curtisag
12-19-2007, 09:36 PM
Sorry, but I just gotta get this rant out of me, and this is the logical conduit to do that.
Ron Paul has an amazing amount of potential to reform and bring back the real strength of conservatism in the Republican party. There is a theory upon which Reagan was elected. They operated under the campaign theory of Fusionism. The theory basically states, there are 3 pieces of the pie that make up the heart of the Republican party's majority support nationwide which must all be in place to win big in elections. You need fiscal conservatives to be on board, you need religious conservatives to at least not dislike you, and you need libertarian conservatives in the party. Currently there is a split in the party among libertarian conservatives and the other two-thirds. Reagan united these 3 factions very well with his campaign. He had a long history of defending freedom (as can be seen in his 1964 speech at the Republican convention), he was likable and christians certainly liked him, and he preached against the excesses of Government. Bush won in 2000, barely, because christians loved his message, fiscal conservatives liked his tax cutting talk, and Libertarians liked his foreign policy (but no longer).
Pat Buchanan is part of the same wing of the party that has been expelled completely from the establishment of the party. It's the Robert Taft/Barry Goldwater/Old Reagan wing. They're often called paleo-conservatives now. The Neo-conservatives began very early on expelling paleo-conservative thought from the party elite beginning in the Reagan Administration. They're called neo because they haven't been around nearly as long as paleo-conservatives. Paleos were denounced as unrealistic, kookie, and sometimes even anti-semetic (unfairly). The original neo-conservatives that sparked the movement were actually ex-liberals who decided it was time to get serious about anti-communism and the Soviet Union. This is why their tactics have to include smearing when debating against someone like Ron Paul. They say he's a racist, his foreign policy is unrealistic, and he's a conspiracy nut. They cannot argue with him with logic. O'reilly told Paul that he's not interested in the history of foreign policy. And it doesn't matter if he had a shadow writer who wrote something offensive in his newsletter 20 years ago either. They cannot win a fair debate and have a majority of Americans agree with them on foreign policy anymore. Their failures speak for themselves.
However, it has been a long process, over several decades that libertarianism became an anathema to the Republican party elites. The neo-conservatives are a false straw man setup to run against the left. They run to the left on fiscal issues (advocating enormous federal expansion of power and spending to achieve their goals), then they turn around and lean heavily on religious conservatives who want to dictate what people should be allowed to do. Bush has lost all his fiscal and libertarian conservative support. That's why his polling is at an all time low nearly.
Someone like Ron Paul can be satisfactory to all wings of the party (except for the foreign policy hawks). But that's just one issue, it is not a wing of the party. There isn't something like a hawk's wing of the party. Historically, many more Democrats have started wars this past century compared to Republicans (although the Republicans are catching up fast). And if the neo-conservatives can be defeated on their foreign policy ideology, their core of support within the party will fade away. Neo-conservatives have already surrendered to real conservatives on illegal immigration. They don't mind illegal immigration because they adhear to the globalist view the CFR pushes. But that's why immigration is the top issue in Iowa right now among Republican primary voters.
Foreign policy though is why Ron Paul is such a threat to them. That's why he must be ridiculed and excluded from conservative debate (like redstate.com for example). That's why several people at the The New Republic Online have endorsed Ron despite the huge effort to purge all libertarian thought from the conservative mainstream. Ron Paul is the biggest threat to the Republican establishment since Buchanan ran. The media smear campaign ended his chances quickly after New Hampshire.
The Neo-cons tried to pass amnesty for illegals in congress, and now there's an open rebellion against it. Their false conservative ideals are beginning to become readily apparent. They are part of the globalist ideology that the Council on Foreign Relations pushes. This is a long process, because you can't repair all the damage that has been done to the party by the neo-cons overnight. It will take several election cycles to completely expose the weakness of the neo-con's ideas, but eventually the truth will do our work for us. The U.S. is headed for a serious fiscal crisis. World investors know it, your average citizen or investor doesn't really understand it, and that's why Ron Paul has been able to really galvanize an element of the population that hasn't had someone to really vote for in many years. That's why you hear cheers on the floor of stock exchanges when Ron Paul debates the Fed chairman. That's why there's a blimp with Ron Paul's name on it.
If Ron Paul can successfully practice Fusionism, by uniting the wings of the party, he can win so many independents and conservative Democrats it would be amazing. This is how Reagan won in 1984, he swept the nation with a real conservative/libertarian message. During his Administration, he became influenced by the neo-con element, but he ran on same basic principles that Ron advocates. If you look at his memoirs, he notes that one of his biggest foreign policy mistakes was he never realized how illogical middle eastern politics could be and regretted some of the decisions made there. That was Reagan's critique of the neo-con's meddling in other nation's affairs in the middle east. Even Paul Wolfowitz, one of the founding members of the neo-conservative movement, recognizes and admits that our troops in Saudi Arabia were one of the primary motivating factors that allowed Osama to recruit hijackers who would be willing to commit suicide to attack the U.S. Paul threatens to expose this fact, and I'm sure he scares the hell out of them. One party official has come out and openly stated that Ron Paul Republicans are beginning to takeover local party functions. Our people are running for local party chair's, we're reforming the party from the bottom up, with Ron Paul as our leader. We can Revolutionize the party itself, and begin an new era where there really is a difference between Republicans and Democrats again on fiscal issues. We're bringing new people into the party, and these people are going to have a voice if they speak together that cannot be ignored forever. We will run against Republicans in congressional primaries, and we will eventually have people running for the Senate as well.
We young people are the future. The baby boomers are retiring, the world war 2 generation is almost gone. The demographic Paul does best in is the 18-40 year old bracket. He beats Hillary Clinton in direct hypothetical polling in this demographic with little exposure. We are tired of the neo-cons and people telling us how to live. We are tired of being left with the enormous debt burden that cowardly politicians are passing on to the next generation. We have lived beyond our means for so long, we have threated the prosperity of our future, and it will be our generation that will suffer disproportionately compared to people who are now benefiting from the reckless social spending with no a way to pay for it. We want real freedom back, the freedom the founding fathers originally intended. That's economic freedom AND personal freedom.
The neo-cons are clearly on their way out. It's just a matter of time really. They have lost us both houses of congress and people will eventually wake up and see they have completely failed.
I'll end this with a great video clip of Dick Cheney in 1994 explaining why we didn't go into Bagdad in the first Gulf War.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6BEsZMvrq-I
^^^ Wow that was the king of all flip flops right there.
Keep fighting people, WE CAN WIN!
/rant off :).
Ron Paul has an amazing amount of potential to reform and bring back the real strength of conservatism in the Republican party. There is a theory upon which Reagan was elected. They operated under the campaign theory of Fusionism. The theory basically states, there are 3 pieces of the pie that make up the heart of the Republican party's majority support nationwide which must all be in place to win big in elections. You need fiscal conservatives to be on board, you need religious conservatives to at least not dislike you, and you need libertarian conservatives in the party. Currently there is a split in the party among libertarian conservatives and the other two-thirds. Reagan united these 3 factions very well with his campaign. He had a long history of defending freedom (as can be seen in his 1964 speech at the Republican convention), he was likable and christians certainly liked him, and he preached against the excesses of Government. Bush won in 2000, barely, because christians loved his message, fiscal conservatives liked his tax cutting talk, and Libertarians liked his foreign policy (but no longer).
Pat Buchanan is part of the same wing of the party that has been expelled completely from the establishment of the party. It's the Robert Taft/Barry Goldwater/Old Reagan wing. They're often called paleo-conservatives now. The Neo-conservatives began very early on expelling paleo-conservative thought from the party elite beginning in the Reagan Administration. They're called neo because they haven't been around nearly as long as paleo-conservatives. Paleos were denounced as unrealistic, kookie, and sometimes even anti-semetic (unfairly). The original neo-conservatives that sparked the movement were actually ex-liberals who decided it was time to get serious about anti-communism and the Soviet Union. This is why their tactics have to include smearing when debating against someone like Ron Paul. They say he's a racist, his foreign policy is unrealistic, and he's a conspiracy nut. They cannot argue with him with logic. O'reilly told Paul that he's not interested in the history of foreign policy. And it doesn't matter if he had a shadow writer who wrote something offensive in his newsletter 20 years ago either. They cannot win a fair debate and have a majority of Americans agree with them on foreign policy anymore. Their failures speak for themselves.
However, it has been a long process, over several decades that libertarianism became an anathema to the Republican party elites. The neo-conservatives are a false straw man setup to run against the left. They run to the left on fiscal issues (advocating enormous federal expansion of power and spending to achieve their goals), then they turn around and lean heavily on religious conservatives who want to dictate what people should be allowed to do. Bush has lost all his fiscal and libertarian conservative support. That's why his polling is at an all time low nearly.
Someone like Ron Paul can be satisfactory to all wings of the party (except for the foreign policy hawks). But that's just one issue, it is not a wing of the party. There isn't something like a hawk's wing of the party. Historically, many more Democrats have started wars this past century compared to Republicans (although the Republicans are catching up fast). And if the neo-conservatives can be defeated on their foreign policy ideology, their core of support within the party will fade away. Neo-conservatives have already surrendered to real conservatives on illegal immigration. They don't mind illegal immigration because they adhear to the globalist view the CFR pushes. But that's why immigration is the top issue in Iowa right now among Republican primary voters.
Foreign policy though is why Ron Paul is such a threat to them. That's why he must be ridiculed and excluded from conservative debate (like redstate.com for example). That's why several people at the The New Republic Online have endorsed Ron despite the huge effort to purge all libertarian thought from the conservative mainstream. Ron Paul is the biggest threat to the Republican establishment since Buchanan ran. The media smear campaign ended his chances quickly after New Hampshire.
The Neo-cons tried to pass amnesty for illegals in congress, and now there's an open rebellion against it. Their false conservative ideals are beginning to become readily apparent. They are part of the globalist ideology that the Council on Foreign Relations pushes. This is a long process, because you can't repair all the damage that has been done to the party by the neo-cons overnight. It will take several election cycles to completely expose the weakness of the neo-con's ideas, but eventually the truth will do our work for us. The U.S. is headed for a serious fiscal crisis. World investors know it, your average citizen or investor doesn't really understand it, and that's why Ron Paul has been able to really galvanize an element of the population that hasn't had someone to really vote for in many years. That's why you hear cheers on the floor of stock exchanges when Ron Paul debates the Fed chairman. That's why there's a blimp with Ron Paul's name on it.
If Ron Paul can successfully practice Fusionism, by uniting the wings of the party, he can win so many independents and conservative Democrats it would be amazing. This is how Reagan won in 1984, he swept the nation with a real conservative/libertarian message. During his Administration, he became influenced by the neo-con element, but he ran on same basic principles that Ron advocates. If you look at his memoirs, he notes that one of his biggest foreign policy mistakes was he never realized how illogical middle eastern politics could be and regretted some of the decisions made there. That was Reagan's critique of the neo-con's meddling in other nation's affairs in the middle east. Even Paul Wolfowitz, one of the founding members of the neo-conservative movement, recognizes and admits that our troops in Saudi Arabia were one of the primary motivating factors that allowed Osama to recruit hijackers who would be willing to commit suicide to attack the U.S. Paul threatens to expose this fact, and I'm sure he scares the hell out of them. One party official has come out and openly stated that Ron Paul Republicans are beginning to takeover local party functions. Our people are running for local party chair's, we're reforming the party from the bottom up, with Ron Paul as our leader. We can Revolutionize the party itself, and begin an new era where there really is a difference between Republicans and Democrats again on fiscal issues. We're bringing new people into the party, and these people are going to have a voice if they speak together that cannot be ignored forever. We will run against Republicans in congressional primaries, and we will eventually have people running for the Senate as well.
We young people are the future. The baby boomers are retiring, the world war 2 generation is almost gone. The demographic Paul does best in is the 18-40 year old bracket. He beats Hillary Clinton in direct hypothetical polling in this demographic with little exposure. We are tired of the neo-cons and people telling us how to live. We are tired of being left with the enormous debt burden that cowardly politicians are passing on to the next generation. We have lived beyond our means for so long, we have threated the prosperity of our future, and it will be our generation that will suffer disproportionately compared to people who are now benefiting from the reckless social spending with no a way to pay for it. We want real freedom back, the freedom the founding fathers originally intended. That's economic freedom AND personal freedom.
The neo-cons are clearly on their way out. It's just a matter of time really. They have lost us both houses of congress and people will eventually wake up and see they have completely failed.
I'll end this with a great video clip of Dick Cheney in 1994 explaining why we didn't go into Bagdad in the first Gulf War.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6BEsZMvrq-I
^^^ Wow that was the king of all flip flops right there.
Keep fighting people, WE CAN WIN!
/rant off :).