Why I Remain A Republican

[Lord Jim]

I have been very disappointed of late, by those who describe themselves as "Republicans"...

Not these "non-Republicans" who haven't been Republicans since the attendance of Mr. Reagan...

I've been accused of that myself....

I have "Conservatives" telling me that I'm not a Conservative...

Hey, I was Conservative....

When Conservative wasn't cool...

But if my choice will in life will remain the choice between that where a group of dunces who don't understand where wealth proceeds from...

I guess I'll just have to live with that....

[dales]

Barry Goldwater Republican - yes.

Ronald Reagan Republican yes/no.

George Bush I/II Republican - no.

The two have now become mutually exclusive.

Third Party Conservatism is the ONLY furture that I see.

[Lord Jim]

It offends me Dale...

When I see liberal democrats,

Say what they think "good" conservatives ought to be like...

By what stretch of the imagination should we allow the enemy to decide what "good" Conservatives are?

Their idea of a "good" Conservative is one that loses elections.

[Lord Jim]

The Republican Party, for all its faults, understands that the wealth of the people...

Comes from the people...

No matter how I might become exasperated with my party, I could never join a political organization that failed to understand that fundamental point; a party that believes that the riches of our nation are somehow owned by us jointly; but not created personally and individually by our own personal efforts and actions...

I may have a lot of problems with the Republican Party....

But never so many that I will ever become a" Democrat"

[Lord Jim]

The sad fact of the matter is, that nowadays,...

We have two parties...

The party of greed...

And the party of envy....

This is not a healthy situation...

[Lord Jim]

I could never embrace a party that sees military service as just another "employer" meeting "employer" guidelines...

I could never accept that....

I could never embrace a party that doesn't seem to understand where the wealth of the nation comes from; who believes it is some how created in some sort of dream world, collectively without regard to who produces it; and then the "moral" thing do is to let some gang of bureaucrats parse it out for the rest of us...

I also could never embrace a party that just "doesn't seem to get it " when it comes to issues of security and national defense...

So, if I am compelled to choose between what you lot have to offer, and those on my side, with all their faults, I'll take my chances with my bunch of nutters...

[Lord Jim]

Just ruminating a bit, because I don't really know how to lay out a logical game plan for getting from "here to there"....

From what I've seen in the polls, what the broad spectrum of American people really want, is a Joe Leiberman type party, (Like Scoop Jackson 30 years ago)...

A political party that is hard headed and tough on national security and defense issues, but "kinder and gentler" on social issues...

I believe that a party that embraced that sort of agenda, (assuming it had enough cash behind it) could give both of our "major" parties a run for their money...

[Crackpot]

I don't think hard Headed is the phrase you're looking for.

[Crackpot]

Main Entry: hard·head·ed
Pronunciation: \-ˈhe-dəd\
Function: adjective
Date: 1583
1 : stubborn, willful
2 : concerned with or involving practical considerations : sober, realistic <some hardheaded advice> <a hardheaded observer of winds and tides>

Well definition 2 maybe. But I wouldn't want to run that risk.

[Lord Jim]

Definition 2 is precisely what I had in mind, CP....

(well, except for that last bit about winds and tides....)

[Lord Jim]

Oh migawd...

Speaking of making as little sense as Steve...

I really must apologize for this...:

But if my choice will in life will remain the choice between that where a group of dunces who don't understand where wealth proceeds from...

That was a right mess...

What I meant to say...was:

If I have to choose between one group of dunces who don't understand how wealth is generated, and a second group of dunces who understand at least that much, I will choose to stand with the latter...

I hope that makes a little more sense...

[Andrew D]

Well, as long as the Republican party lets itself be run by the loony-fringers, other people of all political stripes are going to take notice.

The fundamental problem for the Republicans is that their policies don't work. Whatever electoral success they may have will depend entirely on the electorate's forgetfulness.

[Lord Jim]

Whatever electoral success they may have will depend entirely on the electorate's forgetfulness.

Well that is, after all, how Nancy Pelosi became Speaker Of The House...

[Lord Jim]

Now here's a bold concept...

Imagine the "looney fringers" on the right...

And the "looney fringers" on the left....

All going off to fuck themselves....

And minimally sane people, trying to work out some modus vivendi...

To actually try to get something accomplished...

Yeah, I know it's a pipe dream...

To even imagine such a thing I must be on four way window pane...

[Sue U]

Do I count as a "looney fringer"? I suspect you would put me in that camp (a FEMA concentration camp, no doubt!).

Looney fringers live here too, and (*choke* *gag*) ought to have as much say in how their country is run as anyone else. Because sometimes they (we?) might even have a good idea, or might know something useful.

But there will be a problem as long as the looney fringers are able to wield disproportionate political power by hijacking the leadership and agenda of a major political party. Their voices should be heard in government, but only in proportion to their actual support among the population. It is far past time to implement a system of proportional representation, which would allow reasonable political leadership the opportunity to enagage in reasonable compromise to implement reasonable policies without having to fear or pander to radical extremes of a party "base."

[Lord Jim]

Sue, it seems to me that "proportional representation" accomplishes the exact opposite of marginalizing political fringe types....

It tends to inflate their importance beyond their numbers....

Imagine a situation where the Republicans have 48% of the Congressional seats, and the Democrats have 48% of the seats, and The Propeller Beanie Party has 4%....

One of the major parties would have to make a deal with the Propeller Beanies, in order to form a majority and organize the Congress....

Agree to enact some portion of their program, give them leadership and committee chairmanship positions, etc.

Objectively, a meager 4% of the vote would not entitle them to that....

[Sue U]

That result does not necessarily follow. Sure a minor party can be brought into government to create a legislative majority, but as a practical matter its policy agenda could not be antithetical to the major partner's, and as a political matter its policy role/ministerial post(s) (if any) could/would be commensurately limited. Alternatively, if the minor party is a single-issue party with particular interest and expertise in a specialized area, it might actually make sense to give it policy control over a specific department; for example, a "Farmer's Party" representative might be the appropriate choice for Agriculture Secretary.

There is also the option of a minority government, or a "unity" or "grand coalition" government of the major parties if the minors are just too wingnutty to stomach. That's sort of the point. Proportional representation would ensure that the government's policy program would at least be those items that a majority can agree on; by doing away with the "all-or-nothing" approach to government of our two-party system, extremists could be marginalized.

[Sue U]

Also, because our system separates the election of government executive from election of the legislature, the executive party would not be forced into a coalition to continue governing; we have had Presidents of one party and Congress controlled by the other at many times, and somehow managed to survive -- and even accomplish a few things.

[Lord Jim]

Well Sue, I think we should proceed with great caution when it comes to making fundamental structural changes in our political system. As dysfunctional as our current system has become, I can imagine worse situations.

Look at Israel. They have an electoral system that grants membership in parliament to parties with as little as 3% of the vote. As a result in their situation, you have handful of right-wing religious parties, (some of whom would be delighted if Israel were to become a straight up theocracy...a sort of Jewish version of Iran...) that wield power waaay out of proportion to their support.

I'll point out something else that I believe has contributed to the current sorry state of Congressional performance...

Back when I was a kid in the 1970's it was considered the right thing to do for Congressmen and Senators to move their families to the DC area, and return to their states or districts primarily during long recesses. (I went to High School with the kids of several of them.)

No more. Now things have gone so far away from that standard that some Congress critters not only don't buy homes in the DC suburbs; they don't even rent apartments. They actually brag about sleeping on a cot in their office when they have no choice but to be in DC.

Supposedly this approach keeps them closer to the people they represent, but I think it's a very fair question to ask whether the constituents are best served being represented by someone who barely know his or her colleagues. I really think this cultural shift has contributed strongly to the problems we have today. It's a lot harder to be an ass wipe to somebody you went to a football game with the day before, than it is to be an ass wipe to somebody you barely know....

[dales]

The sad fact of the matter is, that nowadays,...

We have two parties...

The party of greed...

And the party of envy....

This is not a healthy situation...

Precisely!

So how does one become less greedy or less envious?

Leave both the major parties who are only mirror images of themeselves.

I reiterate: the future of our REPUBLIC does not lie with either the democrats nor the republicans as they are currently constituted. The only hope I see is for everyday working Americans to leaves both of these dinosuars en masse and establish a political apparatus based upon the populist notions of hard work, thrift, and common sense. What we have now is a twin botched abortion that panders to the greedy and lazy among us.

GOD HELP US ALL!