The Republican Party: 1854-2008

but now the same cultural division threatens to tear the Republican Party apart.

The bad news for the Republicans

I believe the unholy Republican troika -- the Wall Street Bluebloods, the bourgoise libertarians, and the social conservatives -- is coming unhitched during this election cycle.

Everything the bluebloods (who have always really controlled this party because they fund it) claimed to stand for -- laissez fair capitalism and fiscal conservatism -- turned out to be a lie.

With this so called crises those libertarian idealogues are realizing those blueblooded insiders are not the people they claimed to be.

Libertarian Rs are now seeking a party which more honestly represents their values.

Hence we read things from them on this board like "Bush is socialist" or Bush is a liberal.

The social conservatives in the Repubican Party, the anti-choice, anti-gay, pro-gun, movements are still vibrant, as evidenced by their support for Palin.

But in light of the fianancal problems facing the American people, the evangelicals cannot overcome the angst of the people on Main Street.

Main Street wants to punish the Republicans for their continually declining quality of life.

And even those evangelist Rs are less than impressed by McCain, who as we all know, only recently started pandering to that religious block, and whose credentials as a social conservative are somewhat dubious.

So This Republican marriage of convenience, one more forged by a mutual hatred for all things liberal, than for any real sympathy for each other, is on the rocks.

The good news for the Republicans

I personally expect to see this alliance reknit somewhat by 2012.

When Obama takes the reins, and as the Democratically controlled legislature passes one law or policy after the other which annoys one or the other of those three elements of the Republicans, they will grudgingly begin working together again.

If Jimmy Carter's term is any indication of what happens when the Democratic party has total control, I expect we will see, just as we saw in the past, the fracturing of the Democratic Party as Obama fails to really do anything significant to help Main Street because his fellow DEMS cannot allow his to really change anything important

The bad news for both parties and the American people

The centers cannot hold, now, in EITHER party, folks.

Why?

Because the DNC and RNC are basically the same class of people. They do NOT represent the interests of 99% of us and they never have.

As we have seem recently, they will throw the American people to the economic wolves if it serves the Wall STREET banking masterclass to do so.

The social class war on Main street, in the meanwhile, remains unresolved.

The liberal Dems and libertarian Dems cannot ally with the Republican social conservtives and the libertarian Republicans.

They truly hate each other on a viseral level.

You see what I am saying here?

BOTH parties are in trouble, but not in as bad a state as the AMERICAN people are.

Yes, the Dems look to sweep the field this cycle, but that momentum will not last.

So the anger many Americans feel about this incompetent administration that Bush has run, will fade when Obama cannot show significant results in ameliorating the problems that average American now face.

And the truth shall set us free

Basically reality is outing the truth about the sham that the parties really have been for the last thirty years, folks.

The truth is that both parties have at heart the interests of a very small group of insiders who fund those parties.


Let's imagine

That Obama may really tries to do the right things for the American people.

I doubt that he can, however sincerely he might want to

Because to TRULY help the American people, he has to radically change the economic environment, and the masterclass surely doesn't want that to happen.

If Obama takes on the FED and master banking class and FREE TRADE, he will either be destroyed by his own party, or if he appears to be too much a populist for that to happen?

Then, some "lone gunman" will cap him with some magic bullet and we'll all laud his memory as the leaders of both parties completely undo whatever he might have accomplished.

These insiders play for keeps, people.

They are, after all, playing for control of the AMERICAN economy.

They're not about to give up that game in the next four years, just because Obama might want to help the American peasants.

Is there a solution?

None that I can see, no.

Not because the insiders are too powerful, even though they are very powerful.

Not because we don't know what we'd need to do, either. Millions of us realize that this game is fixed, and we know how to UNfix it, too.

But because the American people are not themselves all that honest, either.

We have come to accept corruption as simply the way the world works.

We lie to ourselves every day or worse we have come to believe htose anti-social lies that many of you have grown up hearing from the leadership which control our media.

We have come to accept that anyone who is offended by lies, liars, cheats or cheaters is really just an idealistic and a damned fool.

And since such truth tellers are dismissed as idealists, or marginalized as mentally disturbed, are thought merely party partisans who are picking on OUR party, all the evidence supports that contention that they are fools, too.

This society has been killing its unhappy truth tellers and marginalizing them for decades. We created THIS self fulfilling prophecy:

Anyone who won't go along won't get along.

We accept petty corruption in our local governments, in our state governments, in our corporations, too.

We have just seen at least $1.4 TRILLION dollars stolen from our children and we're STILL playing the insiders games according to THEIR RULES.

Most of us don't seek to unmask this sham or eradicate the corruption, either.

In fact many of us, those of us who are realitic seek to join it if we can.

We seek to be servants to the insider class because they have all the fucking money.

These are the philosophical underpinnings of our nation, now, folks.

Greed is good
I got mine Jack, get yours
Life is unfair, get used to it.
Whatever the market will bear
Government is bad, business is good
The struggling should have studied harder in school
Everything I got I got on my own. I owe nobody nothin'
We owe NOTHING to our fellow men.​


And we wonder why things aren't working on Main Street?!

The America bougoise class and the still kind-of-affluent class are god-damned fools.

Society ONLY works when the majority of people are honest and hard working and playing by the rules.

But when the people see that the leaders don't play by those rules, when they see that crime does in fact pay and pay handsomely, well then... we give lip service to good citizenship but we do not practice it.

Did we really imagine that America could bankrupt the bottom half of our society, but that the still reasonably affluent would float above the disaster unfolding on Main Street completely unscathed?

Do we still really imagine that our guns are going to protect us from a society that just doesn't work right for most citizens?

We've run out of scapegoats to blame for the disintegration of this society, folks.

The acceptence of corruption as a way of life has rolled down hill.

We can't find an truly honest man to lead us anymore.

NOBODY who is TRULY honest ever even gets anywhere near real power.

If we accidently elected a truly honest man, one who told us the hard truth we don't want to hear, we'd crucify him.
 
Ron Paul and social conservativism is like Ralph Nader making People Magazine's Sexiest Man of the Year. He wants to legalize prostitution.

Incorrect. He doesn't want the federal government to have any say in the matter at all, because they don't have that authority in the Constitution. He, correctly, believes that it's a state issue. What's that 10th Amendment say again...? Oh yeah...

"The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people."
 
Incorrect. He doesn't want the federal government to have any say in the matter at all, because they don't have that authority in the Constitution. He, correctly, believes that it's a state issue. What's that 10th Amendment say again...? Oh yeah...

"The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people."

An old fashioned Hamiltonist. Unfortunately for you, the idea of limited central government died out almost 200 years ago and we've become a Federal Republic.
 
An old fashioned Hamiltonist. Unfortunately for you, the idea of limited central government died out almost 200 years ago and we've become a Federal Republic.

Were you calling me a "Hamiltonist," or referring to yourself?

Other than that, your post is hilarious.
 
Were you calling me a "Hamiltonist," or referring to yourself?

Other than that, your post is hilarious.

I'm calling you Hamiltonist. That's the origins of the idea of limited central government. Hamilton founded the Democratic-Republican Party, which eventually split into the Democratic and Whig parties. Poor Whigs.
 
I'm calling you Hamiltonist. That's the origins of the idea of limited central government. Hamilton founded the Democratic-Republican Party, which eventually split into the Democratic and Whig parties. Poor Whigs.

:clap2:

You have no idea what you're talking about do you? Alexander Hamilton was a proponent of a strong central government, though I think even he would cringe if he could see today's federal government. What you meant to call me was a Jeffersonian, since it was Thomas Jefferson who believed in limited government. It was also Thomas Jefferson that formed the Democratic-Republican Party, along with James Madison.
 
I firmly believe the social right is killing my party. Can it be revived? We'll see.
:clap2:

The religious right shares a lot of the blame and is the reason I left the GOP. Also the corruption while the GOP ran the whole show was another. There will be a major struggle within the GOP for several years and maybe even a split because there are real die hards on both sides. If the party splits the Democrats could be in total control for more than a decade.
 
:clap2:

You have no idea what you're talking about do you? Alexander Hamilton was a proponent of a strong central government, though I think even he would cringe if he could see today's federal government. What you meant to call me was a Jeffersonian, since it was Thomas Jefferson who believed in limited government. It was also Thomas Jefferson that formed the Democratic-Republican Party, along with James Madison.

Thomas Jefferson, Alexander Hamilton... same thing! ;)

Thanks for pointing out the correction.
 
I love it, I love seeing the ons fall apart because, for the most part, I disagree with everything they think. But, you know whats killing their party? The "Jesus freaks." Thats what's doing it, you have to stop pining to the Jesus freaks and get back to your roots. If you don't, their might not be a Republican party left soon(Oh God I hope so!)
 
I love it, I love seeing the ons fall apart because, for the most part, I disagree with everything they think. But, you know whats killing their party? The "Jesus freaks." Thats what's doing it, you have to stop pining to the Jesus freaks and get back to your roots. If you don't, their might not be a Republican party left soon(Oh God I hope so!)

I'm not sure who the "ons" are. :badgrin:

But defend your theory. Why haven't the liberals of Jackson, Wright and Sharpton declined?
 
I love it, I love seeing the ons fall apart because, for the most part, I disagree with everything they think. But, you know whats killing their party? The "Jesus freaks." Thats what's doing it, you have to stop pining to the Jesus freaks and get back to your roots. If you don't, their might not be a Republican party left soon(Oh God I hope so!)

The thing is that what I think of as the sane Republicans don't have big numbers. (bell curve and all that)

So they needed to find another voting block and they found the evangelists.

All they needed to do to get those people was talk about familiy values and stand in opposition to abortion.

In other words, all they had to do was completely go against their basic instinct to keep the government out of other people's private affairs, and they suddenly had the same kind of party loyal numbers that the Dems had.

The worst thing that could possible happen to this neo Republican party is that they'd WIN the abortion question.

If there was no abortion issue for them to lay claim to the evangelists, what would the Republican party have to offer those folks, really?


Those evangelists are for the most part working class stiffs just like the Democrats.

With the exception of these social issues (gays guns and abortion) their interests are really aligned with the liberals of the Democratic working class.

In fact when I was a kid, these people voted Democrat.

So don't EVER expect the abortion issue to be resolved, folks.

It's too important to the Wall Street Aristos of the Republican party that it continue to be a bleeding wound on the body politic, just like the feminist agenda is too important for the Democratic party for them to abandon the abortion issue, too.

Issues like these are the smokescreeen behind which the insider party manipulates their respective loyalists.
 
This is a pretty inflammatory article, but I don't think things will be a severe as that. 8 years in the grand scheme of things isn't that much, and the Republicans will likely be back in force by that point. Lots, I mean lots can change in that period of time, including the emergance of a strong candidate.
 
which of the two do you think are closer to what you believe?
and no, you can't cop out and say neither

John McCain. He wants to spend less than Obama, I don't like redistribution of wealth, and I agree Roe v. Wade needs to be overturned (Though I think it's for different reasons).

But I do not agree with his foreign policy ideas at all, I never supported the bailout, his extremely negative campaign is an embarrassment to all Republicans, he is clueless on the economy, and he is no supporter of civil liberties. As I've said before, the lesser of two evils is still far too evil.
 
John McCain. He wants to spend less than Obama, I don't like redistribution of wealth, and I agree Roe v. Wade needs to be overturned (Though I think it's for different reasons).

But I do not agree with his foreign policy ideas at all, I never supported the bailout, his extremely negative campaign is an embarrassment to all Republicans, he is clueless on the economy, and he is no supporter of civil liberties. As I've said before, the lesser of two evils is still far too evil.
well, voting for someone other than McCain will only get you the one who least represents you
it sucks, but thats the facts
 

New Topics

Forum List

Back
Top