.

I held my nose in 2006 and I was disgusted. We had a little time to get it right and instead of learning anything we keep inching leftward.

[dforest]

Hmmm? I thought this was a independent conservative site.

If people are ashamed of me for not voting for a RINO, I better find someplace else to hang out.

[DoughtyOne]

I'll stay with Ronald Reagan's model: when he lost the nomination, after lots of blood, sweat and tears in 1976, and his party nominated a RINO, Reagan stayed, supported the nominee who defeated him, and worked for change within the party.

You do know that party leadership abhored Ronald Reagan, did everything they could to keep him from being elected, and proceded to slander him constantly during his eight year term, then proceded to undermine everything he accomplished as soon as he was out of office?

I'm of the opinion that the party leadership needs to be gutted and replaced with some people who know the difference between right and wrong.  One way to set that up is to make the leadership pay dearly for destroying the party with their liberal antics.

I asked another guy if he thought we had moved as a nation toward the right under Bush.  In some ways I would say we did.  In many I would say we not only didn't, but moved far to the left.

I'll ask you, what do you think our nation would look like if Bush could serve another three terms.  Would it be a conservative haven or a nation that had slid toward the left in so many ways, we wouldn't recognize the place.  IMO it would be the later.  And so, I must sadly say that I cannot support the status quo any longer.

It truly is time for a change.  And I don't mean veering off into the lefternmost part of the universe.

[marsh2]

Look at our California Republican platform. How much of it does Schwarzeneggar implement? The candidates have their own platforms. What the party (Regan) coalition agrees upon is now irrelevant. What does it say when 90% of the platform is unsupported by the party’s Presidential candidate?

[MarkDel]

Your approach is 100% logical. I wish everyone used their brain that way...

[free_life]

No Party owns my support, they have to earn it.

[DM1]

i voted my heart in the primary (Thompson). I will now vote for the R nominee over Hillary, Obama or Edwards.

[MarkDel]

You said this about the Republican Party Leadership and their relationship with Ronald Reagan,

“did everything they could to keep him from being elected, and proceded to slander him constantly during his eight year term, then proceded to undermine everything he accomplished as soon as he was out of office?”

While this statement was somewhat true in 1976 and in the very, very early stages of 1980, you are WAY off base for what takes place from August of 1980 and forward.

I don’t have time to dissect this right now and demonstrate how wrong your post is, but I’ll be back later tonight to do so when I have time.

[Eva]

It’s not a matter of teaching any one a lesson, it’s a matter of no longer wanting to be associated with the GOP. I am not leaving the GOP, the GOP is leaving me.

[Recovering_Democrat]

I really don't care if the party leadership abhored Reagan...and I don't know how true it is. The bottom line is for me is Reagan won and became one of America's finest leaders.

If you want to use the history of Reagan's tenure after he was elected, then please consider using his history before he was elected. He hung in there, and changed the world.

The change you call for in leadership is not falling on deaf ears with me...but you don't affect that by walking away. You take yourself out of the equation. When those who care and work for change leave, those worthless leaders you despise will not cry, they will work further to consolidate their power and draw more people, people who don't care, into their realm of influence.

[Recovering_Democrat]

I can’t address the California Republican Party platform. But I do know what Reagan did, and that lesson seems to be a good one to learn from history.