times are changing......

[PostmodernProphet]

I am seriously considering leaving the Republican party and becoming a Libertarian.....

[Kathianne]

I am seriously considering leaving the Republican party and becoming a Libertarian.....

I'm a libertarian leaning Republican, looking towards a remake of 'conservatism' without or within the party.

[hjmick]

Welcome to the darkside...

[avatar4321]

Im thinking of just working on my own life for a while. Make the country better by making myself better. I may not be able to influence elections with my vote, but that doesnt mean I cant make the world a better place.

[Trinity]

My thinking this election was not popular...but I decided that I am not going to follow what others think, say, or do so I did my own research and came to my own conclusions and refrained from partaking in any type of political postings and bashing's of the two parties I have come to hate....after logging onto facebook this morning and seeing all of the really immature, uneducated, bullcrap I couldn't take it any more and I posted this.............

You know I have refrained from posting anything regarding politics just because I think people should be responsible and educate themselves before voting for someone....with that being said this is the one and only thing you will see from me regarding this election. GROW THE FU%K UP! Who cares if your guy won... is it necessary to act like a elementary school child with the nah nah nah nah nah shit. Oh and just for the record I didn't vote for either of the ass clowns that were running. I refuse to vote for the lessor of 2 evils as so many like to call it, so this time I voted for what I believed in, Gary Johnson. I knew casting my vote, Gary Johnson wasn't going to win. Did I care? No I was making a statement. A statement of I am tired of the way the country is and has been run by the republicans and the democrats. So regardless of which party runs the country into the dirt, I know with a clear conscious I played no part in assisting it. Peace out.

js (just saying)

[fj1200]

I am seriously considering leaving the Republican party and becoming a Libertarian.....

At least vote in the primaries to perpetuate the destructive duopolistic dynasty.

[revelarts]

It'd be a pleasant surprise if more people bailed from the GOP and the Dems.

[DragonStryk72]

I am seriously considering leaving the Republican party and becoming a Libertarian.....

Well... Welcome to the team, I guess.

[Tyr-Ziu Saxnot]

It'd be a pleasant surprise if more people bailed from the GOP and the Dems.

They will not bail from the dems, those maggots ,leeches and ignorant bastards got their gravy train and THEY'LL RIDE IT FOR ALL ITS WORTH!!
IN THE FUTURE ALL ITS GONNA TAKE FOR ME TO JUDGE A PERSON A WORTHLESS PIECE OF HUMAN SCUM IS TO FIND OUT THAT THEY ARE A DEMOCRAT.
Before I waited for more evidence but no more.. Now I know and will act accordingly because even the ignorant ones have no excuse. In this day and age self-education is easy with the internet and the desire to search for the truth.
Our nation has stepped off the ship headfirst into deep water , its too damn late to try not to get wet!! -Tyr

[Abbey Marie]

I am seriously considering leaving the Republican party and becoming a Libertarian.....

PMP becoming pro-choice? Never thought I'd see the day...

[Kathianne]

PMP becoming pro-choice? Never thought I'd see the day...

There are pro-life Dems, they just put it aside for voting. One can have personal opinions that differ with a party.

I know my beliefs are very different than Michelle Bachmann's or Sarah Palin's, yet we share more than we disagree.

[Abbey Marie]

There are pro-life Dems, they just put it aside for voting. One can have personal opinions that differ with a party.

I know my beliefs are very different than Michelle Bachmann's or Sarah Palin's, yet we share more than we disagree.

PMP said Libertarian. My understanding is that Libertarians would feel that a woman should have the "right to choose", without government telling her she can't.

As for him disagreeing on that point, but still being Libertarian, he has proven to be strongly pro-life on this board. Hence my having a hard time seeing it. It's a very difficult thing to "put aside".
.

[PostmodernProphet]

Hence my having a hard time seeing it. It's a very difficult thing to "put aside".
.

I'm a Reagan Democrat who never went back....I was raised a Democrat and actually campaigned for McGovern in my first election.....I left the Democrats because they were not competent to handle an economy....they still aren't......however, after the last twelve years I am not confident the Republicans know how to win an election.....

it is true that I will never change my views on abortion.....

however, I am not a supporter of unrestricted mega-corporations, though I am in favor of limited restrictions on small business.....I am not a supporter of restricted legal immigration or refusing to find a logical solution to illegal immigration.......I am not a supporter of strict restrictions on drug use, and in fact advocate for the free distribution of hard drugs to addicts in overdose quantities......I am not in favor of the death penalty.......I am not in favor of restrictions of anyone's ownership of either firearms or fishing poles......I believe we should not simply give federal money to anyone, either domestically or overseas.......I believe we spend far too much time and money and blood on foreign countries who would fuck us over before honestly saying thank you......I think we should convert both Medicare and Social Security to safety nets instead of political footballs......I believe federal spending should be limited to those things the Constitution states the federal government should do......

how close has the Republican party been to MY ideals over the last twenty years?.......I think I can live with a few differences between me and the libertarians......I would call myself an independent but nowdays that seems to imply I am somewhere between Republicans and Democrats......that is not where I see myself.....

[Kathianne]

PMP said Libertarian. My understanding is that Libertarians would feel that a woman should have the "right to choose", without government telling her she can't.

As for him disagreeing on that point, but still being Libertarian, he has proven to be strongly pro-life on this board. Hence my having a hard time seeing it. It's a very difficult thing to "put aside".
.

And one can believe abortion is wrong, even when others believe differently. Personally I think the issue has no place in national discussion, but Roe was bad law.

[gabosaurus]

Instead of leaving the Republican party, perhaps you should try to change it instead.
The American populace as a whole is become more moderate. You can't be extreme left or right anymore.
The death of the GOP as well know it can be attributed to it being perceived as an exclusive club for privileged white guys. You can bring out all the Mia Loves and Marco Rubios you want, but until the rank and file is more diverse, you aren't going to have a good image.

If I ran the GOP brass, I would reach out to Rubio right now and begin developing him for 2016. I think Rubio has a chance to galvanize the Latino vote the same way Obama did with the black vote in 2008.

[revelarts]

Abortion and gay marriage are the reasons i couldn't vote for Gary Johnson. I'm on board with most of the other views.
However there is a strong section of the libertarian party that is Pro-Life as well.
Just depends where you are in the country weather pro-life libertarians make the libertarian ticket i guess.
I voted constitution party again. Closest thing to my views, and solidly pro-life.

[PostmodernProphet]

Instead of leaving the Republican party, perhaps you should try to change it instead.

I devoted ten years to that already....the national debt is now ten trillion dollars higher.....

[Kathianne]

Instead of leaving the Republican party, perhaps you should try to change it instead.
The American populace as a whole is become more moderate. You can't be extreme left or right anymore.
The death of the GOP as well know it can be attributed to it being perceived as an exclusive club for privileged white guys. You can bring out all the Mia Loves and Marco Rubios you want, but until the rank and file is more diverse, you aren't going to have a good image.

If I ran the GOP brass, I would reach out to Rubio right now and begin developing him for 2016. I think Rubio has a chance to galvanize the Latino vote the same way Obama did with the black vote in 2008.

For the time being, I agree with working from within. I don't agree with pandering to one segment of the population. The GOP has more Hispanic politicians in office by far, than the Dem Party. What the conservatives, IMO have failed to do is to explain and sell their ideas. They shouldn't give up core beliefs, such as pro-Life, but they certainly can articulate their actual position and not allow the Democrats to define their position using goofy candidates personal rantings.

Why in favor of lower taxes? Why smaller government? What's in those positions for the middle and lower classes? There's been an assumption that folks 'get it' when they actually don't. I'd analogize it with teaching HS civics, assuming the students have an understanding of the differences between democracy and republic and the basics of federalism. If one assumes those things and is wrong, they will never understand the system of government. Thus one assumes they don't have the ideas and start at the beginning.

[revelarts]

As far as those who want to say in the Republican party and are really frustrated. I say double down on the tea party and Ron Paul type efforts. and refuse to let the establishment Rhinos present tepid candiates , especially since so many see the dire state the country is in. Why settle for just good enough for gov't work repubicains when the countries supposely "over the cliff in freefall". Seems to me all you'll get is a slower freefall, maybe.
If the country is in the dire straits that so many claim it is, is it time to settle? If we are 50 yrs away from where we should be and less than 10 years away from Greece is it time for an "electable" Republican? It's it time for any those incumbents to be given another chance in congress or the presidency?

I feel a rant coming on i better stop.

[PostmodernProphet]

Reagan saved the Republican Party from what it had become.....the question now is, was it worth it.......perhaps, like General Motors it would have been better to have let it go through bankruptcy and see what new thing emerged......

[avatar4321]

I think the problem is we are falling for the false assumption that politics is how to change things.

The electorate isn't conservative. We have to accept that right now. It may not be a huge amount, but it's enough, especially in the bigger states to prevent us from getting control of the government.

We need to change the culture.

[Abbey Marie]

I'm a Reagan Democrat who never went back....I was raised a Democrat and actually campaigned for McGovern in my first election.....I left the Democrats because they were not competent to handle an economy....they still aren't......however, after the last twelve years I am not confident the Republicans know how to win an election.....

it is true that I will never change my views on abortion.....

however, I am not a supporter of unrestricted mega-corporations, though I am in favor of limited restrictions on small business.....I am not a supporter of restricted legal immigration or refusing to find a logical solution to illegal immigration.......I am not a supporter of strict restrictions on drug use, and in fact advocate for the free distribution of hard drugs to addicts in overdose quantities......I am not in favor of the death penalty.......I am not in favor of restrictions of anyone's ownership of either firearms or fishing poles......I believe we should not simply give federal money to anyone, either domestically or overseas.......I believe we spend far too much time and money and blood on foreign countries who would fuck us over before honestly saying thank you......I think we should convert both Medicare and Social Security to safety nets instead of political footballs......I believe federal spending should be limited to those things the Constitution states the federal government should do......

how close has the Republican party been to MY ideals over the last twenty years?.......I think I can live with a few differences between me and the libertarians......I would call myself an independent but nowdays that seems to imply I am somewhere between Republicans and Democrats......that is not where I see myself.....

PMP, all of that is your prerogative. For me, and millions of others, there are issues that can be put aside, and others that cannot. I had thought that you were one of those who felt too strongly about abortion to ignore it for other issues. My bad.

[Abbey Marie]

As far as those who want to say in the Republican party and are really frustrated. I say double down on the tea party and Ron Paul type efforts. and refuse to let the establishment Rhinos present tepid candiates , especially since so many see the dire state the country is in. Why settle for just good enough for gov't work repubicains when the countries supposely "over the cliff in freefall". Seems to me all you'll get is a slower freefall, maybe.
If the country is in the dire straits that so many claim it is, is it time to settle? If we are 50 yrs away from where we should be and less than 10 years away from Greece is it time for an "electable" Republican? It's it time for any those incumbents to be given another chance in congress or the presidency?

I feel a rant coming on i better stop.

So, Romney is too conservative to get elected, but what we need are more conservative pols? That doesn't make sense, Rev.

[PostmodernProphet]

PMP, all of that is your prerogative. For me, and millions of others, there are issues that can be put aside, and others that cannot. I had thought that you were one of those who felt too strongly about abortion to ignore it for other issues. My bad.
I wasn't aware I was putting anything aside.....can you tell me something the Republicans have done in the last twenty years to make abortion go away?......I've been "ignoring" that for a long time......

[PostmodernProphet]

So, Romney is too conservative to get elected, but what we need are more conservative pols? That doesn't make sense, Rev.

apparently 3 million conservatives voted in 2008 that didn't vote in 2012......5 million more voted in 2004.......to be honest, I don't think they stayed home because they liked Obama and I don't think they stayed home because Romney was too conservative.....

[gabosaurus]

The more things change, the more things stay the same.
This article appeared in the Washington Post in 2004, the day after Bush's bitter win over Kerry.
Why were we supposed to accept that without rancor and not the 2012 verdict? What is different? Except for the party winning and the party losing.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A21057-2004Nov3.html


Unlike 99.9 percent of the nation, I didn't think that yesterday's election represented a choice between good and evil. When I pressed the little button on the touch-screen voting machine, I did not do so feeling that the defeat of my chosen candidate would signify the onset of Armageddon. Regardless of the outcome, I knew I would neither be elated nor plunged into despair.


I hope that by the time you are reading this column the losers have been grown-up enough to dispense with the post-election disputes.

[red states rule]

The more things change, the more things stay the same.
This article appeared in the Washington Post in 2004, the day after Bush's bitter win over Kerry.
Why were we supposed to accept that without rancor and not the 2012 verdict? What is different? Except for the party winning and the party losing.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A21057-2004Nov3.html


Nothing really has changed Gabby. America is heading FORWARD on the road to Hell

http://media.townhall.com/Townhall/Car/b/aria_c10494520121109120100.jpg

[Abbey Marie]

Abortion and gay marriage are the reasons i couldn't vote for Gary Johnson. I'm on board with most of the other views.
However there is a strong section of the libertarian party that is Pro-Life as well.
Just depends where you are in the country weather pro-life libertarians make the libertarian ticket i guess.
I voted constitution party again. Closest thing to my views, and solidly pro-life.


Both very interesting points, Rev.

I also have a hard time with the Libertarian view on Defense spending and allocations. Is the Constitution Party more moderate on that than the Libertarians?

[Abbey Marie]

I wasn't aware I was putting anything aside.....can you tell me something the Republicans have done in the last twenty years to make abortion go away?......I've been "ignoring" that for a long time......

The put aside argument was made by Kathianne, not me. I replied that it is a very difficult thing to put aside. But I would agree that anyone who places their economic furitre above life has put life aside.

As for your second point: It is hard for anyone to succeed when the SC has so much unconstitutional power, and bad case law to follow.

Surely your anger hasn't blinded you from seeing a difference between a party that speaks for the unborn and tries to appoint Conservative justices, and one that rallies voters by screaming "Woman's right to choose!"?

[Tyr-Ziu Saxnot]

For the time being, I agree with working from within. I don't agree with pandering to one segment of the population. The GOP has more Hispanic politicians in office by far, than the Dem Party. What the conservatives, IMO have failed to do is to explain and sell their ideas. They shouldn't give up core beliefs, such as pro-Life, but they certainly can articulate their actual position and not allow the Democrats to define their position using goofy candidates personal rantings.

Why in favor of lower taxes? Why smaller government? What's in those positions for the middle and lower classes? There's been an assumption that folks 'get it' when they actually don't. I'd analogize it with teaching HS civics, assuming the students have an understanding of the differences between democracy and republic and the basics of federalism. If one assumes those things and is wrong, they will never understand the system of government. Thus one assumes they don't have the ideas and start at the beginning.

Impossible to sell our ideals hard enough , fast enough and big enough to counter the sold out lying mainstream media that is 100% in the bag for the dem party. That arm of the dem party likely contributed 300 to 400 million dollars worth of free coverage to obama and absolutely help lie and cover for him! Additionally it repeatedly attacked and lied about Romney! Did exactly the same thing it did when McCain was obama's opponent. Our election system is not set up to handle that type of corruption. It must be destroyed BY ANY MEANS. If our Republic is to survive that must be priority number one IMHO.
I AM SOLIDLY FOR ACCOMPLISHING THE DESTRUCTION OF ITS SOLDOUT STATUS BY ANY MEANS POSSIBLE. A rabid dog should get dispatched with no mercy.. Even should it take extreme measures to accomplish!! Either we fight or we fall into ruin and doom our children and grandchildren .. Want to make an omelet , got to break some eggs... Eventually this will happen or else we all will go under.. Jefferson spoke about the sacrifice needed to water the Tree of Liberty and he did so as advice to future generations.. .-Tyr

[revelarts]

I wasn't aware I was putting anything aside.....can you tell me something the Republicans have done in the last twenty years to make abortion go away?......I've been "ignoring" that for a long time......

The put aside argument was made by Kathianne, not me. I replied that it is a very difficult thing to put aside. But I would agree that anyone who places their economic furitre above life has put life aside.

As for your second point: It is hard for anyone to succeed when the SC has so much unconstitutional power, and bad case law to follow.

Surely your anger hasn't blinded you from seeing a difference between a party that speaks for the unborn and tries to appoint Conservative justices, and one that rallies voters by screaming "Woman's right to choose!"?

The Dems are hell bent on having abortions it's true. It's hard to get behind a party , that as PMP points out, has been talking about support life for 35 yrs and have barely held the status quo.
Was Romney A stronger pro-life guy than W Bush, or Bush 1? Frankly, I've begun to understand, and heard reported that many establishment R's cynically use the abortion issue to get the vote out but drop it as a sideshow issue once in office. And their Court appointments haven't been consistently prolife either IMO.
Maybe we think we have to be realistic and settle and that's the best we can hope for, but the left isn't settling for anything thing less than FULL abortions till the 9th month and Gov't paid at all levels if possible. Who's closer to their goals?




Both very interesting points, Rev.

I also have a hard time with the Libertarian view on Defense spending and allocations. Is the Constitution Party more moderate on that than the Libertarians?
Well , well yes and no, they take an America 1st approach. Strong defense of America not the world.

Here's there defense policy

“The very purpose of Government, as defined in the 2nd paragraph of the Declaration of Independence, is "to secure these [unalienable] rights, Governments are instituted among Men", "that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness."

To fulfill this obligation, the Preamble of the Constitution states one of the duties specifically delegated to the Federal
Government is to "Provide for the common defense".

US Constitution, Article 1, Section 8, Clauses 11 - 16 give Congress further direction and authority in this area, including the
power "To raise and support Armies" and "To provide and maintain a Navy".

It is a primary obligation of the federal government to provide for the common defense, and to be vigilant regarding potential threats, prospective capabilities, and perceived intentions of potential enemies.

We oppose unilateral disarmament and dismemberment of America's defense infrastructure. That which is hastily torn down will not be easily rebuilt.
We condemn the presidential assumption of authority to deploy American troops into combat without a declaration of war by Congress, pursuant to Article I, Section 8 of the U.S. Constitution.

Under no circumstances would we commit U.S. forces to serve under any foreign flag or command. We are opposed to any New World Order, and we reject U.S. participation in or a relinquishing of command to any foreign authority.

The goal of U.S. security policy is to defend the national security interests of the United States. Therefore, except in time of declared war, for the purposes of state security, no state National Guard or reserve troops shall be called upon to support or conduct operations in foreign theatres.

We should be the friend of liberty everywhere, but the guarantor and provisioner of ours alone.

We call for the maintenance of a strong, state-of-the-art military on land, sea, in the air, and in space. We urge the executive and legislative branches to continue to provide for the modernization of our armed forces, in keeping with advancing technologies and a constantly changing world situation. We call for the deployment of a fully-operational strategic defense system as soon as possible.

We believe that all defense expenditures should be directly related to the protection of our nation, and that every item of expenditure must be carefully reviewed to eliminate foreign aid, waste, fraud, theft, inefficiency, and excess profits from all defense contracts and military expenditures.

We reject the policies and practices that permit women to train for or participate in combat. Because of the radical feminization of the military over the past two decades, it must be recognized that these "advances" undermine the integrity, morale, and performance of our military organizations by dual qualification standards and forced integration.

We fully support well regulated militias organized at the state level. Further, we fully support and encourage the restoration of unorganized militia at the county and community level in compliance with our patriotic and legal responsibilities as free citizens of the United States.

Under no circumstances should we have unilaterally surrendered our military base rights in Panama. The sovereign right of the United States to the United States territory of the Canal Zone has been jeopardized by treaties between the United States and Panama. Inasmuch as the United States bought both the sovereignty and the grant ownership of the ten-mile-wide Canal Zone, we propose that the government of the United States restore and protect its sovereign right and exclusive jurisdiction of the Canal Zone in perpetuity, and renegotiate the treaties with Panama by which the ownership of the canal was surrendered to Panama.

It should be a priority goal of the President and Congress to insist on enforcement of that portion of the 1978 Panama Canal Neutrality Treaty which prohibits control of the entrances to the Panama Canal by any entity not part of the Republic of Panama or the United States of America. By this standard, the award of port facilities at the entrances to the Panama Canal to Hutchison Whampoa, a Hong Kong company closely linked to the Chinese Communist People's Liberation Army, must be overturned. Similarly, Congress and the President should take advantage of Panama Canal treaty provisions to negotiate the return of a U.S. military presence at the Isthmus of Panama. At a time when the U.S. Navy is one-third its former size, it is essential that rapid transit of U.S. military vessels between the Atlantic and Pacific Oceans be assured.





and their foreign policy





National Sovereignty:
The United States is properly a free and sovereign republic which should strive to live in peace with all nations, without interfering in their internal affairs, and without permitting their interference in ours. We are, therefore, unalterably opposed to entangling alliances - via treaties, or any other form of commitment - which compromise our national sovereignty, or commit us to intervention in foreign wars. We are opposed to the negotiation or ratification of any treaty, agreement, or partnership that would deprive United States citizens of their rights protected by the United States Constitution. We are also opposed to any union whether political or economic, of the United States, Mexico, and Canada (NAU).


To this end, we shall:


steadfastly oppose American participation in any form of world government organization, including any world court under United Nations auspices;
call upon the President, and Congress, to terminate United States membership in the United Nations, and its subsidiary organizations, and terminate U.S. participation in all so-called U.N. peace keeping operations;
bar the United Nations, and its subsidiaries, from further operation, including raising of funds, on United States territory; and
propose that the Constitution be obeyed to prohibit the United States government from entering any treaty, or other agreement, which makes any commitment of American military forces or tax money, compromises the sovereignty of the United States, or accomplishes a purpose properly the subject of domestic law. In this connection we specifically denounce the agreement establishing the proposed Free Trade Area of the Americas (FTAA) and any other such trade agreements, either bi-lateral or regional in nature. All treaties must be subordinate to the Constitution, since the Constitution is the only instrument which empowers and limits the federal government.

American troops must serve only under American commanders, not those of the United Nations or foreign countries.
Pacts and Agreements:
Since World War II, the United States has increasingly played the undesirable role of an international policeman. Through our involvements abroad our country is being changed from a republic to a world empire in which our freedoms are being sacrificed on an altar of international involvement. The United States is now committed by treaty to defend foreign nations in all parts of the world, and by agreements other than treaties to defend more. Therefore, we call upon the President, and Congress, to immediately commence a systematic withdrawal from these treaties and agreements, each of which holds the potential to plunge America into war in some far-flung corner of the earth.
NATO, for instance, serves no defensive purpose for the United States, and this country should withdraw from it.
Unconstitutional, Undeclared Wars:
Since World War II, the United States has been involved in tragic, unconstitutional, undeclared wars which cost our country the lives of many thousands of young Americans. These wars were the direct and foreseeable result of the bi-partisan interventionist policy of both Democrat and Republican administrations.
The Constitution Party is opposed to the continuation of the same interventionist policy, with that policy's capacity to involve our country in repeated wars.
We demand that:


never again shall United States troops be employed on any foreign field of battle without a declaration of war by Congress, as required by the United States Constitution;
Congress refuses to fund unconstitutional, undeclared wars pursuant to presidential whim or international obligations under which American sovereignty has been transferred to multi-national agencies.

Foreign Involvement:
The Constitution Party has consistently opposed American involvement in conflicts in the Middle East, Africa, Asia, Europe, and Central and South America. The United States has no interest in these areas which would justify the sacrifice of Americans on foreign battlefields - nor is our country properly cast as a merchant of death in international arms races.
We propose that the United States


repudiate any commitment, express or implied, to send U.S. troops to participate in foreign conflicts, whether unilaterally, under NATO auspices, or as a part of the United Nations "peace-keeping" operations; and
cease financing, or arming of belligerents in the world's troubled areas.

We support the principle of the Monroe Doctrine, which expresses U.S. opposition to European adventurism in the Western Hemisphere.
We call upon the Congress to immediately terminate American military presence in all foreign countries where such U.S. presence constitutes an invitation for this nation to become involved in, or further participate in, foreign wars.
We are opposed to the negotiation or ratification of any treaty, agreement, or partnership which would deprive United States citizens of their rights protected by the United States Constitution. We are also opposed to any union whether political or economic, of the United States, Mexico, and Canada (NAU),
Foreign Aid:
Since World War II, the United States has engaged in the greatest international giveaway program ever conceived by man, and is now spending billions of dollars each year to aid foreign nations. There is no constitutional basis for foreign aid. These expenditures have won us no friends, and constitute a major drain on the resources of our taxpayers. Therefore, we demand that:


no further funds be appropriated for any kind of foreign aid program;
United States participation in international lending institutions, such as the World Bank and the International Monetary Fund, be ended;
the Export-Import Bank be abolished;
all government subsidies, tax preferences, and investment guarantees to encourage U.S. businesses to invest in foreign lands be immediately terminated; and
all debts owed to the United States by foreign countries, or foreign entities, be collected.


“Europe has a set of primary interests, which have to us none, or very remote relation. Hence, she must be engaged in frequent controversies, the causes of which are essentially foreign to our concerns. Hence, therefore, it must be unwise in us to implicate ourselves, by artificial ties, in the ordinary vicissitudes of her politics, or the ordinary combinations and collusions of her friendships or enmities.

“Why forego the advantages of so peculiar a situation? Why quit our own to stand upon foreign ground? Why, by interweaving our destiny with that of any part of Europe, entangle our peace and prosperity in the toils of European ambition, rivalship, interest, humor, or caprice?”
(George Washington’s Farewell Address)


“I deem [one of] the essential principles of our government, and consequently [one] which ought to shape its administration,…peace, commerce, and honest friendship with all nations, entangling alliances with none.”
Thomas Jefferson—First Inaugural Address. Bergh 3:321. (1801.)


“America has abstained from interference in the concerns of others, even when the conflict has been for principles to which she clings....She goes not abroad in search of monsters to destroy. She is the well-wisher to the freedom and independence of all. She is the champion and vindicator only of her own.”
(John Quincy Adams, Speech Delivered in Washington DC 04 July 1821)


“In the wars of European powers in matters relating to themselves we have never taken any part, nor does it comport with our policy so to do....Our policy in regard to Europe...is, not to interfere in the internal concerns of any of its powers...”
(James Monroe, Monroe Doctrine)

[taft2012]

I am seriously considering leaving the Republican party and becoming a Libertarian.....

Here's a suggestion: Get involved with your local Tea Party and work towards endorsing Tea Party candidates. This way the issues you care about will be prioritized, the issues you don't care about will be minimized, the candidates you endorse will actually stand *some* chance of winning, and your vote will not be marginalized by tossing it towards some obscure third party candidate who stands no chance of garnering 1% of the general vote.

[PostmodernProphet]

Surely your anger hasn't blinded you from seeing a difference between a party that speaks for the unborn

if it accomplishes nothing there isn't a difference.....as for economic issues trumping social issues......if the country doesn't survive, it isn't going to protect anyone......

{falsely accusing me of abandoning the unborn is NOT going to win me over....and is probably going to cost you the respect I have maintained for you in my thoughts}

[Abbey Marie]

if it accomplishes nothing there isn't a difference.....as for economic issues trumping social issues......if the country doesn't survive, it isn't going to protect anyone......

{falsely accusing me of abandoning the unborn is NOT going to win me over....and is probably going to cost you the respect I have maintained for you in my thoughts}

You are making excuses for your new view. Since when do we abandon our deeply held moral beliefs just because they seem to be out of vogue?

I am merely pointing out what you seem to want to currently ignore. Only your heart will decide what is the right course for you. As for your respect for me declining, I'm sorry you feel that way. I have not changed my mind nor principles one iota, so if that causes you to lose respect, so be it. No offense, but it's a small price for my desire to hold fast to and express a crucial point, imo.

I always want to stand firmly on the side of life, and my faith, regardless of the world's follies.

[Abbey Marie]

Rev, I like a lot of what you've posted about your party. Not all, but a lot.

I do have a question: Given the strongly stated policies of non-interventionism I see above, what would the Constitution Party have done about the rise of Hitler and the almost certain fall of Europe into his hands?

[gabosaurus]

Here's a suggestion: Get involved with your local Tea Party and work towards endorsing Tea Party candidates. This way the issues you care about will be prioritized, the issues you don't care about will be minimized, the candidates you endorse will actually stand *some* chance of winning, and your vote will not be marginalized by tossing it towards some obscure third party candidate who stands no chance of garnering 1% of the general vote.

Except for Ted Cruz, who faced minimal Dem opposition in Texas, Tea Party candidates did not do well in the election. When entrenched incumbents like Michele Bachmann have to win by less than 4,000 votes, it is time to look for an alternative.

Like I said before, the American electorate is becoming more moderate. The GOP needs to shift from being the party of ultra conservative white males to being one of all the people.

[Abbey Marie]

Except for Ted Cruz, who faced minimal Dem opposition in Texas, Tea Party candidates did not do well in the election. When entrenched incumbents like Michele Bachmann have to win by less than 4,000 votes, it is time to look for an alternative.

Like I said before, the American electorate is becoming more moderate. The GOP needs to shift from being the party of ultra conservative white males to being one of all the people.

Allen West isn't white. He lost because of George Soros' $$$, and the mainstream media being in the tank for the Dems. People tend to believe what they hear the most.

[revelarts]

Rev, I like a lot of what you've posted about your party. Not all, but a lot.

I do have a question: Given the strongly stated policies of non-interventionism I see above, what would the Constitution Party have done about the rise of Hitler and the almost certain fall of Eurpose into his hands?

the rise of Hitler. wow.

Well seeing facism and dictatorship as an evil I'd like to think that they would have cut off trading with fascist at a much eariler point. This would have crippled the Nazis in the womb.
Ibm and Henry Ford, Dupont and many Wall street people all supported and supplied the Nazis with critical goods technology, services and funding. If this had been cut off early by Government officials on the lookout for those in the U.S. bent on foreign intervention, the holocaust would have probably been less severe and Hitler would not have had his war machine and possibly never risen to power.


It's impossible to say what could have been done.
But a gov't with a mind set that says we don't support foreign wars will have something to say to bankers and companies that want to supply foreigner arms that might come back to bite us in arse.



Wall Street and the Rise of Hitler
...Morgan, Rockefeller, General Electric Company, Standard Oil, National City Bank, Chase and Manhattan banks, Kuhn, Loeb and Company, General Motors, Ford, and other industrialists, in helping to finance the Nazis. To prove his point, Professor Sutton provides bank statements, letters from U.S. ambassadors, mainstream media sources, Congressional Records, excerpts from Congressional Investigations, and statements from the Nuremberg trials. Wall Street's funding of the Nazis is part of authentic history. Professor Sutton wrote that "General Motors, Ford, General Electric, DuPont," and other "U.S. companies intimately involved with the development of Nazi Germany were ... controlled by the Wall Street elite," such as "the J.P. Morgan firm, the Rockefeller Chase Bank and to a lesser extent the Warburg Manhattan bank."
"The deal bringing Hitler into the government was cut at the home of banker Baron Kurt Von Schroeder on January 4, 1933," wrote author Marrs. Other notable figures that are said to have appeared at this meeting include Council on Foreign Relations members John Foster Dulles, and Allen Dulles, of the New York law firm Sullivan and Cromwell, which represented the Schroeder bank. Allen Dulles would eventually become director of the CIA...

....The contribution made by American capitalism to German war preparations can only be described as phenomenal. It was certainly crucial to German military capabilities...Not only was an influential sector of American business aware of the nature of Naziism, but for its own purposes aided Naziism wherever possible (and profitable) - with full knowledge that the probable outcome would be war involving Europe and the United States'. Penetrating a cloak of falsehood, deception and duplicity, Professor Antony C. Sutton reveals one of the most remarkable but unreported facts of the Second World War: that key Wall Street banks and American businesses supported Hitler's rise to power by financing and trading with Nazi Germany. Carefully tracing this closely guarded secret through original documents and eyewitness accounts, Sutton comes to the unsavoury conclusion that the catastrophic Second World War was extremely profitable for a select group of financial insiders. He presents a thoroughly documented account of the role played by J.P. Morgan, T.W. Lamont, the Rockefeller interests, General Electric Company, Standard Oil, National City Bank, Chase and Manhattan banks, Kuhn, Loeb and Company, General Motors, the Ford Motor Company, and scores of others in helping to prepare the bloodiest, most destructive war in history. This classic study, first published in 1976...


http://www.amazon.com/Wall-Street-Hitler-Antony-Sutton/dp/1905570279/ref=sr_1_2?ie=UTF8&qid=1352483985&sr=8-2&keywords=Wall+Street+and+the+Rise+of+Hitler

[PostmodernProphet]

You are making excuses for your new view. Since when do we abandon our deeply held moral beliefs just because they seem to be out of vogue?

I am merely pointing out what you seem to want to currently ignore. Only your heart will decide what is the right course for you. As for your respect for me declining, I'm sorry you feel that way. I have not changed my mind nor principles one iota, so if that causes you to lose respect, so be it. No offense, but it's a small price for my desire to hold fast to and express a crucial point, imo.

I always want to stand firmly on the side of life, and my faith, regardless of the world's follies.

I have abandoned nothing, and quite frankly, its too late to ask me not to be offended......

[SassyLady]

It'd be a pleasant surprise if more people bailed from the GOP and the Dems.

I've never been either of these, so don't have an opportunity to bail.

[taft2012]

You can bring out all the Mia Loves and Marco Rubios you want, but until the rank and file is more diverse, you aren't going to have a good image.


If you mean Democrats when you say "the rank and file is more diverse".... let's review:

There are 3 hispanics in the US Senate.... two are Republicans. We win the diversity award in the US Senate.
There is 1 hispanic governor ... a Republican. We win again.
There are 2 asian governors.... both Republicans.... we win again.

If by "diversity" you mean pandering on the immigration issue ... let's review again:

Ronald Reagan signed an amnesty act for several million illegal aliens. Did the hispanic vote flock to him? No.
In 2008, John McCain was leading the charge for another amnesty act. Did the hispanic vote flock to him? No again.

The issue is; there is a large segment of the white, black, and hispanic population that are moochers and will always vote for freebies paid for by others. It's not much more complicated than that.

[mundame]

I am seriously considering leaving the Republican party and becoming a Libertarian.....


Sure, why not? I left the GOP in 2006; it was all just too sick.

[mundame]

Reagan saved the Republican Party from what it had become.....the question now is, was it worth it.......perhaps, like General Motors it would have been better to have let it go through bankruptcy and see what new thing emerged......



I'm still hoping what will emerge is a switchout --- exchanging the GOP for the Libertarian Party.

[mundame]

apparently 3 million conservatives voted in 2008 that didn't vote in 2012......5 million more voted in 2004.......to be honest, I don't think they stayed home because they liked Obama and I don't think they stayed home because Romney was too conservative.....



I didn't vote because the GOP is running weirdos.

Keep on running a brainless big-boobs like Sarah Palin; or a Mormon or Scientologist or Hari Krishna or Muslim; or hey! how about running a Log Cabin gay Republican, or a Cuban Hispanic like Rubio who favors open borders?

Whatever. Just keep running weirdos, GOP and Dems, and I'll keep on saying democracy doesn't work anymore, the heck with voting.

Let's have more clown-car primaries with sex criminals like Herman Cain, anti-birth control promoters like Santorum, much-married philanderers who ditch whatever wife they're married to as soon as she gets sick like Newt Gingrich.

This is all working so well, GOP! Just keep running weirdos, that'll work sooner or later, right?

[Kathianne]

I didn't vote because the GOP is running weirdos.

Keep on running a brainless big-boobs like Sarah Palin; or a Mormon or Scientologist or Hari Krishna or Muslim; or hey! how about running a Log Cabin gay Republican, or a Cuban Hispanic like Rubio who favors open borders?

Whatever. Just keep running weirdos, GOP and Dems, and I'll keep on saying democracy doesn't work anymore, the heck with voting.

Let's have more clown-car primaries with sex criminals like Herman Cain, anti-birth control promoters like Santorum, much-married philanderers who ditch whatever wife they're married to as soon as she gets sick like Newt Gingrich.

This is all working so well, GOP! Just keep running weirdos, that'll work sooner or later, right?

LOL! That post and saying, "Libertarian", thanks for the laugh!

[tailfins]

Except for Ted Cruz, who faced minimal Dem opposition in Texas, Tea Party candidates did not do well in the election. When entrenched incumbents like Michele Bachmann have to win by less than 4,000 votes, it is time to look for an alternative.

Like I said before, the American electorate is becoming more moderate. The GOP needs to shift from being the party of ultra conservative white males to being one of all the people.


It's not the ideology, it's the skill level. The GOP fielded low skill candidates in 2008 and 2012. The Tea Party lets unskilled candidates slip by. Skilled candidates get scared away because of the liberal media smear machine. We need to have the TEA party, Breitbart or somebody similar to start sliming members of the liberal media. I would like to see them start with Candy Crowley. We need full opposition research against each participant and scandalize them as much as possible. Maybe Sheldon Adelson can offer $1 million dollars for career ending information.

[mundame]

LOL! That post and saying, "Libertarian", thanks for the laugh!


What, the one where I said I hope the GOP is switched out for the Libertarian Party?

Yeah, that's in my Bucket List --- that and the government letting us off Daylight Savings Time before I die.

[Kathianne]

Except for Ted Cruz, who faced minimal Dem opposition in Texas, Tea Party candidates did not do well in the election. When entrenched incumbents like Michele Bachmann have to win by less than 4,000 votes, it is time to look for an alternative.

Like I said before, the American electorate is becoming more moderate. The GOP needs to shift from being the party of ultra conservative white males to being one of all the people.

So your analysis would therefore include Obama and his ilk, for the most part the vote counts in the swing states were by margins for him, much like Bachmann's were for her. They both need to do something else, as winning isn't enough?

[Abbey Marie]

I have abandoned nothing, and quite frankly, its too late to ask me not to be offended......

I'm not asking you to not be offended. I was at first asking you to clarify what your beliefs were, and then asking you to be aware of what you are saying. You didn't like that, so you claim you're "offended" to shift the focus to me. It seems your feelings make you unable to admit that your priorities have shifted. That's your decision. But you can't have it both ways.

[Abbey Marie]

I didn't vote because the GOP is running weirdos.

Keep on running a brainless big-boobs like Sarah Palin; or a Mormon or Scientologist or Hari Krishna or Muslim; or hey! how about running a Log Cabin gay Republican, or a Cuban Hispanic like Rubio who favors open borders?

Whatever. Just keep running weirdos, GOP and Dems, and I'll keep on saying democracy doesn't work anymore, the heck with voting.

Let's have more clown-car primaries with sex criminals like Herman Cain, anti-birth control promoters like Santorum, much-married philanderers who ditch whatever wife they're married to as soon as she gets sick like Newt Gingrich.

This is all working so well, GOP! Just keep running weirdos, that'll work sooner or later, right?

Have you ever read Palin? She is far from a brainless person. Mundame, you are far too savvy to buy the media's trash.

[aboutime]

Have you ever read Palin? She is far from a brainless person. Mundame, you are far too savvy to buy the media's trash.


Abbey. Sadly. Mundame has just become more evidence of my previous assertions about Obama voters being Easily-Led, and Gullible. Based on more than educational levels. There are Smart People. Intelligent people, and then BOOK SMART people who only know what others have told them. And they believe it. Without using the time to determine what is true, and what is false.

[PostmodernProphet]

I'm not asking you to not be offended. I was at first asking you to clarify what your beliefs were, and then asking you to be aware of what you are saying. You didn't like that, so you claim you're "offended" to shift the focus to me. It seems your feelings make you unable to admit that your priorities have shifted. That's your decision. But you can't have it both ways.

actually, I can...my priorities have not shifted.....but comments like yours make me feel I was right to believe there is no longer room for me among people who identify as Republicans......

[DragonStryk72]

Here's a suggestion: Get involved with your local Tea Party and work towards endorsing Tea Party candidates. This way the issues you care about will be prioritized, the issues you don't care about will be minimized, the candidates you endorse will actually stand *some* chance of winning, and your vote will not be marginalized by tossing it towards some obscure third party candidate who stands no chance of garnering 1% of the general vote.

except for Gary Johnson who got 1.33% of the general vote. OOPS.

[mundame]

...I was right to believe there is no longer room for me among people who identify as Republicans......



I am watching to see what is going to become the "narrative" about this election. At first reaction (O'Reilly and the WSJ) it was that whites have been overwhelmed and America is becoming brown and in decline, like South Africa and Holland and Britain and Jamaica and Brazil and Argentina and Zimbabwe and all the sad rest.

However, I am wondering if the fact that SO MANY (millions of) whites simply wouldn't vote on these two miserable choices may become the narrative people settle on. I didn't. Several here wouldn't. You are thinking of bailing now. I see it everywhere: people just saying, sheeeesh, this is just dumb.

And another narrative starting up is that the GOP may have to change radically or be replaced by an internal war that destroys it. That's what I want.......

[Abbey Marie]

actually, I can...my priorities have not shifted.....but comments like yours make me feel I was right to believe there is no longer room for me among people who identify as Republicans......

If your priorities have not shifted, there is no way you could join a non-prolife party. It's really pretty simple.

And your now continued attempts to try to bully me into feeling badly because I had the spine to ask you about your thoughts will not work. Live with your choices, and don't try to use me as an excuse for your new priorities.

[Missileman]

If your priorities have not shifted, there is no way you could join a non-prolife party. It's really pretty simple.

And your now continued attempts to try to bully me into feeling badly because I had the spine to ask you about your thoughts will not work. Live with your choices, and don't try to use me as an excuse for your new priorities.

The question becomes, do you continue to commit fiscal suicide year after year after year to push one or two hot button social issues? I believe it's called cutting off your nose to spite your face.

[Kathianne]

If your priorities have not shifted, there is no way you could join a non-prolife party. It's really pretty simple.

And your now continued attempts to try to bully me into feeling badly because I had the spine to ask you about your thoughts will not work. Live with your choices, and don't try to use me as an excuse for your new priorities.

I'm not being facetious, I'm against murder and cannibalism too, but the Republican Party doesn't have either in their platform. I still think they are OK. Now I've noticed the Dems too, neglect these evils, common in some periods of times, some more than others. Think Gacy or Donner Party, does that make them in favor of?

Party platforms are funny things, none moreso than the fight the Democrats had this time around on leaving out God. Geez.

I'm more interested in a candidate that can represent MY most important issues, for you I guess that's "Life," for me it's the economy and securing a future for my children, the 3 I brought into this world. My grandchildren are not yet conceived, nor born. I pray for some. ;) While my kids all trend liberal, they are all pro-Life. Yet they find succor at the Democrat table. I don't get it, neither does their father, who's political leanings are pretty much the same as mine. Go figure.

[taft2012]

except for Gary Johnson who got 1.33% of the general vote. OOPS.

Really? They must have been popping champagne corks all across the country in the libertarian clubhouses.:laugh:

[PostmodernProphet]

If your priorities have not shifted, there is no way you could join a non-prolife party. It's really pretty simple.

that conclusion isn't simple......merely shallow......



And your now continued attempts to try to bully me into feeling badly because I had the spine to ask you about your thoughts will not work. Live with your choices, and don't try to use me as an excuse for your new priorities.
I'm not trying to make you feel bad, Abby....I'm just trying to tell you you're wrong.....there's a significant difference......I'm not using you as an excuse......I'm just asking you to stop insulting my intelligence.....

[DragonStryk72]

Really? They must have been popping champagne corks all across the country in the libertarian clubhouses.:laugh:

lol, still got more, and the Libertarians are still increasing, and we seem to be getting a lot of convert from the Republican party.

[fj1200]

If your priorities have not shifted, there is no way you could join a non-prolife party. It's really pretty simple.

If the "non-pro-life party" supported Strict Constructionists that ultimately led to a roll-back in Roe v. Wade are they still pro-choice?

[DragonStryk72]

I'm not being facetious, I'm against murder and cannibalism too, but the Republican Party doesn't have either in their platform. I still think they are OK. Now I've noticed the Dems too, neglect these evils, common in some periods of times, some more than others. Think Gacy or Donner Party, does that make them in favor of?

Party platforms are funny things, none moreso than the fight the Democrats had this time around on leaving out God. Geez.

I'm more interested in a candidate that can represent MY most important issues, for you I guess that's "Life," for me it's the economy and securing a future for my children, the 3 I brought into this world. My grandchildren are not yet conceived, nor born. I pray for some. ;) While my kids all trend liberal, they are all pro-Life. Yet they find succor at the Democrat table. I don't get it, neither does their father, who's political leanings are pretty much the same as mine. Go figure.

This outlines one of the biggest reasons the Republicans are having trouble these days. Romney had to flip stance on almost everything in order to secure the Republican nomination, because for many in the party, it seems like if there's one area you don't toe the line on, you're not worth listening to on any other area. Had Romney not flipped on abortion and gay marriage, Obama wouldn't have been able to use those as weapons for his side in the major cities, and likely, would have won, but he got straight-jacketed into every Republican party-line stance coming down the pike.

[Kathianne]

Neal Boortz goes a bit over the top here, but there is much truth in what he's saying. I would go a bit more softly, emphasizing everyone's obvious right to actively campaign for any candidate who holds dear their cherished ideals. For myself, that means I've always voted for those that I agree with on my most important issues. I certainly wouldn't vote for someone that wanted to continue down the road of the last 4 years, which made Obama a zero chance candidate for me. Conclusion: http://www.boortz.com/weblogs/nealz-nuze/2012/nov/08/republican-party-let-me-help-you-out/
...Stop crying in your beer and listen up. America is going to suffer another four years under Obama because of YOU. The Republican party blew this one --- big time. Abortion – gay marriage – immigration reform. The perfect electoral storm, and you couldn’t have played it any worse. Leave these issues alone! Drop them! If the GOP cannot turn loose of this mindless social conservatism, then you will be relegated to second class status (politically speaking) for the remaining days of this Republic, which may not be all that many. The Republican Party as it currently stands needs to die. Like a phoenix, it needs to burst into flames and from its ashes rebuild into a party focused on … * Limited government * Tax reform * A strong military * The rule of law * Reducing regulations * Promoting capitalism – especially small businesses * Restoring self-reliance * Honoring the Constitution Did you see abortion or gay marriage on that list? Didn’t think so. The Republicans need to become more Libertarian and less religiously authoritarian or the Party is dead. It’s amazing that these social conservatives have managed to screw this country they claim to love so much by handing Democrats victories this week thanks to these social issues.

[mundame]

This outlines one of the biggest reasons the Republicans are having trouble these days. Romney had to flip stance on almost everything in order to secure the Republican nomination, because for many in the party, it seems like if there's one area you don't toe the line on, you're not worth listening to on any other area. Had Romney not flipped on abortion and gay marriage, Obama wouldn't have been able to use those as weapons for his side in the major cities, and likely, would have won, but he got straight-jacketed into every Republican party-line stance coming down the pike.


Bingo.

What he said.

[revelarts]

So more "republicans" would have voted for Romney, if he had kept being pro-choice, Pro gay marriage, and I'll add Anti Gun?

or are we saying that more undecided and democrats would have voted for him as well as republicans so Romany would have won and that'd be better for the country and the republican party?
Cause he woulda won, and that's good n stuff.

[DragonStryk72]

So more "republicans" would have voted for Romney, if he had kept being pro-choice, Pro gay marriage, and I'll add Anti Gun?

or are we saying that more undecided and democrats would have voted for him as well as republicans so Romany would have won and that'd be better for the country and the republican party?
Cause he woulda won, and that's good n stuff.

Actually, gun control wasn't really on the plate this time around. I mean, sure there were some test taps, but that was about it. Mostly they made it about women's rights (abortion), and tolerance (gay marriage). Romney's best possible argument against Obama would have boiled down to this, "I'm going to do exactly what Obama did for abortion and gay marriage during the two years he had Democratic majorities in the House and Senate.... absolutely nothing."

[Kathianne]

I think that Democrats successfully interjected social issues into the campaign then spun to put the conservatives on the defensive.

Since nearly all of these issues belong at the state level, it seems prudent to me that the candidate state that and WHY it's important to have both the federalist system and the Republic working.

Indeed, in hindsight one wonders why the number of executive orders, the contempt shown towards Congress, the appearance of intimidation towards the SCOTUS, the encouragement of companies to ignore the WARN ACT along with a promise for the taxpayers to pick up the tab should the companies be sued, the failure to come up with a budget in 4 years were not the leading issues.

[red states rule]

I think that Democrats successfully interjected social issues into the campaign then spun to put the conservatives on the defensive.

Since nearly all of these issues belong at the state level, it seems prudent to me that the candidate state that and WHY it's important to have both the federalist system and the Republic working.

Indeed, in hindsight one wonders why the number of executive orders, the contempt shown towards Congress, the appearance of intimidation towards the SCOTUS, the encouragement of companies to ignore the WARN ACT along with a promise for the taxpayers to pick up the tab should the companies be sued, the failure to come up with a budget in 4 years were not the leading issues. Obama knew a majority of voters could be bought with "free" stuff Kat. Why should single women pay $9/month at Wal Mart for birth control pills when Obama can run on having someone else pay for it. It does not matter if the women is unemployed - she has a right to "free" birth control pills in Obama's America. And I am sad to say, enough women fell for it

[Kathianne]

Obama knew a majority of voters could be bought with "free" stuff Kat. Why should single women pay $9/month at Wal Mart for birth control pills when Obama can run on having someone else pay for it. It does not matter if the women is unemployed - she has a right to "free" birth control pills in Obama's America. And I am sad to say, enough women fell for it

Perhaps that holds for some, like those that thought last time they'd get a car or house, but sure doesn't explain his getting the percentages he did in educated and those making over $250k, hell, make that over $100k. Nope, something wrong with how the conservative message is getting out.

IMO at least a big part of the problem is giving an explanation of why the principles are best for all, from extremely successful to those on the bottom.

[mundame]

Well, let's see: 1.One black Republican candidate liked to invite blond female job seekers to dinner to discuss a job and then grab at them between their legs under the table. He did this repeatedly, and kept a white mistress for 15 years.

2. One Republican candidate cheated on wife after wife for years at a time and always ditched the wife as soon as she got seriously ill.

3. One Republican candidate wanted to stop American women having access to birth control.

4. One Republican candidate was a Mormon of the Romney family sent out in the 1920s to non-American territories to preserve polygamy for a better political time for it; this was some 35 years AFTER federal troops forced Mormons to stop polygamy in Salt Lake City.

5. That same Mormon candidate hired on a VP candidate who was busily making up bills that prohibit any woman for getting an abortion for any reason, however horrendous.

6. And both of them ran on a Republican platform that clearly said no abortion for any reason at any time ever and ever amen.

7. Not to mention the two Republican senatorial candidates who affirmed and applauded rape and said any woman raped had to carry the child to term because rape was God's Will. Sure sounds like Sharia Law to me.



Women would have to be either completely out of their minds or completely out of touch to vote for any of these monsters, and many of us understood that very well.

Something is incredibly wrong with the Republican Party, and I think it's that they are mostly men who violently hate women. Since women are as of this election fully 54% of the electorate, hey, enjoy, fools. The rest of us are bailing out.

[Kathianne]

Well, let's see: 1.One black Republican candidate liked to invite blond female job seekers to dinner to discuss a job and then grab at them between their legs under the table. He did this repeatedly, and kept a white mistress for 15 years.

2. One Republican candidate cheated on wife after wife for years at a time and always ditched the wife as soon as she got seriously ill.

3. One Republican candidate wanted to stop American women having access to birth control.

4. One Republican candidate was a Mormon of the Romney family sent out in the 1920s to non-American territories to preserve polygamy for a better political time for it; this was some 35 years AFTER federal troops forced Mormons to stop polygamy in Salt Lake City.

5. That same Mormon candidate hired on a VP candidate who was busily making up bills that prohibit any woman for getting an abortion for any reason, however horrendous.

6. And both of them ran on a Republican platform that clearly said no abortion for any reason at any time ever and ever amen.

7. Not to mention the two Republican senatorial candidates who affirmed and applauded rape and said any woman raped had to carry the child to term because rape was God's Will. Sure sounds like Sharia Law to me.



Women would have to be either completely out of their minds or completely out of touch to vote for any of these monsters, and many of us understood that very well.

Something is incredibly wrong with the Republican Party, and I think it's that they are mostly men who violently hate women. Since women are as of this election fully 54% of the electorate, hey, enjoy, fools. The rest of us are bailing out.

We got that you hate Mormons. Enjoy that.

As for the other 'points' a quick search will find just as many on the other side.

As for the 'war on women' you seem to be buying into, go for the Dems, you'd be more comfortable there, they join you on the anti-Mormon deal too.

[red states rule]

Perhaps that holds for some, like those that thought last time they'd get a car or house, but sure doesn't explain his getting the percentages he did in educated and those making over $250k, hell, make that over $100k. Nope, something wrong with how the conservative message is getting out.

IMO at least a big part of the problem is giving an explanation of why the principles are best for all, from extremely successful to those on the bottom.

The message was fine Kat. Where Mitt screwed up did not respond to the ads casting him as a vampire capitalist, a murderer, a felon, and all the other attack ads that Team Obama ran. If I am wrong for thinking hard work and paying you own bills with your the money you earn from your job a backward way of thinking - this nation a mega fu***d Kat

[Kathianne]

The message was fine Kat. Where Mitt screwed up did not respond to the ads casting him as a vampire capitalist, a murderer, a felon, and all the other attack ads that Team Obama ran. If I am wrong for thinking hard work and paying you own bills with your the money you earn from your job a backward way of thinking - this nation a mega fu***d Kat

It wasn't 'fine' we lost. We now face 4 more years and that is not a good prospect. It is what it is though. One can whine, decide to double down on what was done-hoping for a 'better candidate' or figure out how to win.

[mundame]

We got that you hate Mormons. Enjoy that.

As for the other 'points' a quick search will find just as many on the other side.

As for the 'war on women' you seem to be buying into, go for the Dems, you'd be more comfortable there, they join you on the anti-Mormon deal too.



You think there were as many Dem candidates who betray women, grope women, cheat on women, want to stop all birth control, want raped women to have to carry the fetus to term?

I definitely don't think you can back that up, because it isn't the case. The situation is that REPUBLICANS this interesting election have acted like Neanderthals throughout from last fall to this fall.

As for Mormons, they are no more Christian than Muslims are and their Book of Mormon is well known to have be plagarized from the Koran by Joseph Smith. That's why the polygamy: These two are the only major religion that do polygamy. Okay, you are a Mormon-lover, but I question how wise it is to turn over the country to a very strange, anti-Christian religion close to Islam. I don't care to help it happen, anyway.

I think it's gone way past reforming the Republican Party. We need a whole new party. One that is willing to include women without this sort of Sharia Law business Republicans are into now.

[red states rule]

It wasn't 'fine' we lost. We now face 4 more years and that is not a good prospect. It is what it is though. One can whine, decide to double down on what was done-hoping for a 'better candidate' or figure out how to win.
Kat I never said losing was fine - Mitt did not respond early to the lies being put out. Perhaps he should have used his own money to respond. I for one dred the next 4 years - even though I should continue to work lots of OT in the Obama economy. If we want to win, the winning way is not to play The Price is Right to buy votes like I have heard sine Tuesday. We are broke and Obama is taking us straight to bankruptcy court

[Kathianne]

You think there were as many Dem candidates who betray women, grope women, cheat on women, want to stop all birth control, want raped women to have to carry the fetus to term?

I definitely don't think you can back that up, because it isn't the case. The situation is that REPUBLICANS this interesting election have acted like Neanderthals throughout from last fall to this fall.

As for Mormons, they are no more Christian than Muslims are and their Book of Mormon is well known to have be plagarized from the Koran by Joseph Smith. That's why the polygamy: These two are the only major religion that do polygamy. Okay, you are a Mormon-lover, but I question how wise it is to turn over the country to a very strange, anti-Christian religion close to Islam. I don't care to help it happen, anyway.

I think it's gone way past reforming the Republican Party. We need a whole new party. One that is willing to include women without this sort of Sharia Law business Republicans are into now.

Then get busy on that, your hate no more represents the conservative message than does those 'Christians' that want to judge everyone else by their standards. Whoops, seems you do fall into that category with the additional point of some sort of feminism that you think is missing.

As for crazy Republican candidates, whether Akin or Bachmann, I do think their constituents have the right to make that call. If I remember correctly, it was a split. Just think, Bachmann doesn't have a penis and still has said some crazy things IMO.

[mundame]

As for crazy Republican candidates, whether Akin or Bachmann, I do think their constituents have the right to make that call. If I remember correctly, it was a split. Just think, Bachmann doesn't have a penis and still has said some crazy things IMO.


Bachmann is okay with me; I like her. She has style and intelligence.

And doesn't hate women, always a plus..........

The more women elected into politics, the better. At least there won't be so much of this wife-swapping and groping under tables as there is now.

[red states rule]

You think there were as many Dem candidates who betray women, grope women, cheat on women, want to stop all birth control, want raped women to have to carry the fetus to term?

I definitely don't think you can back that up, because it isn't the case. The situation is that REPUBLICANS this interesting election have acted like Neanderthals throughout from last fall to this fall.

As for Mormons, they are no more Christian than Muslims are and their Book of Mormon is well known to have be plagarized from the Koran by Joseph Smith. That's why the polygamy: These two are the only major religion that do polygamy. Okay, you are a Mormon-lover, but I question how wise it is to turn over the country to a very strange, anti-Christian religion close to Islam. I don't care to help it happen, anyway.

I think it's gone way past reforming the Republican Party. We need a whole new party. One that is willing to include women without this sort of Sharia Law business Republicans are into now.

Excuse me, but you really are a spiteful and hate filled BITCH Mundame. Your bigotry is really disgusting. You remind me of of Germans looked at Jews in Berlin ion the 1930's

Your so called War on Women was nothing but a bold faced lie, but since your brain has enough mold on it to make a gallon of penicillin - you believed it

Jim I am sorry for the language but I had enough of this bimbo

[Kathianne]

Kat I never said losing was fine - Mitt did not respond early to the lies being put out. Perhaps he should have used his own money to respond. I for one dred the next 4 years - even though I should continue to work lots of OT in the Obama economy. If we want to win, the winning way is not to play The Price is Right to buy votes like I have heard sine Tuesday. We are broke and Obama is taking us straight to bankruptcy court

I hope I'm wrong, but agree that the country is in for a world of hurt over the next 4 years. I do not think Obama is going to move to the center, indeed I can't imagine how far to the left he will move, if those in Congress cannot find a way to block him. I don't expect that he'll engage with Congress anymore than he has in the past.

Hoping there is a second party in 4 years, those in the position to do so had better start figuring out how to win. No, I'm not advocating going 'Democrat lite' the GOP is already too much like that in candidates for the most part. I think the key is finding spokespeople that can articulate why small government, a healthy system of federalism and checks and balances will benefit all. How good government can protect the rights of individuals and their personal belief systems. The government does not have a duty, in fact should not be involved in enforcing personal beliefs onto the whole body politic.

[red states rule]

I hope I'm wrong, but agree that the country is in for a world of hurt over the next 4 years. I do not think Obama is going to move to the center, indeed I can't imagine how far to the left he will move, if those in Congress cannot find a way to block him. I don't expect that he'll engage with Congress anymore than he has in the past.

Hoping there is a second party in 4 years, those in the position to do so had better start figuring out how to win. No, I'm not advocating going 'Democrat lite' the GOP is already too much like that in candidates for the most part. I think the key is finding spokespeople that can articulate why small government, a healthy system of federalism and checks and balances will benefit all. How good government can protect the rights of individuals and their personal belief systems. The government does not have a duty, in fact should not be involved in enforcing personal beliefs onto the whole body politic.

I would like to think you are right Kat, but Obama is consumed with his liberal ideology and seems to want to double down with punishing achievement and expanding the size of government

Look at the number of people who have lost their jobs and companies that have filed for bankruptcy since Obama won the election. I hope the people who voted for Obama are happy - maybe some of those fired workers voted for Obama and are now muttering how Bush is to blame

[Kathianne]

I would like to think you are right Kat, but Obama is consumed with his liberal ideology and seems to want to double down with punishing achievement and expanding the size of government

Look at the number of people who have lost their jobs and companies that have filed for bankruptcy since Obama won the election. I hope the people who voted for Obama are happy - maybe some of those fired workers voted for Obama and are now muttering how Bush is to blame

T, not disagreeing with you, however how you got from what I wrote to the above? I'm unsure.

[mundame]

T, not disagreeing with you, however how you got from what I wrote to the above? I'm unsure.


I'm sure. He has an automatic post generator.

A database of hundreds of sentences from past years that are randomly inserted into the Reply space and fired off after a random number of sentences are generated.

[Kathianne]

It's along these lines that I'm interested at focusing attention:

http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Government/2012/11/12/GOP-Time-to-Get-With-It


Rep. Cathy McMorris Rodgers (R-Wash.) hit the nail on the head on CNN's "State of the Union" Sunday (http://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefing-room/news/267239-republicans-blast-own-party-for-image-problems): “I don't think it's about the Republican Party needing to become more moderate. I really believe it's the Republican Party becoming more modern. And whether it's Hispanics, whether it's women, whether it's young people, the Republican Party has to make it a priority to take our values, take our vision to every corner of this country, to every demographic group.” She is 100% correct. Every time I suggest better, smarter GOP outreach to young people, Hispanics, African Americans, and women, many in the GOP old guard wave their pointer fingers at me and insist that I am advocating pandering, that I am allying myself with the Left's divide and conquer tactics.


Let me correct them in writing, as I have done in speech: Outreach is not pandering. They are completely different things. I am not talking about dividing the country up into special interest groups, pandering to voting blocs with speeches telling them what they want to hear in order to win votes. What I am talking about is taking the conservative message, a message that stands to benefit everyone in society, to places the GOP often ignores--local African-American and Hispanic church groups, feminist centers, and left-leaning college campuses, to name a few.

Will your message face resistance? Yes, and that's okay. It gives you a chance to correct false, media-driven stereotypes about conservatives and conservatism. Will you convert the majority in one afternoon? Of course not; these stereotypes have been inculcated over decades. Opening hearts and minds is a process, not a lunch appointment. That doesn't mean you don't get to work. Andrew Breitbart understood that better than anyone.


Talk to young people about freedom. Remind them that their ability to control so many aspects of their lives is on the line. Remind women what many founding feminists fought so hard for--independence and opportunity--and talk about why the Left is a phony ally of both of those things. Talk about big-government policies, and why they are keeping poverty up--not down--in all communities, including Hispanic and African-American ones.


This is not pandering. This is a message of unity, a message that articulates how conservatism drives success among African Americans, whites, young people, women, men--all of us--but that message won't be maximized until you step away from preach-to-the-choir venues and engage those who aren't part of the GOP base. It's not easy. In fact, it's very hard work. But isn't it worth it?


Let me add a few things. First, the quality of messengers matters. Charismatic, energetic messengers of conservatism are a must. We live in a world where people often listen to those they can relate to in some way. That's a fact, so don't ignore it. Send that pro-life conservative female feminist to a left-leaning women's group. Send young conservatives to left-leaning college campuses and let the youth debate it out together. That's not pandering; it's smart outreach...

[mundame]

From above:

"Every time I suggest better, smarter GOP outreach to young people, Hispanics, African Americans, and women, many in the GOP old guard wave their pointer fingers at me and insist that I am advocating pandering..."

This is why it is impossible: the GOP as presently constituted cannot reform. It is too old, too sclerotic. It is composed almost wholly of the famous "angry white men," and that would be fine, except that browns are rapidly becoming a majority and women already have. So as of now, the angry white man party can never win again.

Never.

So we need a wholly new party, with new ideas, Libertarian ideas of personal freedom and restricted government. Angry white men don't want any of that: they want women locked up and under control and everyone else disenfranchised. The latter idea has a lot of appeal to me personally, being actually no liberal, but I know that it isn't likely to happen unless the country splits up into separate cultural nationstates, something I'm not holding my breath for. Big things happen, but never as soon as we expect. Or WHAT we expect.

As things are now, Republicans need to go and a wholly new party form on better lines that more people will like to live by.

[Kathianne]

From above:

"Every time I suggest better, smarter GOP outreach to young people, Hispanics, African Americans, and women, many in the GOP old guard wave their pointer fingers at me and insist that I am advocating pandering..."

This is why it is impossible: the GOP as presently constituted cannot reform. It is too old, too sclerotic. It is composed almost wholly of the famous "angry white men," and that would be fine, except that browns are rapidly becoming a majority and women already have. So as of now, the angry white man party can never win again.

Never.

So we need a wholly new party, with new ideas, Libertarian ideas of personal freedom and restricted government. Angry white men don't want any of that: they want women locked up and under control and everyone else disenfranchised. The latter idea has a lot of appeal to me personally, being actually no liberal, but I know that it isn't likely to happen unless the country splits up into separate cultural nationstates, something I'm not holding my breath for. Big things happen, but never as soon as we expect. Or WHAT we expect.

As things are now, Republicans need to go and a wholly new party form on better lines that more people will like to live by.

No, Mundame. YOU may need to go with a whole new party or not. That is your choice.

[red states rule]

T, not disagreeing with you, however how you got from what I wrote to the above? I'm unsure.Sorry Kat. I was trying to do more than one thing at a time. I stand corrected. http://media.townhall.com/Townhall/Car/b/gv111112dAPR20121109044545.jpg

[mundame]

No, Mundame. YOU may need to go with a whole new party or not. That is your choice.


So you think the Republican Party can struggle on as is through the next election or so.

Well, maybe......

I guess we'll see.

We are remembering that Lincoln's Whigs switched out for Republicans just before the Civil War, right? I mean, it isn't exactly illegal for a new party to form.

[red states rule]

So you think the Republican Party can struggle on as is through the next election or so.

Well, maybe......

I guess we'll see.

We are remembering that Lincoln's Whigs switched out for Republicans just before the Civil War, right? I mean, it isn't exactly illegal for a new party to form.

Mundame, one of the great things about America is that everyone has a right to act stupid. But you are starting to abuse the privilege

[mundame]

If it happens -- a new major party -- it will happen very, very fast.

Everything big happens very fast, as a rule. Usually within a week, often half a week.

Remember the Tea Party's rapid formation. Feb. 19, 2009, Rick Santelli's rant on the floor of the Chicago Stock Exchange went viral and presto, a new.....not quite party. But still, it's been big, huge, in elections since.

[Kathianne]

So you think the Republican Party can struggle on as is through the next election or so.

Well, maybe......

I guess we'll see.

We are remembering that Lincoln's Whigs switched out for Republicans just before the Civil War, right? I mean, it isn't exactly illegal for a new party to form.

Feel free to start one.

[red states rule]

Feel free to start one.
I see her as the founder of Americans Against Mormons Party