Republicans Against George Bush

Personal Creation | 1/21/04 | Manny Paulet

[MannyP]

REPUBLICANS AGAINST GEORGE BUSH

1. Who are we? We are Americans. We believe in small government, America first, the Constitution, the rule of law, secure borders and competitive capitalism that favor the needs of the average American over the rest of the world.

2. Why are we against President Bush? Chairman of the GOP Gillespie has stated that the GOP does not stand for limited or smaller government and President Bush is acting accordingly. Cutting taxes is a good thing, but not when cutting a single program or entitlement hasn't even been proposed. The opposite is true. New or expanded programs are constantly being proposed by the Bush administration. Since the advent of the Bush administration, government has become a larger and even more intrusive force in our lives. In addition, continued free trade overtures threaten to destroy the economic viability of the average citizen of the United States.

3. What do we want? We want likeminded Americans to vote for the Reform Party candidate for President of the United States and for Republicans in the congressional races? We think that enough people voting for the Reform Party in the presidential election, and doing so publicly AS REPUBLICANS, should cause President Bush to lose. This in turn should create a demand within our party for a President more in line with our principles. If we do this, we must make sure that OUR Republican party hears our message. This makes it twice as important to get every Republican voter that we can get publicly behind this. They must not stay at home for the election. I hope to be able to point to the numbers of people who vote for the Reform Party candidate and tell our Republican leadership that we are the party of small limited government, strong national defense, individual rights, a rule of law and sound economic policies.

4. Do we mean for the Reform Party candidate to win? This is not a goal of this group. We want to create a public demand for a small government GOP without leaving the party.

5. Does this mean that we approve of Dean or any of the other Democratic nominees? No! We explicitly reject the Socialist /Democrat party and think that their actions are causing the decline of this great nation. It is because our beloved GOP is becoming indistinguishable from the Democrats in other than foreign relations arenas that we are undertaking this action.

6. Are there any up-sides to this action in the 2004 election? It is likely that there are many Republicans that are disillusioned with the current administration and Jim Gillespie’s leadership. The likely result is that many will stay home. This could cost us seats and/or control of the House or Senate. If enough people turn out to register this protest vote, we could increase our majority.

7. Do we have any specific long term goals? If President Bush loses due to our efforts, it is our hope that our party leadership will enact a platform more in line with our traditional Republican principles. The next candidate should also be more concerned with sound domestic policies.

8. How many people would it take to accomplish our objective? According to recent election results, a few thousand in just a few states could change the result of a presidential election.

9. What happens if we do not succeed? If Bush wins in 2004, after eight years of growing government and spending, the average Republican will be dispirited and stay away from the polls just like what happened to his father. Also, the people will be tired of a war on terrorism that can’t end and the strength of foreign policy will not sustain the next candidate either. (Remember; “Its the economy stupid” ?) Facing increasing debt, a lack of meaningful employment, and a dispirited/divided Republican Party, Hillary/Bayh will likely be elected. Strengthened by eight years in opposition, the Democrats will be united and will show up to the polls for Hillary/Bayh. To those who claim that it can't happen, I would refer you to those of us who said Bill would never get elected or reelected and those who said that New York would never elect Hillary. Does it still seem so far fetched? How many Republicans have you met who are really excited about the direction of Bush's domestic policy?

10. What’s in it for R.A.G. BUSH? When we pledge allegiance to the “Republic”, we do so not to any politician or party, but rather to the republican system of limited government set up in the Constitution. We consider socialism and tyranny in all of its forms an enemy to be conquered and not one to compromise with. We get to do something to try to keep freedoms lamp lit in America. We want our children to know the greatness of the United States, not experience its decline. Enough people talk about all the things that are wrong, let’s do something. In 2008, we want to help elect a strong Republican president who stands for the things that we value and who will face the ineptitude of one of the eight candidates that are currently contesting the Democratic nomination. We have faith in our fellow Americans. If our purpose is righteous and Americans united, who can stand in our way?

"This idea that government was beholden to the people, that it had no other source of power is still the newest, most unique idea in all the long history of man's relation to man. This is the issue of this election: Whether we believe in our capacity for self-government or whether we abandon the American Revolution and confess that a little intellectual elite in a far-distant capital can plan our lives for us better than we can plan them ourselves. You and I are told we must choose between a left or right, but I suggest there is no such thing as a left or right. There is only an up or down. Up to man's age-old dream-the maximum of individual freedom consistent with order or down to the ant heap of totalitarianism. Regardless of their sincerity, their humanitarian motives, those who would sacrifice freedom for security have embarked on this downward path." Reagan (1964)

[MannyP]

Just testing to see if more replies than 180 are possible.

[jstolarczyk]

TR lost!!!

[jstolarczyk]

Name one conservative that is not a prepared to be a centrist that could win the nomination in 2008? Name one, just one! Then take your list of future losers and tell me which one is electable! As things stand today, 2008 belongs to the Democrats. They have a batch of stronger candidates some like Edwards will have already gone through this trial by fire once. Hillary will be the top prospect, enough time will have passed since the first Clinton White House that many voters will have been too young to remember all the issued with Bill. Instead of R.A.G. you should call yourself the S.I.C. Party, Single Issue Conservatives, since you are not taking in consideration the results of your action. For a catchy phrase you can call yourself the "Nose Less Party", since you cut off your noses to spite your face in 2004.

[jstolarczyk]

No, you sound like you are still a Canadian!

[jstolarczyk]

No it is not over, until we here Mr John F'ing Kerry Heinz sing Hail to the Chief. But damage has been done.

[jstolarczyk]

Ever hear of the charge of the Light Brigade, how about Custer's Last Stand, do you remember reading about the Alamo. It is one thing to fight another to fight a losing battle. In all of the above battles, the commanders made mistakes that resulted in disaster. We remember them fondly, but they all died for their mistakes. I am sure someone will remember you fondly as well, however, you will lose! There are differences between parties, many of these differences are lost during the fight to pass bills, or to put together programs. Fight for change from within the party, especially when the party is in power. Or leave...fight from the outside and lose. Most people do not vote because they are too damn lazy to look at issues beyond their own personal well being. And some just think they are so superior to the rest of us, that they known what is best for the Republic and will sit out the election. No difference between the "lazy" and the "know it all", they both sit on their hands.

[Delta-Tango]

Just testing to see if more replies than 180 are possible.

Gee, I feel so *used* -- and you didn't even have the decency to *ask* me first! ;)

[MannyP]

What results am I failing to consider? I think that it is you that fail to consider the future. We, as Americans, are to rooted in immediate gratification. Actions have long term results. I think that I am proposing a little pain now, to have less pain in the future.
Here are three specifics that I have considered: 1)keeping control of congress 2) preventing Hillary from running in 2008 and 3) steering my party back towards small government policies. All of them are about the future. If there were any way to support Bush and further these goals, I would consider it.
As for the candidate for 2008, I will give you the free market answer. If the demand is created, the supply will be provided. However, if we are always satisfied with less, we will get it. If we accept that Bush has to grow government and be happy that it MAY be at a slower pace than the Dems, I see no reason to care for we have already given up.
I am not a RINO. I am a Republican because I believe in certain principles. If a person calling themselves Republican does not match my principles, then I do not support them. I think that they are RINOs. I don't see why this is so difficult to understand.

[MannyP]

I do not intend to leave the GOP. I also do not intend to let panderers and big government advocates to take my party over without fighting it. I am fighting from within the party. If I left the party or did not believe in what I think are its core principles, I would not be concerned about keeping the congressional majority. I think that congress is much more important than the presidency. Your way, we not only lose any appearance of integrity, but we probably lose control of congress AND guarantee Hillary's election in 2008. I vote. I plan to use my vote to send a message. I intend to encourage people to register and vote for GOP candidates in Congress. I will not sit on my hands. That is not my style.

"You and I are told increasingly that we have to choose between a left or right, but I would like to suggest that there is no such thing as a left or right. There is only an up or down--up to a man's age-old dream, the ultimate in individual freedom consistent with law and order--or down to the ant heap totalitarianism, and regardless of their sincerity, their humanitarian motives, those who would trade our freedom for security have embarked on this downward course.
You and I have the courage to say to our enemies, "There is a price we will not pay." There is a point beyond which they must not advance.
You and I have a rendezvous with destiny. We will preserve for our children this, the last best hope of man on Earth, or we will sentence them to take the last step into a thousand years of darkness."

Reagan 1964

[MannyP]

What will I lose? To fight and lose i.e. not achieve your goals is not dishonorable. To not have fought at all is.

[rcofdayton]

Your suggested action does not follow logically from your complaint. A conservative who wants a limited government that follows the Constitution would vote either Libertarian or for the American Constitution Party, not the Reform Part.

[rcofdayton]

Don't abstain from voting. Vote Libertarian or the American Constitution Party.

[MannyP]

I imagine that less than one percent of the people have ever heard of the Constitution Party. As for the Libertarian Party, it was the other party that I considered. However, I would like to protect American jobs from being continously exported. This position is inconsistent with the Libertarian plataform. Also, being that my audience consists of fellow Republicans, I figure that more could be convinced to vote for the Reform Party. Many of my fellow Republicans would have supported Perot had he not betrayed the people by dropping out twice. Buchanan, the last Reform Party candidate, was a life long Republican. You can read the Reform Party plataform at: http://reformparty.org/ and decide if this is not a party for limited government, yet protective of American interests.

[Delta-Tango]

Don't abstain from voting. Vote Libertarian or the American Constitution Party.

No way I'd *ever* vote Libertarian. Those wing nuts are for open borders! Read their platform, then get ready for some real-life nightmares. ACP is more NeoCon crap, where they view America as a "market." They no doubt LOVE the Bush/Rove amnesty-on-the-installment plan. I sincerely thank you for your concern, and taking the time to post. But I am so bitter and angry with the NeoCon take-over of the GOP that I just want to sit out the Presidential part of the ballot this year. I want to vote in my March California primary in order to give our Congressman David (Open Borders) Drier a scare, and support some other soon-to-be-extinct REAL Republicans. Once that task has been performed I'm staying home and hoping the day that Karl Rove wishes he had never been born will come for his fat a** REAL soon.

[rcofdayton]

OK, then vote for the American Constitution Party. Since its vote totals have been small in the past, it won't take a lot of votes to double or triple its votes. Vote are much more easily seen than abstentions.

[MannyP]

Please consider voting for the Reform Party. At least tell me why you would not do so. I would like to point to record numbers of reform party voters and tell the GOP leadership that they lost these votes because of not paying attention to their base. Also, please have a look at www.ragbush.com and give me your opinion.

[olde north church]

Last time I heard something like this, a serpent was inviting a woman to take a bite of fruit!

[MannyP]

Boy! That's Funny!!!
LOL, A real knee slapper.

[jstolarczyk]

Vote reform Party. Yea,.. great place for a conservative to go. Saw some of their people during the last election. They made allot of noise until they came down and needed another toke. Why waste your time. Sit home and take what you get! What you will not get is a more conservative Republican party. You will get 8 - 16 years or more of liberalism. Waste a vote, do not vote explain the difference? You are dreaming if you think you will accomplish anything!

[olde north church]

I'm having doubts about your sincerity, sir, most Republicans I know have a sense of humor, the more conservative the better.