Why the GOP?

[Anti Federalist]

Not much point in re-hashing the third party/GOP reform or let it die arguments, that's been done already.

But, let's assume that "working within the system" is the only option that is open to us.

So, why is the GOP the only option?

Take this election cycle: it was obvious to anybody with a pulse that the GOP was going to be taken to the cleaners on the national level, the "brand" was so damaged that the opposition could have run Vlad the Impaler and won.

Imagine how well things could have worked out if we had run some democrats in congressional or state races. Yes, maybe they would have had to have been "stealthy" in saying what they truly believe, but what's the crime in that?

Politics is the art of skillful lying.

I voted for a democrat state representative, who, after questioning her and making sure she would not support broad based state taxes (income and sales) or any "gun control" measures. Her other views were not far out of line with mine, home schooling, local farming and industry and so on.

As hostile as the GOP has been to us, and still is, and with the third party option off the table, why not put effort into the democrat party as well?

[zadrock]

Depends on where you're located, but I pretty much agree. Democrats dominate here in MD. I think we'll need to run Democrats in the primaries to have a chance. The lower turnout in primaries actually helps our cause, I think.

A RP Dem can run on some good issues. Being anti-war will probably be #1 by 2010, since Obama and the Dem Congress will just continue our worldwide aggression, I'm sure. We need to educate the populace more about the Fed - we can win liberals who understand that the Fed is anti-poor. In some places, the drug war could be a big issue.

Regarding health care, environment, education, and abortion, we believe these are all state issues and we should stress this to Dems. They got a perfect storm this year to gain control of the Presidency, House and Senate, and they are STILL not filibuster-proof, so legislation can be blocked. We need to point out to Dems that state solutions will be more easily attainable. For instance, here in MD we should convince voters to keep our money in the state (MD is the wealthiest state, btw) instead of sending it to all these red states that oppose our agenda. We can have universal health care, more funding for schools, etc. here in MD because we have a Democratic governor and the legislature is overwhelmingly Democratic. At the same time, we should reduce the size of the federal government and reduce federal taxes which sends our money to Washington instead of Annapolis.

Note that I am not in favor of doing those things, even at the state level, but I think it's a good argument for winning libs to our side.

Z

[WRellim]

Not much point in re-hashing the third party/GOP reform or let it die arguments, that's been done already.

But, let's assume that "working within the system" is the only option that is open to us.

So, why is the GOP the only option?

Take this election cycle: it was obvious to anybody with a pulse that the GOP was going to be taken to the cleaners on the national level, the "brand" was so damaged that the opposition could have run Vlad the Impaler and won.

Imagine how well things could have worked out if we had run some democrats in congressional or state races. Yes, maybe they would have had to have been "stealthy" in saying what they truly believe, but what's the crime in that?

Politics is the art of skillful lying.

I voted for a democrat state representative, who, after questioning her and making sure she would not support broad based state taxes (income and sales) or any "gun control" measures. Her other views were not far out of line with mine, home schooling, local farming and industry and so on.

As hostile as the GOP has been to us, and still is, and with the third party option off the table, why not put effort into the democrat party as well?

I don't think it's the ONLY option.

It's just the current BEST opportunity before us.


Consider this FACT, I attended our local GOP party meeting this past Thursday evening (post McCain FAIL) -- there were 17 people present, which by my count broke down this way:

3 people -- were local County party officers (the Secretary, 2nd Vice Chair, and the District Chairman) -- but others were NOTABLY missing, including the Treasurer, and the Chairman, his assistant (who really runs things). Note that the 1st Vice Chair spot is currently vacant.

4 people -- were elected officials, the area's State Senator & his wife, the area's State Assemblyman & his girlfriend (who is also the County Clerk). (Other area elected officials were absent).

6 people -- were "old-timers" (and I do mean "old") these are the retirees for whom this is an important social club. Oh, and one of these was actually a youngster, the head of the local college Republicans (who is a "legacy" Republican, meaning he is one because Dad & Grandpa are).

5 people -- were Ron Paul people. We had NOT "coordinated" anything, each just independently decided to show up.

My point is that majority of the "general members" DID NOT show up (typical attendance even a year ago at these meetings was on the order of 30-40 people, which I though small at the time.)

But of the "general members" who DID show up -- nearly HALF were OUR PEOPLE... and indeed the only "general members" UNDER 65 were us 5 and the ONE college Republican kid.

If last year is any guide, I would expect that January & spring meetings next year will be similar -- a paucity of members in attendance. If we can get 20 Ron Paul types to attend we can be in control of the party -- elect whoever we want as officers, etc. If we can do likewise in other counties around the state, we can essentially control the districts AND the state party officials (or at least a significant enough number of offices and positions) -- if we do that in enough states around the country, we can force change at the RNC level as well (or repudiate the RNC if it refuses to follow).



I don't simply see it as an "option" but as a "golden opportunity".



Consider that the BEST time to get in and buy a stock (or anything) is when NO ONE ELSE wants it -- then you can pick it up for a bargain price, and a minimal amount of effort.

[Join The Paul Side]

]Why the GOP?


Because Ron Paul said so. Anymore questions? :)

[Jeremy]

We have very little people in the Democratic Party... most people here are Republicans, and so are Ron Paul's supporters. Besides, we've got the Republican Liberty Caucus, etc. And how is a Ron Paul candidiate going to win a Dem primary? I mean it's possible, but much harder when they support big government things.

[Truth Warrior]

The Difference between Democrats and Republicans
http://differencebetweendemocratsandrepublicans.com/ (http://differencebetweendemocratsandrepublicans.com/)

An accurate, quick and easy read.<IMHO>

[Jeremy]

The Difference between Democrats and Republicans
http://differencebetweendemocratsandrepublicans.com/ (http://differencebetweendemocratsandrepublicans.com/)

An accurate, quick and easy read.<IMHO>

The difference is the amount of liberty people and groups we have trying to take over the party.

[ArrestPoliticians]

The GOP's ideological roots are in liberty, so it makes things easier for us. We can name drop the constitution and quote the founding fathers as republicans and get some positive vibes from Republican voters. Democrats have roots in socialism and are less open, although there are certain areas of the liberty program that they will be more receptive to.

[Truth Warrior]

The difference is the amount of liberty people and groups we have trying to take over the party. Not what the book says, nor my personal experience.

The GOP merely TALKS a good game. :p :rolleyes:

[Jeremy]

The GOP's ideological roots are in liberty, so it makes things easier for us. We can name drop the constitution and quote the founding fathers as republicans and get some positive vibes from Republican voters. Democrats have roots in socialism and are less open, although there are certain areas of the liberty program that they will be more receptive to.

+1

If you want to get far in the Democratic Party you have to talk about stealing from the rich and giving to the poor... maybe even racist things like AA... not good. We can already get Republicans to agree with us economically if we have to... I don't see anywhere the mainstream Dems would agree with us. Dennis Kucinich is not a mainstream dem... and he only agrees with us on foreign policy and civil liberties. Foreign policy is probably temporary anyway... the GOP has usually been the anti-war party, so we don't have much to worry about as far as Republicans supporting the war because that will have to change with time.

[Goldwater64]

MUWAHAHAHAHA.

Yeah, you think the GOP gives us a hard time, just try the Dems. First time you suggest getting rid of entitlement programs you will be labled a racist so fast your head will spin.

[Truth Warrior]

MUWAHAHAHAHA.

Yeah, you think the GOP gives us a hard time, just try the Dems. First time you suggest getting rid of entitlement programs you will be labled a racist so fast your head will spin. Many more whites are on welfare and other "entitlement" programs than blacks. ;)

[Goldwater64]

Many more whites are on welfare and other "entitlement" programs than blacks. ;)

Learn to read...I never suggested otherwise.

That won't stop them from CALLLING you racist.

And by the way, did you put entitlement programs in scare quotes? Really?

[heavenlyboy34]

As hostile as the GOP has been to us, and still is, and with the third party option off the table, why not put effort into the democrat party as well?

Some of us still have principles, that's why.

[Truth Warrior]

Learn to read...I never suggested otherwise.

I have, nor did I ever suggest otherwise. :p

That won't stop them from CALLLING you racist.

So, if I played the idiot card on you and CALLED you an idiot, would you stop?

Please. :D

And by the way, did you put entitlement programs in scare quotes? Really?

No, but many idiots seem to characterize that being the reason. Yes really!


:rolleyes:

[Anti Federalist]

The GOP's ideological roots are in liberty, so it makes things easier for us. We can name drop the constitution and quote the founding fathers as republicans and get some positive vibes from Republican voters. Democrats have roots in socialism and are less open, although there are certain areas of the liberty program that they will be more receptive to.

The GOP's third party roots are found in Lincoln, the all powerful fedgov and bloody civil war.

The democrat's roots trace back to Jefferson.

Just sayin'.

Flame on.:D

Seriously, I'm not suggesting for one second that liberty minded people chuck their principles, what I am suggesting is that both parties are equally hostile to freedom and liberty.

If we have to run as "stealth" candidates within the GOP, then why limit our options? Run as stealth candidates within the democrat party as well.

[tpreitzel]

If we have to run as "stealth" candidates within the GOP, then why limit our options? Run as stealth candidates within the democrat party as well.

RPFs seems to be the haven for purist ideologies lately which just won't work in reality at all. The reason likely lies in the fact that it's easier to talk than to do. Human nature IS the problem that these purists never fully grasp. In the meantime, just DO it, i.e. infiltrate and surround first with the GOP, then the Democrats. We need more constitutionally minded candidates in both major parties who won't tow the party line just for political favor.

[Truth Warrior]

RPFs seems to be the haven for purist ideologies lately which just won't work in reality at all. The reason likely lies in the fact that it's easier to talk than to do. Human nature IS the problem that these purists never fully grasp. In the meantime, just DO it, i.e. infiltrate and surround first with the GOP, then the Democrats. We need more independent candidates in both major parties who won't tow the party line just for political favor. The only problem with pragmatism is, it DOESN'T work. :D

[tpreitzel]

The only problem with pragmatism is, it DOESN'T work. :D

Wrong. What doesn't work is irresponsibility in the name of some purist ideology. ;)

P.S. Apparently, pragmatism was the reason many of you hitched your fate to the Ron Paul Revolution. Bob Barr wasn't quite good enough, eh? Maybe, if we had sufficient help from the purists, the 2008 campaign might have yielded greater success. However, even without the purists, the majority of Ron's supporters will continue to work to change the ship of state. Success, part or full restoration of constitutional liberty, lies in the hands of doers. I salute the doers for their sense of civic responsibility. ;)

[tremendoustie]

Not much point in re-hashing the third party/GOP reform or let it die arguments, that's been done already.

But, let's assume that "working within the system" is the only option that is open to us.

So, why is the GOP the only option?

Take this election cycle: it was obvious to anybody with a pulse that the GOP was going to be taken to the cleaners on the national level, the "brand" was so damaged that the opposition could have run Vlad the Impaler and won.

Imagine how well things could have worked out if we had run some democrats in congressional or state races. Yes, maybe they would have had to have been "stealthy" in saying what they truly believe, but what's the crime in that?

Politics is the art of skillful lying.

I voted for a democrat state representative, who, after questioning her and making sure she would not support broad based state taxes (income and sales) or any "gun control" measures. Her other views were not far out of line with mine, home schooling, local farming and industry and so on.

As hostile as the GOP has been to us, and still is, and with the third party option off the table, why not put effort into the democrat party as well?

Sure, it's not like we're some monolithic block who can only do one thing. I'll vote for democrats, republicans, libertarians, constitutionalists, independents, or coneheads if they support liberty. Who cares what label someone has. I'm not voting for them so I can see my favorite letter on the screen next to their names, I'm voting to support ideas.

I think the answer is "all of the above". Whatever motivates you, and whatever strategy seems to be accomplishing the most, is the way to go.

[spotics]

I was actually thinking this last night. In my area, we are universally despised in the GOP. The corrupt county and district chairs have demonized us and refuse to work with us even those of us who have obtained power in the Republican Party. I've generally found favorable treatement by Democrats. One Democratic Executive Committee member even gave us money.

In fact one of the most libertarian members of the state legislature is a Democrat whom the governor actively campaigned with along with several state politicians. Recent libertarian Republicans in the state legislature have fared less well. One was forced out by a primary challenge because the state GOP didn't believe his ideas would win him re-election and another was forced to go independent because he refused to go with the party leaderships unconstitutional agenda.

Still you will be battling the people who want more government. However it might be easier than battling the people who want more war and Patriot Acts.

[Truth Warrior]

Wrong. What doesn't work is irresponsibility in the name of some purist ideology. ;)

WRONG! Pragmatism and compromise, over decades, just got us ALL EXACTLY where we are. :p :rolleyes:

How about responsibility in the name of a purist ideology?

P.S. Apparently, pragmatism was the reason many of you hitched your fate to the Ron Paul Revolution. Bob Barr wasn't quite good enough, eh? Maybe, if we had sufficient help from the purists, the 2008 campaign might have yielded greater success. However, even without the purists, the majority of Ron's supporters will continue to work to change the ship of state. Success, part or full restoration of constitutional liberty, lies in the hands of doers. I salute the doers for their sense of civic responsibility. ;)

The LP ( GOP-lite :rolleyes: ) oxymoron is IRRELEVANT AND INSIGNIFICANT, ALWAYS has been ( 37 YEARS), and ALWAYS will be.<IMHO>



In matters of style, swim with the current; in matters of principle, stand like a rock.
Thomas Jefferson

[Anti Federalist]

I was actually thinking this last night. In my area, we are universally despised in the GOP. The corrupt county and district chairs have demonized us and refuse to work with us even those of us who have obtained power in the Republican Party. I've generally found favorable treatement by Democrats. One Democratic Executive Committee member even gave us money.

In fact one of the most libertarian members of the state legislature is a Democrat whom the governor actively campaigned with along with several state politicians. Recent libertarian Republicans in the state legislature have fared less well. One was forced out by a primary challenge because the state GOP didn't believe his ideas would win him re-election and another was forced to go independent because he refused to go with the party leaderships unconstitutional agenda.

Still you will be battling the people who want more government. However it might be easier than battling the people who want more war and Patriot Acts.


Exactly my point.

Now, don't get me wrong, I'm still convinced that there is little to no chance of "reform" or "restoration" within the "system", as it stands right now.

But it was in the spirit of adding more to the mix than "hang 'em all high, and now" (which is my usual first response) that I posited my thoughts.

I suppose it will depend on how powerful the Kool-Aid effect is.

Will Republicans realize that empire, wars and PATRIOT Acts are a dichotomy that cannot be reconciled with what they say their party stands for, or will Democrats realize that they have been betrayed and lied to once again, and that wars domestic spying and banker bailouts will not end under the regime of the Messiah?

Which ones come out of the fog first, I suggest are the ones most likely to listen to the "message".

Worse case scenario is that neither side will care, and just go on mindlessly rooting for the "home team".

Which is what TW is always driving at, and, sadly, usually right about.

[tpreitzel]

In matters of fantasy, swim with the current; in matters of principle, work pragmatically against the current of hopeless ideologies and apathy to restore constitutional liberty.


I couldn't have said it better myself. And the most pragmatic solution for restoring constitutional liberty isn't the tongue, it's the gun. Hopefully, we won't have to resort to the latter.


WRONG! Pragmatism and compromise, over decades, just got us ALL EXACTLY where we are.

No, irresponsibility in the name of purist ideology and many other excuses, e.g. apathy, got US where we are today. Stop trying to duck your blatant irresponsibility. Your irresponsibility is just as much a part of the problem as those politicians who compromise on your purist ideology which will NEVER, EVER be realized on earth! Pragmatism and compromise gave us the federal constitution. Could it have been better? Sure, but I certainly won't wait for your purest fantasy to be realized. It won't be realized except in your dreams.


How about responsibility in the name of a purist ideology?

Sweet, but you might have to actually snap out of your impossible dream and get to work and compromise with others to see your dream realized. Once again, you're living on fantasy island because it's a convenient excuse to do nothing. If your purist ideology worked, we'd be living in utopia in the US, wouldn't we? ;) Unfortunately, human nature doesn't work in a manner suitable for realizing your impossible dream. Welcome to the nightmare of reality.

[JohnJay]

Depends on where you're located, but I pretty much agree. Democrats dominate here in MD. I think we'll need to run Democrats in the primaries to have a chance. The lower turnout in primaries actually helps our cause, I think.



Good intelligent ideas, as usual on these forum threads.

But I'd say after the treatment received from the Republican Party over the last 18 months
and all the GOP exclusionary tactics, it is really time to exclude them from the civilian democracy of the United States.
If another political party needs to evolve as the second party in the two-party system -
with a temporay advantage to the democrats - so be it.

In the end the nation will be better off with honest politicians.

[CapitalistRadical]

The Republican party doesn't have a particular philosophy except that which their members believe. If 50 million monarchists, Islamists, or Scientologists joined the Republican Party, that's what the party would reflect.

Consider how the neoconservatives took control of the Republican Party.

Why can't we do likewise? Our worst enemy is the naysayers among us.

[tpreitzel]

The Republican party doesn't have a particular philosophy except that which their members believe. If 50 million monarchists, Islamists, or Scientologists joined the Republican Party, that's what the party would reflect.

Consider how the neoconservatives took control of the Republican Party.

Why can't we do likewise? Our worst enemy is the naysayers among us.

Right. Because talk is cheap. Joining the GOP means having to do some dirty work.

[CapitalistRadical]

Right. Because talk is cheap. Joining the GOP means having to do some dirty work.

Right. Well, I'm going to get involved in my local GOP branch. I really think that now is the time, and we may never get another chance to influence the Republican Party in some decades. I urge all of you to do likewise!

[Truth Warrior]

I couldn't have said it better myself.

Because YOU did. Yep, you're another of the dishonest pol types all right, fraud, deception and deceit. Party of principle, my ass. Go ahead and bust your butt, you're just GROWING the STATE too.

"By their fruits yea shall know them." :p

No, irresponsibility in the name of purist ideology and many other excuses, e.g. apathy, got US where we are today. Stop trying to duck your blatant irresponsibility. Your irresponsibility is just as much a part of the problem as those politicians who compromise on your purist ideology which will NEVER, EVER be realized on earth! Pragmatism and compromise gave us the federal constitution. Could it have been better? Sure, but I certainly won't wait for your purest fantasy to be realized. It won't be realized except in your dreams.

Barbarians NEVER really do make much sense. :rolleyes:

The Federal Constitution Is Dead (http://www.lewrockwell.com/gutzman/gutzman17.html)

'Lysander Spooner once said that he believed "that by false interpretations, and naked usurpations, the government has been made in practice a very widely, and almost wholly, different thing from what the Constitution itself purports to authorize." At the same time, he could not exonerate the Constitution, for it "has either authorized such a government as we have had, or has been powerless to prevent it. In either case, it is unfit to exist." It is hard to argue with that.' -- Thomas E. Woods Jr

Sweet, but you might have to actually snap out of your impossible dream and get to work and compromise with others to see your dream realized. Once again, you're living on fantasy island because it's a convenient excuse to do nothing. If your purist ideology worked, we'd be living in utopia in the US, wouldn't we? ;) Unfortunately, human nature doesn't work in a manner suitable for realizing your impossible dream. Welcome to the nightmare of reality.

36 YEARS of living out my purist libertarian principles day to day in the REAL world. A free society is created one by one.

Though you STATISTS just LOVE to follow YOUR STATE in it's force, coercion and violence of the last 30,000 years. Enjoy your sociopathic cult.

You'll just end up killing us all.


"We shall get nowhere until we start by recognizing that political behavior is largely non-rational, that the world is suffering from some kind of mental disease which must be diagnosed before it can be cured. " -- George Orwell

[CapitalistRadical]

The only problem with pragmatism is, it DOESN'T work. :D

I agree, compromise on principles doesn't work. However, that is very different from what I think is being discussed here.

[Truth Warrior]

I agree, compromise on principles doesn't work. However, that is very different from what I think is being discussed here. Not for the guy that I posted it to. He'd sell his grandmother for a DEAL. :p :rolleyes:

[forsmant]

Historically, the democratic party was closer to the libertarian philosophy than the republican party. In fact the republican party has never as a whole shown any inclinations toward liberty. The party began as a nationalistic paternalism with the intent on conquering the south. The Republicans used the war to implement a series of national laws including national banking pyramids. It soon moved to begin trust busting and conquering Spanish colonies. The republican party initially introduced the federal reserve act. The republicans were the first to intervene during a depression. The republicans created the Interstate highway system in admiration of the German autobahn. The republican party took us completely off of a gold standard and disrespect the office of the president. The republican party sold weapons to Iran, raised social security taxes, intervened in central America numerous times, bombed Iraq after selling them weapons, trained Osama bin Laden, raised taxes, and gave us George W. Bush.

I am not saying the democratic party is any better.

[heavenlyboy34]

Historically, the democratic party was closer to the libertarian philosophy than the republican party. In fact the republican party has never as a whole shown any inclinations toward liberty. The party began as a nationalistic paternalism with the intent on conquering the south. The Republicans used the war to implement a series of national laws including national banking pyramids. It soon moved to begin trust busting and conquering Spanish colonies. The republican party initially introduced the federal reserve act. The republicans were the first to intervene during a depression. The republicans created the Interstate highway system in admiration of the German autobahn. The republican party took us completely off of a gold standard and disrespect the office of the president. The republican party sold weapons to Iran, raised social security taxes, intervened in central America numerous times, bombed Iraq after selling them weapons, trained Osama bin Laden, raised taxes, and gave us George W. Bush.

I am not saying the democratic party is any better.

qft!!

[Goldwater64]

Many more whites are on welfare and other "entitlement" programs than blacks. ;)

You are still the one who uses scare quotes on "entitlement programs."

I think I get this liberal schtick...I can hear it now:

O-Bam-A, Truth War-ior, O-Bam-A, Truth War-ior, O-Bam-A, Truth War-ior.
Yes We Can!

Come on, you defend welfare and then say we should join forces with the dems.

The fact remains, big government is the enemy.

But if you attack most big government social programs, the left WILL play the race card.

[tpreitzel]

"We shall get nowhere until we start by recognizing that political behavior is largely non-rational, that the world is suffering from some kind of mental disease which must be diagnosed before it can be cured. " -- George Orwell

It's too bad, TW, but we're not in the land of OZ.



Because YOU did. Yep, you're another of the dishonest pol types all right, fraud, deception and deceit. Party of principle, my ass.

"By their fruits yea shall know them."


Which is why you can't seem to use the multi-quote feature of the forums and you'd rather embed your imbecilic comments in my remarks, right? Now, we know the real fraud and it's you, Truth Warrior.



Barbarians NEVER really do make much sense.

I suppose pragmatism and compromise didn't give us the federal constitution, eh? Nor do I suppose irresponsibility of civic duty in the name of some misguided ideology or apathy has adversely affected our present course, eh? Furthermore, I suppose your misguided ideology will one day be accepted voluntarily by your fellow man one at a time long after I'm gone, eh? Dream on! <---- Now, even YOU know why my comments don't make sense to you and your kindred.


'Lysander Spooner once said that he believed "that by false interpretations, and naked usurpations, the government has been made in practice a very widely, and almost wholly, different thing from what the Constitution itself purports to authorize." At the same time, he could not exonerate the Constitution, for it "has either authorized such a government as we have had, or has been powerless to prevent it. In either case, it is unfit to exist." It is hard to argue with that.' -- Thomas E. Woods Jr

Wow! We have another quotation. Everybody's got them and everybody's entitled to them. Until you've remade the world one man at a time in your fantastic image, TW, our model of liberty in the US is the federal constitution. We're sorry that it falls short of your vision, but, once again, welcome to the nightmare of reality.


"36 YEARS of living out my purist libertarian principles day to day in the REAL world. A free society is created one by one.

As much as you want to change the world to conform to your impossible image, humanity in general will NOT and can NOT conform to your image of utopia whether one at a time, dozens at at time, or millions at a time. I'm sure that we'd all love to see a replay of your "36 years of living out your purist libertarian principles". I'd suspect that we'd all be rather unmoved except for the negative impact of your civic irresponsibility on our country's freedom.


Though you STATISTS just LOVE to follow YOUR STATE in it's force, coercion and violence of the last 30,000 years. Enjoy your sociopathic cult.

No, we reject your slurs and labels. We constitutionalists just realize that flawed humanity needs a few rules to govern our lives and the federal constitution is the framework for our liberty in the US. In other words, we're pragmatic, not foolish ideologues or anarchists.


You'll just end up killing us all."

No, you'll just end up marginalizing yourself because your views will never held by the masses, much less a majority.

Lastly, we ALL know how much you just want to gnash your teeth and lash your tongue at us constitutionalists one last time...hopefully only once. Go for it and make us proud! ;)

[heavenlyboy34]

You are still the one who uses scare quotes on "entitlement programs."

I think I get this liberal schtick...I can hear it now:

O-Bam-A, Truth War-ior, O-Bam-A, Truth War-ior, O-Bam-A, Truth War-ior.
Yes We Can!

Come on, you defend welfare and then say we should join forces with the dems.

The fact remains, big government is the enemy.

But if you attack most big government social programs, the left WILL play the race card.

I've "known" TW for a while now, and I don't see him as a left-lib at all. You should research your claims before throwing around stuff like that, mate. ;)

[literatim]

Historically, the democratic party was closer to the libertarian philosophy than the republican party. In fact the republican party has never as a whole shown any inclinations toward liberty. The party began as a nationalistic paternalism with the intent on conquering the south. The Republicans used the war to implement a series of national laws including national banking pyramids. It soon moved to begin trust busting and conquering Spanish colonies. The republican party initially introduced the federal reserve act. The republicans were the first to intervene during a depression. The republicans created the Interstate highway system in admiration of the German autobahn. The republican party took us completely off of a gold standard and disrespect the office of the president. The republican party sold weapons to Iran, raised social security taxes, intervened in central America numerous times, bombed Iraq after selling them weapons, trained Osama bin Laden, raised taxes, and gave us George W. Bush.

I am not saying the democratic party is any better.

It was the Democrats that got us into World War 1, 2, Vietnam, Korea, Bosnia, and a host of other wars. In fact, the idea of spreading democracy at the barrel of a gun was a Democratic idea, Wilson's to be exact.

The Federal Reserve Act was signed into law by Wilson, a Democrat. It was also the Democrats that gave us A New Deal and the federal income tax.

The neoconservative leadership determining the GOP strategy were Democrats that switched sides.

[forsmant]

It was the Democrats that got us into World War 1, 2, Vietnam, Korea, Bosnia, and a host of other wars. In fact, the idea of spreading democracy at the barrel of a gun was a Democratic idea, Wilson's to be exact.

The Federal Reserve Act was signed into law by Wilson, a Democrat. It was also the Democrats that gave us A New Deal and the federal income tax.

The neoconservative leadership determining the GOP strategy were Democrats that switched sides.

Income taxes were first introduced by the Lincoln administration. The Federal Reserve act was introduced by Sen Aldrich, a republican. It was ultimately retooled as a democrat bill when passed.

[Anti Federalist]

Historically, the democratic party was closer to the libertarian philosophy than the republican party. In fact the republican party has never as a whole shown any inclinations toward liberty. The party began as a nationalistic paternalism with the intent on conquering the south. The Republicans used the war to implement a series of national laws including national banking pyramids. It soon moved to begin trust busting and conquering Spanish colonies. The republican party initially introduced the federal reserve act. The republicans were the first to intervene during a depression. The republicans created the Interstate highway system in admiration of the German autobahn. The republican party took us completely off of a gold standard and disrespect the office of the president. The republican party sold weapons to Iran, raised social security taxes, intervened in central America numerous times, bombed Iraq after selling them weapons, trained Osama bin Laden, raised taxes, and gave us George W. Bush.

I am not saying the democratic party is any better.

Whoo Hoo, Mr. Krabs gets the golden krabby patty award.

Well Done - QFT

[WRellim]

The Difference between Democrats and Republicans
http://differencebetweendemocratsandrepublicans.com/ (http://differencebetweendemocratsandrepublicans.com/)

An accurate, quick and easy read.<IMHO>


Ah, but if we can take over the party... we can begin to actually FILL those pages!

[WRellim]

Not what the book says, nor my personal experience.

The GOP merely TALKS a good game. :p :rolleyes:


So why not RUN for office yourself?

You can actually WALK the WALK and be a Ron Paul like "stick in the mud"!

How hard can it be to vote "no" on a continual basis?



Long bill you cannot understand? Vote "NO."
Bill you aren't given the chance to even read? Vote "NO."
Bill that raises budgets or taxes? Vote "NO."
Cycle, rinse, repeat!

[literatim]

Income taxes were first introduced by the Lincoln administration. The Federal Reserve act was introduced by Sen Aldrich, a republican. It was ultimately retooled as a democrat bill when passed.

So? The sides switched polarizations. All the southern conservatives Democrats became Republicans and all the northern Republicans became Democrats.

[WRellim]

So? The sides switched polarizations. All the southern conservatives Democrats became Republicans and all the northern Republicans became Democrats.

Not quite... the transition, like all transitions, happened over time, with various factions present in both parties.

Same thing is true today. Each party always consists of multiple factions, cliques, and caucuses; which are generally stable, but always in slight transition themselves.

If they were completely "unified" there would be no need for party "whips" to try to convince and coerce members into supporting or opposing various bills.

[Truth Warrior]

You are still the one who uses scare quotes on "entitlement programs."

I think I get this liberal schtick...I can hear it now:

O-Bam-A, Truth War-ior, O-Bam-A, Truth War-ior, O-Bam-A, Truth War-ior.
Yes We Can!

Come on, you defend welfare and then say we should join forces with the dems.

The fact remains, big government is the enemy.

But if you attack most big government social programs, the left WILL play the race card.

:rolleyes:

Get a frickin' clue newbee, GOVERNMENT is the enemy, the BIG is implied AND merely the reason.

http://i75.photobucket.com/albums/i304/Truth_Warrior/lewrock0305a.gif

[Truth Warrior]

So why not RUN for office yourself?

You can actually WALK the WALK and be a Ron Paul like "stick in the mud"!

How hard can it be to vote "no" on a continual basis?



Long bill you cannot understand? Vote "NO."
Bill you aren't given the chance to even read? Vote "NO."
Bill that raises budgets or taxes? Vote "NO."
Cycle, rinse, repeat!


HINT:

http://i75.photobucket.com/albums/i304/Truth_Warrior/lewrock0305a.gif

:D

[Truth Warrior]

It's too bad, TW, but we're not in the land of OZ.

Yep, much more like the land of Klingons.

Which is why you can't seem to use the multi-quote feature of the forums and you'd rather embed your imbecilic comments in my remarks, right? Now, we know the real fraud and it's you, Truth Warrior.

It's a choice, I like it.

I suppose pragmatism and compromise didn't give us the federal constitution, eh? Nor do I suppose irresponsibility of civic duty in the name of some misguided ideology or apathy has adversely affected our present course, eh? Furthermore, I suppose your misguided ideology will one day be accepted voluntarily by your fellow man one at a time long after I'm gone, eh? Dream on! <---- Now, even YOU know why my comments don't make sense to you and your kindred.

Nope, the bogus unauthorized, illegal and immoral Federalist cabal coup GAVE you the Constitution. :rolleyes:

And then the same kinds of barbarians over the next couple of more centuries have now managed to kill it.

Wow! We have another quotation. Everybody's got them and everybody's entitled to them. Until you've remade the world one man at a time in your fantastic image, TW, our model of liberty in the US is the federal constitution. We're sorry that it falls short of your vision, but, once again, welcome to the nightmare of reality.

The Federal Constitution Is Dead (http://www.lewrockwell.com/gutzman/gutzman17.html)

As much as you want to change the world to conform to your impossible image, humanity in general will NOT and can NOT conform to your image of utopia whether one at a time, dozens at at time, or millions at a time. I'm sure that we'd all love to see a replay of your "36 years of living out your purist libertarian principles". I'd suspect that we'd all be rather unmoved except for the negative impact of your civic irresponsibility on our country's freedom.

Nope, I only did and can change myself. The rest of you and the world is on it's own, to finally figure that one out.

The survival of our species long term is highly iffy and questionable. I doubt that we will make it. Extinction at our own hands is my bet. We won't even last as long as the Neanderthals did. Just chalk it up as another of Nature's failed experiments. NEXT!

No, we reject your slurs and labels. We constitutionalists just realize that flawed humanity needs a few rules to govern our lives and the federal constitution is the framework for our liberty in the US. In other words, we're pragmatic, not foolish ideologues or anarchists.

How about ONE rule: "Do as you please, but harm no other in their person or property."?

How many MORE do YOU really NEED? :rolleyes:

No, you'll just end up marginalizing yourself because your views will never held by the masses, much less a majority.

I am, always have been, always will be, just the smallest minority, an individual. There's currently only about 6.5 billion of us on this planet.

Lastly, we ALL know how much you just want to gnash your teeth and lash your tongue at us constitutionalists one last time...hopefully only once. Go for it and make us proud! ;)

The Illegality, Immorality, and Violence of All Political Action
http://users.aol.com/xeqtr1/voluntaryist/vopa.html (http://users.aol.com/xeqtr1/voluntaryist/vopa.html)


Enjoy your NAU and NWO, brought to through and courtesy of YOUR US Federal government. :p


"The most dangerous man to any government is the man who is able to think things out for himself, without regard to the prevailing superstitions and taboos. Almost inevitably he comes to the conclusion that the government he lives under is dishonest, insane and intolerable, and so, if he is romantic, he tries to change it. And even if he is not romantic personally he is very apt to spread discontent among those who are." -- H.L. Mencken

[tpreitzel]

It's too bad, TW, but we're not in the land of OZ.

TW: Yep, much more like the land of Klingons.

Which is why you can't seem to use the multi-quote feature of the forums and you'd rather embed your imbecilic comments in my remarks, right? Now, we know the real fraud and it's you, Truth Warrior.

TW: It's a choice, I like it.

I suppose pragmatism and compromise didn't give us the federal constitution, eh? Nor do I suppose irresponsibility of civic duty in the name of some misguided ideology or apathy has adversely affected our present course, eh? Furthermore, I suppose your misguided ideology will one day be accepted voluntarily by your fellow man one at a time long after I'm gone, eh? Dream on! <---- Now, even YOU know why my comments don't make sense to you and your kindred.

TW: Nope, the bogus unauthorized, illegal and immoral Federalist cabal coup GAVE you the Constitution.

TW: And then the same kinds of barbarians over the next couple of more centuries have now managed to kill it.

Wow! We have another quotation. Everybody's got them and everybody's entitled to them. Until you've remade the world one man at a time in your fantastic image, TW, our model of liberty in the US is the federal constitution. We're sorry that it falls short of your vision, but, once again, welcome to the nightmare of reality.

TW: The Federal Constitution Is Dead

As much as you want to change the world to conform to your impossible image, humanity in general will NOT and can NOT conform to your image of utopia whether one at a time, dozens at at time, or millions at a time. I'm sure that we'd all love to see a replay of your "36 years of living out your purist libertarian principles". I'd suspect that we'd all be rather unmoved except for the negative impact of your civic irresponsibility on our country's freedom.

TW: Nope, I only did and can change myself. The rest of you and the world is on it's own, to finally figure that one out.

TW: The survival of our species long term is highly iffy and questionable. I doubt that we will make it. Extinction at our own hands is my bet. We won't even last as long as the Neanderthals did. Just chalk it up as another of Nature's failed experiments. NEXT!

No, we reject your slurs and labels. We constitutionalists just realize that flawed humanity needs a few rules to govern our lives and the federal constitution is the framework for our liberty in the US. In other words, we're pragmatic, not foolish ideologues or anarchists.

TW: How about ONE rule: "Do as you please, but harm no other in their person or property."?

TW: How many MORE do YOU really NEED?

No, you'll just end up marginalizing yourself because your views will never held by the masses, much less a majority.

TW: I am, always have been, always will be, just the smallest minority, an individual. There's currently only about 6.5 billion of us on this planet.

Lastly, we ALL know how much you just want to gnash your teeth and lash your tongue at us constitutionalists one last time...hopefully only once. Go for it and make us proud!

TW: The Illegality, Immorality, and Violence of All Political Action
http://users.aol.com/xeqtr1/voluntaryist/vopa.html


TW: Enjoy your NAU and NWO, brought to through and courtesy of YOUR US Federal government.
"The most dangerous man to any government is the man who is able to think things out for himself, without regard to the prevailing superstitions and taboos. Almost inevitably he comes to the conclusion that the government he lives under is dishonest, insane and intolerable, and so, if he is romantic, he tries to change it. And even if he is not romantic personally he is very apt to spread discontent amon

...

[forsmant]

So? The sides switched polarizations. All the southern conservatives Democrats became Republicans and all the northern Republicans became Democrats.

This is a weak generalization of historic events worthy of a sixth grade history book!