Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Republican History Revealed

Posted on 07/23/2003 10:03:09 AM PDT by justshutupandtakeit

In Back to Basics for the Republican Party author Michael Zak (FR's distinguished patriot, Grand Old Partisian) undertakes the heroic and herculean task of clearing the name of the Republican Party from the thicket of lies, distortions and misrepresentations which has been cultivated by the Democrat/media alliance. Since any partisian argument in today's America must begin with the refutation of chronic and consistent lies told about the GOP, Zak's book provides the necessary ammunition to do just that.

This well-written, interesting and enjoyable tour of GOP history can be of use to any patriot who wants to know the truth about the histories of the two major parties. It traces the origins of the GOP to the proto-Republican, Alexander Hamilton, and the Federalists and that of the Democrat Party to its ancestors Jefferson, Clinton and Burr. A brief survery of Federalist and Whig antecedents and policies is sketched to give historic context to events. Since the GOP was created and grew in opposition to the policies and failures of the Democrat Party to extend the benefits of the Constitution to all Americans, that party's history is also examined.

And a sorry history it is. A story of treachery, short-sightedness, racism and economic ignorance unfolds as we see the Democrats consistently for 170+ years fight against allowing the Blacks a chance to achieve full freedom and economic success. Opposition to that fight has defined the best of the GOP's actions. Every advance in Civil Rights for Blacks has come from GOP initiatives and against Democrat opposition. Every setback for Blacks achieving constitutional protection has come from Democrat intitiatives and against GOP opposition. Racists have led the Democrats during most of their history, in sharp contrast to Republicans. All the evils visited against Black are of Democrat design. Democrats created and maintained the KKK, the Jim Crow laws, the Black Codes, it was Democrats lynching Blacks, beating Blacks, exploiting Blacks and perpetrating murderous riots which killed Blacks in

Zak rescues the reputation of the party from the slanders thrown against it during the Civil War and Reconstruction, many of which are popular around FR. He also clearly shows the mistaken disavowal of GOP principles which brought the modern party to its lowest state and allowed the demagogues of Democrats to paint the party as "racist." This was because of the disastrous turn to States' Rights which grew from the Goldwater campaign. It was the final straw in the process which transformed the share of the Black vote from 90-95% GOP to 90% democrat. A modern tragedy of immense proportions.

This is a book which should be studied carefully by Republicans in order to counter the barrage of Lies trumpeted daily by the RAT/media. While it is a work of a partisian, Back to Basics does not hesitate to point to GOP mistakes, failures and incompetence in carrying out its mission nor does it neglect to give Democrats credit when credit is due for actions which are productive of good for our nation as a whole. Unfortunately, those are far too few.

In order to effectively plan for the future we must be fully aware of the past, Zak helps us achieve that awareness.


TOPICS: Constitution/Conservatism; Crime/Corruption; Editorial; Government; Political Humor/Cartoons; Politics/Elections; Your Opinion/Questions
KEYWORDS: dixiewinsinmydreams; historicalrevision; shoddyresearch; treasonforpartisan
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-100101-150151-200 ... 801-836 next last
Time for the "Stupid" Party to shed its stupidity since we know the Evil party will not shed its Evil.
1 posted on 07/23/2003 10:03:09 AM PDT by justshutupandtakeit
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Grand Old Partisan
Some comments about your book.
2 posted on 07/23/2003 10:05:29 AM PDT by justshutupandtakeit (RATS will use any means to denigrate George Bush's Victory.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: justshutupandtakeit
BTTT
3 posted on 07/23/2003 10:07:39 AM PDT by facedown (Armed in the Heartland)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

Comment #4 Removed by Moderator

To: justshutupandtakeit
Product Details

5 posted on 07/23/2003 10:15:24 AM PDT by ZGuy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Grand Old Partisan; Jim Robinson; Admin Moderator
Do NOT post ads, offers, solicitations or links to pages that offer merchandise, etc.
6 posted on 07/23/2003 10:17:09 AM PDT by Constitution Day (THIS TAGLINE IS OFFICIALLY A PETERSON-FREE ZONE!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: ZGuy
My book, now in a third edition, sells mostly at my speeches to Republican organizations around the country. It's only on Amazon because I got tired of mailing copies to people who sent me checks.
7 posted on 07/23/2003 10:20:56 AM PDT by Grand Old Partisan (You can read about my history of the GOP at www.republicanbasics.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: justshutupandtakeit; GOPcapitalist; Constitution Day
It traces the origins of the GOP to the proto-Republican, Alexander Hamilton, and the Federalists and that of the Democrat Party to its ancestors Jefferson, Clinton and Burr.

Well, Hamilton argued for big centralized government, internal improvements, a national bank, and a monarch to boot. Jefferson argued for federalism and the rights of the states to offset the powers of the federal government. Today, in theory we have Democrats calling for even more of Hamilton's ideals and again theoretically, Republicans calling for limited government and more power locally more along the lines of Jefferson. That being said, both parties in reality have hooked on full force to the ideals of that king worshipper Hamilton.

BTW, justshutup, how is a monarchy not really a monarchy? And yes I have read the book. Talk about revisionism.....

8 posted on 07/23/2003 10:21:02 AM PDT by billbears (Deo Vindice)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: billbears
Hamilton never argued for a BIG government centralized or no. He did want a government capable of national defense and national development. You can not point to one word of a Hamilton argument for a monarch. Discussions reported second hand, and out of context at the Constitutional Convention don't count. Show me where Hamilton argued for a monarch.

Jefferson's states were far more repressive than the Federal government ever has been. They controlled people to such an extent that they were forced to join Slave patrols or pay a fine. J. wanted states to leave the petty tyrants of the Slaverocracy alone.

Democrats opposed Hamilton's ideals in 1790 and still do to this day.

Care to point out what revisionism was in the book. Of course, having an inability to accept historical fact handicaps you but go ahead.
9 posted on 07/23/2003 10:28:00 AM PDT by justshutupandtakeit (RATS will use any means to denigrate George Bush's Victory.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: Constitution Day
There is nothing wrong with postings regarding works of interest to conservatives and patriots, Hillary might be offended but I am sure Jim won't be.
10 posted on 07/23/2003 10:29:37 AM PDT by justshutupandtakeit (RATS will use any means to denigrate George Bush's Victory.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: justshutupandtakeit
From the link I posted:

Do NOT post ads, offers, solicitations or links to pages for the purpose of selling or offering merchandise, t-shirts, bumperstickers, coffee mugs, pens, pins, stamps, books, mousepads, stocks, bonds, gold, guns, etc., etc., etc.

Good day.

CD

11 posted on 07/23/2003 10:33:40 AM PDT by Constitution Day (THIS TAGLINE IS OFFICIALLY A PETERSON-FREE ZONE!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: Adam Selene; mhking; WhiskeyPapa; x; Non-Sequitur; dead; nopardons; headsonpikes
to your attention.
12 posted on 07/23/2003 10:35:26 AM PDT by justshutupandtakeit (RATS will use any means to denigrate George Bush's Victory.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Constitution Day
I did none of those, perhaps you didn't notice.
13 posted on 07/23/2003 10:36:07 AM PDT by justshutupandtakeit (RATS will use any means to denigrate George Bush's Victory.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: justshutupandtakeit
I did notice.

My post was directed at G.O.P., who posted a link. Said link is now gone. Problem solved.

14 posted on 07/23/2003 10:38:21 AM PDT by Constitution Day (THIS TAGLINE IS OFFICIALLY A PETERSON-FREE ZONE!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: Constitution Day; Jim Robinson; Admin Moderator
Hundreds of posts a day link articles to sites which are for profit. Every newspaper linked, every network linked and many other links are commercial sites. Why would there be a problem with a link wrt a book?

Why would FR want to restrict its members from links allowing them to obtain the truth? Why would those seeking to prevent the truth from being spread be allowed to prevail?
15 posted on 07/23/2003 10:52:00 AM PDT by justshutupandtakeit (RATS will use any means to denigrate George Bush's Victory.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: Constitution Day
Bwahahahaha!!!! Partisan found himself an agent!
16 posted on 07/23/2003 11:07:54 AM PDT by GOPcapitalist
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: GOPcapitalist; justshutupandtakeit
I don't need an agent. Republican organizations contact me to invite me to speak. A few weeks ago, a prominent congressman had me speak to his Committee and bought copies for everyone on it. A national Republican figure will be writing a forward for the next edition.

Republicans appreciate my work to expose the evils committed by Democrats and their neo-Confederate collaborators.

17 posted on 07/23/2003 11:21:28 AM PDT by Grand Old Partisan (You can read about my history of the GOP at www.republicanbasics.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: Grand Old Partisan
A national Republican figure will be writing a forward for the next edition.

...Then let me just say that I happily and enthusiastically anticipate both that forward and the opportunity to make any necessary corrections to the factual inaccuracies it may contain.

18 posted on 07/23/2003 11:26:01 AM PDT by GOPcapitalist
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: GOPcapitalist
Fair enough. He'll probably be running for the Senate next year, so you can really let him have it then. Cheers,

19 posted on 07/23/2003 11:29:31 AM PDT by Grand Old Partisan (You can read about my history of the GOP at www.republicanbasics.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: Grand Old Partisan
Republicans appreciate my work to expose the evils committed by Democrats and their neo-Confederate collaborators.

Right. And I'm sure they also appreciate your own collaborations with the PC nazis and race mongers of the political left.

20 posted on 07/23/2003 11:30:27 AM PDT by GOPcapitalist
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: justshutupandtakeit
Hamilton never argued for a BIG government centralized or no.

Oh, of course not. I know all the Founding Fathers were just jim dandy with having any form of monarch, elected or not

Hamilton's use of the dreaded "M" word set alarm bells ringing to the exclusion of everything else he said concerning the subject. From Madison's notes: "It will be objected probably, that [an Executive for life] will be an elective Monarch, and will give birth to the tumults which characterize that form of Gov[ernmen]t. He w[oul]d reply that Monarch is an indefinite term. It marks not either the degree or duration of power. If the Executive Magistrate wd. be a monarch for life--the other prop[ose]d by the Report . . . wd. be a Monarch for seven years."

-----

The following day Hamilton was taken to task for his remarks on state sovereignty, which some construed as a call for the abolition of states. Hamilton responded that he had been misunderstood, and explained that he did not advocate a complete abolition of the states, only a diminution of their status as political entities to ensure the preponderance of the federal government.

Nope, no big strong government there < /sarcasm>

Alexander Hamilton bio

21 posted on 07/23/2003 11:33:05 AM PDT by billbears (Deo Vindice)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: Grand Old Partisan
Fair enough. He'll probably be running for the Senate next year, so you can really let him have it then.

Depends on how conservative his politics are. If he's a conservative, he'll probably gain my general support. If he's a RINO or a PC monger, I will work to defeat him in the primary.

22 posted on 07/23/2003 11:33:42 AM PDT by GOPcapitalist
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: GOPcapitalist
No more hints than this, but he's a rising star in the GOP and could well be President some day.

23 posted on 07/23/2003 11:35:54 AM PDT by Grand Old Partisan (You can read about my history of the GOP at www.republicanbasics.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: Constitution Day
You whine just like a democrat
24 posted on 07/23/2003 11:37:55 AM PDT by mac_truck
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: Grand Old Partisan
No more hints than this, but he's a rising star in the GOP and could well be President some day.

As with all GOP candidates, I will devote my advocacy resources toward either furthering that star's rise or initiating its decline depending upon whether or not it is conservative. Not all Republicans are conservative and not all conservatives are Republican.

25 posted on 07/23/2003 11:41:47 AM PDT by GOPcapitalist
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: mac_truck
You whine just like a democrat

As opposed to you, a person who takes political positions as if he was a democrat.

26 posted on 07/23/2003 11:42:49 AM PDT by GOPcapitalist
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: GOPcapitalist
Conservatives who do not firmly support Republican candidates thereby contribute to Democrat victories, and so are the real RINOs.
27 posted on 07/23/2003 11:44:28 AM PDT by Grand Old Partisan (You can read about my history of the GOP at www.republicanbasics.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: mac_truck; Jim Robinson
You whine just like a democrat

Obviously, you need some remedial reading comprehension classes, for those are Jim Robinson's words, not mine.
Are you saying that Jim is whining like a Democrat? Huh?

28 posted on 07/23/2003 11:48:39 AM PDT by Constitution Day (THIS TAGLINE IS OFFICIALLY A PETERSON-FREE ZONE!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: mac_truck
By the way, I got your nasty little FRmail. Get bent.
29 posted on 07/23/2003 11:49:20 AM PDT by Constitution Day (THIS TAGLINE IS OFFICIALLY A PETERSON-FREE ZONE!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: justshutupandtakeit
Having not read the book, I reserve comment to your review and Partisan's FR posts - neither are convincing.

The review is void of facts and details but makes broad-sweeping assumptions. Is the book the same way?

30 posted on 07/23/2003 11:55:07 AM PDT by stainlessbanner
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Constitution Day
I got your nasty little FRmail.

Agreed this is a disgraceful way to get attention. Contributors to this forum do not appreciate spam via FReepmail and pushing goods and services.

31 posted on 07/23/2003 11:58:52 AM PDT by stainlessbanner
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: stainlessbanner
The treasonous tendencies within the Democratic Party did not begin recently but go back to the Civil War, making neo-Confederates calling themselves Republicans and patriots such a joke.
32 posted on 07/23/2003 12:03:36 PM PDT by Grand Old Partisan (You can read about my history of the GOP at www.republicanbasics.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: stainlessbanner
I'll read the book. I'm sure it is excellent political combat, which is great. However, I have reservations concerning the historical merits - based on book synopsis and the author's FR posts.
33 posted on 07/23/2003 12:04:13 PM PDT by Lee_Atwater
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: Constitution Day
I'd say its way past your nap time.
34 posted on 07/23/2003 12:10:51 PM PDT by mac_truck
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: Lee_Atwater; Ohioan
I have reservations concerning the historical merits

Agreed. I choose not to blast the text, at least until I've actually read it. The author chooses to reignite regional and sectional hostilities from the past with his posts on FR. This does nothing to promote conservativism - in fact, it's more detremental to conservatives.

Alienating the the conservative base by dredging up civil war history will not help the GOP.

35 posted on 07/23/2003 12:12:21 PM PDT by stainlessbanner
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: mac_truck
Jeez, get some new material, loser.
36 posted on 07/23/2003 12:12:52 PM PDT by Constitution Day (THIS TAGLINE IS OFFICIALLY A PETERSON-FREE ZONE!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: stainlessbanner
The book is filled with facts that democRATs and their supporters will not like.

Facts are useless when it comes to convincing the D.S.s. They pretend they are just lies and remain in love with falsehoods supporting their warped and incorrect view of history. Just as they are useless in talking to Bushbashers.
Love of fantasies overrides concern with the truth.
37 posted on 07/23/2003 12:14:55 PM PDT by justshutupandtakeit (RATS will use any means to denigrate George Bush's Victory.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: stainlessbanner
I have never denigrated the South, in the book or on Free Republic. Actually, it is an insult to southern heritage for neo-Confederates to claim that during the Civil War everyone South of the Mason-Dixon line was a traitor. In fact, 200,000 southern blacks and 100,000 southern whites fought for the United States of America while millions of northern Democrats collaborated with their rebel brethren of the Confederacy.
38 posted on 07/23/2003 12:16:45 PM PDT by Grand Old Partisan (You can read about my history of the GOP at www.republicanbasics.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

To: billbears
Nope, no big government there.

Thanks for posting the bio. Too bad you didn't read it. Or if you did, didn't understand what it said. Try again.
39 posted on 07/23/2003 12:19:46 PM PDT by justshutupandtakeit (RATS will use any means to denigrate George Bush's Victory.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: stainlessbanner
Alienating the the conservative base by dredging up civil war history will not help the GOP

Thats rich. What ELSE do you neo-confedrate anke-biters do around here BUT that?

40 posted on 07/23/2003 12:20:47 PM PDT by mac_truck
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

To: Grand Old Partisan
Support your claim that Iraqis are like Confederates posted here
"My bunch, the United States Army, is right now in Iraq battling your bunch, enemies of the United States of America."

- Grand Old Partisan


41 posted on 07/23/2003 12:21:35 PM PDT by stainlessbanner
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies]

To: stainlessbanner
The United States Army fought enemies of our country in the South in the 1860s, and the United States Army is doing so in Iraq now. What the Confederacy and Saddam's Iraq had in common were they were both avowed enemies of my beloved country, the United States of America.
42 posted on 07/23/2003 12:27:23 PM PDT by Grand Old Partisan (You can read about my history of the GOP at www.republicanbasics.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 41 | View Replies]

To: Grand Old Partisan
Nor have I since I was born and raised there and my entire family still lives there. However, "denigrating the South" to the D.S.s just means posting truths about the Slavers' treason. "Denigrating the South" just means puncturing the fantasies of the "Noble Cause" and its supporters, all of which are based on lies from start to finish. "Denigrating the South" means pointing out that the Confederacy was a tyranny thru and thru and that it never believed those truths expressed in the Declaration of Independence such as all men are created equal. Since you believe that you are a "race-baiter" and "PC." What a joke.
43 posted on 07/23/2003 12:27:40 PM PDT by justshutupandtakeit (RATS will use any means to denigrate George Bush's Victory.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies]

To: justshutupandtakeit
From Madison's notes: "It will be objected probably, that [an Executive for life] will be an elective Monarch, and will give birth to the tumults which characterize that form of Gov[ernmen]t. He w[oul]d reply that Monarch is an indefinite term. It marks not either the degree or duration of power. If the Executive Magistrate wd. be a monarch for life--the other prop[ose]d by the Report . . . wd. be a Monarch for seven years."

Don't know too many ways that can be taken. Hamilton called for an elected monarch, much as he called for a lifetime Senate. Hmmmm, except for the 'elected' bit sounds quite a bit like England's system of government with the higher offices serving for life. But you keep preaching sunshine....

44 posted on 07/23/2003 12:39:39 PM PDT by billbears (Deo Vindice)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]

To: Grand Old Partisan
How many Southerners are in the United States armed forces today? How many supported our country in WWI, WWII, Korea, Vietnam, Gulf-I, Gulf-II?

You besmirch the honor and integrity of Americans, both North and South, in denigrating Civil War veterans. Be it so far from you to acknowledge the good things about the Confederacy, the contributions made by Southerners past and present to our great Republic?

Throwing barbs like the "Confederate/Iraqi" out and failing to support them is spineless and frankly sir, I expected more.

45 posted on 07/23/2003 12:40:16 PM PDT by stainlessbanner
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 42 | View Replies]

To: Grand Old Partisan
The ONLY reason to vote Republican is to help keep the communist out, but the pubes aren't that much better than the dems are. They are wishy-washy on gun control,abortion,states rights, and government spending has increased under the Bush administration. So much for smaller limited government.
46 posted on 07/23/2003 12:44:02 PM PDT by southern cross forever
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: southern cross forever
They are wishy-washy on gun control,abortion,states rights, and government spending has increased under the Bush administration. So much for smaller limited government.

Well you have to figure they're returning to their true roots, that of abe and the Whigs. Government takes care of all type attitude

47 posted on 07/23/2003 12:54:31 PM PDT by billbears (Deo Vindice)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 46 | View Replies]

To: Grand Old Partisan
Conservatives who do not firmly support Republican candidates thereby contribute to Democrat victories, and so are the real RINOs.

BINGO!

48 posted on 07/23/2003 12:56:44 PM PDT by mac_truck
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: stainlessbanner
You seem to be confused about what century you're in -- 21st, just in case. During the 1860s, my great-great-grandfather served in the Austrio-Hungarian Army. You can besmirch him and the Empire all you want.

The best contribution by southerners in the 1860s was service by 300,000 of them in the United States Army and Navy to defend the country against rebels. I honor all Americans who fought for the United States of America and criticize all Americans who fought against it.

49 posted on 07/23/2003 1:00:42 PM PDT by Grand Old Partisan (You can read about my history of the GOP at www.republicanbasics.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 45 | View Replies]

To: billbears
Well you have to figure they're returning to their true roots, that of abe and the Whigs. Government takes care of all type attitude


50 posted on 07/23/2003 1:04:00 PM PDT by mac_truck
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 47 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-100101-150151-200 ... 801-836 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson