Posted on 06/10/2006 6:20:18 AM PDT by FerdieMurphy
Conservative Republicans held such hopes when Pres. Bush was heralded into office and the Republicans gained control of the Congress. That was then, this is now.
According to recent polls, conservative republicans are perplexed by the non-conservative actions of this president and the Republican-controlled Congress.
As I probed this latest confusion I found that I, and millions of other citizens, are f-o-s-s-i-l-s. According to Wikipedia Encyclopedia online, we are "Paleo" or "Old" conservatives. We are living fossils, 'about-to-become-extinct' hangers-on of the Grand Old Party which no longer appears to represent traditional conservatism.
The Republican Party in its essentials has been taken over by a mutation. Wikipedia describes this line of thought as "Neo" or "New Wave" conservatism. It's tenets are not really new, just enjoined by present-day politicians and citizens as the direction our nation should pursue. But it is contrary to many basic "Paleocon" principles.
"Paleocons" believe in the principles of limited government, limited spending and borrowing, limited intervention into citizens' lives, and states' rights. They also believe in restraint of foreign entanglement, a strong national defense and traditional family values
"Neocons" believe in an agressive foreign policy, empiric intervention in other nations to spread democracy, and global economic-trade policies. Weak on domestic policies, they lack emphasis on national issues. Their vision includes motivating our nation towards what I believe Pres. Bush's father referred to as the "New World Order." Include growth of government and overspending too.
Sound familiar? Now we know why the media refers to Pres. Bush and his administration as "Neocons." Many congressional Republicans belong in this catagory too.
The Republican-controlled Congress has acted and evolved in accordance with the mutant Neocon concept of overspending and overgrowing government, ignoring the burgeoning National and Public Debt approaching $40-60 trillion, most of it owned by foreign investors.
Recent crises and scandals such as social security, medicare, tax reform, earmarks, budget deficits, illegal aliens and gasoline prices gain the media spotlight for a few days or weeks. Then they seem to fade away, crammed together on the "we'll deal with you later"shelf. Always later.
My wake-up call came the morning I woke up to Howard Dean saying, "The first thing we want is tough border control, we have to do a much better job on our borders than George Bush has done." Though I knew this was blatant political rhetoric, it was shocking because I completely agreed with him.
Pres. Bush and the Congress have ignored domestic security of our homeland, borders and ports — until it was raised by the people! But if I agree with a liberal democrat, that does not a democrat make.
It is clear that the Grand Old Party has evolved and mutated which leaves a large conservative group, the Paleocons, scratching their heads and wondering what happened? I, for one, feel isolated from the GOP. The Party has entombed the Paleocons on the sidelines, bleached fossils, puzzled eyes peering at the GOP's total embrace of Neo-conservatism.
There is excited talk about Congress gearing up and acting on a few issues before the upcoming elections so they won't lose voters. I've got news for them. They have already lost citizens like this old fossil, who have reflected on the last five years of non-conservative actions.
Where's the limits on spending, limits on growth in government, adherence to the U.S. Constitution? Where's the traditional values and seeking the good of the nation as a whole instead of the corruptive influence of special interests? Yes, there are a few "Paleocons" in Congress but they are not listened to nor even heard amongst the clamor of "Neocons" and "Liberals" calling each other names.
I am a living fossil as are million of citizens, which brings me to the point. Where's the party that speaks to my conscience? I am past that retort: "Oh no! you must vote Republican or the Democrats will win!" Oh Please! I say — so what? Has it made any difference?
The Grand Old Party appears to have accepted this "Neocon" mutation, to move towards a world economy policy, open borders and the "New World Order." Why would I, this old fossil of white-bleached bones, vote for any republican candidate? No longer does the Republican Party speak to or for my "conscience."
As for this Paleocon, I am searching for a party that matches my "conscience." This is the one freedom citizens still have in this country — a citizen's privilege and responsibility to vote his or her "conscience." This old fossil takes this duty seriously.
You are close.
I would add however that since the collapse of communism and by extension socialism they no longer yearn for socialist solutions with the same fervor that their forebears did. e.g. FDR, Truman etc.
They now know that free markets work and controlled ones do not. And hence are required in order to support their globalist ambitions.
Iraq attacked Kuwait. When beaten they agreed to certain terms. They never lived up to those terms. They did not honor the agreement paid for it.
Sorry, I meant Bill Thomas.
These RINOS all look alike to me.
George Voinovich and Lincoln Chafee were the two Republican sell-outs.
Max Baucus broke ranks with the Democrats, because he's in severe danger of being defeated this year, and the voters in Montana not going to put up with this Death Tax any longer.
Dorgan in North Dakota and Johnson in South Dakota will be hammered on voting to keep the Death Tax the next time they run. So will the two Senators from Arkansas.
WULI FOR CONGRESS! I agree absolutely that the problem with gay marriage is the courts (and, one could add grandstanding mayors). Your solution is spot-on.
"Paleoconservative" isn't the most useful term. I doubt most of those discontented with Bush right now are "Chronicles" readers or former Buchanan voters. It's not the hard and fast ideologues who are discontented -- they've been off the reservation for a long time. Rather, it's people who are more flexible, but have been disappointed by the administration.
Bonus points for naming the candidate who coined the phrase 'Voodoo Economics', and to who's policies that term referred.
Paleos can deny it all they want, but Reagan was a neocon.
All the prominent neocons were and are Reaganites.
If the Palleos believe they are the Republican party they should run Buchanan or a Buchanan clone and see just how much support they get.
If Republicans want to hold their conventions in a minivan, and with some Buchananites, under a rock, dream of a Paleo Republican party.
Bush about Reagan
That, and Buchanan and his ilk keep finding ways of joining in on the anti-Israel discourse among the Left...a Left that USED to pat themselves on the back for being so horrified over Nazi treatment, but are perfectly willing to be apologists for Muslims and Palestinians who want to wipe Israel off the face of the earth. And Israel has done nothing but support America whenever we needed them. When Buchanan becomes the perfect poster boy for the Leftist propoganda that conservatives are nothing but White Crackers under Hoods ready to kick a Jew when he's down, the LAST thing Im going to do as a REAL conservative is listen to him.
I'm taking a good, long look at these guys...
http://www.usiap.org/
Check them out. It might be a topic for a new thread.
"Paleocons" believe in the principles of limited government, limited spending and borrowing, limited intervention into citizens' lives, and states' rights. They also believe in restraint of foreign entanglement, a strong national defense and traditional family values"
Then I must be a Paleocon, and Proud of it.
Isn't that somewhat dissonant?
In this World, how do you have a strong defense without being "entangled" with foreigners?
My wake-up call came the morning I woke up to Howard Dean saying, "The first thing we want is tough border control, we have to do a much better job on our borders than George Bush has done." Though I knew this was blatant political rhetoric, it was shocking because I completely agreed with him.
_________________________________________________
What a dummie. In fact, it was Republicans in the House who pushed for the strict anti illegal immigration bill. And yet you still agree with Deaniac and dem rhetoric. Methinks you were never really a conservative...just a nativist at home in the Dem party.
Then again, I don't hang around country clubs with the deep thinkers, nor do I hang around in compounds in the woods surrounded by barber wire.
No, I've tended to spend my time with people who are too busy with life to get bogged down in the minutia of trying to label everything. Heck, if you asked most of them if they were a Paleo or a Neo they'd just walk away and warn their friends that you might be a little kinky.
but forty years ago the Dems were more conservative than the Pubs are right now.
_________________________________________________________
You gotta be kidding...The 1960s is when dems showed their true proletarian radicalism selling their souls to every self styled disadvantaged group in the country for votes.
But aren't some brakes better than NO brakes?
Yeah. Right. They all screamed the same crap about Reagan during the 1980s. The problem is that is all this clique ever does. Squeal and squeal and squeal, then squeal some more. They never actually LEAVE. Just squeal that they are going to. Frankly most of us are sick and tired of hearing the 80,000,000,000 round of the Whine All The Time Choir.
Do like I do. Tune it out, keep your feet moving. It is the same with any army. You need mass regardless of quality. Mass and quality is better but...
My take (and I find myself edging ever closer to traditional populists every year) is that what you call "paleos" are not so much nationalist as Ameerica Firsters. I don't mind at all putting the interests of Americans first.
Neos want also to avoid the nasty truth about the Balkan turnover to the radical Islamists. It was the doing of the neo intellectuals. Kristol, Krauthammer, Barnes, McCain, Biden and Albright joined up to prod Clinton into sending the US into the Balkan war. Clinton would never have done it without cover from "conservatives".
Don't believe me? Google these keywords "Neoconservative Balkans" and "Neoconservative Kristol Balkans" and read all your hegemonic heart desires from the American Prospect.
Neos have a lot to answer for. Now they want to hand over US sovereignty to Mexico, and with that--you've just lost Joe Sixpack. And there's a lot more Joes than elitist Fred Barnes out there.
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.