Quantcast

Conservatives call for return to core Republican principles

Discussion in 'Legal' started by rick_reno, Jan 10, 2006.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. RomanKnight

    RomanKnight Member

    Joined:
    Mar 9, 2005
    Messages:
    90
    Location:
    Close to Austin, Texas
    No matter what, do NOT vote for a third party! Libertarians and Constitution Party do not deserve the chance to improve what Republicrats and Demopublicans destroy.
     
  2. RealGun

    RealGun Member

    Joined:
    Mar 21, 2004
    Messages:
    8,225
    Location:
    Upstate SC
    The correct spelling, according to my voter registration, is REPUBLICAN. My Senators and House rep are all Republicans and represent me well, thank you. I am also generally supportive of President Bush, another Republican.

    Show me better choices, and I'll consider them. Neither of the two parties you mentioned would work for me. I think it would be useful if Ron Paul had some company, helping to give the GOP more of a conscience. For now, I don't believe he or his philosophy is taken very seriously within the House. I think the question is whether he or those of similar philosophy prefer to be the niggling critic rather than actually be in charge and accountable for reality.
     
  3. Combat-wombat

    Combat-wombat Member

    Joined:
    Jan 2, 2003
    Messages:
    1,683
    How could you be, even generally, supportive of Bush? He's consistently proven himself to be a terrible president. He increases government size, assaults our freedoms, and spends money like Paris Hilton on crack. It's clear to me he's bad for our country.
     
  4. Kodiaz

    Kodiaz member

    Joined:
    Nov 13, 2005
    Messages:
    680
    Location:
    Palm Beach County
    Rock jock you got me the word I couldn't remember was juxtaposed.


    But I'm not going to start a PAC what I'm probably going to do is

    A. not vote because both candidates stink

    or

    B. vote for a democrat that can get me on my other core issue (the environment)

    C. vote third party so the repubs know that they lost a vote that might have gone their way.

    If the choice is between a RINO who won't maintain my freedom while ruining my fishing and making it a felony to miss church. Or a Liberal democrat that won't maintain my freedom but will at least protect the water I fish, paddle, and hangout in then I'll vote for a Dem. I'm an independent if republicans want big govt so they can expand corporate power or push religion then I see no point in voting Republican. Or I could vote third party particularly Libertarian which will let the Repubs know that someone isn't happy with what they are up to.
     
  5. RealGun

    RealGun Member

    Joined:
    Mar 21, 2004
    Messages:
    8,225
    Location:
    Upstate SC
    Those are more properly quarrels with Congress.
     
  6. Biker

    Biker Member

    Joined:
    Mar 10, 2005
    Messages:
    6,108
    Location:
    Idaho
    Considering the fact that Bush can veto, I'd say that the blame can at least be equally shared.
    Biker
     
  7. CAnnoneer

    CAnnoneer Member

    Joined:
    Jul 17, 2005
    Messages:
    1,838
    Location:
    Los Angeles County, CA
    Agreed. But, he could have shown a far better leadership within his own party, at the least. They way I see it, somebody behind the scenes is calling the shots, while Bush and Rep congress do a lot of nodding.

    One of the scariest things about contemporary congress is all the en-bloc voting pattern. There has not been so much agreement since the Soviet parliament...

    +1 biker
     
  8. RealGun

    RealGun Member

    Joined:
    Mar 21, 2004
    Messages:
    8,225
    Location:
    Upstate SC
    That's true, but let's not then use that to state everything as Bush's doing. I think that would be intellectually dishonest, more partisan vitriol than fact. I expect that a different President would do very much the same thing.
     
  9. longeyes

    longeyes member

    Joined:
    Dec 25, 2002
    Messages:
    7,227
    Location:
    True West...Hotel California
    you mean a return to core principles like these?

    "As a nation of immigrants, we welcome those who follow our laws and come to our land to seek a better life. New Americans strengthen our economy, enrich our culture, and defend the nation in war and in peace. At the same time, we are determined to reform the system by which we welcome them to the American family. We must set immigration at manageable levels, balance the competing goals of uniting families of our citizens and admitting specially talented persons, and end asylum abuses through expedited exclusion of false claimants.

    Bill Clinton's immigration record does not match his rhetoric. While talking tough on illegal immigration, he has proposed a reduction in the number of border patrol agents authorized by the Republicans in Congress, has opposed the most successful border control program in decades (Operation Hold the Line in Texas), has opposed Proposition 187 in California which 60 percent of Californians supported, and has opposed Republican efforts to ensure that non-citizens do not take advantage of expensive welfare programs. Unlike Bill Clinton, we stand with the American people on immigration policy and will continue to reform and enforce our immigration laws to ensure that they reflect America's national interest.

    We also support efforts to secure our borders from the threat of illegal immigration. Illegal immigration has reached crisis proportions, with more than four million illegal aliens now present in the United States. That number, growing by 300,000 each year, burdens taxpayers, strains public services, takes jobs, and increases crime. Republicans in both the House and Senate have passed bills that tighten border enforcement, speed up deportation of criminal aliens, toughen penalties for overstaying visas, and streamline the Immigration and Naturalization Service.

    Illegal aliens should not receive public benefits other than emergency aid, and those who become parents while illegally in the United States should not be qualified to claim benefits for their offspring. Legal immigrants should depend for assistance on their sponsors, who are legally responsible for their financial well-being, not the American taxpayers. Just as we require "deadbeat dads" to provide for the children they bring into the world, we should require "deadbeat sponsors" to provide for the immigrants they bring into the country. We support a constitutional amendment or constitutionally-valid legislation declaring that children born in the United States of parents who are not legally present in the United States or who are not long-term residents are not automatically citizens.

    We endorse the Dole/Coverdell proposal to make crimes of domestic violence, stalking, child abuse, child neglect and child abandonment committed by aliens residing in this country deportable offenses under our immigration laws.

    We call for harsh penalties against exploiters who smuggle illegal aliens and for those who profit from the production of false documents. Republicans believe that by eliminating the magnet for illegal immigration, increasing border security, enforcing our immigration laws, and producing counterfeit-proof documents, we will finally put an end to the illegal immigration crisis. We oppose the creation of any national ID card."

    SOURCE: GOP PLATFORM, 1996

    As Bob Dylan says, "Things have changed..."
     
  10. Wllm. Legrand

    Wllm. Legrand member

    Joined:
    Dec 19, 2005
    Messages:
    219
    Right. GOP platform of lies.

    The level of corruption in the FedGOD is such that only an action on the same level as Hercules cleaning the stables of King Augeus could cleanse our "Rome on the Potomac". The stench of both parties needs to be washed away and the bodies political purged.

    I think such an action should be put down as a "good thing".
     
  11. Strings

    Strings Member

    Joined:
    Dec 25, 2002
    Messages:
    2,031
    Location:
    30 miles from Everywhere, right in the middle of N
    >and producing counterfeit-proof documents<

    I always love statements like this. Give me 30 minutes and roughly $2K, and i'll counterfeit almost any document you care to name...

    When WI went to the new plastic DLs, one of the statements made was they'd be harder to counterfeit. They're right, but only to a point: now, you need a special printer (which runs roughly $1K), instead of just a $30 laminator...

    Sorry for the veer...
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
    Dismiss Notice