Republican Party Principles=Doodley Squat

[Osborn F Enready]

Points taken Mr Henry.

I will concede, but only if it would effect the cause we mutually seek.

[PatrickHenry]

Well, I finally found a group of GOPers who have some principles. Their preferred candidates don't seem to get nominated though. http://www.gopwing.com/beliefs.php

I wonder how many national Republican politicians would swear to these principles: http://www.gopwing.com/principles.php

[samsara15]

I hate Republicans, but are Democrats any better? Am I any better? Liberals? Conservatives? Aren't we all a pretty sorry lot? That's what makes me a moral relativist. Which is also a poor choice. Whatever way we turn, or path we choose, human beings err.

[shield772]

Families have been the foundation of our national strength. If we are to endure as a free nation, the traditional family unit must be preserved and encouraged to thrive.

Have some problems with that one

Only men, not women, will serve in combat. Women shall not be drafted into the armed forces.

don't like this one

otherwise I like it and it reflects my beliefs

[US Independent]

Republican principles equal independence. I actually like having the government not take care of me. But democrats think that they have the right to stuff old fogge welfare aka Social Security down our throats. I am planning to take care of my own retirement so that when I am old I won't have to rely on other people to take of my problems. Republicans want to reduce government programs and reduce taxes at the same time. This means that Americans will have to provide for themselves. Again I like it. Welfare can be provided to the people that don't meet the challenge. Republicans protect the morals that America was founded on. They oppose killing infants and harvesting stem cells from infants so that people with genetic diseases can live in comfort. It is sick and it is wrong. Democrats call the Republican's awareness of values a weakness, I call it a virtue. But see their it is where partisan politics split. Maybe one day Americans will be able to see it that way too.

[PatrickHenry]

Democrats don't mean squat in THIS debate, US Independent. You don't sound very independent, more like a mud slinging Republican.

But can you show evidence that your views on Republican values are anything more than a fantasy? I mean how have these so-called "values" influenced their legislation, Presidential directives and enforcement, their courtroom decisions?

[US Independent]

Obviously abortion is one principle that means a great deal. Republicans have always opposed it. The supreme court has been reduced to one issue: that is abortion. You may think that this principle=doodly squat, however to many god fearing christians this is one principle they respect. They know it is wrong and they are grateful that republicans oppose it.

The republican principle of INDEPENDENCE, is one that influences their legislation. They oppose higher taxes and more government programs because it makes US citizens dependent on the government. That is one of the reasons I call myself "independent", just because I vote for what I believe is right does not make me a Republican or a Democrat, I do not try to remain neutral between the two parties, I side with what fits me.

[fushigi]

Quote by: US Independent Obviously abortion is one principle that means a great deal. Republicans have always opposed it. The supreme court has been reduced to one issue: that is abortion. You may think that this principle=doodly squat, however to many god fearing christians this is one principle they respect. They know it is wrong and they are grateful that republicans oppose it. The republican principle of INDEPENDENCE, is one that influences their legislation. They oppose higher taxes and more government programs because it makes US citizens dependent on the government. That is one of the reasons I call myself "independent", just because I vote for what I believe is right does not make me a Republican or a Democrat, I do not try to remain neutral between the two parties, I side with what fits me.

Hmm, I detect a self-contradiction. You think people should be independent, but you also think the government should get involved over a woman's choice to abort her fetus?

I'm not saying I support abortion, I don't under current circumstances. But once abortion is illegal, it will require much more government control and legislation to prevent women from having abortions than it does now to allow them to.

[PatrickHenry]

Quote by: US Independent Obviously abortion is one principle that means a great deal. Republicans have always opposed it. The supreme court has been reduced to one issue: that is abortion. You may think that this principle=doodly squat, however to many god fearing christians this is one principle they respect. They know it is wrong and they are grateful that republicans oppose it.

How has this principle played itself out in the past half-decade of Republican control of both the Congress and the Whitehouse? Has there been a reversal of the abortion phenomenon? Has the President said he would not enforce Roe v Wade? Has congress declared that a baby in the womb may not be killed? Show me how Republican "principles" are implemented.

[US Independent]

Republicans try, democrats resist. That is why it is not reversed. There are still enough democrats to support abortion. If Republicans could they would. Another reason why conservatives and republicans support Samuel Alito.

[PatrickHenry]

Quote by: US Independent Republicans try, democrats resist. That is why it is not reversed. There are still enough democrats to support abortion. If Republicans could they would. Another reason why conservatives and republicans support Samuel Alito.

Your username is deceptive, US Independent. I have penetrated your camouflage. You are nothing but a Republican who denies your party affiliation with a fake username. That's OK. I need somebody to debate...

And you are likely correct in so far as your assessment of Republican politicians on a statistical basis. On the other hand, do you deny that there are pro-abortion GOP politicians? Or that there are significant numbers of pro-life Democrats? And how does this "principle" preserve the lives of fetuses in America?

Here's an interesting look at the two party politics of abortion:
http://www.tikkun.org/magazine/tik05...-22.8728576767

Instead of the full range of highly effective strategies the Democrats can offer for reducing abortions, Republicans pretty much have one strategy of questionable effectiveness: make it illegal. The only other strategy they have proposed is one with no effectiveness at all: a program that recommends people not have sex outside of marriage. You can snicker at how comically unrealistic that is, but I applaud their idealism. I honestly do. Because the truth is, the very best antidote to abortion isn’t contraception, it’s responsibility. If we didn’t have sex outside the context of emotionally committed, stable relationships, abortion wouldn’t be an issue. The problem with the idealism of the Republican plan is that they have no plan B. Their theory is that if you have high expectations, and provide no fallback, people will rise to the occasion. How effective has that strategy proven? A review of ten state evaluations has shown that federally funded abstinence-only programs have little impact. Sex education programs promoting abstinence-only until marriage, which teach teens only to “say no,” produced no long-term success in reducing sexual risk-taking behaviors or delaying sexual initiation. An independent analysis of recent federal data also showed little reduction in sexual risk-taking behavior among teens nationwide since the federal abstinence-only initiative began. Belgium, a country where abortion is legal, has achieved the lowest abortion rate in the world, with sex education that recommends abstinence but stresses responsibility and teaches teens how to use contraception. Unlike the Republicans, Belgians have a plan B. In June 2001, former Surgeon General David Satcher released “Call to Action to Promote Sexual Health and Responsible Sexual Behavior.” The publication underscored findings about the effectiveness of comprehensive sexuality education programs that provide information about both abstinence and contraception. Evidence shows that these comprehensive programs can help delay the onset of sexual activity in teenagers, reduce their number of sexual partners, and increase contraceptive use when they become sexually active. The religious Right seems to have forgotten that their God created sex and won’t be embarrassed by an honest discussion of it. Only progressives can advocate for the kind of sex education that actually works. We can advocate for sex education that strongly encourages self-respect, abstinence, and preparation for a mature, committed relationship, but also emphasizes the need for responsibility and knowledge of contraception on the part of young people who don’t practice the abstinence recommended. Abstinence-only sex education is pretty much the only Republican strategy for decreasing the abortion rate besides making abortion illegal. It is possible that legal restrictions would help lower the abortion rate in America. But the statistical evidence on abortion worldwide suggests that whether abortion is legal or illegal has little effect on the incidence of abortion. The abortion rate is very high in Eastern Europe and low in Western Europe, though it is broadly legal in both areas. Abortion numbers are far lower in Western Europe where the procedure is legal than they are in Latin America where it is highly restricted.

[PatrickHenry]

The Abramoff scandal is like a depth charge to the Republican Party pukes.
http://www.truthout.org/docs_2006/010906M.shtml

much of the $32 million that the Coushattas paid Abramoff and Scanlon over two years went not toward increasing the tribe's influence but toward lining the two partners pockets. Nearly $11.5 million in secret kickbacks was funneled by Scanlon back to Abramoff, according to court papers filed last week, as the man who was once one of Washington's highest-paid lobbyists pleaded guilty to fraud, tax evasion and a conspiracy to bribe public officials. Abramoff's plea agreement admits to expansive schemes to defraud not just the Coushattas but also three other tribes and the lobbying firm Abramoff worked for, and it acknowledges buying off public officials, in part by laundering his clients' funds through legitimate-sounding think tanks and public-policy groups, some of which Abramoff and Scanlon themselves set up.

[PatrickHenry]

Maybe you Republicans have a new flag carrier.
From last year....
http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/ar...TICLE_ID=44376

A porn star who unsuccessfully ran for California governor will be among the guests who will dine with President Bush at an upcoming fund-raiser. According to Counterpunch, the National Republican Congressional Committee is hosting a dinner June 14, and among those in attendance will be the buxom Mary Carey, and her boss, Mark Kulkis. <snip> The inclusion of porn-industry representatives at a Republican event is shocking many Bush supporters. "The Republican Party has been hijacked," said a caller on Joseph Farah's WorldNetDaily Radioactive program. "[Bush] is Clinton all over again! Only he doesn't have someone under his desk." "I'm honored to be invited to this event," said Kulkis, who heads Kick A-- Pictures. "Republicans bill themselves as the pro-business party. Well, you won't find a group of people more pro-business than pornographers. We contributed over $10 billion to the national economy last year." Kulkis is currently an honorary chairman on the NRCC's Business Advisory Council, a roundtable of millionaire business entrepreneurs who advocate a robust "pro-business agenda."

She's having dinner with Bush again.
http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/ar...TICLE_ID=49238

Well, I guess the MSM doesn't really wanna make too much of these sexy stories. They have their hands full with the other crap the Republicans are up to.

[Osborn F Enready]

Well, all I can do is chuckle.

This is what America gets for being COMPLACENT with a 156 year and still running bi-partisan monopoly. No representation, since big business foots more of the bill than the people, at least on the lobbying side, oh, and in the area of political debates.... oh, also in the TAX PAYER FUNDED donations for Presidential campaigns...oh, and...... etc.

Having faith in this system anymore, is comparable to hooking the wagon with all your worldly possessions, including your loved ones, to a horse that is blind, deaf, has no sense of smell, and no reigns for control as you trust it to lead you down the narrow paths of the Grand Canyon........ in other words..... absolutely insane.

A few apprapoh quotes?

“America is at that awkward stage; it's too late to work within the system, but too early to shoot the bastards.”
-Claire Wolfe, 1995-Nov

“To ignore the evidence, and hope that it cannot be true, is more an evidence of mental illness.”
-William Blase

“Logical consequences are the scarecrows of fools and the beacons of wise men.”
-Thomas Henry Huxley (1825 - 1895)

“You know, a long time ago being crazy meant something. Nowadays everybody's crazy.”
-Charles Manson, leader of a murderous cult of entirely unskeptical followers

“Americans are now certifiably insane. They are crazy. They are suffering a mass psychosis. They have lost their own ability to discern right from wrong.”
-Joseph Farah. editor of WorldNetDaily, 1999-Apr-12

“This country is a one-party country. Half of it is called Republican and half is called Democrat. It doesn't make any difference. All the really good ideas belong to the Libertarians.”
-Hugh Downs, 1997

[Marilyn Monroe]

Quote by: US Independent Republicans try, democrats resist. That is why it is not reversed. There are still enough democrats to support abortion. If Republicans could they would. Another reason why conservatives and republicans support Samuel Alito.

Ban on partial birth abortions since Nov. 3, 2003.

[Milton Bradley]

Quote from another thread.

Quote by: Seeker_Of_Sins After the Ball: How America Will Conquer Its Fear of Gays in the 90s", is the book that instructed gays how to wage and win the propaganda war. Witty, brilliant in its perceptions, it was a blueprint of genius. The authors, Marshall Kirk and Hunter Marshall are New York-based gay activists and at the top in their professional field of public relations. They started from the situation in the late 1980s, where active homosexuals were identified with a number of negative public images: strange sexual practices, transmitters and carriers of HIV, dangers to public health and so on. Kirk and Marshall argued that the key to gaining mainstream heterosexual sympathy and acceptance was for gays to portray themselves as "victims". Those who opposed the movement were to be demonised as: "bigots, homophobic (fear of homosexuals), hate-filled", to such an extent that other people would be intimidated into silence. The authors insisted that such ruthless pragmatism was necessary and justifiable, because most heterosexual opposition is motivated by hatred.

Now I think I know where the Republicans got many of their debating tactics.


Suddenly, it all seems so very clear. :rolleyes:

[Marilyn Monroe]

Quote by: PatrickHenry Your username is deceptive, US Independent. I have penetrated your camouflage. You are nothing but a Republican who denies your party affiliation with a fake username. That's OK. I need somebody to debate... And you are likely correct in so far as your assessment of Republican politicians on a statistical basis. On the other hand, do you deny that there are pro-abortion GOP politicians? Or that there are significant numbers of pro-life Democrats? And how does this "principle" preserve the lives of fetuses in America? Here's an interesting look at the two party politics of abortion: http://www.tikkun.org/magazine/tik05...-22.8728576767

I never thought US Independent was an Independant party affiliate, just a user name. Why does this matter one way or another? He's a debater, and debaters can have a wide spectrum of ideas.

Belgium requires counseling, and has a six day waiting period afterward, so a woman can consider her decision. This sounds discriminatory to me. I mean the US wouldn't go for that. Belgium also started trying in 1971 to liberalize their laws concerning abortion, and it wasn't till 1995 that the were able to get it thru. The US started way before that. Early 70's I believe. Vietnam has a very liberal abortion law, and their abortion rate is high. Eastern Europe has a high abortion rate opposed to Western Europe's low. This could mean they have less women of child-bearing age cause Europe is getting old from what I've read.

I don't care to compare the US to other countries. We are different, we are unique, as they are, and what we do is what is best for us.

[PatrickHenry]

Quote by: Marilyn Monroe I don't care to compare the US to other countries. We are different, we are unique, as they are, and what we do is what is best for us.

No changes necessary, huh, Marilyn? Everything is hunky-dory...

[brien]

Quote by: Prometheus If you guessed his affiliation based on a name, I am truely impressed. Although reading just a few posts of his would tell you too. Being a libertarian myself, I may offer an explination as to why libertarians like historical patriots other than uncreativeness. Libertarians want big sweeping changes. Changes on the magnitude that have not occured since the formation of this country. The only people to look to who caused changes this big are historical patriots, or people from the more recent communist revolutions (Che, Lennin etc.). When you understand how libertarian motives fit into history, it becomes evident why they look to the poast for role models. Libertarians have trouble relating to both of the major parties. Even though we embrace views from boths sides, we hold also hold views that deeply offend both parties (welfare abolition and drug legalization for example). Of course on top of this we have the problem that a lot of libertarians are do damn dogmatic that they cannot compromise. It's thier way or the highway. This really hurts inter-party relations. Another problem we have is than many libertarians are just libertarians to get attention. They like telling someone about a libertarian belief that shocks them, just so they can get in someones face with an argument. I call this the libertarian macho flash. This type of bahavior is also very damaging to inter-party relations. However, libertarians tend to get along better with liberals becasue they are generally more tolerant and open minded. Of course the other problem with the parties relating to eachother is the straw man argument that the 2 major parties perpertrate on the libertarians. You just did it. You called us anarchists. You people are so wrapped up in big government, that any downsizing get's met with accusations of anarchy. Letting people screw and ingest what they want (if they are volntary adults) is not anarchy. It's just freedom. Making murder and theft legal would be anarchy. Having no army would be anarchy. Allowing more civil liberties and doing away with government handouts is not anarchy. Let's do away with the "anarchist" word. Accusations like that are just as damaging as what libertarians do to themselves. As far as criticizing Rep principals goes, I think it's intellectually dishonest to call the reps any worse then the dems. Power corrupts. It's almost a truism. You can't get away from it, If libertarians were in power, they would have corruption too. I like to think there would be less, because libertarians are generally very principaled, but it would definitely be there. Singling out one party as more corrupt and hypocritical is just silly.

Prometheus: Good post! I would like to point out one addition. IMO, a Libertarian government would be less corrupt because we believe in much less government in size. The smaller the pie, the less to go rotten.

[Marilyn Monroe]

Quote by: PatrickHenry No changes necessary, huh, Marilyn? Everything is hunky-dory...

Did you read what I wrote about Belgium? Looks like they have a totally different version of abortion than we do. How can theirs be better? They have less abortion, but they have counseling, and a 6 day waiting period to think it over. That has been proposed in the States and was shot down. The Reps also supported an end to partial-birth abortion which from what I've read is dangerous to the mother as well. Is it abortion at all costs, or do we need to have some sanity with it?