"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....

[brat]

You are so right, Red.

[Luis Gonzalez]

It's easy to talk when you know you'll never be held accountable.

[exodus]

To: redrock
Hey, I have a question for you.

I know what everyone's definition of a Bushbot is, a person who supports every single thing Bush does or says, and never, ever is critical of his policies at any level.

Now, here's my question, or perhaps it's more of a request.

Could you point me to all the posts by Keyesters, Brigadiers, or Libertarians critizing ANYTHING their candidate of choice opines, or even gracefully accepting criticism from others?

I'll look for your *PING*.
I just won't look for it anytime soon.
# 268 by Luis Gonzalez
*************************

Keyes was my first choice, I voted for him in the Primaries.
I disagree with his support of the "war on Drugs,"
which I previously considered the greatest threat to our freedom.

Libertarian Harry Brown was my second choice.
I voted for him in the general election.
I disagree with the support of abortion-on-demand
that is a part of the Libertarian Platform.

[brat]

"When you stare into the face of President Hillary Clinton, don't blame the ones you left on the battle field for the loss of our freedoms, blame the ones who walked away from the fight."

Thats what we're doing Luis, fighting. You just don't see it that way. If Hitlery Clinton is elected it will be because GWB deserted his Conservative base. Pure and simple.

[Texasforever]

GWB deserted his Conservative base.

Which "conservative" base?

[cva66snipe]

Could you point me to all the posts by Keyesters, Brigadiers, or Libertarians critizing ANYTHING their candidate of choice opines, or even gracefully accepting criticism from others?

Can you tell me you have actually read this parties platform? No it's by no means perfect but it shows just how far off the mark the GOP is. BTW the parties founder is about as conservative as anyone can get and is a long time grass roots activist even as going as far as helping the GOP on conservative matters.

Click here to get to the link

[brat]

"It's easy to talk when you know you'll never be held accountable."

HUH? What are you talking about Luis? I am accountable in all of my life. I'm not sure what your stating?

[philman_36]

Remarks by the President at Simon for Governor Luncheon
The public education system in America is one of the most important foundations of our democracy.

A strange definition.

I want my kids to learn that too Mr. Bill. I'm afraid you're not going to be teaching it though.
I'm through looking. I'm learning a lot about Mr. Bill tonight. He hasn't said democracy, but he hasn't said Republic yet either.
Now, I'm not knocking your guy mind you, I don't have to vote out there. I have enough problems here in Texas.

Our Texas politicians have never met a democracy they didn't like either...
Gwyn Shea sworn in as new Secretary of State of Texas
Shea was sworn-in Monday morning at a ceremony that included Governor Rick Perry, U.S. Senator Kay Bailey Hutchison, and other leaders from around Texas. Governor Perry named Shea to the post in December.
Snip..."The electoral process is something that has always been a special passion for me. Both of my parents were election judges and safeguarding the democratic the American tradition of democracy will be one of my office’s highest purposes," Shea said.
Snip..."It is never too soon to begin teaching children this core value of democracy. By the time they graduate from high-school and turn 18, we want the young people of Texas to understand that voting is one of the basic responsibilities of living in a free society," she said.

Text of Gov. Rick Perry's Remarks to LULAC
I want to thank you for this opportunity to share my ideas with you about education…the most important issue facing Texas. I want to thank you for your love for America and Texas, and your active participation in our democracy.
Hey Rick...There ain't no such thing as The Democracy of Texas. It's called the Republic of Texas for a specific reason!

Always the education thing. Oh yeah ya'll...indoctrinate 'em well. My kids poor government teachers will be in for a rude awakening someday. I'm looking forward with eager anticipation to the visit I know I'll be having to make.

When an opponent declares, 'I will not come over to your side, 'I calmly say, 'Your child belongs to us already...What are you? You will pass on. Your decendants, however, now stand in the new camp. In a short time they will know nothing but this new community. Adolf Hitler

[section9]

I hate to say this, but I'm ticked off at Admin Moderator, but for all the right reasons, I suppose.

See, I read "semper_libertas" remarks to me.

I saw the cheap little con that he was running. Basically, he took "Republican Apologists" and stuck them in a passage from Mein Kampf, as if that would prove his point. Then he ran and hid, telling me not to argue against him, as his point was 100% valid.

He used the cheap little Hitler card, then tried to get away from it.

I was this close to giving the little clown the horsewhipping of his life on this board when Admin Moderator pulled his posts. I suppose they needed to be pulled.

The thrust of his argument was that we Republicans are "suppressing" the goofballs (Brigadiers, Perotistas, Blak Helikopterz types) simply by asking them to support the Republican Party. Ergo, we were just like the Nazis, the Marxists, and of course, the Democrats.

So I decided to hit him over the head with a ballpeen hammer by making the following hypothetical test case:

Test case:

You say: "Jews to the Ovens!" (he didn't say that, but since he raised the Hitler card, I thought I'd offer my own final solution...)

We say: "Back to the Beer Hall with you, fascist moron!"

If he acts as a fascist moron, does our pointing that out to him suppress his right to Free Speech and Free Thought? No. His right to act as a fascist moron is still intact. But the fact that we are telling him that he is a fascist moron does not mean that his argument that the Jews should go to Ovens is valid.

Now I wasn't calling semper_libertas a fascist moron. That would be wrong. I only pointed out in my rather humble way that he argued like a fascist moron.

Now I know that you are lurking here, Semper_Libertas. And both of us remember the content of your silly post. If you ever, and I do mean ever try to make a silly, fatuous, half-a$$ed series of "arguments" like that to me again, I will give you a hiding that will force you to go down to Office Depot to get a cushion for your chair.

To even think of using the shock value of Hitler or Hitlerism to advance your central thesis: that Republicans have adopted the ideology of National Socialism, is repellent to me and, obviously, to our friend, Admin Moderator. It is the argumentative tool of the frustrated fool who has nothing of substance to argue with but instead chooses to exhume the body from the Fuhrerbunker as if that will close the sale with the rest of us.

What a cheap, shallow attempt at rational thought. You cad, you intellectual bounder, you Three-Card Monte dealer you. And believe me, Semper, I am being charitable.

Be Seeing You,

Chris You

[exodus]

To: exodus
If you can't see a difference between Bush and Clinton,
then you and I have nothing more to discuss.
# 280 by Luis Gonzalez
*************************

You knew my views of Bush months ago, Luis Gonzalez.
They're the same views I had of Bush when he was my Governor.

Governor Bush did nothing to prosecute the murders at Waco.
I knew that a President Bush would be just as forgiving of lawbreaking.
Murder, perjury, witness tampering, lying to Congress, treason, it would be all forgiven.
I said so in earlier threads, both before and after the election.
I was told, "You're wrong. Wait and see. Clinton will be punished."

Well, now Clinton is an ambassador for the Bush Administration,
and Hillary is a respected and honored guest.

[brat]

Old Republican base and values as opposed to Neo-Republican base and values.

[exodus]

We have a liberal in the White House now.
Eight years of liberal Clinton, eight years of liberal Bush,
and eight years of liberal whoever, Democrat or Republican,
who wins in 2008.

Do you really think that we'll ever have a conservative President,
when we're only given liberals to chose from?

The only way off that merry-go-round
is to vote outside of the major parties.
If you vote Republican no matter who they give you,
they have no reason to change.
- exodus

To: exodus
If you can't see a difference between Bush and Clinton,
then you and I have nothing more to discuss.
# 280 by Luis Gonzalez
*************************

The difference is that Bush is a liberal Republican,
and Clinton is a liberal Democrat.

Clinton is guilty of several severe crimes,
Bush is guilty of accessory-after-the-fact to all of Clinton's crimes.

President Bush swore to enforce the law.
He lied.

[section9]

"Perot appealed to two great weaknesses in the American electorate in those times, gullibility and a temptation to follow the Man on the White Horse that the Framers foresaw in all democracies.".......Wrong. We liked Perot because he spoke the truth with FACTS and REAL STATS to back up everything he said.

No, you were gullible.

Time and again, Perot spoke of the "electronic town hall". Through the magic of television and interactive technology, our constitutional republic would be reduced to a series of televised referenda, with Perot acting as the emcee.

Of course he would get all his legislation passed! If he controls the town hall and the audience, it's a no-lose proposition. Perot was and remains a very impatient man. Sadly, he forgot that the Framers intended the passing of laws to be a difficult process. Perot tried to get around this by installing direct, cable TV, democracy.

Which is another name for Fascism, Nielsen Style.

Oh, and Luis was right. Perot was pissed at Bush because of a land deal that went south in Texas and a dispute he had with Bush, Sr. while serving as a member of PFIAB.

The election wasn't lost because of Perot, it was lost because GHWB was a lousy President who ignored the needs of the REAL America. His son is now following suit. W has signed more leftist crap than Clinton did, and that's saying alot.

All that you achieved; the Buchanan revolt, the Perot third party movement, was to undermine Republican chances for victory in 1992. By God, you showed them, didn't you! You bought into Pat's ego and Perot's cafe-latte fascism, and let your eyes wander.

And Clinton sailed into the White House.

I have no time for someone who cannot tell the difference between a Clinton and a Bush.

Be Seeing You,

Chris

[thrcanbonly1]

When you stare into the face of President Hillary Clinton, don't blame the ones you left on the battle field for the loss of our freedoms, blame the ones who walked away from the fight.

The only time I stare into that Marxist Scum's face will be through a scope.

[exodus]

To: brat; Luis Gonzalez
"...All that you achieved; the Buchanan revolt, the Perot third party movement, was to undermine Republican chances for victory in 1992. By God, you showed them, didn't you! You bought into Pat's ego and Perot's cafe-latte fascism, and let your eyes wander..."

"...And Clinton sailed into the White House..."

"...I have no time for someone who cannot tell the difference between a Clinton and a Bush.
Be Seeing You..."

# 293 by section9
*************************

You're both wrong.
While I believe that Perot was an honest man,
his honesty was no challenge for an incumbent President.

Perot had nothing to do with Bush Sr.'s loss.
People were looking for an alternative to Bush,
because they felt betrayed by the "Read my lips" President.
If it hadn't been Perot, it would have been someone else.

Clinton didn't sail into the White House,
he squeaked in,
on the strength of Bush's lie.

We had the same situation in the last election.
W. Bush didn't win because of his qualifications.
He won on the strength of Gore's and Clinton's lies.

If Gore had even hinted that he would correct the abuses of the Clinton Administration,
we would be talking about President Gore,
how "his" War on Terror was undermining our freedom,
and I would be preaching to the choir instead of committing heresy.

[cva66snipe]

When you stare into the face of President Hillary Clinton, don't blame the ones you left on the battle field for the loss of our freedoms, blame the ones who walked away from the fight.

I'm going to blame those Dems and GOP's who chose going after an affair over more serious matters. I'm going to blame those who in the DEM & GOP derailed any chance of an honest senate trial and voted Not Guilty as well. I'm going to blame every single stinking dirt bag politician who put political self or party preservation over their Constitutional Duty to their office. How's that for accountability? See either The DEM or GOP doing the same? I don't! Accountability my eye! Neither party dares look at accountability or responsibility for what has happened under their tenure. I do not consider the likes of these hero's to be defended in any shape or form nor are they worthy of my consideration of a vote.

The ones who tried and yes some did really try to stop the Clintons I will support them. But the others? No not for any reason what so ever. Till others start treating them in this manner and stop re- electing them, those who are re-elected have the permission of those who re-elected them to continue their deeds against America.

[exodus]

To: brat
You better read something other than the rethoric posted here in FR,
and try to grasp an idea about how politics really work.
# 252 by Luis Gonzalez
*************************

So, FreeRepublic is a bad place to learn conservative values?
I have to say that you're wrong about that, Luis.

[exodus]

To: Luis Gonzalez
"...Accountability my eye!
Neither party dares look at accountability or responsibility for what has happened under their tenure.
I do not consider the likes of these heros to be defended in any shape or form
nor are they worthy of my consideration of a vote.

The ones who tried and yes some did really try to stop the Clintons I will support them.
But the others? No not for any reason what so ever.
Till others start treating them in this manner and stop re- electing them,
those who are re-elected have the permission of those who re-elected them
to continue their deeds against America."
# 296 by cva66snipe
*************************

Exactly.
If we re-elect them even after they reveal themselves to be liberals,
politicians are justified in assuming that we want to elect liberals.

[exodus]

To: Luis Gonzalez

When you stare into the face of President Hillary Clinton, don't blame the ones you left on the battle field for the loss of our freedoms, blame the ones who walked away from the fight.

The only time I stare into that Marxist Scum's face will be through a scope.
# 294 by thrcanbonly1
*************************

You're going to be spending a lot of money on televisions, thrcanbonly1.

[exodus]

To: exodus

"The Reform Party had nothing to do with it."

Don't start with the Science Fiction,
I'm not politically naive by a long shot.
The Reform Party had everything to do with it.

Yes, "read my lips" was a big mistake,
the Democrats in Congress made damned sure that he had to eat his words,
and I still voted for Bush...I knew what was going to happen, and it did...twice.

In retrospect, what would have hurt this nation less,
four more years of Bush Sr., or eight years of Clinton?
# 262 by Luis Gonzalez
*************************

Tough question, Luis.
One difference, if Bush Sr. won his second term,
we would have never seen the Republican "Contract with America."

That was a direct result of the votes won by Perot.
The "Contract with America" was an attempt to win back those votes.

It worked, too, until the Republicans broke their word again.
Then Republicans lost their majority in the Senate.