Posted on 07/02/2013 8:17:08 PM PDT by EQAndyBuzz
If Conservatives break away from the Republican party, the big winner are Republicans.
The ptb in the Cheap Labor/Globalist/Corporate Party don't even want to win. They just want enough of their own elected so they can be the fake opposition and barter their support for profit and power.
The only way constitutional conservatives win is if a new party advocates localism. Pass laws that clearly don't violate the constitution on state and federal levels that re-focus government to being as close to the people who are governed as possible.
Your response has nothing to do with my comment. I posted comment number two. Take your argument up with the original poster.
He’s my neighbor. And he gets premium time at the range.
Move to a better neighborhood. That one seems to be infested with rats.
Of course, I live in Cleveland, my Congress critter is Marxist Marcie Kaptor and not one member of the City Council is a Republican, so my neighborhood is also infiltrated with rats.
I think we may be in the midst of a rat invasion!
I don't see these various groups as anything more then pro-war or anti war....pro British or anti British and on and on we go...
You can argue this stuff to death but it was the media that put a fire under the process of expanding these groups of anti and pro into the named parties we have today as well as the new ones that keep popping up from time to time.
Without the media, this expansion would not have occurred in the way it did and it would have been much slower. I believe this is the basis for the long held belief that the media is necessary for the republic that resulted in the inclusion of language about it's importance in the constitution giving it protection.
Pre-constitution the men who we would call the Media had strong opinions...yes...but to say the newspapers were all created by political parties is in my view, exaggeration. Prior to the constitution these same newspapers were either pro-British or anti British...pro-revolution.....anti-revolution. But parties had not been thought of, much less written about as parties....there were opinions, shared via the papers reach in circulation. If You did not like the opinions, you bought a different paper and the Federalist arguments were part of the development and predecessor of the letter to the editor. Or the Editorial.
The way I see it, it was not until after the Constitution was written and ratified and the smash and burn retaliations had stopped against the fledgling government and the founders, that political opinions were better organized by use of the media and Political Parties, with the express intent of electing representatives gelled into a process as opposed to opinions...
That is what I was trying to say....so I expanded the thought....but having put my opinion on paper, so to speak, I cannot find another way that this could have occurred and resulted in a better system....Democracy at the local level has to be messy. Groups must form to create majorities and minority opinion. Political parties then result and that is not the fault of Jefferson, Madison or Hamilton. Those that warned against political parties were naïve in my view..
It is the way you do it when you don't want a King.
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.