Posted on 04/07/2009 8:14:27 AM PDT by La Lydia
I see, from an earlier post you also said: “The Republican Party is conservatism’s Benedict Arnold.”
Your problem is in dumping all Republicans into the same cast.
While a majority of Republicans are conservative, Republicans are not uniformly so, just as not all Democrats are as far to the left as their party majority has become lately.
Where conservatives have lost some battles within the Republican party, most of those intra-party battles they lost have not been on the most conservative issues.
What conservatives in the Republican party have been the most ineffective at is preventing less conservative Republicans from joining Democrats on some critical issues, thus splitting Republican votes and giving the Dims a majority. What you miss is in most of even those cases, MOST Republicans did not go with the RINOS, they just did not hold a legislative majority against some RINOS and the Dims. What you wrongly do is call this a “Republican” betrayal, in spite of the fact that it was not a betrayal of MOST Republicans, only some, enough, that conservatives did not have a majority - even though they represent, in and out of office, a majority of Republicans.
At the end of the day, the Republican party is still the place where more conservatives have built a political home. If they want to diminish the number of RINOS in the party, I believe they can, but it requires the kind of back-to-basics, grass roots, party organizing from the ground up, that first built the conservative Republican base from 19964 to 1980.
Whining about “Republicans” and splintering into 3rd parties has never built a conservative base that can get elected anywhere, at any time, in the U.S.
Quit whining and go to work in your own state and get others in your state to do the same.
You missed the fact that the warning is different on different packs of cigarettes.
I’ve always thought that “quitting now reduces the hazard to your health” was an odd “warning.”
“from extending “free speech” rights to protect the hate speech”
We see at work here one of the very logical results of “hate crime” legislation.
It opened up, and approves, the idea that your thoughts alone (hate) can be seen as a particular crime.
Having sanctioned the idea of the thought crime, in hate crime legislation, it was only time before those who have been indoctrinated to not see the fallacy of the idea would think it only natural and “right” to extend the idea - a crime - to speech.
What strikes me as totally odd is that there is a big difference between a hazard and a risk... one's a given... the other is a minor gamble... shrug...
That and the fact that I knew global warming was a hoax in 2004 makes me distrust liberals even more.
Let's face it... liberals NEVER mind their own business and a constantly lying about something.
Give a Liberal a thought and he’ll repeat it mindlessly all day. Teach a Liberal to think for himself and he’ll vote Republican for the rest of his life.
Since I’m not a woman, I only buy the ones that says smoking causes underweight babies.
/sarc
I assume you’re not a baby, either!
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.