Posted on 10/09/2002 8:58:50 AM PDT by 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.
My belief is that the people receiving a stipend from the Government, plus the apathy of 50% of the electorate, plus the democrats sellout for power, and how could you be optimisic that there is enough of a voter percentage to make a difference. It simply isn't there.
Absent some catastrophic event which doesn't destroy the country, I see no rollback of laws and attitudes which reverses years and years of excesses. And the key is attitudes. It will not happen.
Without change I could see another revolution. When the government comes after the individuals money when it goes broke is when the resistance will occur. Then everyone will realize it waited too long to reign in the government.
I agree with most of your assumptions.
You have to remember how change actually occurs. Change takes place at the margin, not enmasse and not overnight. It takes place first with one person who recgonizes the problem and then discovers a reasonable solution. By making others aware of the problem and the solution, there will be a few who recognize the reality of the problem and the validity of the solution. Some will adopt it as a strategy, some will think about it and most will be unaffected by their first exposure. If the early adopters become enthusiastic supporters, they will share it with their circle of friends, particularly the ones they believe most likely willing to adopt it themselves. Gradually over time the circles of influence widen with an ever increasing number of people being exposed. Again only a few of each group exposed will become early adopters, but the real magic is in the group dynamics at the top.
The present political situation in America is best exemplified by the 2000 Presidential election. Bush won on a fluke of the electoral college through a razor thin margin in a reasonably populous state. All that would have been needed to hand Gore the election would have been for him to carry his own state or for Byrd to have kept West Virginia in its normally Democratic fold. There is no mystery in why Bush caved on steel tariffs. A handful of steel workers in Pennsylvania, Ohio, Michigan or Alabama could be the margin of difference in the next election.
Now look at the next election from a different perspective. I don't know how large the core group of conservatives is that is willing to demand that the US government live within the Constitution. But to understand how powerful the effect of the margin can be, one need look no farther that the American Revolution. In 1775, one third of the colonialists opposed the Declaration of Independence, one third were undecided, and barely a third favored the Declaration and the war that would surely follow. The revolutionary army consisted of an appallingly small number of the eligible manpower and even after the war had been won, there were frightenly large numbers that would like to resume their place as British subjects. That number grew during the time of the Articles of Confederation, and some colonialists did return to England to live. The American Revolution and the United States came about with fully a third of the people indifferent and apathetic to the "cause", and with as many completely opposed as those who favored it. In effect, a third of people were sufficiently motivated to move the overwhelming majority of two thirds who didn't approve or were opposed to the "cause".
Returning to our current political scene, Republicans are acutely aware of the fragility of their margins in winning elections and control of Congress. And the power of government rests with Congress not the President. The president is the tail of the dog, not the dog itself. The tail may own the bark, but the dog's bite lies in Congress. It is rare when situations arise that the tail gets to wag the dog. More than 90% of the time it is the dog that does the wagging. With the exceptions of selected states on both sides, most of the country is evenly divided.
The concept of the "united" states is an oxymoron. We are totally and completely divided politically. I have no illusions what so ever about winning any support from Democrats. I have spent an enormous amount of my adult life attempting to pull Democrats into debates or discussions over their delusional beliefs. In a lifetime of effort, I have only one questionable conversion. It is not the conversion that is questionable with regard to this person, but rather my role in the conversion. I think he saw the light on his own; I don't believe my efforts played any role at all or at best started him to thinking and asking questions. He realized on his own that Democrat's answers to his questions don't make any sense.
The margin for restoring the Constitution lies in only one place, the Republican Party. The miscellaneous splinter parties hold 1-2% of disillusioned Republicans committed to the Constitution but who gave up hope on converting the Republican party and decided to see if they could build their own base. When the time comes, I am pretty sure these people can be returned to the Republican fold. The real question is how many conservatives are still deeply committed to, and understand the importance of the Constitution as the life preserver of freedom itself. And only a handful recognize that the Declaration of Independence has never been formerly codified in our doctrine of law. The very most important of our founding principles are not part of our body of law that any court in America would enforce. The second Amendment and the renouncement of your citizenship are the only two tangible assets in your armentarium of secession outside the Declaration itself. Lincoln the tyrannt attempted to destroy your right to a choice of self-determination. You are not free as long as their are restrictions on your right to leave. And you are not free, if you can leave, but you can't take your property with you. Think about that very carefully, it is a very simple fundamental statement but its true depth of meaning goes much farther than most Americans have ever thought. I will use myself as personal example in another post, this principle deserves a much more comprehensive discussion than appropriate in this reply.
I don't know how many Constitutional Conservatives remain within the framework of the Republican Party. I thought Jim Robinson could be clearly counted on to be in this camp, but his recent "Dump a Democrat" even if means replacing him with a Republican determined to flaunt the Constitution seems to argue that JR is more committed to Republicans than the Constitution. I hope he will defend and enlighten us with regard to his being willing to over look the Constitutional sins of Republicans. At the risk of being taken to task, to me trampling the Constitution is like being a little bit pregnant. There is no grey zone, you are living within the Constitution or you are a lawless tyrannt threatening my freedom and don't belong in government.
My guess is that 5% of Republicans willing to honor the Constitution is plenty, especially if we can convince and entice the third party defectors back to the fold for a single election. Republicans have no great reserve body of voters that they can draw into the party to ensure their elections. Most of our elections are being decided by margins of voters considerably less than five percent.
The election this fall may well go to Republicans without any domestic issues being relevant for either party. Self-defense is the primary reason governments exist at all. Our national and individual securities have been threatened in a more personal way than any other time in my life time. There was nothing personally intimidating about the Soviet Union and nothing an individual voter could do with his vote about the Soviet Union. There are no Americans alive who do not know that Republicans have a superior grasp on military matters and self-defense. And this is the first time in my lifetime that individual votes could make a difference regarding the military outcome. Even more remarkable, the military team the Republicans have in place is the most competent ever assembled. I think the Media, the Democrats and maybe even the Republicans could be stunned by the breadth of Republican victories in Congress this fall. I don't think voters are going to gamble military success in Iraq and the War on Terror by empowering Democrats who would threaten the ultimate success of these military campaigns. Maybe voters are not as smart as I think, but we will know in a few weeks.
By 2004, I don't think the national defense will be the issue. I think the domestic agenda will be upper most in the minds of most Americans. Republicans will need every vote they can muster for Congress. Unless the economy completely craters, not all that unlikely, Bush will probably not have a serious opponent. Bush's biggest fear for 2004 will be ensuring sufficient Congressional strength to keep his agenda on track. Republicans will need every conservative vote that they can get, and they will not want to lose a single one. If FreeRepublic and other conservative forums get on board the Contract with Congress and manage to attract the attention of a few spokesmen like Joseph Farah, Rush Limbaugh, Walter Williams and others, maybe George Wills for example, then the Contract with Congress could become the center piece of the Republican strategy for Election 2004. Change begins with one voter at a time. It does not happen simultaneous over night with conversions of most voters. We might not need to convince any more than 5% of Republican voters if we have a few spokesman that can reach the ear of enough people. Rush Limbaugh would be pretty good as an army of one. Elections are close enough now, that enlisting 5% of dedicated committed voters could drag the rest of the Republican Party back to the Constitution, even against the will of many. Once the Contract is signed, the political consequences of not following through are beyond the resistance of even recalcitrant politicians. A Republican victory in 2004 based on the Contract with Congress would lead to most of it being enacted and the turning of the tide. A tsunami of freedom would sweep the country.
Change begins at the margin. It doesn't take a majority to launch a revolution. A margin of 5% is enough to restore the Constitution to the United States. If there really are 80,000 Freepers, give me 5%, just 4,000 Freepers willing to make a difference and we can change the world. Jim Robinson are you committed to the Constitution or "dumping democrats". I admit they are distantly related like spokes in a wheel, but a wheel without an axle is useless. And the Constitution is not the wheel or the axle; it is our engine. There is no question that FreeRepublic could play some small and maybe even insignificant role in electing a Republican majority. If you are realistic, most Freepers and viewers are not going to have their voting patterns changed by FreeRepublic and dump a democrat. The Contract with Congress can change the world and usher in the Reagan Renaissance.
Restoring the Constitution to the United States would be perceived by most as a monumental change, some would argue impossible. Neither FreeRepublic nor anybody else is going to persuade Democrats to restore the Constitution. I am not at all sure that Democrats will even choose to live under it. Nor do I have any intention of forcing them to live under our rules. But if the Constitution is restored, we will not have to live under theirs. The US Constitution defines how free people can live in a free society. Socialism is the antithesis of freedom. Socialism is a form of serfdom and slavery. I recognize and respect the rights of others to choose socialism as their form of government. I refuse to recognize their right to impose that choice on me. Republicans refusing to respect my free choices are no better than Democrats and make the task of restoring the Constitution that much more difficult. If you can't see this difference and distinction, you need to spend time away from this forum reviewing our history.
The United States is on the verge of falling into a financial abyss. Regardless of any other events, it is not possible politically, and more importantly economically, to fund the soon to mature unfunded liabilities of Medicare and Social Security. The US government whether controlled by Republicans or Democrats will be forced to borrow beyond our credit limits and to print money to the point of destroying our currency while taxing our population to the point that the rich flee and the middle classes are impoverished. Chaos and calamity are headed to our shores and they are inevitable and only avoidable by completely voluntarily privatizing Social Security and then dealing appropriately with Medicare. There are enough physicians of my generation left to fix Medicare after Republicans prove they can deal with Social Security. And the plan for dealing with Social Security almost certainly needs to be undertaken no later than 2009, preferably before 2007. We have no more elections to squander in an effort to dump democrats, particularly if it simply means dumping one socialist for a lesser socialist.
What purpose does it serve to merely change masters? Will you be more free if the chains are around your ankles instead of your necK? Will you be more free if they lower your taxes so that you can afford beans and rice, but still can't afford meat? Will your children be better educated in public schools where teachers are paid 10% more for teaching 10% fewer kids 10% less material of substance, while your education taxes soar to the point that you can't afford to send your kids to real schools that have proven their abilities to actually educate kids? Will your retirement money be safer in the hands of a politican wanting to buy votes, than under your own control? Will your health care be better under a government more interested in controlling outlays than outcomes? Will the environment be preserved better by bureaucrats in Washington or landowners in Wyoming? Are mosquito infested impenetrable swamps, inaccessable forests and pristine wildernesses devoid of people your idea of parks for kids to see and use? Is burning down western forests conservation and practical land management?
By 2016, there will be no United States if we do not act soon to restore the constitution. By 2012, it will be too late to act regardless of what is done. And if Freepers are not the most easily reached and motivated group, who is?
Huh? I said what? When did I say that about Reagan?
And why would I want to move the party to the right? I'm not a right winger. I'm not a left winger.
The political spectrum isn't a straight line left and right. It has a verticle and a horizontal line. The verticle line has to do with individual freedom and personal responsibility. The graph of political interest is diamond shaped.
And as to the voting question, no, I wouldn't vote "Republican". But I would (and have) voted for Republican candidates. Many times I might add. I would walk across red hot coals to vote for Ron Paul, a Republican representitive. And anyone like him.
Let's stick to the subject.
What part of
If you find that none of the people you claim to support ever win, perhaps you should ask yourself why this is so. Maybe you could have worked a little harder, contributed a little more money, or held a few more events for them.
Blaming the "two party machine" for your loss isn't going to make you a winner. It makes you look foolish, and diminishes your candidate. In politics, just as anywhere else, a man is known by the company he keeps. If you come across as an abrasive nut, your candidate suffers as well.
do you not understand? The part about Maybe you could have worked a little harder or the part about If you come across as an abrasive nut, your candidate suffers as well.
LOL, that's rich. A bit shrill, even for a young person.
The country will die because some people won't vote for the candidates of a party they oppose. And one party won't endorse the candidates of another party. Funny stuff.
I got news for ya, the Republican party doesn't endorse candidates of other parties even when they have no candidate themselves. Nor should they.
More like that the country will die because the Republican party (the only opposition party allowed) sucks at opposing the authoritarians in their own party, not to mention the Democratic party.
How old are you?
We? You are confused, WE don't want the same things. I don't want the approach to governance that you do. Libertarians are not "fallen away" Republicans despite what you have been told.
And like I said, the Country die. You doubt me, watch.
The country will die because people no longer embrace the ideals that the country was founded upon. The Republican party has done nothing to stop that. If the country dies, the blame won't be on those who tried to re-instill the proper values in society, but those who claimed to, and sold out for power.
If you are curious as to anything about me that I wish to divulge on this forum, you can find it in my profile.
As to your age, I only ask because you hold typical views and attitudes for someone who is young and relatively inexperienced in matters politic. I had some of the same attitudes at your age. It may interest you to know that everything you have said so far on this topic has been said by generations and generations before you. That was the tip off to your youth. I wish you were right about Republicans being the road to salvation, but alas, you are incorrect.
How do you know? I'd venture to say we only disagree on Boarders, maybe Foreign policy and Abortion. And you know what is funny, plenty of Libertarians agree with me on those issues.
The country will die because people no longer embrace the ideals that the country was founded upon.
Like the idea the Founders had to set aside their few differences to complete a larger task? Differences like Foreign Policy, Immigration and the question of how much governance?
Libertarians are not "fallen away" Republicans despite what you have been told.
I have not been told anything, I can read. And this might surprise you, I am not a Republican. I was Constitution Party and am now a independent.
Got tried of the useless third party garbage, So utopian minded that they are no earthly good.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.