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

6/23/02 | redrock

[Amerigomag]

What many conservatives don't understand is that the pursuit of a strategic aim requires tactical adjustments to benefit one's position on the political battlefield

As time passes the tactical adjustment becomes the strategic aim.

[Amerigomag]

But...how to change the system???

Term limits, no lawyers in elected office, congressional sessions limited to 60 days every other year and low salaries to name a few.

[Amerigomag]

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,

Conservatives did hold the line in 92 and 96 and the party felt the pain. But what was the result?

The party got smart. 43 went out and talked the talk and walked the walk and returned the stubborn conservatives to his camp.

To what end. Within 6 months of his election 43 went right back to his comfortable chair in the Hall of RINO's.

[tpaine]

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.

------ Ping ----

Since you're generalizing, Luis, I will too.
-- In over four years I've seen dozens, if not hundreds of threads at FR where libertarians criticised the LP, its functionaries, its politicans, and even argued bitterly over basic principles.

As to 'gracefully' accepting critiques, -- who does?

Was this answer soon enough?

[tpaine]

From what I've seen so far, Section 9 is what we called in the army a section 8.

[christine]

wow! i am in awe of that post! you are brilliant! ;)

[ImpBill]

An ominous warning, albeit accurate and your take on the twilight of our great republic is also feared in these quarters. It actually has been for quite some time.

[christine]

Good for you. I agree. Now let's just hope that the electoral system isn't so badly broken - i.e. vote fraud - that our votes won't matter anyway.

i have been angry since the election about THAT issue - vote fraud. after suffering the nightmare of this last election, i swore that if the bush administration and the republicans did NOTHING to insure that it could never happen again, then i would NOT vote for them. well, guess what? nothing has been done and nothing will be done-- business as usual. you've got to ask yourself why?

i don't know why. i can only speculate. all i know is i am disappointed, yet again, with the lack of leadership.

[tpaine]

"I can no longer live in the state of California - I left in 1988 - because of guns that I own. Plus, after 1994, the type of guns that I like to shoot can no longer be imported into the US - that's an infringement on the 2nd Amendment."


What type of gun would that be?
- rintense

---

Semi-auto firearms that LOOK like assault weapons, are the 'type'.

But that isn't the worse of the 'new laws'. You can no longer buy these evil looking weapons, --- OR SELL them.
And you cannot give them away to your grandson.
-- At your death, the state will collect & destroy them. -- I kid you not.

Look kid, all this is old news, well discussed on numerous threads you should have read.

-- *Before* you claimed we've lost no rights.

[gunshy]

My personal goals are my responsibility. The goals of the republican party are the responsibility of the party leadership. If the party has no goals than what good is the party?

[Sir Gawain]

Not one single rebuttal of your post. Wonder why?

[broomhilda]

All points well taken. When we say the pledge of allegiance it is "and to the republic for which it stands." Maybe our politicians should say the pledge of allegiance more often to remind them that this is a republic! Or maybe it is their speech writers who are at fault. They were probably educated in our public school system.

[rintense]

Well, I'm not much of a gun person (yet), but fully support the second amendment. As a matter of fact, I may be getting a gun this summer. My bro wants me to get a glock. Ha.

Are AK-47's on that list? I ask only because a friend of mine 'bought' one here in Michigan- from a state cop I think.

[broomhilda]

Thank you for taking my request to vote in new Republican leadership to our Congress and Senate into consideration. I think that when we have a majority, especially in the senate, you will see the difference in the legislation being signed by our President. The big difference will be made in the judicial system and the judges confirmed.

[tpaine]

Does a bear crap in the woods?

-- AK's are practically THE reason for these silly laws.

Get a nice little single action 22 pistol for your first handgun.
--- Everyone around you will be much more happy.

[philman_36]

(beating my head against the wall)
Dude...you've got, like, a major lump on your skull!
Better put some ice on that. /sarcasm

Just kidding around SG. I've gotten a few lumps on my skull the same way.

[philman_36]

BTW...
Or maybe it is their speech writers who are at fault.
Ah yes...the speech writers. Doesn't that distinctly tell you something? Passing the buck is only the half of it!
Think about it. Do you speak your own words or someone else's? Will you stand by that other person's words or only your own?

[blackie]

I'm an Independent...get a grip !!

Freedom Is Worth Fighting For !!

Molon Labe !!

[broomhilda]

I speak my own words but then I am not a politician whose career depends on not making a mistake. In this atmosphere of distrust and racial and political attacks it is a wise politician who writes his own words and then gives it to a "speechwriter" to edit and make it grammatically and politically acceptable.

[philman_36]

I speak my own words but then I am not a politician whose career depends on not making a mistake.
I'm not worried too much about a politician who makes a mistake in a speech. I worry more about a politician whose speech is not a mistake.
In this atmosphere of distrust and racial and political attacks it is a wise politician who writes his own words and then gives it to a "speechwriter" to edit and make it grammatically and politically acceptable.
Then they wouldn't be handing it to a "speechwriter" at all then, they'd be handing it to a proofreader, or an editor.

BTW...any person who gives a speech, especially if it's prepared by a "speechwriter", should review the speech before it is delivered. If they note an error they should call attention to it and have the speech amended. Off the cuff speeches are a reflection of the inner workings of their own minds and give a more definitive view of their thought process.
There should be no "mistake" in speaking the word democracy. Politicians are supposed to know the difference, and they either don't know and shouldn't be in office, or they know and it is intentional.
If nothing else they could even ad lib in the word Republic, but they don't, and that is the most telling thing of all!
The speech is not a mistake at that point, it is given with intent.
I'm just not buying it broomhilda.