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

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

[Cold Heat]

LOL!! And you're blaming Democrats for that?

Yes, I do! We have had and will have a democrap controlled legislature in Arkansas. Huckabee fought some of it but lost in the end.

As to Dole, I have never voted for one! I don't like them. Either one of them. That is why Clinton won a second term.

I should have voted for the bastard and held my nose.

[sheltonmac]

"God forbid anyone should think outside the box."

Those who can't will suffocate in that box. The feds taped up all the airholes long ago.

[billbears]

As to Dole, I have never voted for one! I don't like them. Either one of them

Careful now, she's running as the Republican replacement for Jesse Helms here in NC. No, really, she is. Hard to believe. And the fact is that your state legislature had no control over the issue. The separate and sovereign states were threatened by the national government with being cutoff from highway funds if they didn't pass legislation like the lovely seat belt law. Just one more example of intrusion into local and state issues.

[Red Jones]

that's very interesting what you said about the connecticut republicans being liberal. I can sympathize and believe.

People on this forum IMHO should really try to face some facts, especially the fact that conservatives like Reagan and goldwater before him were really very strongly disliked by the types of republicans that the Bush' represent. The republicans are in fact ruling today at the national level and in many individual states as well as liberals. Some republicans are campaigning openly as liberals in some states. But president Bush has found the need to lie about his intentions. He rules to the left on domestic policy, but in 2000 he campaigned to the right.

I'm with the many in america who are opposed to both the republican and the democrat party as well as the american elite in general. Our country's future depends on our side prevailing.

[Red Jones]

When the republican party first started it was a 3'rd party. They became the dominant party within 10 years of being founding. The party was founded of course become some religiously motivated ideologues had a single issue that they cared deeply about and saw that their views were rejected by the other two parties. Their party succeeded because the elite among the journalists and the business class was sympathetic to them.

Ross Perot's efforts in 1992 were very impressive in my view. He got of to such a good start the first few weeks of his campaign. That shows how terribly dissatisfied people are with the two main parties. Perot actually was leading in some polls in august 92 when he self-destructed. It was all downhill from there.

In america we presume that everything is above board, that our democracy determines our government, etc. That is a pretty foolish assumption IMHO. Lots of republican voters were defecting to Perot that summer of 92. Then in August Perot attacked republicans in general in a very irrational and unreasonable way. He said 'Republicans' were trying to destroy his daughter's wedding, that they were spying on him, etc. It is reasonable to ask 'what made him do that?'. Is perot really that kooky? A man who is so skilled in business we would not think would do something so stupid. Yet he did. We should ask if he was influenced against his will by covert means.

[sheltonmac]

I agree with your assessment. My point has always been that the REAL war is the war of ideas--and this war is fought at the grassroots level, not in Washington. Politicians will always make sure their wishes come before those of the American people, so hanging one's hopes on who gets elected is one-way ticket to disapointment. The hearts and minds of the people need to be changed. Once they can be convinced that preserving the Constitution is more important than party loyalty we might see some progress.

Keep pointing out the fallacy of GOP "conservatism." As long as people believe that blindly voting for the "R" behind a candidate's name is doing some good we will continue to get the kind of government we deserve. "Vote out the 'rats!™" only works when you included Republicrats.

By the way, please add me to your ping list. :o)

[B. A. Conservative]

I grew up Ga. If you wanted to vote in local elections, you had to be a registered Democrat to be able to vote in the Democratic primaries. The election meant nothing since Republicans seldom fielded more than a token slate of candidates and no republican ever won local office. After we moved to Texas, an acquaintance-first name basis but not really friends, ran for the House seat in our Congressional District. I was mistakenly convinced that he was as conservative or more so than his Republican opponent. I voted for him, and to his credit, he was part of the Boll-Weevils that were instrumental in passing Reagan's tax cuts. He was the last Democrat who will ever get a vote from me. There is almost nothing wrong with America that could not be easily fixed in the absence of the Dumokrauts. Low echelon so-called "conservative" democrats are just Dumokrauts when they grow up or achieve higher offices. I think conservative are naive and kidding themselves when they vote for so-called conservative democrats. You will see Freepers commonly discuss the merits of so-called conservative democrats. My son-in-law has some lobbying responsibilities in our state legislature. He assures me that there genuine real conservatives democrats in the Texas legislature. And the voting habits of their districts preclude them from seeking office as republicans. I suspect he is correct, but that is the exception to the rule. My personal rule is never-ever vote for a Dumokraut for anything.

I will be voting for candidates who adopt the Contract with Congress if any do in the area where I vote. Our district is heavily democratic and republicans seldom mount a complete slate of candidates. And third parties hardly ever mount any slate. I hope some of our local Republicans will support the Contract with Congress so that I can vote for them.

[Cold Heat]

Come now bill, I am not ignorant of federal powers when it comes to highway funding. The states do in fact have some say so, on how to enforce. This was my point. The lights and windshiels wiper BS is more telling of the goodie two-shoe attitude of legislators. It's all in the name of safety! If we save but one life etc.!

These lawmaker are most often democrats, but yes, there are some socially liberal pubbies.

Dole is a matter for the Carolina's. I would guess, if I were there that I would hold my nose if it were the only choice. A elected democrat only strengthens the democrat caucus and committees. It does nothing to shift power. It does nothing to get conservative judges appointed.

Look at the big picture and not your personal pride or moral outrage.

[Non-Sequitur]

Speaking of empty Republican suits how is Liddy doing?

[B. A. Conservative]

I won't dispute that you could be correct, but seventy years of history say that you are wrong and that I am right. Republicans win when they run on a genuinely conservative platform and their chances diminish when they don't. When they run on a liberal platform, they lose.

If you think CFR and prescription drugs are what the country needs, then Republicans may win the election, but we lose the Constitution and bankrupt the US. If you are going to vote Republican and your candidate will not agree to support the Contract with Congress, I suggest that you buy gold on the dips. On an ever increasing scale, you are going to need something you can use for money by the time 2012, and beyond, begin to roll around.

Another thing, it is not me that is burning the Constitution. Put the monkey where it belongs. It is Republicans who are acting like democrats and who are pandering to voters who traditionally may vote for democrats. And if you believe that I am wrong about the financial consequences of left leaning republicans, then you have nothing to worry about. The tax and spend, borrow and spend, inflate and spend merry-go-rounds will never stop. And if the music never stops, no one need worry about there being enough chairs.

I have no problems with anyone who wants to live in a socialist's world. But I am opting out. The current income tax burden is being borne by an increasingly smaller per centage of the population with a larger and larger per centage of our population escaping the income tax. The burden for SS and Medicare; however, is increasingly being shouldered by escapees from the income tax. Now that the income music is slowing but the number of would be dancers or sitters are increasing, who and how will the deck chairs on the Titanic be shuffled? How long do you think you can keep the musicians from jumping ship? The better musicians are the most likely to jump ship first. The top 5% pay half of the taxes. Does this look like a stabile situation to you? Linear thinking can be very dangerous to your well being when times and things are clearly changing in major ways. If you believe that there are no free lunches, how long do think the income tax, Social Security and Medicare ponzi free lunch schemes will last?

Until someone offers a better plan than the Contract with Congress, I suggest you give some serious consideration of how to fund a twelve trillion dollar unfunded liability in a country where two thirds of expenditures are for transfer payments to individuals, and the country is running several hundred billion dollar annual budget deficits and a 1.5 billion dollar a day current account deficit. Just where and how do you think the US government is going to be able to fund these liabilities? When the golden geese have fled who will pay?

[billbears]

Well considering every news organization in the state started backing her candidacy as early as December of last year(primary was this September), I'm suprised Bowles has the support he does. Her competition was never mentioned. To the average observer you wouldn't have realized she had competition in the primary or the election

Sad really. In this state when most newspapers and TV stations are this much behind a Republican's campaign, you might want to start questioning her stance on most issues. There were some even on FR that didn't realize she had competition in the primary. I'm not joking, I have never seen the level of media blitz for her from reporters and newscasters alike. Mind you Bowles (the Democrat) is no better, and I wouldn't vote for him anyway, but the issues you would see from a conservative campaign haven't even been broached.

She's going to win in a walk. Not saying that's bad, just wish we would have had a little more choice presented by the media

[Non-Sequitur]

So you figure she'll run for President in 2008? Liddy vs. Hillary, there's a thought.

[billbears]

Heck as close as Slick Willie and Viagra Bob are nowadays with their Sept 11 fund organization among other things, I wouldn't be suprised to see them run on the same ticket!!

[hchutch]

Opt out if you want. Go vote third-party in some tantrum if you wish. I don't give a rat's butt what you do.

I am going to do everything in my powert to make sure you do NOT take others with you on this - and at least keep the damage to a minimum. Just as I have done with my voting habits.

You cannot turn a nuclear-powered aircraft carrier on a dime. The same applies to this country. That is the system designed by the Constitution.

If you wish to runb off in a huff, I can't stop you. Go and run off, I will be fightin in the trenches and doing the best I can. And while you are off with your fantasies of secession or cutting and running, I'll be fighting. I, for one, can look in the mirror and like the person I see.

Quitters never win, and winners do not quit. I believe that you, B. A. Conservative, are quitting. I have NO respect for quitters.

[unixfox]

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.

I'm not sure I can think of ONE.

ALL of them are invloved in campaign scandals. Most of them are involved in a plethora of scandals ranging from sex to shady business deals.

Our government has turned from working for the people to the people working for the government. It seems that all we hear anymore is investigations of our so-called leaders.

Throw em all out I say !!!

[sheltonmac]

"Liddy vs. Hillary, there's a thought."

A scary one!

[CaptBlack]

"You are following the LP mantra: if anyone disagrees with you, shout them down;" I have noticed a LOT of that on FR. A few of the posters who claim to be 'libertarian' are downright hostile, nasty, and unable to debate civily. I've become persuaded against the libertarian issues with the help of their posts.

I've actually seen it mostly with the your-a-loser-if-you-support-third-parties crowd. They seem to be the FIRST to get angry and unload on people like BA Conservative.

[CaptBlack]

Opt out if you want. Go vote third-party in some tantrum if you wish. I don't give a rat's butt what you do. I am going to do everything in my powert to make sure you do NOT take others with you on this - and at least keep the damage to a minimum. Just as I have done with my voting habits. You cannot turn a nuclear-powered aircraft carrier on a dime. The same applies to this country. That is the system designed by the Constitution. If you wish to runb off in a huff, I can't stop you. Go and run off, I will be fightin in the trenches and doing the best I can. And while you are off with your fantasies of secession or cutting and running, I'll be fighting. I, for one, can look in the mirror and like the person I see. Quitters never win, and winners do not quit. I believe that you, B. A. Conservative, are quitting. I have NO respect for quitters.

Doesn't that same Constitution provide for the ability to throw OFF the government if it becomes tyrannical? The Constitution does NOT say you have to go status quo all the way until they have you in chains. It suggests that there may possibly be a day when even the brilliant regime the Founders constructed would go wrong and the people would be required to take up arms. If that isn't "turning on a dime", I don't know what is.

And why is it, that when people vote their God-given conscience to elect leaders WORTHY of voting for, they are derided as having a "tantrum"?? I saw nothing in this post that suggests that people like BA Conservative are so much having a tantrum as FED UP with the status quo.

Why is it that people who decry the "narrow-mindedness" of the third-party-ites are so incredibly quick to turn on them and condemn them to the Pit? As a black man, while I totally disagree with the South's position on slavery, I have ENORMOUS respect for their stand on State's rights and didn't think them worthy of hatred for their stand. Can we attempt to bring back SOME level of civility and dialogue between people that obviously want the best for their country--a Conservative, Godly government? Or does that all get thrown out the door the minute someone doesn't toe the must-vote-Republican-at-all-costs?

[Deb]

Maybe some of us get so angry because a lunatic with a bad haircut, third party crackpot got us 8 years of Bill Clinton. Very few will risk getting hosed again until a third party comes up with a vetted, reliable candidate and an alternate party comprised of more than a bunch of pro-drug malcontents.

Liberal states elect liberal Republicans...no way to get around it, but all that means is we are required to work harder for dedicated conservatives in the non-liberal states.

Throwing out an entire party and national network because some are less than perfect, is the definition of stupidity, insanity and treason since it will plunge this country into ruin.

Why don't you pained constitutionalists ever think about the 40 years of Democrat control we recently shook off? Sabatoging the Republicans will doom the Constitution permanently.

[B. A. Conservative]

"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."

If we can't go back and accepting socialism is perceived as the only viable alternative, then getting out of the way, preserving your own capital base even if it means leaving the country, and letting this behemoth collapse under its one weight is the better solution. And the sooner the United States disintegrates the better. There is real hope that some of the regional republics that will arise from the ashes will offer constitutional republics modeled after the original US Constitution.

I said before that I would never again vote for a Democrat. On reconsideration, at the moment in time when I think we can't turn the clock back, then attempting to fast forward the collapse could well become desirable. Voting for democrats could be expected to hasten the demise of the United States and would become something for those who desire freedom to consider.