Quoting someone from the 'far right'

[Si modo]

Not too long ago, the Democrats called the man who said this an extreme rightie:

On religious issues there can be little or no compromise. There is no position on which people are so immovable as their religious beliefs. There is no more powerful ally one can claim in a debate than Jesus Christ, or God, or Allah, or whatever one calls this supreme being. But like any powerful weapon, the use of God's name on one's behalf should be used sparingly. The religious factions that are growing throughout our land are not using their religious clout with wisdom. They are trying to force government leaders into following their position 100 percent. If you disagree with these religious groups on a particular moral issue, they complain, they threaten you with a loss of money or votes or both.

I'm frankly sick and tired of the political preachers across this country telling me as a citizen that if I want to be a moral person, I must believe in "A," "B," "C" and "D." Just who do they think they are? And from where do they presume to claim the right to dictate their moral beliefs to me?

And I am even more angry as a legislator who must endure the threats of every religious group who thinks it has some God-granted right to control my vote on every roll call in the Senate. I am warning them today: I will fight them every step of the way if they try to dictate their moral convictions to all Americans in the name of "conservatism."​

Funny how the opposition gets labeled.

 

[Ravi]

Not long ago, Republicans considered him too right wing to be a valid presidential candidate. Now, sadly, the GOP has moved even further to the right.

 

[Si modo]

Not long ago, Republicans considered him too right wing to be a valid presidential candidate. Now, sadly, the GOP has moved even further to the right.

In what way has the GOP moved farther to the right? Socially or fiscally?

It's just funny to me. He was labeled as far right by his opposition - Dems. You're right, he didn't stand a chance because of that.

This particular quote might get him labeled as a Democrat today by some in the GOP. Other quotes by him make him one of the first modern day 'Tea Partier' or 'con'.

And other quotes by him would make him a 'lib'.

He is, or was, the quintessential social liberal and fiscal conservative. I really think it is important for all of us to be specific in these 'liberal' and 'conservative' labels if we want effective political discussion.

 

[Bfgrn]

"Mark my word, if and when these preachers get control of the Republican party, and they're sure trying to do so, it's going to be a terrible damn problem. Frankly, these people frighten me. Politics and governing demand compromise. But these Christians believe they are acting in the name of God, so they can't and won't compromise. I know, I've tried to deal with them."
Barry Goldwater


Not that long ago Barry Goldwater WAS the extreme right. But that was before the GOP was hijacked by far right Christians and far left neoconservatives. The Republican party had liberal Republicans like Nelson Rockefeller, liberal Senators like Jacob Javits, compassionate conservatives like Everett Dirksen. And Barry Goldwater was a compassionate conservative who was good friends with Jack Kennedy. The two men talked about traveling the country together campaigning for President in 1964.

Who says the GOP was hijacked? A Goldwater Republican who served as press aide to Barry Goldwater He was also a speechwriter and senior advisor to George H. W. Bush...

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Victor Gold, former speechwriter for George Herbert Walker Bush is a Goldwater conservative...his book explains how the GOP was hijacked away from conservatives by far right theocrats and far left neocons...starting in 1980...

Book Review:

Invasion of the Party Snatchers

By Victor Gold

After four decades as a Republican insider, Victor Gold reveals how the holy-rollers and the Neo-Cons have destroyed the GOP. Now he's fighting to get his party back.

As a man who served as press aide to Barry Goldwater and speechwriter and senior advisor to George H. W. Bush (in addition to co-authoring his autobiography), Victor Gold is absolutely furious that the Neo-Cons and their strange bedfellows, the Evangelical Right, have stolen his party from him. Now he is bringing the fight to them.

Invasion of the Party Snatchers is a blistering critique not only of the Bush-Cheney administration but also of the Republican Congress. Gold is ready to tell all about the war being waged for the soul of the GOP, including the elder Bush's opinion of his sons work domestically and abroad, the significance of the newly elected Congress, and how Goldwater would have reacted to it all. Gold reveals, among other explosive disclosures, how George W. has been manipulated by his vice president and secretary of defense to become, in Lenin's famous phrase, a "useful idiot" for Neo-Conservative warmongers and Theo-Conservative religious fanatics.

Although there have been other books by dissident Republicans attacking the Bush-Cheney administrations betrayal of conservative principles, none have been by an insider whose political credentials include inner-circle status with Barry Goldwater and George H. W. Bush.

Review:
"Make no mistake: author Gold, a former speechwriter for George H.W. Bush and aide to Barry Goldwater, is one disgusted Republican. The GOP of the 2006 midterm election, he writes, is 'a party of pork-barrel ear-markers like Dennis Hastert, of political hatchet men like Karl Rove, and of Bible-thumping hypocrites like Tom Delay.' Gold looks to Goldwater, 'a straight-talking, freethinking maverick,' as the yardstick by which to measure just how far the party of Lincoln has fallen.

He traces the beginning of the end to the 1980 Republican National Convention and the presence of 'a militant new element...personified by Pat Robertson and Jerry Falwell.' The other half of the equation, the neoconservatives, are embodied by Dick Cheney and Donald Rumsfeld, 'two cuts from the same Machiavellian cloth.' In efficient prose, Gold scrutinizes a significant swath of recent GOP history, in particular Newt Gingrich's 104th Congress and the Bush II White House, without losing momentum.

He also has choice words for 'the Coulterization of Republican rhetoric,' the revolving door between Capitol Hill and K Street, and 'sideshow' legislation like the Flag Protection Amendment. Gold sees a promising future for the Republican Party, but not until they lose some major elections and are able to keep down a slice of humble pie; for those disillusioned with the state of the GOP, this quick, uncompromising polemic provides substantial support, along with a large dose of cold comfort." Publishers Weekly (Starred Review) (Copyright Reed Business Information, Inc.)

Synopsis:
The last real Goldwater conservative in America attacks the current state of his movement and his party.

Powell's Books - Invasion of the Party Snatchers: How the Holy-Rollers and Neo-Cons Destroyed the GOP by Victor Gold

 

[Si modo]

I agree that the GOP was highjacked by the religious right, but that does not mean the GOP IS the religious right.

For those of us who are fiscally conservative and socially liberal - and we make up a large portion of independents and the 'undecided' before big elections - pragmatism forces us to vote either [D] or [R], if we want our vote to count. For many of us, the lesser of two evils is to vote [R] because of our fiscal conservative views. If the Democratic Party wants to win these votes, perhaps attention to fiscal conservatism would be a good idea?

Just a thought.

 

[California Girl]

I agree that the GOP was highjacked by the religious right, but that does not mean the GOP IS the religious right.

For those of us who are fiscally conservative and socially liberal - and we make up a large portion of independents and the 'undecided' before big elections - pragmatism forces us to vote either [D] or [R], if we want our vote to count. For many of us, the lesser of two evils is to vote [R] because of our fiscal conservative views. If the Democratic Party wants to win these votes, perhaps attention to fiscal conservatism would be a good idea?

Just a thought.

Mo chara, I doubt many of our lefty posters even understand your point. You're gonna need to spell it out for 'em.

 

[Si modo]

I agree that the GOP was highjacked by the religious right, but that does not mean the GOP IS the religious right.

For those of us who are fiscally conservative and socially liberal - and we make up a large portion of independents and the 'undecided' before big elections - pragmatism forces us to vote either [D] or [R], if we want our vote to count. For many of us, the lesser of two evils is to vote [R] because of our fiscal conservative views. If the Democratic Party wants to win these votes, perhaps attention to fiscal conservatism would be a good idea?

Just a thought.

Mo chara, I doubt many of our lefty posters even understand your point. You're gonna need to spell it out for 'em.

I thought I did?

 

[Ravi]

I agree that the GOP was highjacked by the religious right, but that does not mean the GOP IS the religious right.

For those of us who are fiscally conservative and socially liberal - and we make up a large portion of independents and the 'undecided' before big elections - pragmatism forces us to vote either [D] or [R], if we want our vote to count. For many of us, the lesser of two evils is to vote [R] because of our fiscal conservative views. If the Democratic Party wants to win these votes, perhaps attention to fiscal conservatism would be a good idea?

Just a thought.

Mo chara, I doubt many of our lefty posters even understand your point. You're gonna need to spell it out for 'em.

I thought I did?

No, don't you know? Most of our lefty posters are mentally retarded.

 

[Si modo]

Mo chara, I doubt many of our lefty posters even understand your point. You're gonna need to spell it out for 'em.

I thought I did?

No, don't you know? Most of our lefty posters are mentally retarded.

Some certainly are, as are some of the rightie posters.

 

[Two Thumbs]

Not too long ago, the Democrats called the man who said this an extreme rightie:

On religious issues there can be little or no compromise. There is no position on which people are so immovable as their religious beliefs. There is no more powerful ally one can claim in a debate than Jesus Christ, or God, or Allah, or whatever one calls this supreme being. But like any powerful weapon, the use of God's name on one's behalf should be used sparingly. The religious factions that are growing throughout our land are not using their religious clout with wisdom. They are trying to force government leaders into following their position 100 percent. If you disagree with these religious groups on a particular moral issue, they complain, they threaten you with a loss of money or votes or both.

I'm frankly sick and tired of the political preachers across this country telling me as a citizen that if I want to be a moral person, I must believe in "A," "B," "C" and "D." Just who do they think they are? And from where do they presume to claim the right to dictate their moral beliefs to me?

And I am even more angry as a legislator who must endure the threats of every religious group who thinks it has some God-granted right to control my vote on every roll call in the Senate. I am warning them today: I will fight them every step of the way if they try to dictate their moral convictions to all Americans in the name of "conservatism."​

Funny how the opposition gets labeled.

I watched the GOP go from being right of center fiscally and socially.

Then the bible thumpers went nuts and the GOP was following what preachers said over what the Constitution said just to get elected. Then fiscal liberals snuck in under the gise of social conservatism [doing it for the chilluns]. Once I realised that, I knew neither party was conservative in any fashion. Neither care about the economy or the Constitution

They dicker over what to waste money on and what parts of the bible they will enforce or shut down.

 

[Two Thumbs]

Mo chara, I doubt many of our lefty posters even understand your point. You're gonna need to spell it out for 'em.

I thought I did?

No, don't you know? Most of our lefty posters are mentally retarded.

*ahem*PC*ahem*

Mentally handicapable.

 

[Si modo]

Not too long ago, the Democrats called the man who said this an extreme rightie:

On religious issues there can be little or no compromise. There is no position on which people are so immovable as their religious beliefs. There is no more powerful ally one can claim in a debate than Jesus Christ, or God, or Allah, or whatever one calls this supreme being. But like any powerful weapon, the use of God's name on one's behalf should be used sparingly. The religious factions that are growing throughout our land are not using their religious clout with wisdom. They are trying to force government leaders into following their position 100 percent. If you disagree with these religious groups on a particular moral issue, they complain, they threaten you with a loss of money or votes or both.

I'm frankly sick and tired of the political preachers across this country telling me as a citizen that if I want to be a moral person, I must believe in "A," "B," "C" and "D." Just who do they think they are? And from where do they presume to claim the right to dictate their moral beliefs to me?

And I am even more angry as a legislator who must endure the threats of every religious group who thinks it has some God-granted right to control my vote on every roll call in the Senate. I am warning them today: I will fight them every step of the way if they try to dictate their moral convictions to all Americans in the name of "conservatism."​

Funny how the opposition gets labeled.

I watched the GOP go from being right of center fiscally and socially.

Then the bible thumpers went nuts and the GOP was following what preachers said over what the Constitution said just to get elected. Then fiscal liberals snuck in under the gise of social conservatism [doing it for the chilluns]. Once I realised that, I knew neither party was conservative in any fashion. Neither care about the economy or the Constitution

They dicker over what to waste money on and what parts of the bible they will enforce or shut down.

I agree that neither party is conservative, but they are not fiscally conservative as a whole. So, many independents and undecided who value fiscal conservatism have to settle for the lesser of two evils in that game. The GOP seems to be more socially conservative than the Dems, but that is not attractive to me. The Dems seem less fiscally conservative than the GOP right now.

So, what to do? Right now, the social conservatives don't seem like much of a threat to me but the fiscal liberals do. What should those who are trying to win elections do to get the undecideds, because those are the votes that win elections.

 

[Ravi]

I thought I did?

No, don't you know? Most of our lefty posters are mentally retarded.

*ahem*PC*ahem*

Mentally handicapable.

Actually, the PC term is differently-abled.

 

[Si modo]

Another quote: "You don't have to be straight to serve in the military, you just have to shoot straight."

Fucking con.

 

[Two Thumbs]

Not too long ago, the Democrats called the man who said this an extreme rightie:

On religious issues there can be little or no compromise. There is no position on which people are so immovable as their religious beliefs. There is no more powerful ally one can claim in a debate than Jesus Christ, or God, or Allah, or whatever one calls this supreme being. But like any powerful weapon, the use of God's name on one's behalf should be used sparingly. The religious factions that are growing throughout our land are not using their religious clout with wisdom. They are trying to force government leaders into following their position 100 percent. If you disagree with these religious groups on a particular moral issue, they complain, they threaten you with a loss of money or votes or both.

I'm frankly sick and tired of the political preachers across this country telling me as a citizen that if I want to be a moral person, I must believe in "A," "B," "C" and "D." Just who do they think they are? And from where do they presume to claim the right to dictate their moral beliefs to me?

And I am even more angry as a legislator who must endure the threats of every religious group who thinks it has some God-granted right to control my vote on every roll call in the Senate. I am warning them today: I will fight them every step of the way if they try to dictate their moral convictions to all Americans in the name of "conservatism."​

Funny how the opposition gets labeled.

I watched the GOP go from being right of center fiscally and socially.

Then the bible thumpers went nuts and the GOP was following what preachers said over what the Constitution said just to get elected. Then fiscal liberals snuck in under the gise of social conservatism [doing it for the chilluns]. Once I realised that, I knew neither party was conservative in any fashion. Neither care about the economy or the Constitution

They dicker over what to waste money on and what parts of the bible they will enforce or shut down.

I agree that neither party is conservative, but they are not fiscally conservative as a whole. So, many independents and undecided who value fiscal conservatism have to settle for the lesser of two evils in that game. The GOP seems to be more socially conservative than the Dems, but that is not attractive to me. The Dems seem less fiscally conservative than the GOP right now.

So, what to do? Right now, the social conservatives don't seem like much of a threat to me but the fiscal liberals do. What should those who are trying to win elections do to get the undecideds, because those are the votes that win elections.

To get elected to what the media wants you to do. The rest is of no concern b/c so few people actually know who they are voting for.

Take the big deal the left was making of Bachmanns headaches and her missing votes.
I checked, there's damn few misses.
But what was big 0's reason for missing so many votes? With no medical issues, he was just to damn lazy to vote or vote yes or no.
That got little to no mention by the press.

The main issue for me is the same issue it's been since ~ Bush Sr / Clinton; The debt, everything else is just feel good bs.

 

[Two Thumbs]

No, don't you know? Most of our lefty posters are mentally retarded.

*ahem*PC*ahem*

Mentally handicapable.

Actually, the PC term is differently-abled.

 

[Bfgrn]

I agree that the GOP was highjacked by the religious right, but that does not mean the GOP IS the religious right.

For those of us who are fiscally conservative and socially liberal - and we make up a large portion of independents and the 'undecided' before big elections - pragmatism forces us to vote either [D] or [R], if we want our vote to count. For many of us, the lesser of two evils is to vote [R] because of our fiscal conservative views. If the Democratic Party wants to win these votes, perhaps attention to fiscal conservatism would be a good idea?

Just a thought.

Pretty much an oxymoron. The only way to describe your beliefs is as a conservative..PERIOD; someone who puts property before people. IF you understand what an economy is and isn't, there can be no social justice without economic justice. The total history of mankind has been proof.

As long as radicals like Grover Norquist and Club for 'Growth' ostracize and destroy any Republican candidate who even hints at compromise and moderation, the far right HAS TOTAL control of the GOP.

Moderate Republicans who are willing to speak out are NO LONGER in office.

Fmr. GOP Sen. Alan Simpson Calls Republican Refusal To Raise Revenue ‘Absolute Bullshit’

Former GOP Sen. Alan Simpson blasted his intransigent GOP colleagues on the Hill today for failing to reach a deal on the deficit. The blunt-talking co-chairman of President Obama’s bipartisan fiscal reform commission slammed Republicans for kowtowing to Americans for Tax Reform head Grover Norquist (“Republicans can’t be in thrall to him”) and pushed Treasury Secretary Tim Geithner to stand fast on the August 2 deadline.

Surveying the lay of the current fiscal land, Simpson said, “We’re at 15 percent revenue, and historically it’s been closer to 20 percent.”

He added, “We’ve never had a war without a tax, and now we’ve got two. … Absolute bullshit.”

More

Or sprinkled throughout the media...


The Mother of All No-Brainers

By DAVID BROOKS
Published: July 4, 2011

If the Republican Party were a normal party, it would take advantage of this amazing moment. It is being offered the deal of the century: trillions of dollars in spending cuts in exchange for a few hundred billion dollars of revenue increases.

A normal Republican Party would seize the opportunity to put a long-term limit on the growth of government. It would seize the opportunity to put the country on a sound fiscal footing. It would seize the opportunity to do these things without putting any real crimp in economic growth.

The party is not being asked to raise marginal tax rates in a way that might pervert incentives. On the contrary, Republicans are merely being asked to close loopholes and eliminate tax expenditures that are themselves distortionary.

This, as I say, is the mother of all no-brainers.

But we can have no confidence that the Republicans will seize this opportunity. That’s because the Republican Party may no longer be a normal party. Over the past few years, it has been infected by a faction that is more of a psychological protest than a practical, governing alternative.

The members of this movement do not accept the logic of compromise, no matter how sweet the terms. If you ask them to raise taxes by an inch in order to cut government by a foot, they will say no. If you ask them to raise taxes by an inch to cut government by a yard, they will still say no.

The members of this movement do not accept the legitimacy of scholars and intellectual authorities. A thousand impartial experts may tell them that a default on the debt would have calamitous effects, far worse than raising tax revenues a bit. But the members of this movement refuse to believe it.

The members of this movement have no sense of moral decency. A nation makes a sacred pledge to pay the money back when it borrows money. But the members of this movement talk blandly of default and are willing to stain their nation’s honor.

The members of this movement have no economic theory worthy of the name. Economists have identified many factors that contribute to economic growth, ranging from the productivity of the work force to the share of private savings that is available for private investment. Tax levels matter, but they are far from the only or even the most important factor.

But to members of this movement, tax levels are everything. Members of this tendency have taken a small piece of economic policy and turned it into a sacred fixation. They are willing to cut education and research to preserve tax expenditures. Manufacturing employment is cratering even as output rises, but members of this movement somehow believe such problems can be addressed so long as they continue to worship their idol.

Over the past week, Democrats have stopped making concessions. They are coming to the conclusion that if the Republicans are fanatics then they better be fanatics, too.

Mere parsimony is not economy. Expense, and great expense, may be an essential part in true economy.
Edmund Burke

 

[Si modo]

I agree that the GOP was highjacked by the religious right, but that does not mean the GOP IS the religious right.

For those of us who are fiscally conservative and socially liberal - and we make up a large portion of independents and the 'undecided' before big elections - pragmatism forces us to vote either [D] or [R], if we want our vote to count. For many of us, the lesser of two evils is to vote [R] because of our fiscal conservative views. If the Democratic Party wants to win these votes, perhaps attention to fiscal conservatism would be a good idea?

Just a thought.

Pretty much an oxymoron. The only way to describe your beliefs is as a conservative..PERIOD;
....

Then, discussion over.

 

[Sactowndog]

I agree that the GOP was highjacked by the religious right, but that does not mean the GOP IS the religious right.

For those of us who are fiscally conservative and socially liberal - and we make up a large portion of independents and the 'undecided' before big elections - pragmatism forces us to vote either [D] or [R], if we want our vote to count. For many of us, the lesser of two evils is to vote [R] because of our fiscal conservative views. If the Democratic Party wants to win these votes, perhaps attention to fiscal conservatism would be a good idea?

Just a thought.

Yeah I would agree but the Republicans are showing me they are even less fiscally responsible than the Democrats. And sadly, neither side has a clue about what to do about jobs in today's international marketplace.

With Revenue at 14.9% of GDP you better find a way to trim Social Security, Medicare or Defense drastically. And if Revenue stays at that percentage it will likely have to be 2 of the 3.

 

[Bfgrn]

I agree that the GOP was highjacked by the religious right, but that does not mean the GOP IS the religious right.

For those of us who are fiscally conservative and socially liberal - and we make up a large portion of independents and the 'undecided' before big elections - pragmatism forces us to vote either [D] or [R], if we want our vote to count. For many of us, the lesser of two evils is to vote [R] because of our fiscal conservative views. If the Democratic Party wants to win these votes, perhaps attention to fiscal conservatism would be a good idea?

Just a thought.

Pretty much an oxymoron. The only way to describe your beliefs is as a conservative..PERIOD;
....

Then, discussion over.

Awe............poor baby!!!

"All people are born alike—except Republicans and Democrats," quipped Groucho Marx, and in fact it turns out that personality differences between liberals and conservatives are evident in early childhood. In 1969, Berkeley professors Jack and Jeanne Block embarked on a study of childhood personality, asking nursery school teachers to rate children's temperaments. They weren't even thinking about political orientation.

Twenty years later, they decided to compare the subjects' childhood personalities with their political preferences as adults. They found arresting patterns. As kids, liberals had developed close relationships with peers and were rated by their teachers as self-reliant, energetic, impulsive, and resilient. People who were conservative at age 23 had been described by their teachers as easily victimized, easily offended, indecisive, fearful, rigid, inhibited, and vulnerable at age 3. The reason for the difference, the Blocks hypothesized, was that insecure kids most needed the reassurance of tradition and authority, and they found it in conservative politics.
Psychology Today

I never gave anybody hell. I just told the truth and they thought it was hell.
Harry S. Truman