Republican versus Democrat Brands, a comparison

republican-democrat-brands.blogspot.com ^ | El Gringo (aka JWThinkwright)

[El Gringo]

The table gives a side by side comparison of the Republican and Democrat brands. To win elections, the Republicans have to proselytize the American public, and lead by example. Since most Americans, regardless of gender ethnicity, or immigrant status, favor those items embraced and supported by Republicans, the Republicans will win elections as long as the public is not duped by the Democrats. The biggest priority of the Republicans is to call out Democrat lies, with gusto and assertion, and without fail.

Ronald Reagan’s genius was in pointing to the Democrats, and their ilk around the world, as liars. He spoke truth and called out liars, even when it caused discomfort. He called the Soviet Union the “Evil Empire,”and brought to Gorbachof a statement of great import: “Tear down this wall,” against the advice of his “advisers.” He would not be shouted down, either. Early in his presidency, while delivering his thoughts on a college campus, a student tried interrupting by staging a one-man demonstration (shouting down opposing views is encouraged by Democrats), but Reagan stopped him by stating in a stern tone, “Oh, Shut up.”This stopped the deranged man and discouraged future such adventures. To bad the Bushes, 41 and 43, did not have the Reagan moxie.

Here is where the future of the Republican Brand is to be found: MOXIE. And, PARTICULARLY, moxie in calling out lies, liars, and those who try to shout down truth.

Table. Republicans & Democrats Side by Side

| Value | Republican | Democrat |

|---------|--------------|------------|

| Life | Support |No big deal |

|---------|--------------|------------|

|Liberty* | Embrace |Group rights|

|---------|--------------|------------|

| Morals**| Embrace | Disdain |

|---------|--------------|------------|

| Career | Money Economy| Politics |

|---------|--------------|------------|

| Energy |Green, nuclear| Green only,| | |coal & oil | *** |

|-------------------------------------| |* Individual Liberty |** Traditional Morals, based on the Ten Commandments |*** part of a political agenda

a> href="http://www.republican-democrat-brands.blogspot.com"<>Continue ...

[familyop]

Politics is a screeching comedy series now. Use Brand X.

[El Gringo]

Most people hate politics. I know I do, but your life is more in the hands of politicians than we would like to admit. See ‘Polticians are clueless’ on Free Republic.

[familyop]

That's true. But what will they do without the big revenues and votes for legitimizing their crookery? Believe it or not, there are greenies getting together with conservative survivalists (over 4,500 comments and ongoing). Many of the real environmentalists (as opposed to the corporate/government shills) are beginning to see the light in regards to corporate/government intrusions against private activities (e.g., owner-building, gardening, livestock, etc.) and in regards to other matters of freedom (like the threats of commie/fascist globalism). What will those politicians do, when we are only producing for our neighbors and having lots of kids? They'll get tax revenues. But they'll have to move into shacks, because their merchant constituents will be out of business.

[familyop]

Ah...and try the following keywords

nonpolitical politics Vaclav Havel

There’s no need for violence or lawbreaking, and there’s still sufficiently good material there without misdeeds. Dig deeper for the tactical stuff.

[El Gringo]

who mentioned law-breaking? To appreciate the tone of what I believe, I recommend that you read Chapter 13, Doing Good in the e-book Bye Bye Sweet Liberty.

[familyop]

"who mentioned law-breaking? To appreciate the tone of what I believe, I recommend that you read Chapter 13, Doing Good in the e-book Bye Bye Sweet Liberty."

Not you. I was referring to some of the strife involved in Czechoslovakia, Poland and other areas (re. nonpolitical politics). The violence, at times, was incidental to other events there. ...was only stating the disclaimer that violence is not necessary for nonpolitical politics to be effective. There are many ways.

Thank you for the tip for reading.

[El Gringo]

Thank you for your service, sir.

As far as the Ahrent-Hlavel reference: (pardon the spelling, I am flying by memory of what I read a few minutes ago.) The reference sounds like “flower power” to me—— John and Yoko in bed with cameras whirring around them. Just wait until a pirate ship hijacks an ocean liner —— then try waving flowers in front of the pirates. Joseph Stalin understood power. When someone mentioned the huge number of Catholics in the world, Stalin cynically asked: “So how many Divisions does the Pope have?”
When it comes to power, the side that has the largest numbers and most lethal weapons usually dictates the terms of the cessation of hostilities. As a droll Nathan B. Forrest once stated, [Battles are won] by the general who “gets there fustest wit’ the mostest.”

[familyop]

...interesting disclaimer. Vaclav Havel was only one of many of our assets who broke that power of Stalin in satellite countries and brought the evil empire down in a short time. But describe the efforts of soldiers and assets in terms like “flower power,” if you wish. I’ll pass that on to a few real men. It motivates them.

[familyop]

We’ll get the fence built sooner, too.