Do Republicans Stand For Anything?

Toogood Reports ^ | Septemeber 16, 2002 | W. James Antle III

[cmsgop]

So Fred

How do you feel about the new developments regarding Iraq now?

[georgiabelle]

This is an e-mail that I sent to the RNC after receiving a letter from the White House.(Others have stated they received the same letter.)

What do the Republicans stand for? Certainly not the citizens of the United States.

Maybe we all should send this message to the Republicans.


Dear Sirs:

Please send my thanks to the President for his letter. But I’m afraid that his letter did not reassure me at all.

I thought that the primary duty of our government was to protect and secure our borders. This has not happened.

Even after Sept. 11, the Republican party and President Bush still have not secured our borders. In fact just the opposite. You are still allowing people from the Mid East to come over here. Who do we blame for another terrorist attack? The terrorist or our own government.

As for as 245i, I have read it. It is just another amnesty program for the illegal immigrants. Do explain to me why the citizens of the United States should have to pay for schooling, health, housing and food for these people. They are breaking our laws.

I would like for the President to tell me which federal laws that I now have to follow. And which ones that I will be given amnesty for. Will I be allowed to break into houses or banks to take money or things that I don’t have? After all, I just want a better life for myself and family. To me this is no difference than what the illegals are doing. You are selling your country out for a few votes and money from the Business people.


Because of your inability to follow the Constitution, to protect our borders and to have smaller government I regret that I will no longer be able to vote for a Republican candidate. I will either not vote or vote for the independent. I will also urge all of my family to do this and my friends.

[Torie]

The guy's political agenda (one needs to read between the lines to get a sense of it since the article is more about whining than offering concrete alternative proposals) would be hard put to pull 25% of the vote, even under the GOP tradename. This thread is a perfect zero for me. I don't agree with the article or much of anything said in the ensuing 21 replies. You all have a good time. I know I am a party crasher and shall exit.

[Romulus]

The guy's political agenda (one needs to read between the lines to get a sense of it since the article is more about whining than offering concrete alternative proposals) would be hard put to pull 25% of the vote,...

Thus demonstrating that the two viable political factions in this country are the smart liberals and the stupid liberals. The GOP has the latter franchise sewn up.

...the GOP tradename.

You said it.

[Torie]

Somehow I never thought of myself as a stupid liberal. But I am sure some others have. :)

[Texasforever]

It does beg the question though. What is the point of the article? I see a lot of vitriol but no alternate solutions being presented. Was this just posted as therapy or was there something more substantial in mind that "there are too many Rinos in the GOP" There are also two few conservatives in the GOP because they cannot abide the un-pure.

[Romulus]

Somehow I never thought of myself as a stupid liberal.

Smart liberal then? 'Cause the smart conservatives sure as hell have no place to call their own.

[yuleeyahoo]

You mean instead of Socialist Republicans?

[x]

Even George W. Bush, the most intuitively conservative president since Reagan, is often adrift without a philosophical anchor. John O´Sullivan once described him as a Tory, the sort of conservative who believes that good government is achieved by having the right people in charge to manage whatever may come up. The problem with this sort of conservatism is that it tends to leave an administration at the mercy of events.

Very true, and worth repeating.

A party isn't a train going in a given direction or moving along an established track. It's more like a car -- no, wait -- an SUV that you can take where you want to, if you're in charge. That's what Goldwater did, with little success in the end, and what Reagan did very well.

It's certainly true that the GOP isn't living up to conservative expectations. But part of the problem is that conservatives themselves are so unclear about what they really want. There's what people would want in their dreams or in a perfect world, but what people want to achieve in the here and now is less clear. Set attainable, real world goals and work for them, and the party will have to take you into account.

Three reason why conservative goals are unclear: the Gingrich "revolution" fizzled out and with it the idea of great changes, the late nineties prosperity dampened the discontent that is the motor of reform, and right now, foreign and military policy are the focus of the big conservative periodicals.

[R Sole]

Do Republicans stand for anything?
I used to think so, then I heard one of my all time favorite Republicans Dick Armey commit the most disgusting act of demagoguery I have ever heard from our side, speaking on illegal immigration Armey slammed anyone who wanted orderly immigration as "anti Mexican". Not the defend the law stance I expected from a man I had always considered to be principled. I am used to this BS from the left, but a Republican? Mexican illegals are 80% of the illegal alien problem, but he slams me and those like me and defends people that don't give a damn about our sovereignty. Dick, you are well named but completely wrong when you think your cheap labor will vote Republican. You too Gearge.

[R Sole]

sorry...make that George, or Jorge..whatever.

[elfman2]

The strongest steel in the world is called "soft" steel and will bend before it breaks. The alternative is cheap and brittle.

In the sophisticated politics of today, when America is fatter and happier than any nation in all of history, being unwilling to bend is as great a liability as it is a defect in steel. But that doesn't mean that the path to success is compromise. Success will come from Republicans promoting the principles at our foundation, by studying them, educating people about them, living them, and enacting them whenever opportunities arrive. It's a battle.

An a principle that must be embraced is that battles must be carefully selected, even if they require a tactical withdrawal from occupied ground. This has proven essential to militarily success, and it needs to be recognized so for political success, depending on the circumstances. Anything less would be to deny that our politics really is war, or to believe that deception and maneuver, command and control are not essential in battle.

Our representatives are of course littered with those who have forgotten this or are in denial that the war exists. It's probably a result of overload on the job and too much fraternity with the opposition. Our job, as citizens, is to remind them that the war still exists and to keep them focused on their role as our wartime leaders. Tell them that they don't have to win every battle
or make enemies of every opponent, but they must always operate strategically to promote our principles.

[KC Burke]

IMHO... too many 'RINOs' in the present administration have received too much support, too many excuses. Now it appears dissent will be quashed, differing opinions ridiculed.

I assume you mean that the quashing and ridicule will happen here, on FR. I guess I will have to agree.

First of all, I ask that you take heart and have patience. As one of the "researchers" of the web, consistantly bringing articles from diverse places to the forum's attention, for year after year, you are truely essential. Your persistance will triumph in the end.

I think that Jim feels that the more strident posters always can change a forum's appearance just through their persistance and doesn't want the platform to become something that leftists can selectively use to stay in power. That it could be if it became too much a rant-platform for anti-Bush or Anti-Republican sentiment.

He has always said that just and reasoned criticism from the conservative side can be, and should be, applied to Bush or the Republicans in general.

Unfortunately, reasonable discussion on an anonymus internet board is hampered by those who wish to rant. Therefore, those individuals that wish to blindly follow Bush and/or Republican policy wherever it may go, are far too ready to castigate the reasoned discussion along with the Ranters, all the while thinking that they are just "following Jim's" desires.

Jim wants the leftists defeated, first, last and always. I think that Jim expects there are reasoned posters, like yourself, that can see this bigger picture, and still keep the drum-beat of conservatism providing the cadence to help those at the oars stay on a true path.

I still remember the comment he made to Don Morgan et. al. after they had over-played to cadre stance when asked why he didn't say something to them. It was along the lines of being too embarrased.

I think there are some here that he hopes he doesn't have to explain things to, in too much open detail. He expects us to figure it out and keep up the true fight for a constitutional republic.

As far as the Atlee article, I won't even comment on it as your thoughts are far more important than this one little article.

If I have too incorrectly characterized Jim, I'm sure he will straighten me out, LOL.

[cynicom]

Mostly the republicans stand in the same line with the democrats. The big government line.

[jpl]

The grass-roots Republicans generally are still pretty principled. Sadly, most of the entrenched elite Republicans stand for little more than cheap nannies, getting a good tee time at the country club, and keeping the sailboat in good condition.

[First_Salute]

bttt

[Stand Watch Listen]

Do Republicans Stand For Anything?

The question was posed in 2002. Seems ten years later the question has been addressed...no they do not. No message, nor adequate messenger.

[First_Salute]

I listened to Mark Levin this evening. He is correct; the Republican Party keeps arguing issues, when it really needs to have people in the public eye, who are articulate and passionate about our worthy American foundations and heritage -— both Ronald Reagan strong suits.

[Stand Watch Listen]

...the Republican Party keeps arguing issues, when it really needs to have people in the public eye, who are articulate and passionate about our worthy American foundations and heritage ....

Seems the performane (public eye) of Senator Cruz (R-TX), in the first month of his Senate term, has shown himself as one Conservative that 'stands for something'.
I'll take whatever encouragement that's out there.