What the Republicans need to do

[jillian]

If it was only the minimum wage, I wouldn't have even mentioned it. Nixon clamped controls on what produces could charge and prevented wage increases as a means of controlling inflation.

For the record, I disagree with your assessment of the minimum wage and basic economy. I've never heard of unregulated Capitalism. Did we actually practice that at some point? Certainly hasn't existed in my lifetime.

I like clean water and clean air too.

Actually, there have for as long as I can remember, been certain controls on a minimum of basic consumer goods. By unregulated capitalism, I mean, capitalism left to its own devices, without wage laws, without OSHA regs, without child labor laws, etc. Apologies if that wasn't clear.

Clean air and water is good, but unfortunately has been made into a fairly ignorant partisan issue of the past eight to ten years.

But it's exactly those things, which I think reasonable people can agree on, that I would hope form the basis for at least some compromise.

 

[Zoom-boing]

Have a sensible stance on abortion. No abortions for any reason at not time is pretty ridiculous. I have said before the real issue behind abortion is when does human life begin. That's real discussion that needs to take place. For me that's when we are dealing with a human capable of feeling pain. I think we can all agree that doesn't exist at the moment of conception. i think we can also agree it isn't only after the baby is expelled from the whom.

Speak for yourself. LIFE begins at conception. Why is this so hard for people to understand? The minute the egg and sperm meet, the cells begin to divide, then redivide, then redivide, etc. That is life and since humans give birth to humans . . . it's human life.

I take the view announced by Justice O'Connor, if you can take the fetus out of the womb (regardless of whether you've actually done it) and it can live, it's a baby. If you can't, it's not. Seems like a bright enough line to me.

If I took you, as you are right now completely unprepared, and plopped you down in the middle of Siberia how long would you last? You wouldn't, you would die. If you take a baby out of the womb before they are prepared, they die. Just because they cannot survive outside of the womb does not mean they are not human.

As much as you'd like it to, the abortion issue - and those who are against it - will never go away. There are millions who will fight for the right to life . . . forever.

 

[Annie]

the obvious to me is



Education. All around eductation, not liberal indoctrination.

I don't think the federal government should say squat about education, other than encouraging it.

I buy into CW's main points. Smaller government. The candidates certainly can stress their adherence to and advocacy of God, truth, and apple pie, but should leave the government out of marriage-it's a state issue. Religion-that is a personal issue. Choice/Right to Life-that is for the courts, mistaken though Roe may have been. What companies should fail or succeed-that is for the markets to decide, the government needs to get out of the way.

They should focus on advocacy of rebuilding our country's infrastructure, protecting us from invasion, and enforcing the laws.

 

[seth1492]

Here is my 2 cents...

Simplify.

Make the message easy and concise. I like that you said small gov't, small platform. That is exactly right! Cut the garbage out of our party and focus on the principles behind the platform. We have gotten so lost in the who's and the how's that we have forgotten the why's... Republicanism is the only party that makes sense... But explaining that requires you to know the theory and philosophies behind them. More people need to read Leo Strauss and other conservative philosophers.
In the debates there were so many times that I wished I could throttle Palin and McCain for not talking about our ideology. People can't argue with our ideologies as much as with our policies. Our ideologies make sense, they are rational. So we simply need to return to them.

 

[Turboswede]

I posted this in another thread, but I wanted to post it again so each and every Republican sees it.

The GOP needs to get back to its "core" values. True conservatism. Goldwater conservatism. This is what the GOP needs to focus on:

-Low taxes with balanced budgets
-Strong national defense
-Engaged foreign policy
-Protection of the environment
-Less government interference in individual lives

These tenets of true political conservatism have been missing from the GOP since the Reagan Revolution. These principles, these conservative principles are now viewed by the Rabid Religous Right as unimportant. Some refer to the Republicans that believe in these principles as RINO's or in some cases liberals. Instead the party is now more worried about homos getting hitched, forcing the Christian God into every crevice of the US Government, and abortion. I loved Ronald Reagan, I really did. He didn't rebuild a damaged Republican Party, he rebuilt a damaged United States. But he hijacked my party in the process and it is time to take it back. I thought McCain was the guy to do it. He preached these very things in 2000 and seemed to forget about them in 2008. These are the principles that matter in government. They are the polar opposite of the ideals of liberalism. They are the polar opposite of proposed policies of President-Elect Obama. These conservative ideals are my ideals and the Republican that demonstrates these ideals wil get my support.

You rock Crimson and you are absolutely right on this. There is no reason I should vote Democrat, I am a white male urban professional in a (fairly) high tax bracket with a young family and a (fairly) conservative world view. I am the poster child of the republican party from the days of Hamilton through 1992. The embodiment of:

“if you are a conservative under 30 you have no heart, but if you are a liberal over 30 you have no head”

If you guys don’t lay off the fiscal liberal / social conservative bender then more and more of your non-evangelical center will either jump ship, or just not vote (or go libertarian).

 

[del]

I was getting scared for a minute there that we might be taking them off your hands.

help yourself. they're free.

 

[Kevin_Kennedy]

I am the poster child of the republican party from the days of Hamilton through 1992.

As in Alexander Hamilton? He wasn't a Republican.

 

[elvis]

What should the republican party do? Adopt the policies of the Libertarian party. Have a platform which would:

1. Legalise all guns to non-felons.
2. Legalise drugs.
3. Support strong defense, but pull troops out of other countries.
4. Abolish or significantly the income tax.
5. Cut social programs.


That's a start.

 

[elvis]

I know it's not my party. And far be it from me to want your guys back in power. But if you really want to know where your party should get back to, look at Richard Nixon. I know that sounds funny. But if you remove the paranoia and megalomania that resulted in watergate, he'd have been one of the greatest presidents we ever had.

I think Nixon was a good President, when compared to other Presidents.

 

[Red Dawn]

someone explain to me how Goldwater is the model for future success for the GOP. While I do admire that he was pro-choice, and he wasn't anti-gay, he did lose in the biggest landslide in american history.

And he was against Medicare, Social Security, and Medicaid. He was only one of four republicans to vote against the 1964 civil rights act. Obama wouldn't be president today, and black still wouldn't be allowed to vote in the south without the 64 Civil Rights Act.

In the year 2008, how would being against Medicare, Medicaid, Social Security, and the Civil Rights Act of 1964 sell broadly to the american electorate?

It wouldn't. A candidate that espoused those views would lose almost every single one of the 50 states in a national election.

Teddy Roosevelt is the model for a populist, moderate to liberal republican. Although he is totally outdated, his ideology could be brought up to speed for the 21st century.

The reality is that the GOP is stuck with the religious rightwing. They courted them for three decades, and they are the inevitable result of Nixon's southern strategy. If the GOP kicks them out now, the GOP will never win another national election, and they know it.

 

[PubliusInfinitum]

What should the republican party do? Adopt the policies of the Libertarian party. Have a platform which would:

1. Legalise all guns to non-felons.
2. Legalise drugs.
3. Support strong defense, but pull troops out of other countries.
4. Abolish or significantly the income tax.
5. Cut social programs.


That's a start.

#1 is a constitutionally protected right... Perhaps you're speaking of the 'common sense regulations' which the gin grabbers use to usurp the individual of the means to exercise that right... Agreed.
#2 is moronic and counter productive to the sound culture
#3 Pulling US troops out of other countries undermines a Strong Defense of the US.
#4 Is a great idea tht will never happen, as the Government needs money to operate and tend to the common defend and the general welfare... Abolish all social spending... particularly entitlements wherein the government subsidizes all but that which is essential to national security.
#5... BINGO

 

[Kevin_Kennedy]

#1 is a constitutionally protected right... Perhaps you're speaking of the 'common sense regulations' which the gin grabbers use to usurp the individual of the means to exercise that right... Agreed.
#2 is moronic and counter productive to the sound culture
#3 Pulling US troops out of other countries undermines a Strong Defense of the US.
#4 Is a great idea tht will never happen, as the Government needs money to operate and tend to the common defend and the general welfare... Abolish all social spending... particularly entitlements wherein the government subsidizes all but that which is essential to national security.
#5... BINGO

2. So you feel it's the government's right to tell people what they can and can't do to themselves? When it doesn't hurt anybody else? Non-violent drug crimes are a waste of time, money, and resources.

3. So we need troops in Germany to keep America safe?

4. Introduce a fair tax and adopt a non-interventionist foreign policy and the you can abolish the income tax.

 

[Old Rocks]

I have to ask, when did protecting the environment become a conservative idea? The tenets you profess, less environmentalism, sound more like libertarianism than conservatism. I think you are voting for the wrong party...

Theodore Roosevelt

 

[Old Rocks]

This is a funny thread. I am a blue collar liberal. You want to know how to rebuild the
Republican Party? Start by adapting a non-hate platform. Just because I do not agree on policy does not mean that I do not love my nation. I was in uniform, on base, when we stopped the Soviet ships off of Cuba. As a volunteer, not drafted. So why are you calling me, and many like me, traitors, and worse, because we do not agree with you?

If you preach fiscal conservatism, practice it. Going to war, and cutting taxes? And you supported that idiocy? How dare you even mention fiscal conservatism!

I do not like the public sale of assault weopons. Don't even try parsing the meaning, we all know what they are. However, after eight years of Bush, I support the right of any American to own anything up to a twin .50. His policies, Patriot Act, dismissing the right of Habeus Corpus, ect. definately made of believer of me for citizen firepower.

Stop the shit on Social Security and Universal Health Care. The former is about the most successful program our nation has, and the latter is working in every industrial nation except ours. And we have the highest per capita medical costs, with results that are third world. Cuba beats us in both average lifespan and infant mortality. As more people are forced into early retirement in this ongoing economic debacle, only to find out that the promised company pension is no longer there, and those laid off, find that they are one medical bill away from total bankruptcy, the present Republican stances on these issues are going to stink to the point of creating another Republican debacle in 2010.

And finally, do not support liars in your own party. I promise that the moment a Democrat lies on any subject, I will call them out for that. We saw Treason committed at the White House level concerning Valerie Plame. And you fellows just parroted the lies that she was not an undercover operative. Even after the testimony in a trial setting that proved she was. Same for the WMD. Same for the failure to kill or capture Bin Laden. Treason is treason, and abysmal failure is abysmal failure. Take care of your own, good or bad.

A viable conservative viewpoint is a neccessity for this nation. We have not seen such for the last eight years. So do something about it. I cannot, I am a Liberal, and proud of it. So you must.

 

[editec]

I posted this in another thread, but I wanted to post it again so each and every Republican sees it.

The GOP needs to get back to its "core" values. True conservatism. Goldwater conservatism. This is what the GOP needs to focus on:

-Low taxes with balanced budgets
-Strong national defense
-Engaged foreign policy
-Protection of the environment
-Less government interference in individual lives

These tenets of true political conservatism have been missing from the GOP since the Reagan Revolution. These principles, these conservative principles are now viewed by the Rabid Religous Right as unimportant. Some refer to the Republicans that believe in these principles as RINO's or in some cases liberals. Instead the party is now more worried about homos getting hitched, forcing the Christian God into every crevice of the US Government, and abortion. I loved Ronald Reagan, I really did. He didn't rebuild a damaged Republican Party, he rebuilt a damaged United States. But he hijacked my party in the process and it is time to take it back. I thought McCain was the guy to do it. He preached these very things in 2000 and seemed to forget about them in 2008. These are the principles that matter in government. They are the polar opposite of the ideals of liberalism. They are the polar opposite of proposed policies of President-Elect Obama. These conservative ideals are my ideals and the Republican that demonstrates these ideals wil get my support.

YES.

The only thing you forgot is that traditional Republicanism is STRONG FOR PROTECTIVE TARIFFS.

Why?

Well probably because you didn't know that.

Why?

Because nobody every makes it easy to learn that, that's why.

Historic revisionism is a plague on this nation.

If we forget our history we are all tools to whomsoever controls it.

 

[Kevin_Kennedy]

YES.

The only thing you forgot is that traditional Republicanism is STRONG FOR PROTECTIVE TARIFFS.

Why?

Well probably because you didn't know that.

Why?

Because nobody every makes it easy to learn that, that's why.

Historic revisionism is a plague on this nation.

If we forget our history we are all tools to whomsoever controls it.

Are you referring to the mid-1800's Republican Party and the tariffs that forced the southern states to secede from the union? Protectionism is not a good policy.

 

[PubliusInfinitum]

2. So you feel it's the government's right to tell people what they can and can't do to themselves?

Nope... and FYI: Government do not have 'rights,' government has power.

Non-violent drug crimes are a waste of time, money, and resources.

I agree, thus the basis for illicit drug use being a crime. But I tell ya what I'll do... the SECOND you completely shut down all social spending which in any way and on every level, where a person that uses illicit drugs can't be subsidized IN THE SLIGHTEST by tax dollars for counseling, housing, food, medical care or any other 'need'...

3. So we need troops in Germany to keep America safe?

Absolutely... along with the dozens of other international locations where US troops are permanently stationed; and the special operations forces which are in dozens and dozens more... along with intelligence operations, both overt and covert.

4. Introduce a fair tax and adopt a non-interventionist foreign policy and the you can abolish the income tax.

American foreign policy... again let me EMPHASIZE: AMERICAN Foregin Policy is not interventionist... Americans have deep and substantial interests in foregin nations and those interests need to be protected. American interests do not end at the shore line. But cut entitlement spending, return the government to a Federalist framework and the fair-tax will work fine. I've no
problem with it.

But such is a pipe-dream. As it stand right now these idiots can't get it done with THREE TRILLION DOLLARS... and they're working as hard as is humanly possible to undermine the markets and cripple economic productivity; which will shrink the cashflow to the treasury... and being leftists, this can only mean that they will re-double that which resulted in the shortfall, whereupon they'll re-double that same crippling policy... Money is power and they aren't about to give up on that potential for power until they eventually kill it.

After the war which follows that... perhaps we'll implement something along the lines of a fair-tax.

 

[PubliusInfinitum]

Are you referring to the mid-1800's Republican Party and the tariffs that forced the southern states to secede from the union? Protectionism is not a good policy.

ROFLMNAO that idiot doesn't know what she's referring to...

Now this fool is trying to project that Republicans are economic protectionists... Which is false...

Protectionism is the same brand of idiocy which cries about "OUTSOURCING"... It's the same dumbassery which laments US JOBS FLEEING OVERSEAS; the SAME IMBECILIC CALLS FOR LAWS TO PUNISH US COMPANIES THAT MOVE PRODUCTION OUT OF THE US.


All of which was created by LEFTIST POLICY WHICH JACKED UP THE COST OF DOING BUSINESS IN THE US TO THE POINT THAT IT IS CHEAPER TO CLOSE DOWN HERE AND BUILD BRAND NEW FACILITIES AND TRAIN THE IGNORANT LOCALS IN SOUTH BUMFUC, BANGKCOCK...

Regarding which CONSERVATIVE POLICY DICTATES A CUT IN COST INCREASING REGULATIONS SO THAT IT IS NOT LESS EXPENSIVE TO MOVE ONE'S ENTIRE OPERATION 8000 MILES AWAY.

 

[Kevin_Kennedy]

Nope... and FYI: Government do not have 'rights,' government has power.



I agree, thus the basis for illicit drug use being a crime. But I tell ya what I'll do... the SECOND you completely shut down all social spending which in any way and on every level, where a person that uses illicit drugs can't be subsidized IN THE SLIGHTEST by tax dollars for counseling, housing, food, medical care or any other 'need'...




Absolutely... along with the dozens of other international locations where US troops are permanently stationed; and the special operations forces which are in dozens and dozens more... along with intelligence operations, both overt and covert.



American foreign policy... again let me EMPHASIZE: AMERICAN Foregin Policy is not interventionist... Americans have deep and substantial interests in foregin nations and those interests need to be protected. American interests do not end at the shore line. But cut entitlement spending, return the government to a Federalist framework and the fair-tax will work fine. I've no
problem with it.

But such is a pipe-dream. As it stand right now these idiots can't get it done with THREE TRILLION DOLLARS... and they're working as hard as is humanly possible to undermine the markets and cripple economic productivity; which will shrink the cashflow to the treasury... and being leftists, this can only mean that they will re-double that which resulted in the shortfall, whereupon they'll re-double that same crippling policy... Money is power and they aren't about to give up on that potential for power until they eventually kill it.

After the war which follows that... perhaps we'll implement something along the lines of a fair-tax.

Well I'm certainly not going to argue over words, and you're right. If you don't think the government should punish drug offenders, and you don't want them to pay to help drug offenders; then why do you care if it's legal for somebody to smoke weed? Put it in the same vain as alcohol and cigarettes and there should be no problem.

You say we don't have an interventionist foreign policy and then you go and defend certain facets of an interventionist foreign policy. The cost of stationing troops in at least 130 different countries, the two wars we're fighting, and the economic aid we give to nations such as Israel is going to bankrupt our nation. Interventionism isn't keeping our country safe. What right do we have to force Democracy on other nations at the point of a gun? It simply makes these people resent us even more than they already do, and helps terrorists such as Osama bin-Laden recruit new members to his organization. Osama has stated that he wants us over there, we've played right into his hands. What possible reason could we have for stationing troops in Germany? Last I checked the Nazis were no longer in power.

In 1953 we helped Great Britain restore a military dictator to power in Iran, by removing a popularly elected official. Why did we do this? The Prime Minister wanted to nationalize Iran's oil fields which Great Britain had an interest in. Is this the type of interest we have in foreign countries that we need to protect?

Thomas Jefferson said, ""Peace, commerce, and honest friendship with all nations – entangling alliances with none." It's about time we began adhering to this sensible advice.

 

[Kevin_Kennedy]

ROFLMNAO that idiot doesn't know what she's referring to...

Now this fool is trying to project that Republicans are economic protectionists... Which is false...

Protectionism is the same brand of idiocy which cries about "OUTSOURCING"... It's the same dumbassery which laments US JOBS FLEEING OVERSEAS; the SAME IMBECILIC CALLS FOR LAWS TO PUNISH US COMPANIES THAT MOVE PRODUCTION OUT OF THE US.


All of which was created by LEFTIST POLICY WHICH JACKED UP THE COST OF DOING BUSINESS IN THE US TO THE POINT THAT IT IS CHEAPER TO CLOSE DOWN HERE AND BUILD BRAND NEW FACILITIES AND TRAIN THE IGNORANT LOCALS IN SOUTH BUMFUC, BANGKCOCK...

Regarding which CONSERVATIVE POLICY DICTATES A CUT IN COST INCREASING REGULATIONS SO THAT IT IS NOT LESS EXPENSIVE TO MOVE ONE'S ENTIRE OPERATION 8000 MILES AWAY.

Are you saying that I'm the fool trying to project Republicans as protectionists? You're incorrect if you are. It's true that it was the Republicans in the 1820's that enacted the tariffs that crippled the southern economy, but the Republican Party of that time had much more in common with modern Democrats than Republicans. Though I don't believe either modern party as a whole advocates protectionist tariffs, I could be wrong though.

I was simply responding to editec's post about tariffs, and giving reasons as to why they're not good ideas.