Republican Party Principles=Doodley Squat

[PatrickHenry]

Quote by: Marilyn Monroe 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?

My view of abortion is that it kills children. When you say a proposal shot down, what Party was the majority in that legislature?

[Marilyn Monroe]

Quote by: PatrickHenry My view of abortion is that it kills children. When you say a proposal shot down, what Party was the majority in that legislature?

In 1992 the Court allowed states to enact restrictions on abortion – including mandatory waiting periods, and parental consent requirements – so long as they do not create an undue burden. Clinton was in office, but wasn't there a majority Republican Congress?

[PatrickHenry]

Maybe the legislature question was irrelevant in that case, since the rules were proceeding from the Supreme Court.

But wouldn't you say that a political party that has a majority in the legislature and posession of the Executive Branch as well as a number of partisan judges in the court system would be able to decide what is in line with their party philosophy and implement it?

Is the Republican Party REALLY anti-abortion, or is it all just rhetoric, seeking votes from the Religious Right?

[Marilyn Monroe]

Quote by: PatrickHenry Maybe the legislature question was irrelevant in that case, since the rules were proceeding from the Supreme Court. But wouldn't you say that a political party that has a majority in the legislature and posession of the Executive Branch as well as a number of partisan judges in the court system would be able to decide what is in line with their party philosophy and implement it? Is the Republican Party REALLY anti-abortion, or is it all just rhetoric, seeking votes from the Religious Right?

It's hard to get things changed once they are in place is all I can figure.

Look at Social Security, Affirmative Action, Medicare, just to name a few. Try and change those, and see what happens.

I think it takes balls to be anti-abortion because it's not the law of the land. To have it in your platform. It's not that popular of an issue to me. Overall most people do believe abortion is necessary is what I think. They may not agree with it, but think it's necessary. I think it is necessary, but I don't care about it too much when I vote.
Abortion hasn't always been considered murder, and really up until the 19 century it wasn't, even the Catholic Popes didn't think it was till later in the pregnancy, when you could "feel" life. One Pope changed that. One of the Piuses. He made all abortion a sin. Go figure. I'd say Protestant's are more liberal on abortion, and Catholic's say one thing and do another is what I always thought. I'm Catholic by the way. Mostly Catholic's are liberal, although that is changing. Look at the NE. Lots of Catholics up there. Lots.

Abortion won't get you elected. It's way down there on the totem pole of votes.

[PatrickHenry]

Quote by: Marilyn Monroe Abortion won't get you elected. It's way down there on the totem pole of votes.

I agree. It's a meaningful issue to me, because I focus on justice, fairness and integrity. I think that a person who had nothing to do with initiating their own life shouldn't be a target for elimination just because the term of pregnancy is inconvenient. I am speaking about a child in the womb. Fetuses are the most powerless individuals in the world. They can't vote, can't speak, can't even cry out when they are killed. You will never see a letter to a legislator from an unborn child.
But being against abortion's not what gets politicians elected to office.

I think they could get some traction with another agenda that would lead into an anti-abortion position.
1. War and Empire are destroying the Old Republic
2. Globalism is wrecking the basis for working people's livelihood.

And finally, 3. The Federal judiciary is subject to the will of the People. They must be apprised that our constitution gives limited powers to the Feds and everything else is assigned to the States and the People.

[Milton Bradley]

A great quote I heard yesterday... ( Don't know the author )


The Republicans gloating about the fact that there have not been any terrorist attacks against the U.S. since 9/11 looks as ridiculous to a Liberal as...


...if the Democrats kept saying to the Neocons "look, we have not been attacked by Cuba since Kennedy's blockade,the plan was a success".

[Cephus]

Quote by: PatrickHenry You will never see a letter to a legislator from an unborn child.

You won't see one from a dog either. What's your point?

[puellamore]

As a lifelong Republican, I'd like to make a few comments, even though I'm late to this thread.

What the Republican party today stands for is far removed from what it did when I joined. It seems to have rejected all or most of what it stood for back then; fiscal responsibility, privacy, individual liberty, prudent international leadership, adherence to principle. When you look at the policies of this administration, they are diametrically opposed.

Of course, the Democrats are no better with their penchant for catering to special interests. They're just different special interests.

I have voted Libertarian in the past, but I have problems with their somewhat selfish attitude that it's every man for himself, with no provision for those who are unable to protect themselves from the strong and/or unethical. So the question of whom to support is always a difficult one for me. Virtually every group has at least one plank in their platform that I strongly oppose. Sometimes I think they all should be taken out and shot.

[PatrickHenry]

Quote by: puellamore As a lifelong Republican...Sometimes I think they all should be taken out and shot.

Hear! Hear!
As a lifelong Democrat(until about 12 years ago), I think the same for that bunch of stinkers.

Where's the guns?

Quote by: Cephus Quote by: PatrickHenry You will never see a letter to a legislator from an unborn child. You won't see one from a dog either. What's your point?

I guess your point is that unborn children have no more value to you than dogs. Mine is that they are voiceless people. Is that so hard to understand?

[brien]

Quote by: puellamore As a lifelong Republican, I'd like to make a few comments, even though I'm late to this thread. I have voted Libertarian in the past, but I have problems with their somewhat selfish attitude that it's every man for himself, with no provision for those who are unable to protect themselves from the strong and/or unethical.

Can you cite me the plank in the Libertarian platform that states this? I guess what I am asking is what principle(s) in the LP leads you to believe this philosophy? Can you give me some examples? Welcome. :)

[Milton Bradley]

Quote by: brien Can you cite me the plank in the Libertarian platform that states this? I guess what I am asking is what principle(s) in the LP leads you to believe this philosophy? Can you give me some examples? Welcome. :)

A lot of people come to the conclusion that if government is not doing it, it won't get done.


It is our fault for not focusing more on bringing attention to the great examples that do exists of the private sector acting in a way that fits within the Libertarian view of the rules. My best example is the Better Business Bureau. A perfect example of the private sector doing what the government cannot, operating in the black while performing a public service for profit.


The BBB operates on the principle that is Libertarian to the very core.

[twoanickel]

Quote by: PatrickHenry GBA, thanks for responding to my challenge. At least one Republican member is willing to engage in dialog about their Party when it is announced in a bluff and derogatory manner by a "libertarian." To clarify, I am not a Libertarian Party member, but I do find common ground with their political program in certain areas. The party I actually prefer is the Constitution Party, but I don't carry a card of theirs either and disagree on certain points of their program as well. But this thread isn't about me and my preferences. It was a rank challenge to justify how "principles" of the Republican Party are applied where the rubber meets the road, to use a cliche. I think that the Republican Party may have had some principles in the days of Dwight Eisenhower, perhaps in the days of Richard Nixon, even some in the term of Ronald Reagan. Each of those Republican presidents had significant failures during their administrations, but the Party may have had adherence to some principles in those bygone times. Is this played out by the huge corporate donations to the campaign of GW Bush by criminal conspiracies like Enron, that defrauded the citizens of California of billions? Then why are there no elected black Republicans in Congress? Why does the Party have trouble attracting Black leaders? I have plenty more ammunition for any courageous Republicans willing to brave the fusillade. Or will you all hunker in your bunkers and hope that mean PatrickHenry will go away?

Good post. It is late in America's day, and it is time conservatives woke up and realized that belonging to a party which claims to be conservative is not enough. That party should also follow conservative principles. The Republican party has had these years in the majority and they have used them to vote with the democrats; and now they think if they spend half a year acting like conservatives we will forget what they have actually done and failed to do in these years. I was warning people that Bush was no conservative before he was elected the first time. I believe we should vote out all the RINOs to assure people that if they want the vote of conservatives they better act the part rather than just blow smoke screens while they go in the opposite direction.

[Keith Hamburger]

Quote by: Milton Bradley A lot of people come to the conclusion that if government is not doing it, it won't get done. It is our fault for not focusing more on bringing attention to the great examples that do exists of the private sector acting in a way that fits within the Libertarian view of the rules. My best example is the Better Business Bureau. A perfect example of the private sector doing what the government cannot, operating in the black while performing a public service for profit. The BBB operates on the principle that is Libertarian to the very core.

Don't forget Underwriters Laboratories. Protecting us from dangerous appliances for around a century, and little to do with government.

Keith

[Milton Bradley]

This morning on C-SPAN, we saw a great segment addressing the Repuclicans stalling the debate about future Iraq policy, and it's funding.


We saw Ron Paul ( R-Texas ) addressing the House, and saying "We are told that we are fighting in Iraq to keep from having to fight them here, but nevermind the fact that they ( the Terrorists ) are here, because we are over there."



He also pointed out that the Republicans always switching the topic when they attempt to talk about Iraq, and only wanting to discuss "terroism" in the broader context.


Then, the show stopper ( as far as I was concerned ) when Neil Abercrombie ( D Hi ), addressing the Republican stall tactic, stated that "we ( Congress ) are only trying to do what the Bush asked Clinton to do in 1999", and started quoting newspaper articles from 1999, where our Dear Leader is quoted twice, from different sources, at different times as saying "I think it's important for the President ( Bill Clinton ) to articulate his exit strategy for Iraq to the American people, and to set a date for departure".


I guess old George is just using the Democrats own tactics ( the ones they constantly condemned ) against them in the name of bipartisan politics.

[Short Round]

The Republicans will win again because the Dems have no platform of real reform they can explain to the people that will be of any real difference from the Repubs. We need some Libertains and Consitutional Party candidates in there to make real change. /won't happen

[Mr. Jaggers]

A true conservative is for limited government: “That government is best that governs least.” Under the Neoconservatives, there has been the greatest increase in the size of the federal government and expansion of its regulatory power in the history of the nation.

A true conservative is in favor of state rights and against the intrusion of the federal government into individual and private affairs. Contrary to this, the Neoconservatives are the first to go running to the federal courts the minute things don’t go their way; and it is they who have enacted legislation in the name of patriotism that represents the most invasive and pervasive intrusion upon our civil rights and individual liberties.

A true conservative is for a strong national defense as the first order of the federal government. The Neoconservatives, however, have actually proposed the most drastic reduction of the nation’s armed forces and dismantling of our military bases and installations since the end of the last world war, while wasting tax revenues on phony defense contracts. Indeed, their motto is: Military appropriations are spendable, military personnel are expendable.

A true conservative is for a balanced budget. Under the Neoconservatives, we have gone from surpluses to the largest deficits in our history. The greatest thing that America leads the world in now is the amount of the national debt. It will not be long before control of our national economy will be held by China.

A true conservative is for religious freedom as guaranteed by the Constitution under the Bill of Rights. The Neoconservatives, however, would turn the Constitution upside down and substitute religious dogma for our government of laws. “Jesus is Lord!” they shout. But whose religion will prevail, as history has shown, can only be determined by religious wars, followed by religious persecution. Our founding fathers, whose names the Neoconservatives now take in vain, sought to insure religious freedom through the separation of church and state.

A true conservative is against engaging in foreign entanglements. Our citizens should not be sacrificed on foreign shores but in defense of the nation from attack by our enemies. Nor do the arguments for globalization require that America be engaged in foreign wars. Yet the Neoconservatives have done just that. Worse, they are preemptive wars; wars that are being waged for the sake of private and not the national interests.

A true conservative would “conserve” our natural resources for all the people. The Neoconservative would “reform” conservation to mean exploitation of the nation’s resources for private business interests. Under the stewardship of the Neoconservatives, much of the great wealth of the nation has been squandered.

The Neoconservatives are not conservatives at all - they are exactly the opposite. They share none of the traditional conservative values they purport to represent, and practice none of its principles. They are, in truth, subversives who want to undermine the Constitution and destroy our democratic institutions. They try to hide behind morals and values they do not share. They have nothing to offer but vicious selfishness, rapacious greed and callous meanspiritedness.

[Milton Bradley]

Republicans, and their Contract on America seem to be falling into disfavor with an ever increasing number of apathetic people who just might turn out to vote against Republicans, if not to vote for something.


I guess you reap what you sew.

[PatrickHenry]

Larry Craig, (R-Idaho) US Senator, thinks its ok for small town folks to dring arsenic...

Just months after a new standard took effect to limit levels of arsenic in drinking water, Sen. Larry E. Craig (R-Idaho) will introduce a measure today to suspend enforcement of the rule for small water systems, including more than 100 in California. Craig spokesman Dan Whiting said a moratorium on civil penalties was needed to ease the financial burden on water systems that serve 10,000 customers or less. "These are extremely small communities who just don't have the resources," Whiting said. "This will make sure small districts don't get hammered."

http://www.latimes.com/news/nationwo...,7442689.story

Yeah, I wouldn't pay more than ...oh , say...$200 per person in my family to make sure we weren't drinking arsenic... :rolleyes:

[Milton Bradley]

This morning on Fox News, I heard Mitt Romney (R) opining at Fox's 10th birthday celebration, and he perfectly articulated what I think is the Republicans true position on civil liberties.

Quote by: Mitt Romney If it were up to me, I would allocate even more funds for domestic security, because we need to protect our number one civil liberty, the right to stay alive.

Nevermind liberty, or justice, or free speech, we need to be able to "stay alive" amidst all of the enemies my parties foreign policy creates.


Another salesman for the Police State.


( off topic )


Now I think I understand Fox News a little better. They are just acting like any other ten year old.

[Georgia]

Republican Party Principles=Doodley Squat

I'm not a Republican because for many of them principles=Doodley Squat. However my own representative Charlie Norwood (R - GA) does represent my views and I urge him on many occasions to get his party together.

I'm far from Democrat as the only principle they have is to obstruct and attack and oppose all efforts to defend ourselves against those who would kill us..

I'm more Libertarian than anything else. If what you're doing isn't violating anyone else's right to life, liberty or property then we should be free to pursue our happiness in it.