Republican Breakup?

PhxNews ^ | Joe Duarte

[johnfl61]

BARF ALERT!!

[gcruse]

I wrote Reinventing Libertaria back in May.  It addresses what might be the next step, and what stands in the way.

[CyberCowboy777]

I will read it.

[Scott from the Left Coast]

In many areas of the country, a Republican can only be elected if they are pro-abortion. I know that outrages some people on this forum, but the alternative would be a pro-abortion 'Rat.

Wow...what you say is right on the mark. I live in a state where being anti-abortion is akin to being an Ayatollah (maybe worse!). No Republican could be elected statewide unless they were pro-abortion [rights, they call it], and very few get elected anyway.

We have often failed to be as ruthless and mercenary as RATS, supporting people we don't like and swallowing positions we don't like, in order to get people elected...to sneak our candidates in. Some of that is because of an admirable quality: while RATS are almost always mercenary and self-serving at the core, we tend to believe in principles. The down-side of that is that a majority of the population as a whole either disagrees with those principles or simply doesn't care about anything like "principles". That's especially the case in more urbanized, high population geographic settings.

To say that there are fissures in the Republican party is absolutely true (though this guy mis-identifies them by the bundle). There are as many, maybe more, fissures in the RAT party. But the fissures don't mean as much to the RATS, because they have identified their enemy and nearly always keep their eye on that enemy.

There are probably only about a third of the RATS who really go nuts over Hillary...but were she to jump in to the race the entire party would unite like a whirling dervish behind her. Why? They want to win and they hate their enemy more than any internal divisions they might have.

[tdadams]

There's an awful lot of hue and cry over this article when it's essentially a very insightful analysis. I guess it rings a little too true for some people's liking.

[tdadams]

This is a joke. Anyone who views the Christian right this way is either brain dead or has an agenda.

As a former Christian right-er, I'd say that's pretty dead on, except maybe the jailing women for abortion part. But even so, I don't doubt there are some out there who would jail a woman for having an abortion.

[CyberCowboy777]

As a current Christian Right-er I can say that the piece taken as a whole is wrong about both the intentions and ideologies of Christian Conservatives I know.

I do not think anyone can deny my credentials as a Christian Right-er or those of my family and friends and this is a simple and poorly done divide and conquer piece.

[tdadams]

The one true and blue "Libertarian" in Congress, Ron Paul, put up for a vote to get the US out of the UN. Fine the Republic in action, but yet that same congressman, sided with the liberal democrats (who are big UN supporters)and the UN in saying that the US and the UK should have not removed saddam from power. JMO, but can anybody say schizophrenia.

I've noticed you have the keen ability of appearing to be a simpleton. At least I'm giving you the benefit of the doubt and assuming it's feigned.

Ron Paul would only seem schizophrenic to someone who is unfamiliar with the concept of adhering to consistent principles, regardless or who may be allied or opposed with those principles in any given case.

[tdadams]

G_d was the first and loudest proponent of Liberty, Freedom and Personal Responsibility.

"Slaves, obey your masters" - Ephesians 6:5.

Well, I guess it's all a matter of interpretation.

[CyberCowboy777]

Ron Paul is not schizophrenic and I have defended him more than once.

He was wrong on Iraq.

[CyberCowboy777]

"Servents, obey your masters" - Ephesians 6:5.

Not really.

[CyberCowboy777]

Have you ever read what G_d told Samuel to tell the Israelites when they demanded a King "like the other nations"?

Sounds a little like our founding fathers....

[CyberCowboy777]

True.

But he purposely use those words in that fashion.

There is a place for the right kind of Civil Government and Reagan knew that.

[tdadams]

This is why I let all the "losertarian" comments roll off my back with good humor, but I'm quick to correct anyone who calls me a Republican.

[tdadams]

I agree. And I agree with Ron Paul on most things, but I do think he was wrong on Iraq.

My point was that Dane is disingenuously trying to falsely portray Paul as having some alliance with the UN when their agreement on the issue is merely coincidental.

[gcruse]

I think I'm with you there. If anything, little 'l', little 'r'.

[tdadams]

LOL! That's a very fine example of exactly what I was talking about. Your Bible might say "servants", but mine says "slaves". Quintessentially a matter of interpretation.

[CyberCowboy777]

Agreed. (except on Iraq)

Just as Dane is broad brushing a person, this writer is broad brushing a group. That is my point.

[eccl1212]

Good article.

I have always wanted an america that lets me worship as I please, or as I don't. I have never understood the insane desire for a biblical-theocratic america where sometimes ridiculous and irrational belief systems are constantly being codified into law (or at least attempted on some level). They all seem to press for somebody else's (other than mine that is) religious convictions, enforced in the public arena, and upon the public under threat of life, limb or treasure.

The religious nuts who ruined Europe prior to the onset of the dark ages, and who resisted the age of reason, with it's technological and medical brilliance... are all coming to their fullness of time here. They want... a CHRISTIAN nation... instead of a nation of Christians.

It will be our undoing, as a two party system, a nation, and even as individual Christians with conscience.

Having a "born again" president is not enough for some folks. Instead, they want to march the nation by force, through the mississippi and declare us all to be "righteous catholics" or "evangelicals" or "mormons" or "charismaniacs". The problem is human laws and decrees, can never birth a human soul, from death to life.


The crux of the problem is also the fact that these folks pretty much reject each other as heretics. They spew hatred at the "others" over doctrinal interpretations of statements made over a millenia ago, in another language and culture that does not exist today. YET they insist they KNOW what EVERYTHING must mean, what MUST be made into law, and what MUST be enforced on the wicked "unbelievers" they truly hate.

What they THINK they want, they could never live with. It didn't work in Pre dark-ages medievil europe, and teh proven false theories of both divine right and rule is even less viable now.

We have to resolve it, or face our own, very dark age of unenlightenment... and probably sooner than we would like to admit. Technology moves things a lot faster than it used to, and some things, like religious politics and political religions... just are too dangerous to toy with any longer.

Socialism is just plain evil, whether it's masters are Christian socialist, or Politically correct secular humanists. Both are the bane of our times.