BASIC PROBLEMS WITHIN THE REPUBLICAN PARTY
Within the media, on the 'net waves and within the latest movements designed to work towards restoring our Republic back to the people, we encounter continuous arguments regarding "Independents'" effects on the Republican Party. We also hear continuous arguments as to how the difference between moderates and conservatives are leading to a deleterious affect on the Republican Party. Those who know my views should recognize that I am an independent philosopher of politics who supports our Constitutional principles as designed by our Founding Fathers. For the sake of argument, allow me to focus on the problems within the Republican Party with a few points of opinion:
1. Senator McCain lost the 2008 election because of his "compromising" approach towards resolving legislative issues during his political career. This is a definition of a moderate Republican and this approach is what disenfranchised so many conservative voters who chose not to vote for McCain. His campaign's mismanagement of Palin's conservative voice led to the same problems with conservative voters. Despite her immediate attraction to conservatives following the VP announcement, the McCain campaign staff became just as guilty of degrading Palin as the liberals, because she was not a compromiser. Check out your political history and you'll see this same mistake of those moderate/compromising Presidents (regardless of partY)of the past.
2. Everyone must clearly define their principles and values of either small government, constitutional principles as written and designed, and defined morals and Christian ethics or those principles of large government involvement, spending policies that leave the country in continuous debt, disregard of constitutional rights and mandates, and lack of Christian ethics (in other words, liberal approaches). There is no longer any room for compromising between the two approaches.
3. The current Republican National Committee is undergoing internal issues as to where their real platform is aimed towards. Moderate thinkers (who haven't been listening lately anymore than liberal thinkers) are in conflict with conservative thinkers in establishing a clear policy and platform. Michael Steele has his hands full in establishing a viable and believable platform for the party. This has been recognized by the RGA (Republican Governors Association) in particular.
4. As We, the People, it is well past time to get past arguing about moderates vs. conservatives. We, the People now have the opportunity to work together in selecting, campaigning and electing candidates on the local, state and federal levels of government who believe in the American spirit and ability, reflects principles and values, morals and Christian ethics that you believe in, supports our Constitutional rights as granted to us, and are running for office not because they want to be or are a politician but because they desire to represent their electorate rightfully, yet have some reluctance to run for office. When you have someone who is reluctant to run for office, you have a true Patriot who sees the need to have honorable men and women to represent We, the People in their applicable areas.
Tags: discourse, republic, republican
Replies to This Discussion
-
Permalink Reply by Paul P on -
Mr. Conant,
Very nicely put.
I am not certain when and where the two parties came up with the belief that a move towards centrist is what America wants. The move towards centrist only brought more liberalism, more polical correctness, and more failures in our state of readiness for terrorist attack and less resolutions regarding the treatment of captured terrorists. It has brought a huge increase in the size of government and monumental public debt.
The American people want a return to the Nation's foundational principles, with a focus on real representation. Although this is a simple phrase, it means many things. Just as recently as the Brown victory in MA, politicians throughout the country, regardless of party, and at all levels within the government began to state "The people have spoken". Then each went on to tell us what it is we are saying, or more precisely, what it is they are hearing. This is what the Dems did at the results of the last National election. Unfortunately, the Dems then, and these representatives now, are hearing only that which matches what they already believe. This behavior is the only bipartisan behavior in Washington. There is no way any of the representatives can truly know what the American people are saying without having first asked. Instead of holding Town Hall Meetings to explain what is going to be bestowed upon us, regardless of our consent, our elected representatives must hold Town Hall meetings to first listen.
Both parties are merely wasting America's time with their efforts to redefine themselves. There is only one form of American governance and it is clearly defined within our Constitution and the Bill of Rights. There is little to be gained from trying to redefine what constitues a government by the people and for the people. It is already clearly stated within these documents.
If a candidate dispensed with all of the modern, trendy rhetoric and came forward stating the values and priciples with which our Republic was formed, I suspect a landslide victory by this candidate.
-
Permalink Reply by Bobby Cole on -
We have to begin supporting our own candidates. Tea party candidate, Kennedy received very little support in Massachusetts. Instead, many tea partiers went with Brown. We claim Mass as a victory because a dem lost, but now we learn that Brown is pro-choice and accepted $400,000 in campaign donations from Wall Street. Does this sound like a good conservative candidate to you? Texas is running a three way primary for Governor, with two of the same old players, and one tea party candidate, Debra Medina. The Texas tea party has not endorsed her, why? She has clearly won both televised debates against Perry and Hutchinson, yet Sarah Palin is endorsing Perry and the Texas tea party groups are silent. What are we doing? Are we really to believe that the Republicans who have been in Washington for years and years, who tell us now what we want to hear during the election cycle, are going to change their politics after we re-elect them? I just don't see it.
-
Permalink Reply by Smitty on
-
Gentlemen,
Both have put forth a well expessed examples of why I'm a registered Independant.
In Florida we had a few Candidates come out of the Tea Party Groups. One actually came to my house to hang a door knocker, I don't know what else to call it, informing the residence he was running for local office. We talked for a few minutes but I still knew nothing about his positions. I certainly applaud his commitment and drive. He actually had his kids with him, he had just picked them up from school. I find that refreshing and encouraging for our children's future.
My point is, that I knew nothing about the man because of the lack of exsposure. and to be quite frank, I don't have faith in others endosements. I want to know their history and hear them talk about their positions.
Respectfully, Smitty
-
Permalink Reply by Paul P on
-
That is why I earlier mentioned the need for the Tea Party to vet local and national candidates through a question and answer session, with prepared questions intended to the discover if the candidates share our values.
-
Permalink Reply by tony santurio on -
That is what I find wrong with the Tea Party Organization. It should be free of political party affiliation. If this is the way they are going to conduct business they can count me out. The Constitution is neither Democrat or Republican, or for any party for that matter. It is American! We must become Americans not Democrats or Republican or whatever other party that should arise. When are people going to get it!
-
Permalink Reply by Paul P on
-
Tony S.
Please understand what I'm getting at. This is the current, existing political system, and I am saying, if we are to make quicker progress towards repealing and/or reversing all of the nonsense that has so far progressed, I think we will need to work within what is already there. If you, I, and the countless others associated with the TPM share similar ideals, I think it is highly likely that an existing member from either party, but more likey the GOP, also shares our views. If we were able to vet an existing candidate to move our ideals forward, while the TPM grows and becomes known for its trustworthy, honest representation, the Tea Party may in due time, be able to stand on its own and offer candidates of its own.
I suppose this strategy is based on my belief that it may not be possible to make the drastic or revolutionary changes which may may want, as quickly as we may want. To me just the amount of finacial support it takes to run a campaign is a deterent, for now.
My statements from the earlier post are really intended to show my partial agreement with your overall sentiment that neither party is where we want them to be. Nor, do I believe that either party as a whole, currently shows a true understanding of the American people. Their continued efforts to redefine and refine themselves only seem to further entrench them in the same old politics and in what they already believe. Their efforts have not in the least, tuly opened them to understand the values and ideals shared by the American people. Yet, without the ties and alliances of someone already known to the nation, it seems to me to be too much of an uphill battle.
Just as a side note regarding the other's mention of Christianity. I believe these statements are in no way intended to be exclusionary. I believe they stem only from the clear desire of many Americans to return to the beliefs and principles on which our nation was founded. Furthermore, I believe these sentiments are fostered as resistance to the total secularization of American Society. We all know that throughout American history, the principles and values of Christianity have not been always practiced. And at times, throughout world history the church herself, has not always shown the love and brotherhood that she claims as principle. Yet, without the sense of love and respect for your neighbor and brotherhood among all men, I believe, as I think many do, that all would be lost without these as a guide.
These are just my thoughts. You know! I'm just another guy.
-
Permalink Reply by tony santurio on
-
Paul , thank your for your response; While some people may think that I'm trashing someones Religion, What I'm doing is bringing attention to the seperation that exists in this country because of it. The Constitution reads That all men are created equal! It does not distinguish anything else.
-
Permalink Reply by tony santurio on
-
Thank you Eric I got mixed up . I'm so engrossed in studying these two documents, that until I can internalize each one, everything flows back and forth i n my mind. Again thank you for pointing this out to me.
Tony
-
Permalink Reply by Bill Conant on -
Tony, all postings prior to this one are preaching the same beliefs as what you have said: "We must become Americans not Democrats or Republican or whatever other party that should arise." That also includes my overall theme in the original post. Unfortunately, there are some Tea Party organizations who believe that "rescuing" the Republican Party is the goal of the Tea Party movement. This has been expressly advocated by Jared Law (of 9.12 Project Network) and Justin Phillips/Mark Skoda (of the Tea Party Nation). Jared has made this abundantly clear in his postings on the 9.12 Project Network website and both Justin and Mark made statements to this affect to Fox News reporters at this weekend's Tea Party Convention in Nashville, TN. Upon study, you will see many major Tea Party, 9/12 and other "We, the People" type organizations who backed out of attending the convention for this very reason. I'm working on a new blog which will address this phenomenom, reminding everyone of how we were warned that such a cause (rescuing the Republican Party) would work it's way into the Tea Party philosophy and how we must stay true to our principles and values, so that we can elect candidates who truly represent We, the People and are not "professional politicians". Instead, they are candidates who are running for office (from local levels to state and up to federal) who are campaigning because they believe it is their duty to get involved in our country's political machine, fix it from the bottom up and represent the American citizens instead of the lobbyists and political financiers whom they would then owe favors to. More on this soon.
-
Permalink Reply by tony santurio on
-
Thank you Mr. Conant , You have given me hope that there are those out there that understand the importance of the Tea Party Organization becoming an entity free from Religious or political influence. We must strive to be free truly free. What this freedom means to me, an organisation for the people, by the people, and through the people. We are the fourth branch of Government, this branch oversees the other three branches of Government that they have our best interest at heart. In the the forum of checks and balances we are the most important voice in keeping in check the other three branches, so as to maintain Democratic equilibrium in America.
-
Permalink Reply by Karen Green on
-
If we all voted principle over party, then we would have principled candidates. As long as we vote outside of our principles, then we continue telling our politicians that their self-serving policies are fine by us. We are sending the wrong message.
-
Permalink Reply by Bill Conant on
-
I am in complete agreement with you, Eric. However, I would approach your concern regarding the socially conservative agenda where a candidate would "support a constitutional amendment granting such power" (e.g., anti-gay marriage) "to the federal government" in a more appropriate constitutional manner. Per the Constitution, the legislative branch is limited to the powers and duties that it is empowered to follow. As you have said, these powers do not include social issues. My approach is for the states to address the social issues (abortion and gay marriage issues; your examples) as granted by the Tenth Amendment ("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). In other words, "hands off, feds; these issues are to be determined within the individual states and their citizens".
Thanks for your comments,
Bill
© 2010 Created by Eric Odom.
