What have Republicans done for us lately?

MensNewsDaily.com ^ | December 9, 2003 | Roger F. Gay

[RogerFGay]

What have Republicans done for us lately?

December 9, 2003

---

by Roger F. Gay

---

The pages of MensNewsDaily.com have recently displayed the most common characteristic of American election year politics - partisan bickering at the expense of focus on issues.

MND has never hidden its conservative tendencies; a much needed balance to the increasingly irrational and often extreme leftist bias of the old media. MND writers and readers alike express strong support for adherence to constitutional principles and a strong aversion to arbitrary government control through policies based on group prejudice.

For at least a fleeting moment in our history, the lines of ideology and partisanship seemed to come together.

The Democrat Party had a Soviet (or Nazi, take your pick, they both worked the same way) approach to government, playing one group against another and promising money and power over others to groups they chose to be on their side. (They were racists when the KKK was powerful and began playing more sides in the 1960s when other movements threatened the old order.) They have systematically eroded individual rights until tens of millions of Americans now feel the crescendo; many thousands of emotionally loaded, psychologically motivated bureaucrats with the power to arbitrarily control our lives by force and intimidation, with police entering our homes without just cause dragging us away at gun point.

The rational choice, at least for a short while, was the Republican Party; the party of Lincoln, the party of limited government, the Grand Old Party. The last Republican president of that description was Gerald Ford. But even he - while noting that creation of a U.S. Office of Child Support Enforcement - took the federal government too far into domestic relations, signed the bill that created it. At least he publicly acknowledged that it was wrong and in fact promised to suggest legislation to correct it.

The creation of the office was introduced as an amendment to more popular social services legislation by Democrat Senator Russell Long, whose family was strongly associated with racist neo-nazi organizations and organized crime. There were no compelling facts or scientific logic to his suggestions, just rants about "deadbeats" costing taxpayers money. If much of the anti-father rhetoric he threw around had been true, his core supporters would have opposed him; since most of them would have been part of group he attacked. At that time however, especially given the Long family's reputation, the association he made between "deadbeats" and welfare suggested an attack on racial minorities. Long's proposals also hung on the coat tails of an international leftist movement, expressed through a Hague Convention manifesto.

The bill was signed during an election year, just as most bills of this sort are; as they are aimed at spending and political favors with the hope of getting votes in return. Ford lost the election and no corrective legislation was suggested. Not much happened on this front during the Carter years. He didn't expand the program. He didn't fix the problem. The program was not in the public interest, but also not in the political interests of Jimmy Carter or Democrats to oppose. Its billion dollar a year budget would be missed by the states.

A revolution was about to occur and not many people would see just how important it was. Ronald Reagan, who had introduced so-called "no-fault" divorce to the United States as governor of California, first appeared before Congress in support of a federal child support enforcement program in 1974; along with representatives of what is now widely acknowledged as a leftist political extremist group, NOW. When the Reagan administration began suggesting dramatic increases in spending on child support enforcement in the 1980s, the Republican Party lost interest in limited government and buried its understanding of constitutional principles.

The new philosophical divide is an ACLU / NOW variety anti-religious left-wing cultism verses the Republican's pompous pseudo-religious right-wing cultism. The difference in the details of their rhetoric depends not on their real politics, but on the core groups each party intends to capture to win elections. In the end, both parties support the same domestic policy agenda apart from minor differences here and there and some exaggerated drama during election campaigns. The two party system is not really alive and well. Judged on the basis of how politics effects the huddled masses, we have a one party system with competing factions. Neither party remembers what a "free country" is supposed to be like. Corruption is rampant. The closest they ever come to an expression of ideological difference is a Marxist battle between "big business" capitalism and the "working class" in which both parties actually make promises to both sides.

For the years since 1975, Russell Long's agenda has held a prominent place in the official Democrat Party Platform and did not find its way into the official Republican Platform until the so-called "Contract With America." The radical changes that have taken place in America enjoyed bipartisan support since the time of Ronald Reagan's presidency.

Rather than moving in the direction promised by Gerald Ford, president Bush promised to "build on what we already have." His HHS Secretary Tommy Thompson enacted plagiarized Soviet family policy as governor of Wisconsin, and helped promote it as the national model for welfare reform. The assistant secretary for children and families Wade Horn is a published anti-father bigot who has spent years trying to recruit churches and charities into the current web of corruption. Republicans have enjoyed a majority in both houses of Congress as well as holding the presidency without any suggestion that problems in family policy will be fixed. The two parties are pursuing the same agenda, working to incorporate different segments of society.

This is not the appropriate time for honest people who are sincerely interested in family policy to join the partisan game. To do so leaves us with nothing but an illusion that we have supported the lesser of two evils. It is time to ask, what have the parties done for me lately? Evil is not what we want and we should not give our support without concrete change.

Roger F. Gay

---

Roger F. Gay is a professional analyst and director of Project for the Improvement of Child Support Litigation Technology. Other articles by Roger F. Gay can be found at Fathering Magazine and the MND archive.

[familyop]

"The U.S. Constitution does not define a two party system."

The Constitution does not forbid peaceable assemblies of people to strategize for elections, and it is not our responsibility to make a teeny, tiny, noisy, impotent party into a bigger one. So we have two parties.

And folks, why would anyone want the USA to have more parties than two--to be more like Canada and other socialist countries?

And how many of you have read the Libertarian official Platform? Have you read the Libertarian position on Women's Rights and Abortion?" ...or their Platform on "immigration?" ...or on "religion?" Go beyond the part about "separation of church and state," and see the part about "conservatorships."

Quote:

From Webster's Revised Unabridged Dictionary (1913) :

Conservator \Con"ser*va`tor\ (?; 277), n. [L.: cf. F. conservateur.]

1. One who preserves from injury or violation; a protector; a preserver.

And oh, there's more--much more.

And BTW, for conservatives here, did you know that anarchists in old Europe had the purpose of disrupting conservatives for the sake of socialists? They wasted the time of conservative opposition. They did what they did, because even their socialist friends needed some level of competence.

[autoresponder]

No 3rd party has ever remained viable in US history while the other 2 existed

I have ancestors who signed the Declaration of Independence and US Constitution and am related to 5 US Presidents

What credible sources can you post concerning the exact intent(s) of the "framers"?

The "Federalist Papers"?

Anti-Federalist publications?

Speeches from Hillary?

Babble from Harry Brown?

Pro-Druggie claims and hopeless drivel from drug dealers, users, idiot politicians?

Are you the source of what the "framers" intended?

Who is?

You need to set up a "Psychic Hotline" and link it to ex General Wesley Clark's "Time Machine".

Do not get into an IQ spitting contest with me as that is a real non-starter.

Incidentally, without resorting to GOOGLE, where is MENSA now located?

Where was MENSA located before?

You have 60 seconds to reply now.

Whoops!

Too late!

The opening bid is beyond your budget.

You may not comprehend what that means but many here on FR do.

But they will not tell you.

Go vote 3rd party.

Big deal.

[Southack]

"In the end, both parties support the same domestic policy agenda..."

What idiot said that?! Does he think that the *Democrats* were going to ban Partial Birth Abortion, Privatize Medicare, build our ABM nuclear defense system, give three raises to our military, and cut income taxes at least twice?

Presidency of George W. Bush -- the first 34 months

 

Banned Partial Birth Abortion

Reversed Clinton's move to strike Reagan's anti-abortion Mexico Policy

Killed the Kyoto Global Warming Treaty

Killed U.S. involvement in the International Criminal Court

Killed Clinton's CO2 rules that were choking off all of the electricity surplus to California.

Killed Clinton's "ergonomic" rules that OSHA was about to implement; rules that would have shut down every home business in America.

Killed the U.S. - CCCP ABM Treaty that was preventing the U.S. from deploying our ABM defenses

Has CONSTRUCTION in process on the first ten ABM silos in Alaska so that America has a defense against North Korean nukes

 

Pushed through THREE raises for our military.

Increased Defense Dept funding which had deteriorated during the previous 8 years

 

Stopped foreign aid that would be used to fund abortions.

Supported and upheld the ban on abortions at military hospitals

Signed E.O. reversing Clinton's policy of not requiring parental consent for abortions under the Medical Privacy Act

Signed TWO bills into law that arm our pilots with handguns in the cockpit

Currently pushing for full immunity from lawsuits for our national gun manufacturers

Ordered Attorney-General Ashcroft to formally notify the Supreme Court that the OFFICIAL U.S. government position on the 2nd Amendment is that it supports INDIVIDUAL rights to own firearms, NOT a leftist-imagined *collective* right

Told the United Nations we weren't interested in their plans for gun control (i.e. the International Ban on Small Arms Trafficking Treaty)

Successfully executed 2 wars: Afghanistan and Iraq. 50 million people who had lived under tyrannical regimes now live in freedom

 

Executed a WAR ON TERROR by getting world-wide cooperation to track funds/terrorists (has cut off much of the terrorist's funding and captured or killed many key leaders of the al Qaeda network)

 

Brought back our EP-3 intel plane and crew from China without any bribes or bloodshed

Started withdrawing our troops from Bosnia and has announced withdrawal of our troops from Germany and the Korean DMZ.

Signed the LARGEST nuclear arms reduction in world history with Russia

Initiated comprehensive review of our military, which was completed just prior to 9/11/01, accurately reported that ASYMMETRICAL WARFARE was critical.

Changed the tone in the White House, restoring HONOR and DIGNITY to the Presidency

Reorganized bureaucracy...after 9/11, condensed 20+ overlapping agencies and their intelligence sectors into one agency: the Department of Homeland Security.

Initiated discussion on privatizing Social Security and individual investment accounts.

Improving govt. efficiency with .8 million jobs put up for bid...weakening unions and cutting undeserved pay raises. Wants merit based promotions/raises only.

Orchestrated Republican control of the White House, the House AND the Senate.

Killed the liberal ABA's role in vetting federal judges for Congress.

GWB signed an executive order enforcing the Supreme Court's Beck decision (re: union dues being used for political campaigns against individual's wishes)

Turned around an inherited economy that was in recession.

Passed tough new laws to hold corporate criminals to account as a result of corporate scandals.

Signed 2 income tax cuts ---- 1 of which was the largest Dollar value tax cut in world history

Reduced taxes on dividends and capital gains

In process of eliminating IRS marriage penalty.

Increased small business incentives to expand and to hire new people

Signed into law the No Child Left Behind legislation delivering the most dramatic education reforms in a generation (challenging the soft bigotry of low expectations)

Reorganized the INS in an attempt to safeguard the borders and ports of America and to eliminate bureaucratic redundancies and lack of accountability.

Signed trade promotion authority

Committed US funds to purchase medicine for millions of men and women and children now suffering with AIDS in Africa

Passed Medicare Reform (authorized $39.5 Billion per year for preventive medicine such as drugs and doctor visits as well as included a ten year Privatization option)

Urging federal liability reform to eliminate frivolous lawsuits

Supports class action reform bill which limits lawyer fees so that more settlement money goes to victims

Submitted comprehensive Energy Plan--awaits Congressional action (works to develop cleaner technology, produce more natural gas here at home, make America less dependent on foreign sources of energy, improve national grid, etc.)

Endorses and promotes The Responsibility Era ("In a compassionate society, people respect one another and take responsibility for the decisions they make in life. My hope is to change the culture from one that has said, if it feels good, do it; if you've got a problem, blame somebody else -- to one in which every single American understands that he or she are responsible for the decisions that you make; you're responsible for loving your children with all your heart and all your soul; you're responsible for being involved with the quality of the education of your children; you're responsible for making sure the community in which you live is safe; you're responsible for loving your neighbor, just like you would like to be loved yourself. " -----this quote was too good to leave out)

Started the USA Freedom Corps

Initiated review of all federal agencies with a goal to eliminate federal jobs (completed September 2003) in an effort to reduce the size of federal gov while increasing private sector jobs.

Part of coalition (Russia, Israel, EU, Palestine, USA) for Israeli/Palestinian "Roadmap to Peace"

Challenged the United Nations to live up to their responsibilities and not become The League of Nations ( in other words, completely irrelevant)

Nominated strong, conservative judges to the judiciary.

Changed parts of the Forestry Management Act to allow necessary clean-up of the national forests in order to reduce fire danger.

As part of the national forests clean-up, the President restricted judicial challenges (based on the Endangered Species Act and other challenges) and removed the need for an EIS (Environmental Impact Statement) before removing fuels/logging to reduce fire danger.

Significantly eased field-testing controls of genetically engineered crops.

President Bush signed the workplace verification bill to prevent hiring of illegal Aliens
S. 1685, the Basic Pilot Extension Act of 2003, was signed by President Bush on December 3, 2003.
It extends for five years the workplace employment eligibility authorization pilot programs created in 1996. It expands the pilot programs from the original five states to all 50 states.

[autoresponder]

When will you win an election?

When will you get over a tiny % in a election?

When will you be take seriously?

Sitting on the bench is not an option.

No different then sitting in the stands.

Not so grand.

Just standing there.

[PhilDragoo]

This man here knows you must be present in the arena to win.

[nopardons]

Personally, I am disgusted and weary of the MORE CONSERVATIVE THAN THOUers, PURISTS, and UNAPPEASEABLES, who would still never " get it ", if someone attempted to educate them, 24 hours a day, 365 days a year, for the next 1,000 years. They are the ENEMY WITHIN , who would rather have Hillary Clinton as Queen of the world, forever, than a re-elected President Bush, for 4 more years.

Their nimbers have grown on FR and they are trying to turn this site into their own private hell. TOUGH! They're wrong, they're suffering from abject lack of historical and political knowledge, and they are they will never learn. They were NEVER so happy, as during the eight long, weary years of the Clintons, when everyone else here was also miserable. They are not ever to be taken seriously!

[autoresponder]

Great post!

A shame you had to resort to truth and facts and action........

Vague sweeping generalities are so much easier.......

[nopardons]

Facts and truth, though always IGNORED by the fring of the fringe, is the best way to refute moronic drivel.

Ain't life grand ? :-)

[nopardons]

You tell 'em ! The facts might not set them free ( since they refuse to even look at them ); however, it's always THE best refutation.

[RogerFGay]

First of all, I should mention that I'm not a politician, and I'm certainly not shopping for a political handler. It's clear that Republicans are not interested in the votes of fathers and in fact, have been running an anti-father, anti-family agenda since Ronald Reagan's presidency. The 10s of millions of eligible voters who happen to be fathers, and the 10s of millions more who have the potential to become parents and will be adversely effected, deserve to understand what's going on. In November, 2004, they will go to the polls to make an important decision, and they should do so with a solid understanding of what their choice means.

Your view of politics is one that I find strange, but not unfamiliar. You're a partisan who sees the political world upside down. Partisan politicians you think, should not be responsible to voters. Instead, voters should set aside their own interests, work at being ignorant, and expend enormous effort to subjugate themselves to political parties. Maybe there's a place for you in Saddam's regime.

Once again, I should point out that there are 10s of millions of fathers who oppose the Repub/Dem "social policy" regarding marriage and family. Attacking me with bizarre comments and incredible accusations isn't going to change that. The proof that things have been mismanaged is the emergence of same-sex "marriage." That didn't emerge from a vacume. You partisans did that.

[MeekOneGOP]

Way to go, Southack !!

[RogerFGay]

The fact that it's not a response to the issue being discussed should of course not count in it's reality rating.

[Southack]

"It's clear that Republicans are not interested in the votes of fathers and in fact, have been running an anti-father, anti-family agenda since Ronald Reagan's presidency."

So Reagan hates fathers in your warped world?!

Man, you could ring the looney bell completely off the wall.

[Orangedog]

Sounds like you've never had any of your rights taken away while being "processed" by the divorce industry. But there's no real reason that you should care that. It hasn't happened to you. And of course it can't happen to you and certainly can't happen to anyone you care about.

The courts make more and more of us every day. Maybe in a few years there will be enough of us so that we can't be ignored and shouted down anymore. Try not to get too upset if that day comes.

[Southack]

Look kid, rights can't be taken away from me because I am free man.

I'm armed.

I'm educated.

I'm rich.

I live on my own land.

I kick ass.

I live in a free country.

I also live in a free state.

Your own mileage may vary.

[stands2reason]

Don't forget Bush is responsible for 9/11 and North Korea. You said so yourself!

[Orangedog]

Look kid, rights can't be taken away from me because I am free man.

OK, pops. Keep thinking that. It can't happen to you or anyone you care about. Nevermind that it happens to thousands of equally "free" men every week.

[Southack]

What right(s) have you lost, specifically?

[Orangedog]

My right to be a parent has been reduced to 4 days a month. I was told by the court that this was because I'm a man.
My right to privacy gets violated when I have to report to a government agency whenever I change employers or move. Every three years I have to submit in writing where I work and how much I earn. I've never been late on even one of the support payments that the court has deemed I can afford to make, but the industry pushed hard to change the law to have my paychecks garnished, like someone who defaulted on a debt would have done to them, instead of me simply writing a check.

When that government agency makes a mistake (and the have) it goes on my credit. When the mistake is brought to their attention, they don't have to report the error to the credit agencies because they are exempted from the credit reporting laws.

Other men have received worse treatment. Many have tried to get our Representitives and Senators at the state and federal level to address these matters, but divorced fathers are political lepars thanks to the feminists on the left, so the conservatives are too scared of being called mean names to even think about it. The GOP certainly has no interest in this either. Nobody cares until it happens to them, and many think that it can't happen to them...until it does.

[Southack]

"My right to be a parent has been reduced to 4 days a month. I was told by the court that this was because I'm a man. My right to privacy gets violated when I have to report to a government agency whenever I change employers or move."

No, you haven't "lost" those rights.

You still have a right to be a full-time parent. Consider that your adult children can visit you as often as they want, and you can visit them as often as they will let you. What has happened is that the court has intervened in a dispute between two legal guardians over minors. Your wishes and rights conflicted with your spouse's wishes and rights, forcing a court intervention that applies to minors (the true wounded party in divorces). As your children turn into adults, the court's temporary intervention won't even be valid or apply.

Of course you're bitter. One can hardly fault you for that. Divorces are nast, bitter pills to swallow.

But none of that means that you "lost" any rights that you had to the exclusion of others. Everyone has rights, but those rights stop when they conflict with the rights of others. This means that agreements that you entered into with *other* parties, such as marriage and founding companies, will affect the boundaries of your rights if such joint ventures are terminated through a court settlement.

But you agreed to the court settlement at some point, and that agreement supercedes your old arrangements. No doubt that it isn't as full and fun and wonderful as the old, but these things happen when the court is called in.