Posted on 07/23/2003 10:03:09 AM PDT by justshutupandtakeit
In Back to Basics for the Republican Party author Michael Zak (FR's distinguished patriot, Grand Old Partisian) undertakes the heroic and herculean task of clearing the name of the Republican Party from the thicket of lies, distortions and misrepresentations which has been cultivated by the Democrat/media alliance. Since any partisian argument in today's America must begin with the refutation of chronic and consistent lies told about the GOP, Zak's book provides the necessary ammunition to do just that.
This well-written, interesting and enjoyable tour of GOP history can be of use to any patriot who wants to know the truth about the histories of the two major parties. It traces the origins of the GOP to the proto-Republican, Alexander Hamilton, and the Federalists and that of the Democrat Party to its ancestors Jefferson, Clinton and Burr. A brief survery of Federalist and Whig antecedents and policies is sketched to give historic context to events. Since the GOP was created and grew in opposition to the policies and failures of the Democrat Party to extend the benefits of the Constitution to all Americans, that party's history is also examined.
And a sorry history it is. A story of treachery, short-sightedness, racism and economic ignorance unfolds as we see the Democrats consistently for 170+ years fight against allowing the Blacks a chance to achieve full freedom and economic success. Opposition to that fight has defined the best of the GOP's actions. Every advance in Civil Rights for Blacks has come from GOP initiatives and against Democrat opposition. Every setback for Blacks achieving constitutional protection has come from Democrat intitiatives and against GOP opposition. Racists have led the Democrats during most of their history, in sharp contrast to Republicans. All the evils visited against Black are of Democrat design. Democrats created and maintained the KKK, the Jim Crow laws, the Black Codes, it was Democrats lynching Blacks, beating Blacks, exploiting Blacks and perpetrating murderous riots which killed Blacks in
Zak rescues the reputation of the party from the slanders thrown against it during the Civil War and Reconstruction, many of which are popular around FR. He also clearly shows the mistaken disavowal of GOP principles which brought the modern party to its lowest state and allowed the demagogues of Democrats to paint the party as "racist." This was because of the disastrous turn to States' Rights which grew from the Goldwater campaign. It was the final straw in the process which transformed the share of the Black vote from 90-95% GOP to 90% democrat. A modern tragedy of immense proportions.
This is a book which should be studied carefully by Republicans in order to counter the barrage of Lies trumpeted daily by the RAT/media. While it is a work of a partisian, Back to Basics does not hesitate to point to GOP mistakes, failures and incompetence in carrying out its mission nor does it neglect to give Democrats credit when credit is due for actions which are productive of good for our nation as a whole. Unfortunately, those are far too few.
In order to effectively plan for the future we must be fully aware of the past, Zak helps us achieve that awareness.
Oh, of course not. I know all the Founding Fathers were just jim dandy with having any form of monarch, elected or not
Hamilton's use of the dreaded "M" word set alarm bells ringing to the exclusion of everything else he said concerning the subject. From Madison's notes: "It will be objected probably, that [an Executive for life] will be an elective Monarch, and will give birth to the tumults which characterize that form of Gov[ernmen]t. He w[oul]d reply that Monarch is an indefinite term. It marks not either the degree or duration of power. If the Executive Magistrate wd. be a monarch for life--the other prop[ose]d by the Report . . . wd. be a Monarch for seven years."
-----
The following day Hamilton was taken to task for his remarks on state sovereignty, which some construed as a call for the abolition of states. Hamilton responded that he had been misunderstood, and explained that he did not advocate a complete abolition of the states, only a diminution of their status as political entities to ensure the preponderance of the federal government.
Nope, no big strong government there < /sarcasm>
Depends on how conservative his politics are. If he's a conservative, he'll probably gain my general support. If he's a RINO or a PC monger, I will work to defeat him in the primary.
As with all GOP candidates, I will devote my advocacy resources toward either furthering that star's rise or initiating its decline depending upon whether or not it is conservative. Not all Republicans are conservative and not all conservatives are Republican.
As opposed to you, a person who takes political positions as if he was a democrat.
Obviously, you need some remedial reading comprehension classes, for those are Jim Robinson's words, not mine.
Are you saying that Jim is whining like a Democrat? Huh?
The review is void of facts and details but makes broad-sweeping assumptions. Is the book the same way?
Agreed this is a disgraceful way to get attention. Contributors to this forum do not appreciate spam via FReepmail and pushing goods and services.
Agreed. I choose not to blast the text, at least until I've actually read it. The author chooses to reignite regional and sectional hostilities from the past with his posts on FR. This does nothing to promote conservativism - in fact, it's more detremental to conservatives.
Alienating the the conservative base by dredging up civil war history will not help the GOP.
Thats rich. What ELSE do you neo-confedrate anke-biters do around here BUT that?
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.