Republicans, All Dressed up, But Nothing More Than Empty Suits

Vanity ^ | 10/09/02 | B. A. Conservative

[B. A. Conservative]

The election is now only a month away. FreeRepublic blindly backs Republicans regardless of issues or the Republican platform. FreeRepublic and the Republicans expect conservatives to prefer Republicans, if nothing else, because Republicans are the lesser of two socialists. The Emperor has no clothes, and faced with a socialist or a clone, Democratic voters will have no trouble picking the real thing. Conservatives willing to demand a real choice have other options.

The "boomers" will start reaching Social Security's retirement age in October 2008. By 2012, Social Security will become cash flow negative. There are no (none; zero; nada) assets in the so-called Social Security Trust Fund. The intruments in this so-called "trust fund", at best represent promises that Congress will raise taxes, cut benefits or both sufficiently to bring Social Security back into cash flow equilibrium. Political rhetoric and political reality differ. We have all heard the derivative debate regarding counter party risk and the risk of off balance sheet accounting typified by Enron. Social Security and its so-called "trust fund" encompasses the very worst features of both counter party risk and off balance sheet liabilities. Social Security makes Enron, Worldcom, and Global Crossing look good in the off balance sheet accounting department. And Social Security makes JPM and Long Term Capital Management look good in the counter party risk department. All of the financial catastrophes that have come to the United States in our 200 year history have been linear events. If we deal with the impending Social Security crisis within the next five years using the complete voluntary privatization of SS using the Chilean model of the Cato Foundation Plan, the crisis can be contained and kept linear. If we wait longer than five years to completely privatize SS or leave SS under government control, SS becomes a non-linear event with derivative implosion a certainty. It is not financially or politically possible to fund the unfunded liabilities of Social Security much beyond 2012. Politicians will address this problem by destroying the full faith and credit of the United States or by destroying our currency or both.

Speaking as a retired physician, it is not possible to fund the unfunded liabilities of Medicare. Medicare becomes cash flow negative in 2008, well before the "boomers" become eligible for Medicare beginning in 2011. The unfunded liabilities of these two programs are too large to fund through payroll taxes alone. And these liabilities are too large to fund through combinations of benefit cuts or income tax increases. All Americans are over taxed. Government has become a monolithic vulture crippling every American family. It must end now before American families are bled dry.

Every democracy in history has ended in bankruptcy. When the Democratic Party subverted the Constitution, and turned the United States into a serfdom based on socialism, it was necessary to democratize our republic. They succeeded in spades. In order to fund the unfundable, it will be necessary for the government of the United States, no matter whether controlled by Democrats or Republicans, to borrow to or beyond the limits of our credit, to print dollar bills in an unending inflationary spiral until the dollar is worthless and the United States and almost all of its citizens are bankrupt. And this reality will come to pass before there is a presidential election in 2016. All democracies in recorded history end in bankruptcy and so will ours. This is absolutely predictable and if we act now, preventable. We must restore our Constitutional Republic before it becomes too late shortly after the end of the current decade.

Democrats paved the road to socialism in 1936. That road goes off a cliff somewhere between 2012 and 2016. There is a fork in the road to the RIGHT dead ahead. This road offers the only realistic way to avoid the collapse and disintegration of the United States and the only chance to restore freedom and Constitutional law to the first country to realize these dreams or to the people from whom they have been stolen. If FreeRepublic will take the right fork, the Republicans will follow.

I do not want to mislead you into believing that enough Americans will follow the Republican lead. We have seen three clear elections where this is true. Ronald Reagan won two landslide elections running on a strong conservative Constitutional agenda. The Contract with America was a landslide success and gave Republicans control of Congress for the first time in most voters' voting lifetimes. But make no mistake, there are large numbers of Americans now addicted to socialism and serfdom. And this group of Americans is determined to impose slavery on the rest of us. Socialism spawns the unproductive and/or the weakly productive. It penalizes the productive. It is unrealistic to believe the myth that the people of this country are united. Study the map of the 2000election if you have any doubts. I am no longer willing to allow Democrats to impose their socialistic programs on me or my family. If we cannot defeat socialism with ballots, then let them have their own country and run it as they see fit. I intend to excercise my God-given rights and secede if there are sufficient like-minded souls. If not, I will simply leave and find another country that is willing to respect my freedom and the God-given rights of its citizens. And if the Democrats and other socialists choose to interfere with my right to secede or my right to leave peacefully, their blood will be on their own hands. I can speak for no other man, but I am going to live free or am willing to risk death in the attempt. Who among you will join me in demanding the return of our freedom? I am no longer willing to vote for a lesser tyranny. I invite all conservative freedom loving Americans to join me. The battle for freedom doesn't take campaign contributions nor does it require taking to the streets. All it requires is the quite determination to cast your votes only for candidates willing to act to restore the Constitutional rights that we have already lost.

[riley1992]

FreeRepublic blindly backs Republicans regardless of issues or the Republican platform.

You betcha. "If you don't vote Republican, you are handing it to the Democrats." is the war cry. God forbid anyone should think outside the box.

[B. A. Conservative]

I have not yet looked into the Republic of Texas. I know they exist but am not familiar with the organization or what they advocate.

Your comments about change are very relevant to the end of the United States. Basic mathematics govern financial accounting. The rules for you and for the United States are basically the same with a single exception; you cannot lawfully print paper into money. The United States has been spending more money that it has received in revenue every year since WWI with only one or two years as an exception. There were no surpluses during any year during Clinton's term or Bush II's. I am sixty and there has only been one true surplus for one year under Eisenhower. The admitted estimates of the unfunded liabilities of Social Security are about 12 trillion dollars. No one can accurately even begin to guess at the unfunded liabilities of Medicare when the boomers reach retirement age. US GDP is roughly 10 trillion.

Up until sometime in 80's, beneficiaries retiring under Social Security reaped a windfall profit. Average benefits exceeded the taxes paid in plus a reasonable return on the invested capital. Up until the 70's the benefits exceeded contribution by a wide margin. Almost all beneficiaries retiring now will lose money based on their prior contributions. Anyone under the age of 50 is going to get screwed royally and the younger you are the worse the screwing. SS is nothing more than a cheap Ponzi scheme exactly like a chain letter. It was never fair. It was never equal. And it has always been Unconstitutional. Medicare is worse. Almost all the present problems being experienced by Americans related to the health care system are the direct fault of Medicare or US government policy.

Things changed but you are living in a delusion or a fantasy if you think they are for the better. And if we don't change Social Security and Medicare, the United States will be bankrupt before 2016. If we don't return to living under the Constitution, the United States will end in bankruptcy, but the world will be a better place.

[ex-snook]

"You betcha. "If you don't vote Republican, you are handing it to the Democrats." is the war cry. God forbid anyone should think outside the box.

Righto. So what differences does a voter expect and what does he get? Review the sameness - expanded government, bombing countries without war declaration, NAFTA exporting factories, robbing the Social Security 'lock box', runaway Attorney General's snoop patrol, ignoring illegal immigration, despise military opinions, servant worker jobs replacing factory jobs, using union Reagan Democrats for photo-ops.

Differences - more morality in the White House and big tax cuts for investors and the dead.

[riley1992]

Differences - more morality in the White House and big tax cuts for investors and the dead.

To his credit, he cut taxes for more than just that. However, on all else we agree. It is asinine how you are slammed around here now for daring to disagree with the Bush Administration's policies. Automaton comes to mind for some odd reason.

[rintense]

A third party would only mean the complete and utter death to any chance of there ever being a conservative government ever again in the Untied States. Take a good, long look at New Zealand and their multi-party system.

[Wolfstar]

Thanks for the thoughtful reply. I think yours is a very reasonable definition and is very close to my own point of view. Unfotunately, that nation began a slow decline during the Civil War, and has existed only in vestigal form since passage of the Income Tax nearly 100 years ago. We will never go back to that earlier version of our nation. It just isn't going to happen. So the best we can do is try to hold the line against creeping national and global Socialism.

[Protagoras]

Do you prefer Kennedy, Bradley, Byrd, and Blagojavich?

It isn't a yes or no proposition. I don't vote straight tickets and I don't have to choose the people you listed in order to reject the clowns I listed.

I reject Ryan (both of them) and also Blagojavich. I reject Nixon and Kennedy.

[rintense]

You ought to be ashamed for trying to turn that on those of us who vote on principal.

Then you have pegged nearly 100% of the Bush bashers here on FR. They have admitted they voted for Bush because he was either:

1. A lesser of two evils
2. Anyone but Gore

So don't just throw out your admonishments without acknowledging that many of the angry conservatives on FR have only themselves to blame for not voting their principles.

[Arioch7]

I agree with you. However, I think that the real problem here lies in the RINOs who pretend to be Republican in order to get the vote if they campaign from a GOP district.

The reson I vote GOP(Although sometimes I vite LIbertarian.) is this... most people in the US are centrists. They are neither left nor right. I believe most would be Conservative if they fully understood the ramifications of thier choices but to most people politics is a two day study in ideas the DAYS before they vote.

After reading the platform of the Republican LIberty Caucas, I have come to the conclusion that it is easier working within the GOP to attempt to change IT rather then fighting against it.

It upsets me that many people in the GOP are moderates but that is the way it is and the way it shall remain for a long time. While President BUsh has shown some spirit on certain issues, he has capitulated in others. The reasons for this are it is easier to try to change things when one is in office rather then when one is outside of the power structure.

It comes down to Realpolitik, and the reason some are getting angry with you is that if we followed your vision, we would be a fringe party unable to do ANYTHING. As I have said, I work inside the GOP to bring it more to the right and if people like me succeed, it will bring the country farher to the right.

I might add, the political capital is not present to demand the changes that you wish. We must do it by incrementalism. This is the same strategy that the left has used with the DNC and on the American public, and it works. The country would NEVER go for thier looney lefty ideas so they have waged war using incrementalism hoping that it will be too late once the Country wakes up and realizes what is happening.

IN summary, I share your ideals but I am a realist and will fight for every last inch. Who would have EVER thought ten years ago that a President would campaign as a Conservative and win? Albeit, as a Compassionate Conservative but a Conservative nevertheless.

The reason we are practicing Realpolitik now is that the November elections are a HAIRSBREADTH apart and we must not lose. If we Conservatives all abandon the GOP, what will we gain? The Libertarians and the COnstitutionalists will gain more members but will still be fringe groups and the DNC will have acheived an absoulute stranglehold over our government.

I am hoping you are just a frustrated idealist and will see my point, because as I have said, I share your views but strategically you are advocating your own extinction and giving the GOP free reign to become EXACTLY what you predict. IN other words, your actions(If taken en masse.) would produce a self-fulfilling prophecy.

[Protagoras]

I guess you where wrong on this.

Yes, it didn't get canceled. I'm surprised.

Could you be wrong about your fellow Freepers who vote Republican?

Wrong about what?

You have to vote for the best person for the job, that is your civic duty.

Even if the best person isn't running? If two commies were running against each other, which one would you vote for? If two crooks were running, which is often the case, you vote for the one who stole less? I don't choose to vote that way, but we keep getting bad candidates because lots of people have the childish notion that it is the right way.

The bottom line is that we have to vote in the primaries and get Conservative GOPers on the ballots.

I'm not interested in conservatives if they represent what many so-called conservatives here stand for.

Unless you cannot vote in good conscience, at least consider voting for a conservative R, they have the best chance of making a change and it keeps the Ds out of office. They are the ones who want to destroy our country.

I cannot vote in good conscience for ANYONE who doesn't represent smaller government and the rightful role of government in a free society. Namely, to defend citizens rights.

And we have to DO something, get involved. Write letters to the editor, run for office, get involved in polling place duties, run for committee positions for your local GOP, put up signs, protest.

WE? You have a frog in your pocket? I'm more involved than you are ever likely to be. Skip the lecture, you don't know anything about my involvement so you have no credibility on the issue.

Finally, Stop fighting about the things we can deal with later.

There is no no "later" when it comes to fundamental differences. I oppose all parties that would expand the role of government, or for that matter, keep it the same. That includes Republicans in most cases.

LP, CP and RP agree on basic principles and are close on many issues.

Incorrect on "basic principles", partially correct on "many" issues.

I'd much rather see GOP vs. LP in general elections, I know both really care about the Country and Liberty.

Debatable.

The lack of action and in fighting by the conservative base is the reason the GOP is not more conservative and why we are losing the country.

We are losing the country because people have abandoned the principles of limited government and personal responsibility. Both major parties are guilty of continuing the downward spiral.

[Arioch7]

Did you read my post? :)

[reformed_democrat]

It isn't a yes or no proposition.

Yes. It is. You either vote Republican, or you get a dem.

I reject Ryan (both of them) and also Blagojavich. I reject Nixon and Kennedy.

Then who do you choose, and how will they win?

If you can't answer that question, then you, like Perot's Pinheads, Buchanan's Bimbos, and other assorted "libertarians" who vote their feelings will elect democrats.

Better a Bush-Bot then a dem shill, even if your intentions are good and you feel better about yourself for not voting Republican.

[reformed_democrat]

"If you don't vote Republican, you are handing it to the Democrats."

You have it right. In spite of yourself.

[Cacique]

btt

[Protagoras]

More like a RBA. Republican before American. Go vote for Hitler you moron. How the hell old are you? Why do they let children on this forum unsupervised?

[sixmil]

I've said this before, but it bears repeating. The time to steer your party is not election time. By then it is too late, and you are forced to vote RINO, assuming you still believe your vote counts. The reason why RINOs, like liberals, seem to always be calling the shots is simply because they are more politically active. Those of us in caucus states have no excuse for being politically apathetic. Those in primary states will have a harder time breaking into the machine, but you have to get in and put your issues and candidates into the party platform before the primaries. Political activism/participation is something that has to happen year around. When you get mail from the party, take them up on their offer and go to the meetings and run for office. There you will be able to steer things and come election time you will not be forced to vote for the RINO to spite the socialist. Also, you have to remember that there has never been a successful 3rd party in this country. New parties are always spawned from existing parties, so save yourself some trouble fighting history and work the existing party.

[sixmil]

One more thing. I have nothing against 3rd parties, it's just that they have no viability in elections without run-offs. Until this is implemented in every state and at the national level, we are stuck with the 2 party system. For national elections at least, that would require a constitutional amendment, which is a pretty tough hill to climb.

[Mulder]

I'm very dissatisfied with the current GOP leadership also. I believe that there is really not much difference between the two parties at the top (grassroots/local level is a MUCH different story). Both of these arguments have been hashed out for years here by those on both sides.

However, a large number of good conservatives think there is a difference between the leadership of the two parties. They think that by winning the Senate, Bush and the GOP will take a hard turn to the right.

The only way to know for sure is to vote the Republicans into office, such that they have a majority in both Houses of Congress. I'm supporting my incumbent GOP congressman and I urge others to do the same.

If the GOP takes back the Senate, one of two things will occur.

The first possibility is that a conservative agenda will finally be advanced in DC. I would be very happy with this outcome.

The second possibility is that a conservative agenda will not be advanced in DC. Under this scenario, many of the grassroots Republicans will "wake up" and realize what is happening. This would lead to an increase in conservative activism at the grassroots level, and would lead to many challenges against RINOS during the primary elections. It could very well spawn another Reagan revolution or Contract With America.

The best way to "force the issue" is to give the Republicans the Senate.

[billbears]

As to the great things that democraps do, it is illegal in this state to drive in the rain with the with your lights off. Thousands of people are ticketed for not wearing seat belts!

LOL!! And you're blaming Democrats for that? Better check your history there. Who was the politician who pushed for airbags, lowered speed limits, seat belt laws, and that stupid third brake light, all of which BTW increased the price of cars and increased revenues through tickets into the coffers of each and every state. Why I think, yes I know that was Elizabeth Dole!! Not some local democrap as you say.

Documented here with attached report at bottom

Read the report. More than once she went against the Reagan administration's wishes and against businesses. I guess it was 'for the children' huh?

[Red Jones]

And you and your wannabes have no votes...... it does take the votes to get into position to govern.....

you're mistaken deport. as ba conservative made clear in his editorial the conservative side doesn't lack votes it lacks leaders. The actual history is that when the republicans have conservative leadership they win in a landslide. In 1980 & 1984 we had a real conservative leader and we won by very wide margins. In 1994 the republicans campaigned on a strong right-ward bent with contract with america and made very strong gains in congress. Bush 1 of course won easily in 1988 when people assumed he would at least try to be loyal to the ideas he was campaigning on. Then when they saw he was a big government, bash the private secotr monster just like the democrats they elected clinton in 1992. Even in the face of the very terrible, corrupt and criminal democrat party leadership these liberal republicans that the bush' represent can barely win. Very much unlike when the republicans have conservative leadership as has been demonstrated. So, it's not a lack of votes. The american people do support real conservatism. It is a lack of leaders inside the republican party that is the problem.