Posted on 11/06/2009 9:16:32 PM PST by Circle_Hook
"Listen to the highly respected Gerald Celente, who pulls no punches, announce that the political system is failing the America people and that the Banks (Oligarchy) are robbing us blind. If you're not outraged, you're on life support. As Celente predicts – watch for the formation of an angry Progressive / Libertarian third party before the mid-term elections in 2010 and I'll be an active participant."
‘Progressive’ and libertarian are diametrically opposed ideologies.
There will more likely be a Moderate Party formed.
By the way Lew Rockwell is not approved here.
I can see it now. Split conservative voters and put the liberals in with another landslide.
Is there a list of what is and isn’t approved? I don’t want to be tagged a nonapproved poster! LOL
Lets elect a bunch of Spectors and Snowes instead! Won’t that be swell!
Lets elect a bunch of Spectors and Snowes instead! Won’t that be swell!
Sure. You really don’t have much to support your position. The liberals would love nothing more for the republicans / conservatives to split. You really don’t have to look any further than the election this week in NY.
Yeah, I don’t know what kind of crack he’s smoking with that part of the prediction.
If we do get a new political party, it would be socially fairly progressive but will be economically quite conservative. It would mean the following:
Economics
1. Taxation will be done on consumption, not on income.
2. Our monetary system will be based on currency backed by real precious metals, using a combination of gold, silver, and platinum.
3. Our stock markets will become far more conservative institutions of investment with tight controls on the types of investments available (no more potentially risky investments like derivatives, hedge funds and credit default swaps).
4. Our banks will become conservative depositories of personal wealth under the 1933 Glass-Steagall Act guidelines.
Social norms
1. Some illegal drugs will become legal, especially cannabis. However, punishments for intoxication become might stricter.
2. Some form of the Equal Rights Amendment gets revived.
3. The gay marriage issue gets resolved by expanding the registered domestic partner concept to the Federal level.
Neither party represents conservative values.
Go ahead and support an ACORN and KOS endorsed abortion loving RINO. I’ll support candidates who represent me.
Most conservatives stopped blindly voting “R” long ago.
The rest of you sheep can do as you will.
Go ahead and put your next demo in office. The liberals appreciate it.
and yet, we'll still have fools voting third party....
we thank you for Freakin in Minnesota......
even now, the rats and their elite finaciers are planning ways to bring another Perot up to take just enough votes to keep zero sotero in place...
and all the while, Goldman Sachs is destroying the middle class...
Gerald talks like a communist, and probably is. Whenever I hear someone going off against “oligopolies”, red flags go up.
Which is rather odd considering that site was once linked within the news resource links on the home page. The site is not approved any loner probably because they are far too libertarian at the expense of modern conservative values.
Look at the most recent Gallup and Pew polls for political identification. There is no significant percentage of the population that identifies itself as libertarian. There are some few libertarian positions that everybody agrees with; unfortunately, no two people agree on the same set of libertarian positions. This is why libertarianism is important as an ideological movement, but has never gone, and never will, go anywhere as an actual political party that can take and hold power.
When you legalize marijuana you will for all practical purposes disband the (capital-L) Libertarian Party, because a huge part of its base will have nothing to adhere to.
The 20% who identify themselves as liberals are at home in the party they have.
The 35-40% who identify as independents or moderates are notoriously fickle; a fecklessness born of intellectual indolence and little ability to focus. Look at where they were on Tuesday and where they were a year ago. They aren't going to join a party, and if they do, you won't be able to rely on them to stick around. Democrats correctly fear the impulses of this group which are mostly -- but not reliably -- conservative.
The third Party talk is a way to peel off disaffected Conservatives from the Republicans, and channel conservative leaning independents into an ineffectual cul-de-sac to protect Democrat majorities. Nothing more.
“I can see it now. Split conservative voters and put the liberals in with another landslide.”
Ain’t that the truth.
Progressives WILL NOT draw in the Tea Parties..sorry Celante is wrong. Not only that, but I predict the opposite, minor third parties will become weakened because rage has emboldened activists to become more involved in the major paries and “take them over”..
If you support that rather than taking over the Republican Party: You are a fool 1) For making social conservatives your enemy, and 2) Splitting the “right” vote (rather than taking ideological battles primarily done in primaries) thereby ensuring more Socialists are elected! THANKS!
You’re exactly right. We just need to do a better job of selecting our candidates. I believe the recent vote for congress should prove that we don’t need any more RINOs.
If the GOP cannot figure out from the recent congressional election in NY that we don’t want anymore RINOs, we’re screwed. Seems they would have figured it out after McCain but I just don’t believe the GOP is that smart.
How can every non-democrat or non-republican party be called a “third party”?
Liberals are not happy with what happened in upstate NY this past week. In fact,they are scared as hell. The conservative majority in the country has become awakened.
I’m with you. Only a brain-damaged fool would vote for a Republican after all the times they’ve thrown us over the side. Better an enemy in office where you can see him than a “friend” who’ll stab you in the back.
Fascist more than communist.
Is there a difference?
He is progressive socially and we know what that means from a quick review of Obama’s czars. He has humanist ethics which means he has none and he has no respect for life if he is socially progressive because he does not believe in natural rights. He has no respect for individual freedom nor for religious freedom nor for freedom of thought and speech. He is politically correct to the hilt. He has expressed hatred for conservatives (Christians).
Obama’s progressives celebrate killing babies and the eldery. Progressives hate Christians and Libertarians - not all - but many, are seriously hate filled bunch towards those who are not social marxists. Celente is into forcing everyone to eat healthy, etc. like the fascist progressives. He is a frickin’ control freak.
I think his progressive oppression ambition travels on a National government scale rather than a global government scale. A communist is pursing a global government for total oppression but a fascist is just aiming for total control of a nation. His party will have a lot of libertarians but they will chace away Conservatives (40%) of the third party potential because libertarians are progressives and they can not tolerate anyone with Western morals or ethics.
Libertarians really belong in the Democrat Liberal wing of the party and they have been hanging out there for the past few years. Celente is proposing three progressive parties; the rino gop, the communist democrats and his personal dream of a fascist libertarian third party - all 200 of them.
For instance, we could form a "Conservative Party" but in order to be successful, we would need to reduce the Republican Party to "fringe" status. Otherwise, we would simply split the vote and hand the election to the socialists (such as what happened in the NY 23rd earlier this week).
So "third party" is not the operative term. We need a "replacement" party for the Republicans. With today's technology, it is not as difficult as you might think to form a replacement party for the Republicans. Call it a the "Conservative Party" or the "American Party" or something along those lines. Millions of Republicans, Independents (and even a few "Democrats") will flock to it and this would quickly become the major party opposing the Socialists (Democrats). The Republican Party as we know it today would become an empty shell.
With the power of the Internet and talk radio, we could put such a party together in time for the 2010 elections.
I agree! As it is now, it is basically a one party system! I think all the bums need to be thrown out and replaced!
Like Spector? Putting that hard-core Republican representative really knocked the liberals back on their heels, huh?
There are two very simple answers for the alleged tension between the libertarian and social conservative wings of the GOP....which isn’t as big a tension as people think when you get down to it.
They’re called the Constitution and Federalism.
Most conservatives are free market. There are always going to be the Buchanan protectionists, but they’re a dwindling minority.
On social issues, though, conservatism - true conservatism - has an answer for social conservatives and libertarians alike: Federalism.
If you ask most people what the law on abortion was pre-Roe v. Wade, they’ll probably tell you it was illegal. Which is, of course, nonsense. It was exactly as our constitution intended such matters to be: decided by the states. NY had liberal abortion laws because most New Yorkers are fine with slaughtering the unborn. Let it be on their heads. Mississippi, on the other hand, had strict prohibitions.
The fact of the matter, though, is that both libertarians and conservatives agree that we should stick to the constitution. The only real sticking point is on borders where some (NOT all or even most) libertarians are open borders, and defense where libertarians are clearly isolationist.
I describe myself as a contsitutional libertarian nationalist. I believe in strong defense, protected borders and virtually no government regulation in commerce. I dare say that describes the vast majority here.
Hank
I’m with you Bear.
He’s a Libertarian.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.