Newt, Sarah and a New GOP
"Sometimes party loyalty asks too much," said JFK.
For Sarah Palin, party loyalty in New York's 23rd congressional district asks too much. Going rogue, Palin endorsed Conservative Party candidate Doug Hoffman over Republican Dede Scozzafava.
On Oct. 1, Scozzafava was leading. Today, she trails Democrat Bill Owens and is only a few points ahead of Hoffman, as Empire State conservatives defect to vote their principles, not their party.
Newt Gingrich stayed on the reservation, endorsing Scozzafava, who is pro-choice and pro-gay rights, and hauls water for the unions.
Scourged by the right, Newt accused conservatives of going over the hill in the battle to save the republic, just to get a buzz on. "If we are in the business about feeling good about ourselves while our country gets crushed, then I probably made the wrong decision." How Scozzafava would prevent America's being "crushed" was unexplained.
The 23rd recalls a famous Senate race 40 years ago. Rep. Charles Goodell was picked by Gov. Nelson Rockefeller to fill the seat of Robert Kennedy in 1968. To hold onto it, Goodell swerved sharp left, emerging as an upstate Xerox copy of Jacob Javits, the most liberal Republican in the Senate.
In 1970, Goodell got both the GOP and Liberal Party nominations, and faced liberal Democrat Richard Ottinger. This left a huge vacuum into which Conservative Party candidate James Buckley, brother of William F., smartly moved.
Assessing the field, the Nixon White House concluded that, with liberals split, Goodell could not win. But Buckley might. Signals were flashed north that loyalty to the president was not inconsistent with voting for Buckley. To send the signal in the clear, Vice President Agnew described Charlie Goodell to a New Orleans newspaper as "the Christine Jorgensen of the Republican Party."
The former George Jorgensen, Christine had undergone the most radical sex-change operation in recorded history.
Liberals went berserk, calling on New Yorkers to rally to Goodell, who began surging, at Ottinger's expense. Buckley scooted between them both to win. Hoffman may also. But even if he does not, Palin, a conservative of the heart, did the right thing.
And the GOP has been sent a necessary message.
For, according to Gallup, 40 percent of Americans now identify as conservatives—only 20 percent as Republicans. If the GOP is not the conservative party, it will never be America's Party.
But what does "conservative" mean in 2009? And where do conservatives come down on the great issues? For what the right is against—any repeal of the Bush tax cuts, the $787 billion stimulus, Obamacare—is much clearer than what the right stands for.
In 2010, this may not matter, as the Obamakins rule the roost and will be held accountable, and Republicans can unite around what they oppose. Year 2012, however, is problematic.
Then the party must declare itself. And the reality is that the GOP remains a house divided.
What, for example, is the conservative view of the war in Iraq and the Bush economic policies that cost the party both Houses of Congress in 2006 and the White House in 2008?
Why did President Bush leave with 27 percent approval? Did Bush policies the GOP once applauded have anything to do with it?
Was Bush free trade responsible for the decline of the dollar and the loss of one in four manufacturing jobs? Is globalization still good for America and NAFTA the deal of the century?
What is the conservative position on reaching out to Russia, as Barack Obama has done, on bringing Georgia and Ukraine into NATO, and on canceling that anti-missile system Bush planned in Poland?
"We're all Georgians now!" John McCain declared. Are we?
What is the party position on a "long war" in Afghanistan?
For if America has soured on the war and opposes more troops today, will America be enthusiastic about soldiering on in 2012, after 1,000 or 2,000 more American dead have been shipped home?
Do Republicans support negotiating with Tehran, or cutting off gasoline and starting up the escalator to air strikes on Iran's nuclear facilities that are today under U.N. inspection?
Will the GOP propose to stimulate the economy with tax cuts after four straight trillion-dollar deficits? Will the Bush line, "They'll pay for themselves," still be credible after Bush's deficits?
If the largest federal outlays are for Medicare, Medicaid, Social Security, defense and interest on the debt, followed by education, housing, homeland security and transportation, where would the GOP use the knife to balance the budget?
According to Gallup, America is moving closer to the Republican position on regulations, abortion, guns and union power. But half of all Americans now favor cuts in legal immigration. Are Republicans willing to call for a moratorium on immigration to tighten the labor market and force wages up? Or does the Chamber of Commerce still call the tune?
Ronald Reagan arrived with new ideas that fit the needs of his time. Where are the Republican ideas that fit the needs of this time?
COPYRIGHT 2009 CREATORS.COM
Entries(RSS)
I agree with Pat that conservatives in this country have no representation. But I also believe that it will NEVER happen through the Republican Party. They are at the core of the problem.
"Why did President Bush leave with 27 percent approval? "
That's likely a result of cleverly structured polls in which the wrong questions were asked. W's approval rating was probably closer to 4%. The media carried water for him for 8 years while pretending to lambaste him on non-issues. He and his puppet master, Cheney, are unindicted war criminals and traitors who should be on trial right now.
If one wants to discern the true nature of the GOP, it's only necessary to look at John McCain, Lindsey Graham, and the rest of the current crop of baby killers, gungrabbers, and foreign invasion surrender monkeys who make up the great majority of party anointed republicans.
The few non-socialist GOP incumbents and candidates stick out like a white bean in a black cat's butt when one views the whole sorry lineup of GOP officeholders.
The party of Massa Abe can't die off soon enough to suit me.
The problem with reliance on the GOP as a vehicle for the advancement of conservative or Traditionalist ideas is that the GOP is already controlled by the great-corporate interests. Provincial and national-level candidates have to pass muster with larger-business contributors in order to get enough funds to become viable. The party elites may use religious/traditionalist voters as lower-level field workers---and even local-level candidates---but NEVER as high-level candidates.
Solving this problem is less one of "capturing the party organization" than of changing the ballot-access laws. From what I am given to understand, ALL provincial laws in this area are skewed to favor the Republican-Democratic duopoly. Change those laws to allow real, actual second parties to emerge, and you may actually see substantive changes in US politics. (For whatever that may be actually worth.)
But don't hold your breath waiting.
Unfortunately, Doug Hoffman is no Buchanan. He's closer to the Sean Hannity wing of the Stupid Party.
Unfortunately the chances are slim to none of a grey mare coming out of the wilderness who will call for:
1. Scaling back international entanglements and keeping the world safe for "democracy."
2. Controlling illegal immigration, let alone restricting the legal kind.
3. Ending corporate welfare and moving toward a balanced budget.
4. Halting the growth of federal control, let alone cutting it back.
5. Ending affirmative action.
Republican party MUST BE DESTROYED!
That is the beginning of all wisdom for every conservative, patriot, and lover of liberty.
#6 Republican party MUST BE DESTROYED
"GOD WILLS IT !!!"
"Ronald Reagan arrived with new ideas that fit the needs of his time."
Such as? IMHO, we're living the legacy of RR, the most self-centered, mendacious con artist who ever fleeced anybody anywhere. As long as the GOP remains the party of Reagan, I'm with Dr. Wilson.
I will never understand why Pat remains so loyal to a party that did nothing but drag his name in the mud.
Pat asks: "Ronald Reagan arrived with new ideas that fit the needs of his time. Where are the Republican ideas that fit the needs of this time?"
But he doesn't give the answer: Ron Paul, Rand Paul, and the Paulians. Restore the Constitution. Bring the troops home -- all of them. Bring back states' rights, including the right to independence for any state. End the income tax. Repeal the TRAITORS' Act (a/k/a "PATRIOT" Act), torture, etc.
May the Republican Party die a miserable death, and may it's progressivist, millenialist, interventionist, reconstructionist, big corporate plutocrat soul rot in hell.
It's hard to imagine a worse bunch of cowardly buffoons than the Republicans, curtsying like old women at a cotillion instead of defending this nation like men from the cataclysm at hand. I'm thinking of de-registering as a Republican in protest, but the alternatives are meaningless.
Bush set up the loss of the White House, but it was the egomanical McCain who fathered the Obamanation, not the left. McCain's curtsying before the left reminds me of Jefferson's jibe about Hamilton's putative bravery after he saw him riding by on a horse, saying in so many words that no hero could lose so much of his manhood. The way the Republicans are headed, they'll probably nominate Lindsey Graham and Olympia Snowe next time around.
Dan @13:
You're seeing the light, Dan my man! Don't just THINK of leaving the GOP, do it! Free yourself! Pat Buchanan has disappointed us all these years by noticing how corrupt the GOP establishment is, yet sticking to them out of loyalty. As though he owes them for all they've given him. Don't be another Buchanan in that regard. I broke free just in time for the 2006 elections which sent the Republicans to the congressional minority. Join us!
"The way the Republicans are headed, they’ll probably nominate Lindsey Graham and Olympia Snowe next time around."
Yes,they still like to use the South for cannon fodder when they can. My guess is Palin, Gingrich, Graham, Bush, Romney. It doesn't matter. It will be interesting to watch how they exclude Ron Paul from the debates -- will they simply pull a rule committee vote as they did with Pat Buchanan (nobody polling less than 15% ) simply break his legs with calumny or put him in concrete boots because of his age. The REPUBLICAN PARTY NEEDS DESTROYED but in the mean time, they are doing a wonderful job flirting with suicide.
I am guessing that Dr. Wilson and other posters will not be cheering when Bob McDonnell trounces Creigh Deeds next Tuesday in what Governor Kaine calls "the New Dominion"- Virginia. Indeed, McDonnell isn't much. The only joy I'll get next week when the election tallies come in is that Barack Obama and his minions will be feeling low.
Derek,
Please don't mistake my death wish for the Republican party as support for the Democratic party. One is just as vile as the other except if we can isolate the wolf under his natural disguise of sheep-skin it will be much better for all of us than attempting to identify him under his unnatural disguise of shepherd-skin. With just one party, we could at least have a conservative side or minority within that party. We could chip away at the behemoth like men of old, who would tunnel under or ladder over the walled city. As it is, the enemy posing as our ally from within the walls, is doing us the most damage.
Prof. Wilson:
I've been reading your writings for nearly 20 years. I've always enjoyed and learned from them. I believe I am further to the Right than you (or anyone else at Chronicles, excepting the late Sam Francis). My hatred for GOP treason and cowardice is boundless.
But - what can we realistically do? What is the alternative? Some advocate a kind of neo-'retreat to the catacombs', to which I can only respond, "Please." Voting does indeed matter. What Obama is doing to the medical sector will indeed have major and deleterious consequences, and while I wrote in Ron Paul to protest the ogre McAmnesty (R-AZ), I am certain that under McCain, we would not be having this healthcare debate, we would not have Justice Sotomayor, nor a "gay hate crimes" bill, nor many other coming outrages. This is just a fact.
It is simple to say the GOP is evil and must be destroyed. But I have worked in political campaign consultant positions, and know that doing anything politically is never easy. And 'abjuring the realm' is mere idle fantasy. Someone will rule, and if decent people don't participate, even if by having to choose the lesser of the evils, then they will get the greater evil.
We live under a rigged, duopolistic regime, That, too, is a fact. We do need to capture the GOP; there is no other credible alternative for resisting continuing American decline. And that decline does really matter - in wealth confiscation, public safety, racial persecution for whites, cultural persecution for Christians, loss of historical memory and peoplehood.
We have to fight, and we should do so on the basis Sam Francis advocated for several decades: Middle American nationalism, which, incidentally, will, over the coming decades, 'morph' into white racial nationalism (as I think Sam recognized). Our race and civilization, not to mention nation and way of life, are passing through the historical meat grinder, and will not endure, absent a militant, confrontational, 'primal' reaction. "Do not go gently into the good night." Indeed, sir!
#18. Capturing the GOP by conservatives (not recapturing because it will be the first time)sounds like a plausible strategy. But is not possible as long as money talks.
"The media carried water for him for 8 years while pretending to lambaste him on non-issues"
This cannot be emphasized enough. The demonization of the "liberal media" by the Fox News Right is so absurd as to be ridiculous. Mind you, that's not to say the charge itself - that the media is largely left-wing - is ridiculous. Of course it is. But so is the GOP, and no president ever had his water carried so readily and with such enthusiasm as did George W. Bush. The MSM acted as a virtual megaphone for Bush admin propaganda, and dutifully and uncritically amplified its lies so utterly as to defy caricature. A check on power? Please. The MSM is owned by the same corporations that own congress, and only lamely offered substantial criticism long after the fix was in and the game was over.
I have a question. Weren't Sarah Palin and Newt Gingrich buddies in 2008? I ask this because I am wondering if the whole Palin Schtick is nothing more than to divide and conquer what is left of conservative America.
Didn't she call Newt and Guliani after she resigned? Especially since she supposedly a conservative and those two are true blue neocons. I just think the whole thing is a divide and conquer scenario. You have the folks that have "woken up" to the fact that the GOP is a leftist organization and the other who still think the GOP is the only vehicle to further the conservative agenda. Palin and Newt play each factioin off the other. Classic maneuver.
#19. "the most self-centered, mendacious con artist who ever fleeced anybody anywhere" the self-serving idocy of statements of this kind is why Paleos have a difficult time being trusted in general and have a hard time getting policy assignments by any US president. Contrarianism for contrarianism's sake perhaps seems clever to some but is really infantile and useless most of the time. Reagan was the best president in our lifetime and one of the best we ever had and accepting this fact will not diminish anybody's Paleo credentials.
Bob McDonnell may be the most recent example on why conservatives can not trust the Republicans to run the government in a conservative direction. During the campaign, it came to light that McDonnell had written a master's thesis two decades ago that condemned daycare, the two wage-earner family and easy divorce, not exactly profound criticisms of America's degraded family culture. Rather than defend his analysis, McDonnell turned his back on his old self and disavowed it. Moreover, he boasted of his military daughter as proof that he, too, was a feminist, truly a modern man in all ways.
McDonnell's big campaign promise was to build new roads in the ugly, no longer Virginian, sprawl-hell that is Northern Virginia. For those not familiar, Northern Virginia, the ancient home to Washington and Lee, is now mile upon mile of roads, malls, shopping centers, corporate office buildings, chain restaurants, McMansions and the occasional Megachurch. Its high temple is Tyson's Corner. It is a land destroyed by wealthy developers who eagerly play each party against each other for campaign contributions and endorsements. If McDonnell was truly a conservative, he would have advocated a moratorium on development and the building of no new roads and let the fools who choose to live in Northern Virginia to simmer in that stew of expensive automobiles and concrete. But McDonnell is a Republican and not a conservative.
Jack, "Mr. Republican", Bailey states: "is why Paleos have a difficult time being trusted in general and have a hard time getting policy assignments by any US president"
Silly me. I thought it was the same reasons as why Mel Bradford was denied the Chair for the National Endowment for the Humanities by the Reagan Neocon adminstration. I saw it as real conservatives being tossed aside and discarded with the justification: Either toe the party line or else. I guess I'm just to simple to see it as: We must all come together and do as ordered by our left-wing, Neocon betters.
MAP writes: "I saw it as real conservatives being tossed aside and discarded with the justification: Either toe the party line or else."
Me too. One cure for what ails Mr. Bailey is for him to get out of college write down four or five conservative principles he would like to see the Republican Party embrace and then dedicate himself to that cause within that party for the next four or five years. Send us a before and after photo,a before and after prescription account, his honest convictions before about what can be done, and then his honest story about what was actually accomplished. In other words, rather than argue with those of us who have been there and done that with the Stupid Party, just get in there and get after it --- wear yourself out like so conservatives did with Reagan, like Pat Buchanan has since his early twenties and too many of us have in the last thirty years. Then go read some bum, like David Frum and his articles published as the "lead stories" for the "leading conservative journalistic rag ever to be run by kids" and then come back to us as a more sober and honest conservative.
I have no particular love for the GOP (see my comment @18). But those spewing shotgun vitriol at the Republicans, and now at Mr. Bailey, naturally fail to engage the simple points I made above. Carping is easy, but what is your alternative? The Democrats?! They are perpetually worthless, more left wing than ever in their history - and now permanently so, due to demographic shifts. A third party? At the Presidential level, I have NEVER NOT voted third party (unless a write-in, for Ron Paul, doesn't count as a 3rd), although I did so only because I live in CA, and each time the winner of my state was a foregone conclusion long before election day.
I would love to see a viable paleo-third party arise. Such would drive me back into the political campaign business. But we had an opportunity in 2000 with Pat (whom I voted for; did YOU?), and how did that go? Granted, he faced innumerable problems, both wrt ballot access, and even his personal health. Still, he received far fewer than half a million votes. Sure, I had Buchananite friends who voted for Bush solely out of Clinton/Gore hatred, so maybe Pat's 'real' take would have been 1.5 million; hell, I'll up that and give you a flat 2 million Buchananite voters (and maybe a few million more 'issues' supporters), had he not had the problems he did that year.
(Full disclosure: my firm did work for the Buchanan campaign in '96.)
A few million third party paleo voters does not an Administration make. And remember: POLITICS MATTERS! No 'abjuring'. Obama is doing real material damage to us. The simplest truth is the truth: the Republicans are bad, the Democrats much worse - and the difference really is crucial.
Let the carpers give us their plan for how to save America without the GOP. I will stick to the old values: we rightists must work to capture the GOP apparatus, and use it for our purposes. That's the only game in town.
OK Lone Racer here is my plan. Forget about being pro-family on a national level and just attempt to raise a family of your own. Forget about putting your faith in liars and politicians and attempt to find the honest neighbor next door. Forget about trying to change the world and try to contribute something to your local church, community or school. Forget about medicaid and medicare reform and attempt to take care of your parents in their old age. Spend at least one/tenth the time in silent meditation or perusing some ancient author as one does in preaching politics, at least try and respect your elders on this blog even when you cannot agree with them, last and most Importantly, buy the few friends you have who still reflect on the vicissitudes of life, even if once a year, a annual subscription to Chronicles. And if this doesn't work to cheer you up,you can vote republican in the next election, take two aspirins and start brewing your own beer or selecting your own wine for your own table. Or if you are young and can stand the treck, take up Kentucky and Tennessee whiskey when all else fails.
So, what you're saying Robert is roll over and play dead. We've lost already.
There is nothing to stop people living the sort of moral life that you advocate and working to change one's country.
Although much of the writing at Chronicles is excellent I would not give a subscription to a friend as it is so thoroughly infused with defeatism.
Lone Racer @27 and Chris @29:
You have both unintentionally stumbled upon the entire purpose and point of real and authentic American conservatism: realism! It is not defeatist, but REALISTIC, to understand and to accept that 1) the American populace is becoming more and more post-modernist, post-Christian, and culturally Marxist in their thinking, and 2) the American empire will collapse just as Rome did. American patriots who wish to preserve their civilization and their heritage from the Marxist onslaught are a tiny remnant of the American populace, and it is doubtful that it will grow, because our institutions of influence are controlled by our Marxist enemies: the schools, the media, the political establishment, etc. Both parties are also permanently outfitted with the purpose of gaining power and money at the expense of the American people. Those in either party who espouse opposing views like Ron Paul are and always WILL be kept out of the party establishments. Do you need me to repeat any of these things so that they might sink in?
"The simplest truth is the truth: the Republicans are bad, the Democrats much worse – and the difference really is crucial"
I think this claim is farcical. Ronald Reagan was a "better" president than Obama (is so far). Both Clinton and Carter were "better" presidents than George W. Bush. Gerald Ford was a "better" president than LBJ. Some presidents are better than others, but I see nothing - absolutely not one thing - to indicate that "the Democrats" are "much worse" than "the Republicans". On the contrary, one of the very few distinctions I can make between the two parties is that the Democrats seem slightly less inclined towards mass murder. Slightly.
The reason it seems, right now, to many conservatives that the Democrats are oh-so-dangerous is that the previous Republican administration was such an unmitigated, nearly unprecedented disaster, so malignant and cynical and manipulative and duplicitous and stupid, that they thoroughly discredited the conservative philosophy to which they falsely claimed to adhere (yet never acted upon), leaving America eager for any other direction than the one the GOP took, and giving the Democrats carte blanche to enact the most radical sorts of legislation that would never pass were the country not so desperate and shell-shocked.
Barack Obama: Brought to you by the good folks at the Grand Old Party.
Wow. It's amazing how fast the political landscape in this country has changed. A gradual drift since 96, then suddenly we fall out of bed. The GOP is dying, and it should. Embracing the neocon vision of social liberalism and globalism by corporation is killing it. All the GOP has left is it's traditional support for the military. It's not going to be enough to keep true conservatives on board.
As far as #31 comment goes. There is no question that the Dems are worse than the GOP. Out and out America hating Marxism versus blue blood neocon liberal light. If you think the Marxist democrats are "slightly less inclined to mass murder", then I say just be patient. They'll come through for you once they're done crashing the economy, silencing free speech and imposing that new civilian police force that Obama says will be bigger than the military.
Commentor #30, Brock: It sinks in with me friend. What you say is as much the truth as can be put into words. Good comment.
Chris@29 writes:
"So, what you’re saying Robert is roll over and play dead. We’ve lost already."
Not at all, Chris. I am not advocating quietism or despair or even that noble kind of quite desperation such as Stoicism. I am trying to honestly relate to the younger readers not to waste too much of their fleeting days of youth, as I did, on trivial pursuits like national politics. The John Randolph Club is meeting in a few weeks in San Antonio, Texas, try that on for size as a political interest. At least the participants there will be honest men. What I am advocating is the intelligent use of ones life by refusing to play the fool for folks that need our support but hate everything about us. I know it may sound defeatist for young men who have been ruined by what we call a "university education" but my honest admiration for men like Bill Bailey, LoneRacer and yourself inspires me to give the only thing I can give under the constraints of a Blogosphere and that is my honest opinions about the good life, where it still might be lived, enjoyed and conserved. I might be wrong as hell but if I am, it is not inspired by deceit or ill will, rather from the bad experiences I have endured in foolishly following some of the same trails being advocated here -- mainly attempting the impossible task of attempting the amateur hi-jacking of a party of professional hi-jackers i.e. The Republican Party
"Out and out America hating Marxism versus blue blood neocon liberal light"
"Marxism" means something, and what it means does not describe what the Democrats are any more than what the GOP is. Honestly, I can not believe how deeply ingrained fealty to the GOP is, so that even now people could consider it a relatively worthwhile option. Insane.
#34 Toddard. You are correct that the basic problem i not "Marxism." To dwell on the dangers of "Marxism" and "socialism" is merely to fall into the Republican trap. There is no difference in the parties and neither is motivated by any kind of idea or philosophy, though the Democrats are less insincere than the Republican leadership, who are liars and con artists from the gitgo.
#32 Jonathan. Part of the problem of unthinking allegiance to the Republicans is a too short historical perspective. Republicans "traditional support for the military." "That traditional" support goes back only to the 1970s. In the elction of 1960 Kennedy was the military supporter. Only when Nixon brilliantly took over responsibility for the Democrats war in Indochina did the Republicans become the greater military supporters.
The overwhelming support the military, active and retired, gives the Republican Party shows how conservatives have lost the culture wars and how little leadership the Republican Party has provided in defending traditional values, including military values. In a Christian and civilized nation, women are not permitted in the military. When radical feminism demanded the "right" to fight for women, the Republican Party and the military rolled over meekly. When President Clinton changed the Reagan policy of rooting out homosexuals in the military to one that proclaimed "Don't Ask, Don't Tell", the Republicans treated this as a victory and the military went along with a whimper. When eventually the radical Left strikes down "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" and up-front and out homosexuals are permitted in the military, the Republicans and the military will supinely accede.
The Republican Party cares not a whit for social conservatism except as a source of votes. The Republican Party is about money and nothing more. And that is why, until it is a corpse, the Republican Party is of no use to conservatives.
Mr. Leaberry @ 36 Well said! The party's core agenda hasn't changed since its inception with 'Honest' Abe. All else is deception for votes alone.
Dr. Wilson, you mentioned before that should conservatives take control of the GOP, it would not be "recapturing" it because they'd never had it before. Do you not consider the GOP as it stood in opposition to the New Deal to have been conservative, or at least a conservative force? The GOP as it was under Taft and the "Do Nothing" Congress etc? Is it that you don't consider Taft and his Midwestern allies at the time as "conservative" in any meaningful sense, or do you believe the party was, even then, primarily under the control of the northeastern establishment and their Rockefeller Republican manservants?
For an excellent example of an authentic paleo-conservative/ libertarian view written by one of the better female journalists to turn a phrase these days, I recommend this weeks column by Ilana Mercer posted over at "Barely A Blog." This woman has suffered much in her life and is therefore principled to a degree that precludes her from being duplicious for pay, or fearful to say what she means to power mongers. It doesn't hurt that she hails from South Africa (she knows what creative destruction is all about) and still has her English manners (which are pre-conditions for English morals.) Enough, off to look at the Big prices for the John Randolph Club on November 14. As they say, "everything is bigger in Texas, even the bs!!
The recent poli-sci grads now flooding Washington's intern positions, capitol hill staff, K Street spiveries, and other saaorted non-productive jobs are among the most shallow educated people I've ever had the displeasure of meeting. Many talk of running for office, but it matters not a whit which one they choose because these young people have been stripped of their beliefs and simply do what is expedient.
One of my radical solutions is to change the constitution to say that nobody onder 60 can serve in the congress. My other radical idea is to order colleges to abolish their "political science" majors so students can learn something useful -- like needlework and basketweaving.
"order colleges to abolish their “political science” majors so students can learn something useful — like needlework and basketweaving."
Well said. Masonry, welding, carpentry. etc. are far more liberal arts today than the traditional liberal arts which are now servile arts to the "causes" which are now designed only for wierdos and geeks. They have even destroyed drama, marching bands and campus athletics. Is there anything else left to leach on?
Toddard,
Can you remember which republican candidate was shot by the "stalwart" republican or what would be called today the "loyal" republican. (as opposed to disillusioned republicans?) I too look forward to Dr. Wilson's answer to you questions. Thanks for asking what we all would like to know... --- was there ever a time ?
"Can you remember which republican candidate was shot by the “stalwart” republican or what would be called today the “loyal” republican"
I'm sorry, Robert - I'm not following you. What do you mean by "shot"?
I have heard the historical account of a republican candidate being shot with a pistol by some nut who said before shooting the poor fool," I am a stalwart republican." It reminded me of what must have been said to Mel Bradford so many years ago.
robert, it is hard to see what made Charles Guiteau a bigger nut, that he was a stalwart Republican or a member of the bizarre Oneida Society. Probably Guiteau's Republicanism and his Oneidaism fed off each other and intensified his derangement.
Thanks Derek, that is who I was looking for. After some further research I can see why he was one of the stalwarts. He could be a leader within the party today with his ability to slice and confuse issues while telling whoppers and believing the public really liked him. For instance while awaiting trial -- "He dictated an autobiography to the New York Herald, ending it with a personal ad for a nice Christian lady under thirty. He was blissfully oblivious to the American public's outrage and hatred of him, even after he was almost assassinated twice himself. At one point, he argued before Judge Cox that Garfield was killed not by himself but by medical malpractice, which was more than a little true ("The doctors killed Garfield, I just shot him").
“The simplest truth is the truth: the Republicans are bad, the Democrats much worse – and the difference really is crucial”
Then this would explain the campaign MO of the GOP for the last twenty years, ever since Poppy Bush won the nomination in 1988: "Sure, we in the GOP are pond scum, but our democrat party opponents are bigger, slimier, more putrid pieces of pond scum. Vote for us!"
The difference between the two major parties is now so infinitesimally small that to not vote your conscience is to throw your vote away.
Etienne Gervaise wrote: "One of my radical solutions is to change the constitution to say that nobody onder 60 can serve in the congress. My other radical idea is to order colleges to abolish their “political science” majors so students can learn something useful — like needlework and basketweaving."
Surely there are bed pans to be emptied and toilets to be scrubbed even in Washington's halls of power and in the various state capitals? Tending for the bodily needs of the sick and dying would be a far, far nobler task than whoring oneself out as an intern to one of our nation's elected chair-moisteners and would pose less risk to our states and what remains of our republic.
@ #34 TL Stoddard
@ #34 TL Stoddard
All that really matters after the terms are thrown around is, what is happening and who's making it happen? For me, the buzzwords are wealth redistribution and government takeover of the economy. That's all I need to know. The Dems lead. The GOP follows.
I am an independent conservative. I have no allegiance to the GOP for about 20 years now.