Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
Member Login

Log In

A valid email is required.
Password is required.
Site Notices
3/20/2017 5:03:23 PM
Posted: 4/28/2001 10:59:54 AM EDT
I see alot of people around here claiming to be true conservatives and proud Republicans at the same time. Isn't this a contradiction these days? If you ask me, current republican leaders do just as much damage as the liberal democrats. The Republican party once represented conservative America, but it seems to me that they have almost completely sold out in order to maintain their wallets and political positions of power. The only way to get anywhere in the entrenched washington of today is to maintain the status quo that both republicans and democrats alike have grown comfortable with. How can we call our nation a democracy, when third party candidates are completely crushed by big business money machines and then aren't even aloud to join in on the debates??? Sounds like something you would find in a banana republic's fascist regime if you ask me. I guess what I'm trying to say is that maybe we should all follow the example of some brave conservatives and leave the republican party until they get their act together and start representing the interists of true conservative americans like you and me...or, we can continue to lend our support to these puppets and pray that things will all work out in the end. Unfortunately, I fear that the Lord will not protect our rights, our property, or our values... only we can...
Link Posted: 4/28/2001 11:01:32 AM EDT
Link Posted: 4/28/2001 11:04:00 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 4/28/2001 11:03:46 AM EDT by Scipio]
I too like much about the libertarian movement, but I can't bring myself to support it whole heartedly because I do have many religious and moral conflicts with it. For instance, Libertarians seem to support legal prostitution as well as legal drug use, and don't forget their support of unfettered immigration... These among other platform issues I really struggle with...
Link Posted: 4/28/2001 11:11:36 AM EDT
Originally Posted By Scipio: I too like much about the libertarian movement, but I can't bring myself to support it whole heartedly because I do have many religious and moral conflicts with it. For instance, Libertarians seem to support legal prostitution as well as legal drug use, and don't forget their support of unfettered immigration... These among other platform issues I really struggle with...
View Quote
Ditto. I fall somewhere between Republican and Libertarian. I just refer to myself as a conservative. The problem with the Republican Party these days is not the party itself, but a few Liberal Republicans - not mentioning any names - (uh-hum-McCain...) It's the Liberal Republicans who sell out their party by compromising with the left's agenda and they continue to LET the left set the agenda. Hopefully, now that Dubya is in, some of these pussy Republicans can get a backbone again and stick it to these assholes like Reagan did.
Link Posted: 4/28/2001 11:19:45 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 4/28/2001 11:20:52 AM EDT by KBaker]
Everybody has different beliefs on what is and what isn't "right", and those beliefs range from leftwing anarchy to rightwing religious totalinarianizm. The beauty of a Constitutional Republic is that we (are supposed to) have a base set of rules that we MUST live by, but the rest is pretty flexible. If enough people can get together and not violate the Constitution, then what they believe as the majority of the nation, goes. Well, here's the problem: We're devolving into a Democracy, where 50.1% of the voters is enough to pass anything, and voters make up only about 10-15% of the population. So, in effect, about 6-7% of us are telling the other 93% how to live. We've essentially abandoned the Constitution as a guiding document. It's apparently considered "outdated". A Republic (or any other form of representative government, for that matter) works only so long as A) the populace is involved and interested in the workings of government, and B) the officials of the government are held accountable for their actions in office. Now, knowing what we know about how our government has worked for, oh say about the last 50 years, how good a job would you say We the People are doing? It's our fault, folks. We aren't doing our part of the job. Then again, our public school systems aren't exactly teaching our kids just how the government is SUPPOSED to work, are they? I really like this quotation attributed to Lord Alexander Tytler, an 18th Century Scottish historian and economist (whether he actually wrote it or not is immaterial, the sentiment is accurate, I think): "A democracy cannot exist as a permanent form of government. It can only exist until the voters discover that they can vote themselves largesse from the public treasury. From that moment on the majority always votes for the candidate promising the most from the public treasury with the results that a democracy always collapses over loose fiscal policy, always followed by dictatorship. "The average age of the world's greatest civilizations has been 200 years. These nations have progressed through the following sequence: From bondage to spiritual faith From spiritual faith to great courage, From courage to liberty, From liberty to abundance, From abundance to selfishness, From selfishness to complacency, From complacency to apathy, From apathy to dependency, From dependency back again into bondage." -- I'd put us somewhere between apathy and dependency. What do you guys think? [sniper]
Link Posted: 4/28/2001 11:20:47 AM EDT
George Washington warned against a political party system in his Farewell Address. "I have already intimated to you the danger of parties in the state, with particular reference to the founding of them on geographical discriminations. Let me now take a more comprehensive view, and warn you in the most solemn manner against the baneful effects of the spirit of party generally. This spirit, unfortunately, is inseparable from our nature, having its root in the strongest passions of the human mind. It exists under different shapes in all governments, more or less stifled, controlled, or repressed; but in those of the popular form it is seen in its greatest rankness and is truly their worst enemy. The alternate domination of one faction over another, sharpened by the spirit of revenge natural to party dissension, which in different ages and countries has perpetrated the most horrid enormities, is itself a frightful despotism. But this leads at length to a more formal and permanent despotism. The disorders and miseries which result gradually incline the minds of men to seek security and repose in the absolute power of an individual, and sooner or later the chief of some prevailing faction, more able or more fortunate than his competitors, turns this disposition to the purposes of his own elevation on the ruins of public liberty. Without looking forward to an extremity of this kind (which nevertheless ought not to be entirely out of sight), the common and continual mischiefs of the spirit of party are sufficient to make it the interest and duty of a wise people to discourage and restrain it. It serves always to distract the public councils and enfeeble the public administration. It agitates the community with ill-founded jealousies and false alarms; kindles the animosity of one part against another; foments occasional riot and insurrection. It opens the door to foreign influence and corruption, which find a facilitated access to the government itself through the channels of party passion. Thus the policy and the will of one country are subjected to the policy and will of another. There is an opinion that parties in free countries are useful checks upon the administration of the government, and serve to keep live the spirit of liberty. This within certain limits is probably true; and in governments of monarchical cast patriotism may look with indulgence, if not with favor, upon the spirit of party, but in those of the popular character, in governments purely elective, it is a spirit not to be encouraged. From their natural tendency it is certain there will always be enough of that spirit for every salutary purpose; and there being constant danger of excess, the effort ought to be by force of public opinion to mitigate and assuage it. A fire not to be quenched, it demands a uniform vigilance to prevent its bursting into a flame, lest, instead of warming, it should consume."
Link Posted: 4/28/2001 11:22:38 AM EDT
We are in dependency and quickly heading into bondage. The Republic is lost.
Link Posted: 4/28/2001 11:29:28 AM EDT
Originally Posted By Imbrog|io: We are in dependency and quickly heading into bondage. The Republic is lost.
View Quote
But can we build an new one? Or are we doomed to failure because of human nature? [sniper]
Link Posted: 4/28/2001 11:47:04 AM EDT
Try calling yourself a Republitarian. I coined the term to describe conservatives of libertarian leaning who are working from within the Republican Party to move them in a more conservative direction (only support the more conservatire Republicans, speak up when a liberal Republican sells us out, etc.) I used to think that we needed a 3rd party, but I think that the last election has proven that to be impossible in today's political climate. Working from within an existing, popular, party is the only way to move the country back to the Constitutional Republic that it is meant to be. It took a long time for the liberals to move us to the point we are at today, it isn't going to be changed overnight but we can make a change. The school system is very important in this and the increase in the popularity of home schooling is an encouraging sign that some people 'get it'. Brian
Link Posted: 4/28/2001 11:53:02 AM EDT
Originally Posted By Scipio: I see alot of people around here claiming to be true conservatives and proud Republicans at the same time.
View Quote
I dont. I see lots of people voting Republican, but not many saying they ARE Republican. I'm an independant who usually votes Republican & Libertarian.
Link Posted: 4/28/2001 12:20:35 PM EDT
I consider myself a Christian American - and in that order. I will fight and defend my self, my family, my city, my state, and my country whenever the need arises against any foe both foreign and domestic. I do not subscribe to any party affiliation - not because I am a rebel, I simply don't believe that the party system serves this nation favorably. A great majority of all elected officials today are either wealthy, or former lawyers or judges (which are former lawyers) or both. I think that is a shame.... [sniper] The Sniper
Link Posted: 4/28/2001 12:24:48 PM EDT
What exactly does saying you're republican mean these days? It seems like there is too much interest in centrism these days. Somebody said that the only things that belong in the middle of the road are dead armadillos and a yellow stripe. If more of us get active, maybe there's hope that we can get decent representation. I think our chief problem is the media, of maybe even wimp-ass advertisers. [red][size=4] P.R.K.
Link Posted: 4/28/2001 1:13:58 PM EDT
Originally Posted By prk: What exactly does saying you're republican mean these days? [red][size=4] P.R.K.
View Quote
Being republican these days means you are a john mccain, yet at the same time also being a Ron Paul. It is the party of contradictions and all of the members flock back to be abused just like a battered wife.
Link Posted: 4/28/2001 1:15:56 PM EDT
Originally Posted By Imbrog|io:
Originally Posted By prk: What exactly does saying you're republican mean these days? [red][size=4] P.R.K.
View Quote
Being republican these days means you are a john mccain, yet at the same time also being a Ron Paul. It is the party of contradictions and all of the members flock back to be abused just like a battered wife.
View Quote
I dont think you could be any further form the truth on that one. Especially the John McCain comment.
Link Posted: 4/28/2001 1:25:33 PM EDT
"I pledge allegiance to the Flag, and to the REPUBLIC for which it stands..." Yes. I am a REPUBLICAN.
Link Posted: 4/28/2001 1:41:38 PM EDT
Originally Posted By Death_By_AR15: I dont think you could be any further form the truth on that one. Especially the John McCain comment.
View Quote
Ok. Substitute mccain with kalifornia republicans dan lungren, or george deukmejian. republican drug czar bill benett. Luckily these 3 are no longer in office, but the damage they wrought has already been done. Then at the same time you have people like Alan Keyes and Larry Craig. There IS NO CONSISTENCY within the GOP. Like one of their "employees" said before, "the point is that the party must stay in power". This "staying in power" has made the Constitution and Bill of Rights take a back seat to political expediency. As the democrats move farther left, the republicans continue to move towards where the democrats used to be.
Link Posted: 4/28/2001 2:01:30 PM EDT
The trouble with this whole line of thinking is that if you are not a Republican or a Demorat, you effectively have no say in how this country is run. The place to make your voice heard is in the primaries, then vote straight party line. A vote for a libertarian is A WASTED VOTE!!!!! You might as well pull that lever for the Demorats. Third parties, since the turn of the last century, have been spoilers for the candidate closest to their veiws. Lately, look at the Perot's party and the Green party. What positive impact have they had beyond election day? Neither of them have a chance of winning.
Link Posted: 4/28/2001 2:15:36 PM EDT
Originally Posted By pogo: A vote for a libertarian is A WASTED VOTE!!!!! You might as well pull that lever for the Demorats. Third parties, since the turn of the last century, have been spoilers for the candidate closest to their veiws. Lately, look at the Perot's party and the Green party. What positive impact have they had beyond election day? Neither of them have a chance of winning.
View Quote
You are staying true to the gop and contradicting yourself. You say that a vote for the Libertarians (3rd party) are a wasted vote, yet in the very next paragraph you state that 3rd parties have been "spoilers". If you truly believe that the Libertarians are not a threat then why do gop members continually bitch and whine about them? If you want their vote why don't you doesn't your party get candidates that will make Libertarians WANT to vote for a republican??? I said it once and will say it a thousand times, IT IS NOT THE JOB OF THE OUTSIDERS TO CHANGE YOUR PARTY. Continually voting for the wishy washy republican candidates sends a message to the leadership that YOU LIKE what they are doing and they will keep taking your votes for granted.
Link Posted: 4/28/2001 2:34:22 PM EDT
You cannot pickup one end of the stick without the other. When you pickup one end you automatically pick up the othr end. So, you cannot call your self a Democrat or a Republican without also calling yourself a murdering, second ammendment destroying communist since both parties allow for some form of abortion, gun laws, and unconstitutional taxes and welfare programs. For your own sake, it does not matter who gets into office, it matters how you vote. Voting for a third party which has no chance may be the vote that allows the Democrat to take office. But atleast I can say that I did not vote for the Republican who will run this nation up the same creek as the Democrat; (it will just take a little longer). The founding fathers, especially Washington, were very opposed to establishing parties, In part because there would be no real difference between them and people would end up voting for one or the other without using their own mind, thus the government can achieve their objectives and make at least half the people happy at any given time. Be a man, think on your own, don't follow a party.
Link Posted: 4/28/2001 5:08:52 PM EDT
Putting it as plain as I can, I said that third party votes are wasted votes. I don't see a contradiction here. To have any influence on the Republican party, you must participate in that party. The place to vote your concience is in the primaries. For example, If I voted for Alan Keyes in the primary or caucus, and he did not recieve the nomination, I will still vote for the winner and not stay home on election day. Or, if my candidate is very strong, I will cast my vote for the weak democrat in the primary. This is an established Alaskan tactic - the Ted Stevens rule. If you can't stand your candidate, like Senator-For-Like Ted Stevens, feel free to vote for a Demorat like Theresa Obermeyer to send a wake up call to him as a protest-but not if it means the election. Letters to politicians do count to them! I hope this does not confuse you.
Link Posted: 4/28/2001 5:23:47 PM EDT
Each man is accountable only for himself. Our founding fathers devised a republic, a place that one can vote for the best person to represent him in the political arena. We have been betrayed since the days of the citizen statesman for the boot licking politicians who are only out for what they can get from the public pig sty. I personally have long since divested myself of any party affiliation. I examine the man, his previous record, not what the media tries to tell me that it is, and then make a choice as to who the best person is to represent my interest. By doing this I can vote with a clear understanding of what I alone have done on the ballot. I give a shit less if a vote for a third party person is a wasted vote, to me if that is what I chose then I have upheld the mandates of our founding fathers, not the political hacks, media suckfacers, and the butt licking pollsters.
Link Posted: 4/28/2001 5:30:25 PM EDT
Why participate in a party that allows the opposition party set the playing field??? Again it is not my job to try to change what you obviously will not try to change yourself and thus endorse. How about last election for example? NRA F rated democrat senator diane feinstein was challenged by your gop's NRA F RATED republican tom campbel! Some choice there isn't it? How about the Governor's race? NRA F rated democrat gray davis was challenged by the gop's pick of NRA F rated dan lungren. The choices between these 2 were SO BAD that the NRA endorsed NO ONE in that election. Then there are those gems the gop runs in NY. Woo hoo! As soon as the republican party grows some balls and quits playing "inclusion" and "bi-partisanship" games with the liberals then MAYBE I will consider voting for them. I do not trust any candidate or elected official that doesn't trust me with guns. I suggest that you read George Washington's entire Farewell Address and see how far away from true conservatism that the republicans truly are.
Link Posted: 4/28/2001 7:06:38 PM EDT
The Libratarians are about the only thing keeping the republicans from being democrats. They are afraid that the Libratarians will take too many votes if they don't portrey themselves as conservative. What they say and do are entirely different things. Doing the same thing over and over and expecting different results is not very smart. I have not seen one inch of movement to the right on the Federal level in the 40 years I have been on this earth. What makes anyone think that giving away their vote to the republicans will improve things. With the strong showing of the green party perhaps we all will be voting either Democrat or Green in years to come because the Democrat party can win and is the less of two evils.
Link Posted: 4/28/2001 7:45:28 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 4/28/2001 7:49:03 PM EDT by pogo]
Call it what you will, but the most contemptible citizen that exists is the one who has a stated interest in the result and refuses to participate in the process. Politics is a crude and disgusting non-stop power play. If you don't VOTE effectively and make your voice heard, you DESERVE to be run over by anyone who does. Don't confuse the actors for the party. The Republicans are used to being killed by Clinton over manufactured differences. Hard to overcome that Pavlovian reflex. Sure, Trent Lott has made some astounding mistakes, and all candidates in liberal states are to some degree anti-gun. Wake up and smell the coffee. That is the prevailing mood of that state. A politician is just an unemployed loudmouth if he can't get elected. A man will win election if his veiws can be identified with a majority of VOTERS' veiws. Don't tell me what a man dead 200 years has to say about the political process. His day is long gone. Also, I am tired of hearing that a law may violate the 2nd amendment. Until the courts take the whole constitution seriously, any firearms battle will have to be waged on political grounds. You have to fight where the battle is being fought, and that is within the two parties. If you hold your nose and pretend to be above the fray you will be roadkill. If you truly beleive there is no difference between the parties, stop bitching here and set up your own compound in north idaho and let us all go down the road to bolshevism. Beleive me, we share the same goals. I am realistic enough to understand my goals will be advanced by the Republicans - and not the Democrats. If you think any other party count for anything, look at which parties are represented in any legislative body. Ventura was a political fluke. There will never be a return to the pre WW2 or pre civil war minimalist government. Anyone who thinks so is smoking something. We have to find and advance the right candidates - Reagan was on the right track. Over and Out on this topic.
Link Posted: 4/28/2001 8:41:28 PM EDT
I consider my self a conservative constitutionalist/republican(small r). I don't trust Democrats at all, and don't trust the Republicans either. libertarians and conservatives have been voting for Republicans for years, and what has it gotten us? More regulations, more laws, more spending, etc. W. is a perfect example. He has been cowtowing to the enviro-wackos, giving in on tax cuts, etc, etc. Something needs to change. We can't keep doing the same thing we have been doing, it hasn't gotten us anywhere. I don't know if third parties are the answer, but something needs to be done.
Link Posted: 4/28/2001 9:03:51 PM EDT
Originally Posted By Scipio: I too like much about the libertarian movement, but I can't bring myself to support it whole heartedly because I do have many religious and moral conflicts with it. For instance, Libertarians seem to support legal prostitution as well as legal drug use, and don't forget their support of unfettered immigration... These among other platform issues I really struggle with...
View Quote
Ditto! If Rush Limbaugh is a Republican, then that's what I am. I almost never disagree with him. There are those in the Republican Party that are too liberal. (What does Rush call them? Cocktail Party Republicans?) These people need to be kicked out or reformed. They are fiscally conservative, but only because they want to keep their wealth. They care nothing for the principals of Conservatism. They are Socially Liberal and support things like Gun Control. I actually agree 100% with the Constitution Party ([url]http://www.constitutionparty.org/ustp-99p1.html[/url]), although the Constitution Party will never get very far because people will perceive it as being too connected to Christianity. It is what the Republican Party needs to be more like. I think the Republican Party needs to be changed from the inside rather than jumping ship. Look what happened to the Democrats with the Green Party! Thank you Ralph Nader!
Link Posted: 4/28/2001 9:49:52 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 4/28/2001 9:51:41 PM EDT by patriot_dave]
Third party's never get very far because the sheeple are told how to vote by the media and the two political partys. Imagine a day where people listen to the candidates and vote for whom they wish to lead them instead of who they are told to vote for or who they are told can win. Perot got 19% of the vote. I feel he could have won if he did not give up and re-enter. So third partys can win if people believe they can. Until people stop listening to the propaganda and vote for who they wish to win we will keep loosing our freedom. Unfortunately I think the ballot box has failed and can not be repaired due to big media spinning. Until the republican's move to the right they won't get my vote. They may have to loose 10 elections before they figure out they are loosing their base but eventually they may come home.
Link Posted: 4/29/2001 1:21:18 AM EDT
Link Posted: 4/29/2001 10:15:20 AM EDT
Lets just start a Conservative Party. That is what I call myself, and that is what I registered myself as. I only go by conservative...I will not limit myself to a party.
I too like much about the libertarian movement, but I can't bring myself to support it whole heartedly because I do have many religious and moral conflicts with it. For instance, Libertarians seem to support legal prostitution as well as legal drug use, and don't forget their support of unfettered immigration... These among other platform issues I really struggle with...
View Quote
I agree. Opening up our border, ending protectionism, I just can't agree with those. Plus, Bill Maher being with them doesn't help.
Link Posted: 4/29/2001 10:25:46 AM EDT
First of all Troy... I do not have a liberal collectivist education. The only education that I value is the one that I received from my own search for the truth... my BA, and my JD mean very little. So, libertarians I'm sure think that homicide is a bad thing, does this mean that they don't think that murder should be regulated by the law? Over regulation is the problem, not regulation that aims at bettering society...
Link Posted: 4/29/2001 2:23:34 PM EDT
Opening up the borders and reduction in the Military are the major issues I see with the Libratarian party. These are things that could not be implemented imediately as many other things have to change first. From what I understand the Libratarian's believe that cutting out the govt handouts and medical handouts, requiring you to work for a living, would in effect reduce significantly the hoards of imagrants. Their belief is that if we quit fiddling around in everyones affairs in the world we would become much less of a target from terrorist and other countrys, and I agree. They also believe in a very strong missle defense and believe that the populace should be the nations defense to be called when needed. The papers behind the constitution also warn against a powerful standing army. We should not police the world as we have no business doing it. Our government is more aggressive than any other on earth when it comes to forcing their will. While I agree with their principles on both of these issues I don't think that they could happen overnight nor do I believe that the goals could ever be reached, but it would be nice if we could get half way there.
Link Posted: 4/30/2001 9:27:24 AM EDT
Link Posted: 4/30/2001 9:48:57 AM EDT
Bill Maher a Libertarian? In his dreams, have you ever watched that show? He is Rosie in loafer's.......scum sucking democrat.....I tried to watch it a couple of times but I keep screaming at the set....On the voting issue-- do any of you guys really believe that you vote matters anymore? Ask any of the Armed services people that had their ballots "disposed of". The people that actually defend our country can't even be taken care of. And please do not reply with "If you do not vote, you are roadkil" I know that, I am roadkill.....I do not have a solution to the problem and I sure as Helllll do not see either W or one of the other heads as being the answer.....hound out
Link Posted: 4/30/2001 11:02:10 AM EDT
I emailed the LP asking about bill maher. Their reply was that he is not a member of the party, does not represent them, but does have the right to call himself anything he wants. Now on the other hand, the gop still claims as a member in good standing a certain john mccain...
Link Posted: 4/30/2001 2:13:46 PM EDT
major kudo's to: KBaker troy imbroglio you guys hit the nail on the head [:D][:D] since Republicans dont refer to this country as a republic, than that alone is enough reason not to support them. i would oppose religious totaltarianism the very same way i oppose secular totaltarianism. why would it be anybody's concern if a women sells her OWN body!!. her body does not belong to anyone else. just her. please explain the differnence between protittution and "dating". today there seems to be no different thanks to our implusive image driven society. same thing goes for poison. want to become a crack addict and kill yourself. fine by me. bye-bye. worried about drug related crimes. the cities should allow the subjects to arm themselves. some goblin breaks into your home to steal crack money should suffer a different kind of poisoning. (lead poison) freedom loving lib
Top Top