"THAT which you believe"---"An open letter to Republicans"

6/23/02 | redrock

[redrock]

"This is free ground. All the way from here to the Pacific Ocean. No man has to bow. No man born to royalty. Here we judge you by what you do, not by who your father was. Here you can be something. Here's a place to build a home. It isn't the land--there's always more land. It's the idea that we all have value, you and me, we're worth something more than the dirt. I never saw dirt I'd die for, but I'm not asking you to come join us and fight for dirt. What we're all fighting for, in the end, is each other."

What is it that you believe???

A real question....since so many times on this forum, and others, the Republican 'mantra' has become a simple one.

Defeat the Democrats..whatever the cost..the Democrats are the enemy...(sort of Orwellian in it's simplicity)..repeated time after time...and anyone who dares to ask questions of George Bush's policies and actions is loudly shouted down.

But here's a 'news flash' for ya.......It may be that the Democratic Senators...Representitives.....leaders ARE the enemy of maintaining a Constitutional Republic.

But...the average member of the Democratic Party...is not.

The average member of the Democratic Party is just brainwashed..(for want of a better word)...

Just like the average member of the Republican Party is in danger of becoming.

"This is a party, this Republican Party, a Party for free men, not for blind followers, and not for conformists. "

So..I'll ask my very simple questions once again......

And Republicans who wish to rant and rave about 'third party' this or that...go right ahead.

But George W. Bush barely won the last election.....

You NEED staunch conservatives ( nowadays I guess we would be considered 'radical'.....) to help re-elect him....and others of the party..

CONVINCE us.........that at a certain point you will be willing to fight for 'old time values'.....

CONVINCE us ...that you have not become slavish followers of GWB...in much the same way as some did with Clinton....that you will ask the 'hard questions' (and demand the answers).

CONVINCE us.......and you will not do so by the constant dismissal of our very real concerns.

CONVINCE us.......

-----------------

So where do we 'draw the line'????

Should we elect rapists or murderers...if they are members of the Republican Party..and could 'help retake the Senate'???

At what point do you say 'this far and no further'???

Must every single American 'prostitute' themselves in order for one political party (one which on CLOSE examination is no different than the other one) to 'control' government???

I have certain values and beliefs...based upon my Belief in God.

Should I just throw those Beliefs and Values away...and close my eyes....just so the Republicans can win???

The basis of this Nation is a hardcore belief that the values and ideals (sorry to use that word..ideals...seems that word anymore has the same effect on Republicans as a Cross does to evil) that founded this Nation are important....

[BluesDuke]

Let me be first say"BRING BACK NEWT"

And let me be the first to ask, "Are you nuts?" Newt was one of the biggest sellouts we had to deal with during the Clintonista era. He personified what is meant when people say of today's Republican't Party that they talk the talk but do not walk the walk and that it has been thus for longer than people comprehend.

[redrock]

"Dopey. Just like this entire thread."

Ahhh..the 'Sinkspur Seal of Approval!!!'

Thanks!!!

redrock

[WakeUpChristian]

what have the Republicans done? More than the Libertarians.

the Republicans have been the head of the house for ten years!!

[redrock]

"The American people will never knowingly adopt Socialism, but under the name of Liberalism they will adopt every fragment of the Socialist program until one day America will be a Socialist nation without knowing how it happened."
--- Norman Thomas, 1936 presidential candidate on the Socialist ticket

Yep...seems to be working....

redrock

[Arch-Conservative]

I am a lifelong Republican who does not foresee any change in party affiliation, and I would be happy to answer your questions...

First of All - What do I believe? I believe in the supremacy of the individual, but that individual power must be tempered by private morality. I believe in the rule of law, and that law violations should be met with considerable force, and severe punishments. I believe in economic and political freedom, private property rights, and non-intrusive domestic government (other than in the defense of property rights). I believe in a strong military, and an armed population. I believe in freedom of speech on a political level, but that such freedom is not without limits. I believe in freedom of religion, but not freedom of morality. In short, I am a textbook Reagan - Buckley - Limbaugh conservative.

Now, on to your operative question - why continue with the Republican Party? When does one abandon ship? Why not a third-party - etc?

I would be the first to admit that the Republican Party has not fully embodied the values of conservatism at all times (recently there have been a few major deviations). I would further concede that some elected Republicans exist in a realm to the left of me. However, these inter-party conflicts are not new, and should be dealt with by acting within the party structure. Christ has yet to run for office, so there will not be a "perfect" elected official.

I am a conservative - not a Libertarian, Constitutionalist, Reformer ... whatever. I have yet to see a political party which entirely embodies the political beliefs that I espouse, and, frankly, no viable third-party even comes close.

The Reform Party, with Pat Buchanan and Ross Perot? Buchanan is off the reservation on foreign policy (I am not an isolationist - I am a colonialist), and his stance against globalism is a slap in the face to capitalists; and Perot is a bit off his rocker. The Libertarians? Harry Browne is a good man, but I have trouble aligning myself with a party which has morphed into a group of drug-addicts who seek to legalize whatever they're on. Furthermore, I have distinct problems with the Libertarian ideology - I have a Libertarian streak, but I am a conservative ... not a Libertarian. Those are the only two worthwhile right-leaning third-parties. The Constitution Party, etc are too small to make any difference.

This third-party movement is not productive, and it will only serve to marginalize the right-wing. Case-in-point - the Green Party. These are avowed leftists, and their secession from the Democratic Party has only made them look even farther out of the mainstream than they appeared before. If we remove the right-wing from the Republican Party, Republicans will move further left, capture the conservative Democrats, and catch a second wind. The Party will continue to drift leftward, and the real conservatives won't win an election for another half-century. We must work within the party, and release the grip of the left. We will never win by diluting the conservative vote.

So, you ask, at what point will I stand for principle? Frankly, I always stand for principle. But I fight from within the party, not from outside. With Democrats holding the Senate, the Republicans are forced to make more compromises - however, the Republican controlled House is a distinctly conservative body. The Senate can be corrected in a single election, but not if weak-stomached conservatives jump ship and vote for someone who hasn't got the money or talent to actuall win an election.

At what point will I draw the line? My answer is, I won't. I will not abandon my party, so that it may be taken over by the left. I will continue the fight for my values, even after you and your cohorts have abandoned ship and swam to safer waters. So, you can make your principled, but inconsequential, vote for some no-name third-party, and I will retake the Republican Party, so that the weak-stomached will return.

I am first and foremost a conservative; not a Republican. I fight for conservative values, and I fight to maintain the conservative grasp of the Republican Party. The more conservatives abandon the Republican Party, the farther away the Party will drift. So - in short - I blame you "principled" Republican refugees for the recent leftward drift. But, make no mistake - we rock-ribbed conservatives will hold the Republican Party long after your dozen-member third-party has been disbanded and liquidated.

Just something for you Reformers to think about.

From the right,
Adam D. Elrod
adamdelrod@hotmail.com

"The heart of the wise inclines to the right, but the heart of the fool to the left." -- Ecclesiastes 10:2

[Kevin Curry]

Let them hear conservative policies described as something other than the heartless throwing of widows and orphans into the street, and they will vote for these policies.

Good point. For example, there is a bold and sassy conservative contingent right here at FR that daily champions dope, porn, and the gay and lesbian lifestyles as keystone conservative policies for a new, revitalized America.

Given how much wonderful cost-free freedom and miraculous prosperity these new conservatives stand ready to deliver to the families of America, it astounding they don't already run the country.

[christine]

howdy, backatcha ;)

[Twodees]

No chance for a conviction? That's a handy excuse. Plenty of excuses are available. Nobody's excused, though. Clinton's removal from office would have been the death knell for the democrats, IMO. When you have a majority in both houses of Congress and you won't even try to get certain things passed because the president can veto it, then you haven't shown anyone any reason to vote for you (you means GOP congressmen, not you, VinnieT). Vote republican because they aren't democrats? That's not enough of a reason. The failure of the republican controlled Senate was a profound failure. The Senators who failed can't redeem themselves personally, they need to be replaced: Warner, Lott, Hatch, Spector and several others simply have to go. Until some real changes are made in the GOP's roster in DC, this sort of discussion is going to keep coming up. GOP faithful FReepers can call the rest of the conservatives here whatever names are convenient. The division will only deepen and conservatism will suffer for it.

[exodus]

To: redrock
"...will I give up my Party for something "better" and my anwser is never.
Instead I will work to make it better..."

The Republican party has gone through some rough times in the past,
and I admit this one is a bigge, but we have gotten through and are better for it.

So I've got a question for you, when are you going to work to make the party better
by either running for election or helping to elect those within the party who support your beliefs.
# 16 by tricky_k_1972
*************************

I did that.

I asked myself, "who best represents ideas I agree with?"

My answer was "Alan Keyes."
Most people I talked to said the same thing,
with the qualifier," He'll never win."
So they voted for Bush in the primaries,
even though Bush is a liberal Republican.

Here's the kicker; when Bush won easily, with a majority of Primary votes, he was considered to have a "mandate," the fullhearted support of all members of the Party. With that kind of success, do you really expect to move the Republican Party back to it's former conservative ideas?

[Twodees]

Yep, the '92 non-campaign was only barely better than the '96 non-campaign. Dole was a soft pitch to Clinton. It looked as though the RNC rummaged through their closets and found the absolute worst candidate they could find to run against Clinton.

Maybe Dole was meant to attract the cemetery vote, who can say? One thing's for sure: he was the republican most likely to lose an election that year.

[brat]

Thankyou, redrock. I think we each must ask ourselves which issues are the most important to us. Then we must stack W or anyone else against that list. For me the key issues have already been crapped on. I have no choice but incur the wrath of the Bots in favor of principle. We Conservatives are truly in a predicament. We can no longer go Republican yet no third voice will be allowed to rise by our government sponsored two party system. I pray that that will change, some loophole in the FEC rules will out; Somehow, someway a Conservative voice will be heard. It makes me ill to hear the lame excuses I've heard some make.

[Lester Moore]

but I will not vote for a cannidate who cannot win and there by elect a cannidate who I absolutly don't wan't. I also will not elect a canidate I don't want through the omision of my vote. If you have any constructive suggestions besides the offhand comment I'll be glad to listen.

You are not willing to hold out until the RINO's feel the pain. They must sense personal political risk before they'll even negotiate on change, much less carry out change. You need to be willing to stand on principle no matter how much whining you hear about how, "The other side will win and whiny whiny whine whine..."

Message to the RINO's - You change. You give. Or YOU risk losing everything.

[Arch-Conservative]

You have sought to compare "Republican Apologists" with liberals (such as Hillary), and Socialists (such as Hitler and Marx). However, I see a similar comparison which can be made between liberals and conservative third-party advocates.

Liberalism is an irrational, Utopian, feelings-based ideology. It has no basis in reality, and does not seem to care whether its ideas work - only that their implementation makes liberals feel better. Case in point: welfare. It doesn't work, and it just makes people feel better to simply throw money at poor people. Nevermind that it creates no incentive to achieve, and creates State dependency - we feel good about it.

Republican Refugees are exactly the same way. It makes conservatives feel better to abandon a party at the first sign of creeping liberalism. Nevermind that such a move threatens the viability of the conservative ideology. Nevermind that practical reality calls for a government that occasionally must compromise with the opponent party (though I will concede that I have been displeased with many recent compromises). Nevermind that if the right-wing leaves the Republican Party, it will only continue to drift to the left. Nevermind that such abandonment caused the election of Bill Clinton, the nearly caused the election of Al Gore. Nevermind that it is has been tried a dozen times, and failed in every case. At least it makes you guys feel better about yourselves.

I, a Republican, do not seek to diminish individual thought by advocating unquestioning party loyalty. I simply advocate solving problems from within, so as to maintain a conservative stronghold in a realistically viable political party. You folks fold up your tents and leave with no rational justification for doing so - all in the hopes of some utopian ideal in which you will all feel good about your "principle", with no regards for the practical effects of such a move.

From the right,
A.D. Elrod

"The heart of the wise inclines to the right, but the heart of the fool to the left." - Ecclesiastes 10:2

[cva66snipe]

What joke? In order to convict in the senate, 67 Senators are needed. The GOP had 54-55. As one Democrat Senator said, "we don't care if you have Clinton on tape raping a Nun, we're not going to vote to convict."

My recollection this statement or a variation of it was made in the pre-trial meeting by Ted Stevens-R-Alaska who voted not guilty as well. Can anyone look in Schippers book and confirm this?

[brat]

"I had my bout with spite. I had it in 1992, and my reward was eight years of William Jefferson Clinton. Lots of us showed ol' man Bush just what we thought about 'read my lips.' Sumbitch can't keep a promise, we'll show him, we'll vote for Ross Perot."

Do not despair....our numbers are growing and someday, someway we'll get to break out of our bonds and elect an alternative. Many Dems have left the party, yet can't become Reps. Many Reps have left the party, yet can't become Dems. Like Fox News, we'll end up in the majority in the not too distant future. We must keep pushing and refuse to accept the status quo!

[VinnyTex]

After the house voted to impeach on Dec 19, 1998, leading Democrat Senators told Lott they would never vote to convict. Not one Democrat Senator went to the evidence room to look at what the impeachment managers had. That's when Babs Boxer of California said, "We don't care if you have film of him raping a Nun, we're not going to vote to convict."

End of story. Republicans needed 12 Democrat Senators for removal. They didn't get one. I rest my case. You can blow smoke all want, but those are the facts.

[brat]

But who are the RINOs? Todays Republican is so far removed from Republican principles that they are often the RINOs, all the while calling others by that label.

[Libertarianize the GOP]

thanks for the ping