• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

For Republicans

How do you feel about the Party?

  • I am over 40, and feel I no longer fit in.

    Votes: 5 18.5%

  • I am under 40, and It's a great fit.

    Votes: 1 3.7%

  • I expect the party to become dominant again.

    Votes: 4 14.8%

  • I am worried about the next few election cycles.

    Votes: 6 22.2%

  • Who cares...Obama is Kenyan.

    Votes: 1 3.7%

  • I am not republian, but watnyed to mess with your poll.

    Votes: 12 44.4%
  • Total voters
    27
tecoyah

tecoyah

Illusionary
DP Veteran
Joined
Sep 30, 2005
Messages
10,453
Reaction score
3,844
Location
Louisville, KY
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Slightly Conservative
I am curious about a few things, and wish to poll our membership for enlightenment.
 
It seems that the republicants, like the demorats, have decided that the constitutional enumerated powers are "outdated". It seems that the importance of a matter (issue?) now can (and will) be used to elevate that into a federal government power. Education, medical care and income redistribution are not federal gov't powers granted by the constitution yet both parties try to pretend that they are. The SCOTUS allows new unconstitutional laws, like PPACA, to stand (slide?) based largely on the excuse that since they were passed at the federal level then they must be OK.
 
You forgot "I'm under 40 and I'd like the party to actually be half-way fiscally conservative instead of corporate cronies and I'd like them to actually respect individual liberty instead of just saying they do then violating just about every right we have."

As it stands there's no good reason for the republican party to exist. If we want corporatism and massive spending the democrats already have us covered. So the only unique thing you bring to the table is war mongering and liberty violations poorly disguised as religious actions.
 
The party is becoming degenerate. A larger and less extreme version of the libertarian party. It's becoming dominated by people who think that social conservatism should be abandoned.
 
RabidAlpaca said:
You forgot "I'm under 40 and I'd like the party to actually be half-way fiscally conservative instead of corporate cronies and I'd like them to actually respect individual liberty instead of just saying they do then violating just about every right we have."

As it stands there's no good reason for the republican party to exist. If we want corporatism and massive spending the democrats already have us covered. So the only unique thing you bring to the table is war mongering and liberty violations poorly disguised as religious actions.
Click to expand...
Well......I was going to post on this thread but then I read this......so now I've got nothing.
 
Paleocon said:
The party is becoming degenerate. A larger and less extreme version of the libertarian party. It's becoming dominated by people who think that social conservatism should be abandoned.
Click to expand...

Just because your party is drifting away from wanting to deny rights to gays doesn't make them suddenly libertarianesque; it just makes them slightly less childish and a little more constitutional.
 
RabidAlpaca said:
Just because your party is drifting away from wanting to deny rights to gays doesn't make them suddenly libertarianesque; it just makes them slightly less childish and a little more constitutional.
Click to expand...

Where does the Constitution mention gay marriage?
 
Paleocon said:
Where does the Constitution mention gay marriage?
Click to expand...

Exactly. Where does the constitution enumerate the government with the power to negate contracts made between two sovereign citizens? If you find it, let me know.

(And FYI, the supreme court ruled 13 times that marriage is a fundamental right.)
 
RabidAlpaca said:
Exactly. Where does the constitution enumerate the government with the power to negate contracts made between two sovereign citizens? If you find it, let me know.

(And FYI, the supreme court ruled 13 times that marriage is a fundamental right.)
Click to expand...

The tenth Amendment.
 
1]I am over 40, and feel I no longer fit in and I expect the party to become dominant again and I am worried about the next few election cycles.

2]or not
 
ttwtt78640 said:
It seems that the republicants, like the demorats, have decided that the constitutional enumerated powers are "outdated". It seems that the importance of a matter (issue?) now can (and will) be used to elevate that into a federal government power. Education, medical care and income redistribution are not federal gov't powers granted by the constitution yet both parties try to pretend that they are. The SCOTUS allows new unconstitutional laws, like PPACA, to stand (slide?) based largely on the excuse that since they were passed at the federal level then they must be OK.
Click to expand...

Yes, the Republicans are little better in the Democrats in that the Republican Party is just as populated by the permanent political class who are in it to increase their own power, prestige, influence, and personal wealth as are the Democrats.

The ONLY thing the Republicans have going for them is that they need the vote of the libertarians (little "L")/classical liberals/consevatives and therefore they at least have to go through some of the motions to get those votes. As such they do somewhat less damage to liberty, common sense, and the American way so to speak and are less destructive to the concepts the Founders gave us than are the Democrats. At the very least they are taking us to hell in a hand basket at a somewhat slower pace than are the Democrats, and that might buy us some time to turn it around.

We libertarians/classical liberals/constitutional conservatives are a dying breed though, I fear, and I do believe we are the last generation that has any chance to turn it around.
 
AlbqOwl said:
Yes, the Republicans are little better in the Democrats in that the Republican Party is just as populated by the permanent political class who are in it to increase their own power, prestige, influence, and personal wealth as are the Democrats.

The ONLY thing the Republicans have going for them is that they need the vote of the libertarians (little "L")/classical liberals/consevatives and therefore they at least have to go through some of the motions to get those votes. As such they do somewhat less damage to liberty, common sense, and the American way so to speak and are less destructive to the concepts the Founders gave us than are the Democrats. At the very least they are taking us to hell in a hand basket at a somewhat slower pace than are the Democrats, and that might buy us some time to turn it around.

We libertarians/classical liberals/constitutional conservatives are a dying breed though, I fear, and I do believe we are the last generation that has any chance to turn it around.
Click to expand...

The bottom line is that voting for the lesser of two evils is still voting for evil. ;)
 
ttwtt78640 said:
The bottom line is that voting for the lesser of two evils is still voting for evil. ;)
Click to expand...

But to fail to vote for the 'lesser evil' when the alternative is that the greater evil will prevail is in itself evil. Most especially when it is done just to make ourselves feel better.

But we should all be rallying behind groups like the Tea Party, 9/12ers, tax reformers, etc. and refusing to allow the existing permanent political class in Washington or the media or the self-serving beneficiaries of that political class to demonize and marginalize them. They really are our only hope to turn it around.
 
Last edited:
Paleocon said:
The party is becoming degenerate. A larger and less extreme version of the libertarian party. It's becoming dominated by people who think that social conservatism should be abandoned.
Click to expand...

How can people that claim they want a small government support the things social conservatives do? Sorry, it doesn't make a whole lot of sense. For that matter, how can conservatives support the military complex, while at the same time wanting a small government? Again, there is no sense to it.
 
AlbqOwl said:
But to fail to vote for the 'lesser evil' when the alternate is that the greater evil will prevail is in itself evil. Most especially when it is done out just to make ourselves feel better.

But we should all be rallying behind groups like the Tea Party, 9/12ers, tax reformers, etc. and refusing to allow the existing permanent political class in Washington or the media or the self-serving beneficiaries of that political class to demonize and marginalize them. They really are our only hope to turn it around.
Click to expand...

Exactly. The important race is the primary. ;)
 
Henrin said:
How can people that claim they want a small government support the things social conservatives do? Sorry, it doesn't make a whole lot of sense. For that matter, how can conservatives support the military complex, while at the same time wanting a small government? Again, there is no sense to it.
Click to expand...

Define "small government".
 
Paleocon said:
The party is becoming degenerate. A larger and less extreme version of the libertarian party. It's becoming dominated by people who think that social conservatism should be abandoned.
Click to expand...



Remember Focus on the Family? They didn't abandon their principles...they just suddenly realized that they were alienating more people than they were converting and decided to stop beating people over the head with their principles.
 
Paleocon said:
Define "small government".
Click to expand...

Murray Rothbard put my point better than I did...

For how can the leftist be opposed to the violence of war and conscription while at the same time supporting the violence of taxation and government control? And how can the rightist trumpet his devotion to private property and free enterprise while at the same time favoring war, conscription, and the outlawing of noninvasive activities and practices that he deems immoral?
Click to expand...

The only principle of small government that truly makes sense is if the government exists to defend the liberty of every individual without exception. In reality you don't support a small government at all, but instead a large invasive government that violates the rights of people, so that you feel better about the world you live in.
 
Paleocon said:
The party is becoming degenerate. A larger and less extreme version of the libertarian party. It's becoming dominated by people who think that social conservatism should be abandoned.
Click to expand...

Becoming? It's totally degenerate. The neo-cons are just religiously fanatic liberals. There are no conservative parties in the U.S. anymore.
 
ttwtt78640 said:
The bottom line is that voting for the lesser of two evils is still voting for evil. ;)
Click to expand...

But every party out there is evil, including the Libertarians. You cannot vote for any professional politician and not vote for evil.
 
Cephus said:
Becoming? It's totally degenerate. The neo-cons are just religiously fanatic liberals. There are no conservative parties in the U.S. anymore.
Click to expand...

I said becoming because there are still a few conservatives in it, like Santorum for instance.
 
Paleocon said:
I said becoming because there are still a few conservatives in it, like Santorum for instance.
Click to expand...

Santorum isn't a conservative, he's a religious loony-toon.
 
Cephus said:
But every party out there is evil, including the Libertarians. You cannot vote for any professional politician and not vote for evil.
Click to expand...

There is nothing except tradition to dictate that candidates must be professional politicians. One of the most ridiculous things about our gov't, especially at the federal level, is the extremely modest pay that these positions offer. A medical specialist makes more money and does not have to spend a year (or more) campaigning to get their job, which often requires a second home as well.

image.jpg

The money in politics is not from direct compensation so it tends to attract those that already have lots of money and/or will use that "public service" position to get it "on the side". The big money in politics is simply required to campaign for a job that pays poorly compared to its demands for time and travel.
 
Last edited:
ttwtt78640 said:
There is nothing except tradition to dictate that candidates must be professional politicians. One of the most ridiculous things about our gov't, especially at the federal level, is the extremely modest pay that these positions offer. A medical specialist makes more money and does not have to spend a year (or more) campaigning to get their job, which often requires a second home as well.

View attachment 67165831

The money in politics is not from direct compensation so it tends to attract hose that already have lots of money and/or will use that "public service" position to get it "on the side". The big money in politics is simply required to campaign for a job that pays poorly compared to its demands for time and travel.
Click to expand...

In the modern world, that is what we have though. People who go into politics as their primary and perhaps only means of making an income, lifelong. Unfortunately, we have a political system that doesn't just encourage politicians to become corrupted by their time in office, it requires it. You cannot get anything done, thus guaranteeing that you never get re-elected, unless you're willing to play the political game. That's why, even if by some miracle, a Libertarian candidate was ever elected President, they'd leave office a failure because neither the Democrats nor the Republicans would play ball with him. I don't care what kind of ethics one claims while running for office, those ethics vanish once you actually hold the office.

It's what American politics has become and the only people who can change it are the ones who already benefit from it being the way that it is.
 
tecoyah said:
I am curious about a few things, and wish to poll our membership for enlightenment.
Click to expand...

I am worried that the establishment repubs still think its ok to engage in crony capitalism and sell votes. The rank and file just want honest government and conservative policy.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom