What would it take to get the Republican party off Morality and Religion......

Pacomc79
Pacomc79 Posts: 9,404
edited March 2007 in A Moving Train
and back on to small effective government and responsible economics?


Clearly the Republican party is in the toilet, it's been moving this way for quite a while but they still seemed economically focused in the early 90's.

Now they've essentially abandoned any real "republican" values so to speak and have moved on to the legislation of morality and big government. Also they have all but abandoned sound economic policy save brief subtle moments.

What would it take to get that party out of bed with fundamentalism and back to its responsible principals of economic freedom?
My Girlfriend said to me..."How many guitars do you need?" and I replied...."How many pairs of shoes do you need?" She got really quiet.
Post edited by Unknown User on
«13

Comments

  • floyd1975
    floyd1975 Posts: 1,350
    There are a few Republicans out there still who talk about economic freedom.

    I find it sad that, every time I read about a candidate in the local or national media, the first two questions asked by the media right now are about abortion and gay marriage. This makes me wonder if the fiscal conservatives are being shut out by the media before even being able to publicize a platform. I can understand why the media does this though. You don't see many people showing up to a "March for a balanced budget."
  • Cosmo
    Cosmo Posts: 12,225
    Pacomc79 wrote:
    and back on to small effective government and responsible economics?


    Clearly the Republican party is in the toilet, it's been moving this way for quite a while but they still seemed economically focused in the early 90's.

    Now they've essentially abandoned any real "republican" values so to speak and have moved on to the legislation of morality and big government. Also they have all but abandoned sound economic policy save brief subtle moments.

    What would it take to get that party out of bed with fundamentalism and back to its responsible principals of economic freedom?
    ...
    What would it take? That's easy... all it would take is those voters who believe the lies of politicians... being moral and having values to quit buying into those lies. Wake up, fools... they are politicians.
    Allen Fieldhouse, home of the 2008 NCAA men's Basketball Champions! Go Jayhawks!
    Hail, Hail!!!
  • MrBrian
    MrBrian Posts: 2,672
    Perhaps another republican party needs to be born?
  • norm
    norm Posts: 31,146
    Vote Libertarian. It's as close as you're gonna get.
  • El_Kabong
    El_Kabong Posts: 4,141
    cutback wrote:
    Vote Libertarian. It's as close as you're gonna get.


    hmmm, i dunno, are libertarians 'electable'?

    :D

    sad that it's always 'not the year' to vote 3rd parties for both sides
    standin above the crowd
    he had a voice that was strong and loud and
    i swallowed his facade cos i'm so
    eager to identify with
    someone above the crowd
    someone who seemed to feel the same
    someone prepared to lead the way
  • know1
    know1 Posts: 6,801
    I don't see you ever getting either party off of morality. After all, laws are based upon some level of morality.

    Religion is a different issue.
    The only people we should try to get even with...
    ...are those who've helped us.

    Right 'round the corner could be bigger than ourselves.
  • farfromglorified
    farfromglorified Posts: 5,700
    Pacomc79 wrote:
    and back on to small effective government and responsible economics?

    The Republicans will return to small government and responsible economics when the voters do. In other words, never.

    Vote Libertarian. You won't win, but at least you'll be able to sleep at night.
  • farfromglorified
    farfromglorified Posts: 5,700
    know1 wrote:
    I don't see you ever getting either party off of morality. After all, laws are based upon some level of morality.

    Yes, but I suspect the original poster's point was about enforcing a specific brand of morality.
  • farfromglorified
    farfromglorified Posts: 5,700
    El_Kabong wrote:
    sad that it's always 'not the year' to vote 3rd parties for both sides

    Every year is the year to vote 3rd parties.

    You know, it's odd. For all the complaining we all do here, I suspect that 80% of the people here tend to vote predominantly for one of the two major parties. Maybe I'm wrong.
  • Abookamongstthemany
    Abookamongstthemany Posts: 8,209
    farfromglorified wrote:
    Every year is the year to vote 3rd parties.

    You know, it's odd. For all the complaining we all do here, I suspect that 80% of the people here tend to vote predominantly for one of the two major parties. Maybe I'm wrong.

    Sadly, I don't think you are wrong. I guess they just like having so much to complain about. ;)
    If you want to tell people the truth, make them laugh, otherwise they'll kill you.

    Man is least himself when he talks in his own person. Give him a mask, and he will tell you the truth.
    -Oscar Wilde
  • Pacomc79
    Pacomc79 Posts: 9,404
    zstillings wrote:
    There are a few Republicans out there still who talk about economic freedom.

    I find it sad that, every time I read about a candidate in the local or national media, the first two questions asked by the media right now are about abortion and gay marriage. This makes me wonder if the fiscal conservatives are being shut out by the media before even being able to publicize a platform. I can understand why the media does this though. You don't see many people showing up to a "March for a balanced budget."


    I do tend to wonder what questions people are being asked. It just seems like to me the focus is lacking. Why are "abortion and gay marriage" the top issues? With taxes, spending, eminent domain, the federal government's involvement in public schools, the lack of savings in the average American household and their debt levels, decreasing dependance on fossil fuels especially the imported variety....I mean what the heck is that? That's a bunch of topics that are a hell of a lot more relavent than gay marriage or abortion as far as that which is really hurting our nation.

    I'm all about religious freedom, I'm all about economic and social freedom, I just don't get why these canidates are worried about offending thier "base". The base of both of these parties have about a 7 second attention span....offend away, tell them that abortions legality and homosexuality even if you disagree strongly with both really don't amount to a hill of beans regarding the state of the nation.
    My Girlfriend said to me..."How many guitars do you need?" and I replied...."How many pairs of shoes do you need?" She got really quiet.
  • norm
    norm Posts: 31,146
    El_Kabong wrote:
    hmmm, i dunno, are libertarians 'electable'?

    :D

    sad that it's always 'not the year' to vote 3rd parties for both sides

    You're right but if more people were brave enough to change the way they think when it comes to how they vote, then maybe 2008 would be the 3rd party year.
  • blackredyellow
    blackredyellow Posts: 5,889
    farfromglorified wrote:
    The Republicans will return to small government and responsible economics when the voters do. In other words, never.

    I don't think that it's so much about the voters not wanting it, but just an inherent part of being in power today. Politicians from all sides don't get into governing for the sake of governing the best, they get in it for the power and money associated with the position.

    We will never ever see a politician that would be willing to trim thousands of government jobs and departments... where would they get their friends and contributers jobs at?
    My whole life
    was like a picture
    of a sunny day
    “We can complain because rose bushes have thorns, or rejoice because thorn bushes have roses.”
    ― Abraham Lincoln
  • Abookamongstthemany
    Abookamongstthemany Posts: 8,209
    Pacomc79 wrote:
    I do tend to wonder what questions people are being asked. It just seems like to me the focus is lacking. Why are "abortion and gay marriage" the top issues? With taxes, spending, eminent domain, the federal government's involvement in public schools, the lack of savings in the average American household and their debt levels, decreasing dependance on fossil fuels especially the imported variety....I mean what the heck is that? That's a bunch of topics that are a hell of a lot more relavent than gay marriage or abortion as far as that which is really hurting our nation.

    I'm all about religious freedom, I'm all about economic and social freedom, I just don't get why these canidates are worried about offending thier "base". The base of both of these parties have about a 7 second attention span....offend away, tell them that abortions legality and homosexuality even if you disagree strongly with both really don't amount to a hill of beans regarding the state of the nation.

    Maybe it's because the media doesn't bring up these issues often enough if at all.
    If you want to tell people the truth, make them laugh, otherwise they'll kill you.

    Man is least himself when he talks in his own person. Give him a mask, and he will tell you the truth.
    -Oscar Wilde
  • Pacomc79
    Pacomc79 Posts: 9,404
    know1 wrote:
    I don't see you ever getting either party off of morality. After all, laws are based upon some level of morality.

    Religion is a different issue.

    point taken and very true. I'm really just trying to wrap my head around why the so called "conservative base" seems to be focused (at least in polling data) on primarily fundamentalist christian ideals. It's not that I have a problem with anyones religious freedom to think that way, it's just that a theocracy is a terrible way to run a "free" country. Then again it doesn't seem like that's what they seem to want.
    My Girlfriend said to me..."How many guitars do you need?" and I replied...."How many pairs of shoes do you need?" She got really quiet.
  • Pacomc79
    Pacomc79 Posts: 9,404
    Abookamongstthemany wrote:
    Maybe it's because the media doesn't bring up these issues often enough if at all.


    well on Mcneil/Leherer but yeah I can't really expect most of the public to sit through a debate show on public television with taupe walls......TAUPE!!

    Are you kidding me, it's like a parody of itself. Great show, but taupe walls?
    My Girlfriend said to me..."How many guitars do you need?" and I replied...."How many pairs of shoes do you need?" She got really quiet.
  • chopitdown
    chopitdown Posts: 2,222
    Pacomc79 wrote:
    What would it take to get that party out of bed with fundamentalism and back to its responsible principals of economic freedom?

    losing the presidency while running a fundamentalist.
    make sure the fortune that you seek...is the fortune that you need
  • farfromglorified
    farfromglorified Posts: 5,700
    blackredyellow wrote:
    I don't think that it's so much about the voters not wanting it, but just an inherent part of being in power today. Politicians from all sides don't get into governing for the sake of governing the best, they get in it for the power and money associated with the position.

    We will never ever see a politician that would be willing to trim thousands of government jobs and departments... where would they get their friends and contributers jobs at?

    Meh...this is part of it, yes. But a politician who would run on trimming jobs and government is now asking for political death. The average voter has no practical reason to want smaller government.

    When politics becomes the struggle of extracting rights rather than protecting rights, this is exactly what you're going to get: subsets of the population turning against each other and demanding what's theirs while proclaiming offense. It's all about power, nothing about principle. That's the game, as it stands today, and both sides are playing it exactly the way it should be played.
  • boxwine_in_hell
    boxwine_in_hell Posts: 1,263
    Pacomc79 wrote:
    and back on to small effective government and responsible economics?


    Clearly the Republican party is in the toilet, it's been moving this way for quite a while but they still seemed economically focused in the early 90's.

    Now they've essentially abandoned any real "republican" values so to speak and have moved on to the legislation of morality and big government. Also they have all but abandoned sound economic policy save brief subtle moments.

    What would it take to get that party out of bed with fundamentalism and back to its responsible principals of economic freedom?

    A friggin miracle is what it would take. Divine intervention maybe.
    one foot in the door
    the other foot in the gutter
    sweet smell that they adore
    I think I'd rather smother
    -The Replacements-
  • farfromglorified
    farfromglorified Posts: 5,700
    chopitdown wrote:
    losing the presidency while running a fundamentalist.

    Tell that to Bob Dole, or George Bush Sr.

Categories