PDA

View Full Version : Conservatism's Dilemma: To be or not to be in the GOP



tacitus
01-22-2009, 10:15 AM
By Larrey Anderson (http://www.americanthinker.com/larrey_anderson/)

The GOP heavily (almost exclusively) relies on conservatives for grassroots campaign workers and financial support. But the Republican Party has a long history of exploiting conservatives' efforts and misusing conservatives' financial contributions. In many ways, the situation is reminiscent of an abusive marriage. Is it time for conservatives to finally recognize the lies and abuse and move out of the house? Or is some sort of reconciliation still possible?

I will make my position clear from the outset. A divorce by conservatives from the GOP would be a disaster for all of the parties involved. Just like most marriages, the grass may look greener on the other side of the fence -- but it almost always isn't. This is true for the GOP and for conservatives.



If reconciliation between conservatives and the GOP is going to happen, conservatives must take firm control of the GOP. Here are some tough love suggestions for how this can be done:

read the rest here. (http://www.americanthinker.com/2009/01/conservatisms_dilemma_to_be_or.html)

Ringo
01-22-2009, 10:24 AM
I predict that the conservatives will stay with the GOP, despite being betrayed by them starting with Reagan and his big government and massive record spending and debt....all the way up to GWB.

It's like a battered wife syndrome. The GOP also betrayed the religious right in the same way. The GOP used the gay marriage battle cry when they needed votes, but then never delivered on the religious rights wishes.

Both groups were used by the GOP. The religious right is waking up much faster than the conservatives.

Either way, when Obama saves the economy and passes health care...we will see exactly what the death of a political party looks like, the GOP is on life support as we speak.

http://www.worth1000.com/entries/71000/71451JOQN_w.jpg

Gingersnap
01-22-2009, 10:43 AM
They are all excellent ideas but I like this one best:


(5) Finally, let's take this bull by the horns. Conservatives need to start running for office. I know. I know. This is a daunting idea. But stop and think about it for a moment. If Nancy Pelosi is fit to be the Speaker of the House, then at least 90% of the rest of America's citizens are qualified to run for some public office. (This includes 99.99% of America's conservative stay at home moms. Run ladies run!)


There are problems with this final proposal. Most conservatives are too busy working at the jobs that make the country run to quit their real jobs and run the country. Be that as it may, some of us must step up to the political plate and take our turn at bat. After all, conservatives believe in limited government and this includes, for some of us, a limited term of public service.[i]

This is certainly what the Founders meant when they envisioned citizen participation in government. They weren't looking to create a permanent political class of life-long office holders.

megimoo
01-22-2009, 01:12 PM
I predict that the conservatives will stay with the GOP, despite being betrayed by them starting with Reagan and his big government and massive record spending and debt....all the way up to GWB.

It's like a battered wife syndrome. The GOP also betrayed the religious right in the same way. The GOP used the gay marriage battle cry when they needed votes, but then never delivered on the religious rights wishes.

Both groups were used by the GOP. The religious right is waking up much faster than the conservatives.

Either way, when Obama saves the economy and passes health care...we will see exactly what the death of a political party looks like, the GOP is on life support as we speak.

http://www.worth1000.com/entries/71000/71451JOQN_w.jpg
I predict that you will suffer a blowout of your Butt Gasket from the overPressure of your Political BullShit.

Point one: The Conservatives will dump as many RINO's as they can and build a new party.And After four years of Socialism America will be ready for a major change then watch all of the liberal rats run for cover.
The Reagan years saw the fall of the Soviets as a world power and Americas emergence as the most powerful country in the world and we still are thanks to him.

Point Two:Gay marrage is a Money issue to the Progressives in California.The rich Homo's dump big bucks into the far left wings coffers and expect delivery of national acceptance of their abomination of a life style .

And finally the Progressives will not give much to Obama no matter what he does.They are all on a power trip and Pelosi thinks that she is the new Queen of America.They'll all get to fighting and back stabbing and the Socialized Medicine Healthcare plan will run out of money before it even starts.

The way these Progressives are raiding the American coffers we will be debtors to the world even if any country will buy our worthless treasury bonds .Top it all off with a blowup in the Mideast and the fall of both the EU and the UK with England in default and the EU bleeding member states to go their own he will be quite busy covering up these messes.

And the UN will be whining for more money,power,more control over our foreign aid,military and resources to enhance their position and power in the world at our expense .They will push for an American national tax to finance their operations and drive to exercise control of our military as their peacekeepers.

Saudi Arabia will test a Nuclear device to demonstrate to Iran not to become too ambitious in the region
and will provide Nuclear reactor technology to some Arab states to keep the power balance between Sheii Iran and the Sunni countries.

Ringo
01-22-2009, 01:18 PM
[SIZE="3"]
And After four years of Socialism America will be ready for a major change then watch all of the liberal rats run for cover.

Like the country did when FDR was elected ? ... LOL

FDR served from 1933 to 1945 ... and because of him the republicans changed the term limits.

The country certainly didn't want major change after a dose of Socialism.




The way these Progressives are raiding the American coffers we will be debtors to the world even if any country will buy our worthless treasury bonds

WTF ? ...Bush came into office with a national debt of 5.6 trillion ...he has now added 6 trillion on top of that ...FUCKING DOUBLING IT.

But it's the progressives who are on a spending spree ? ..thats totally absurd. No wonder your party is dying.

PoliCon
01-22-2009, 01:23 PM
They are all excellent ideas but I like this one best:



This is certainly what the Founders meant when they envisioned citizen participation in government. They weren't looking to create a permanent political class of life-long office holders.It was one of the things they were very much against.

PoliCon
01-22-2009, 01:24 PM
Ringo - go read FDR's Folly and learn how he managed to stay in power for so long . . . :rolleyes: and why the depression was only GREAT here in America - and why there was a bipartisan effort to pass the XXII Amendment.

Ringo
01-22-2009, 01:26 PM
Ringo - go read FDR's Folly and learn how he managed to stay in power for so long . . . :rolleyes:

He stayed in power by getting votes from the people.

PoliCon
01-22-2009, 01:30 PM
He stayed in power by getting votes from the people.by buying votes.

Arroyo_Doble
01-22-2009, 01:33 PM
There are not enough conservatives (by the author's seemingly narrow definition) to gain a majority of the House and Senate or take the Executive Branch even in our quasi-democratic system which allows for minority rule.

xavierob82
01-22-2009, 01:56 PM
Modern-day American conservatism has nothing to do with fiscal or economic conservatism, or anything related to monetary matters for that matter.

Hell, President Bill Clinton, who was supposedly a Marxist Communist tax-and-spend big-government America-hating liberal like Obama, was FAR more fiscally conservative than George Dumbya, leaving office with a federal budget surplus and only a 7% increase in the federal government. Dumbya, a conservative Republican, increased the federal government by 22% and will leave office with America's largest deficit in history. And Dumbya had a Republican-controlled congress most of his time in office.

What does this have to do with the future of the GOP and conservartism? That's easy: The GOP has become the party of religious evangelicals and the Deep South, and has little appeal outside these 2 demographic groups, and has little or nothing to do with fiscal conservatism, as the past 2 administrations have demonstrated. They are a SOCIALLY conservative religious fundamentalist party, first and foremost, and without the fundies the GOP is nothing.

wilbur
01-22-2009, 01:58 PM
What about the libertarian party causes this author to say its a party of "selfishness"? Their stance on social issues? What?

PoliCon
01-22-2009, 01:58 PM
There are not enough conservatives (by the author's seemingly narrow definition) to gain a majority of the House and Senate or take the Executive Branch even in our quasi-democratic system which allows for minority rule. I have to disagree. There are more of us out here than you might suspect.

wilbur
01-22-2009, 01:59 PM
Modern-day American conservatism has nothing to do with fiscal or economic conservatism, or anything related to monetary matters for that matter.

Hell, President Bill Clinton, who was supposedly a Marxist Communist tax-and-spend big-government America-hating liberal like Obama, was FAR more fiscally conservative than George Dumbya, leaving office with a federal budget surplus and only a 7% increase in the federal government. Dumbya, a conservative Republican, increased the federal government by 22% and will leave office with America's largest deficit in history. And Dumbya had a Republican-controlled congress most of his time in office.

What does this have to do with the future of the GOP and conservartism? That's easy: The GOP has become the party of religious evangelicals and the Deep South, and has little appeal outside these 2 demographic groups, and has little or nothing to do with fiscal conservatism, as the past 2 administrations have demonstrated. They are a SOCIALLY conservative religious fundamentalist party, first and foremost, and without the fundies the GOP is nothing.

I was actually somewhat agreeing with the article till it mentioned Sarah Palin... as if that were the new standard with which to gauge how conservative a republican is... and calling for more of her/her archetypes... I'm resisting the urge to puke.

Molon Labe
01-22-2009, 02:00 PM
I predict that the conservatives will stay with the GOP, despite being betrayed by them starting with Reagan and his big government and massive record spending and debt....all the way up to GWB.

Here's one that won't.... starting way before you joined here. :cool:

My dogma and beliefs go beyond party loyalty

Goldwater
01-22-2009, 02:10 PM
This is certainly what the Founders meant when they envisioned citizen participation in government. They weren't looking to create a permanent political class of life-long office holders.

It's more to do with people's attitudes when they run or get elected, they become shills concerned only with votes or how they look, this would be true of a lot of conservatives or liberals who reach the office.

Arroyo_Doble
01-22-2009, 02:15 PM
I have to disagree. There are more of us out here than you might suspect.

It is possible but I will continue to believe that leadership in this nation has to naturally gravitate toward the center or it will be marginalized. Coalitions are the only route to successful implementation of an agenda outside of extreme circumstances.

Ringo
01-22-2009, 02:36 PM
It is possible but I will continue to believe that leadership in this nation has to naturally gravitate toward the center or it will be marginalized. Coalitions are the only route to successful implementation of an agenda outside of extreme circumstances.

republicans reject those views.

Gingersnap
01-22-2009, 02:39 PM
What about the libertarian party causes this author to say its a party of "selfishness"? Their stance on social issues? What?

Probably because we aren't much interested in using "compassionate" as some kind of required political adjective.

Goldwater
01-22-2009, 02:43 PM
Probably because we aren't much interested in using "compassionate" as some kind of required political adjective.

I question the author's conservatism then.

PoliCon
01-22-2009, 02:51 PM
It's more to do with people's attitudes when they run or get elected, they become shills concerned only with votes or how they look, this would be true of a lot of conservatives or liberals who reach the office.

Term limits would end that fear.

PoliCon
01-22-2009, 02:51 PM
It is possible but I will continue to believe that leadership in this nation has to naturally gravitate toward the center or it will be marginalized. Coalitions are the only route to successful implementation of an agenda outside of extreme circumstances. Dude - Conservatives ARE the center. :rolleyes: