| 7/2/2009 7:21:54 AM | GOP, a party of yesterday | | 
rig216
Red Deer, AB
age: 47
| The demographics are changing rapidly in the U.S. The minority population growth is one main reason why the GOP must become centrists, and/or split leaving behind the right wing traditionalists. Here are some example of the current Canadian Conservative party, a centrist party compared to U.S. Conservatives.
The Canadian Conservative centrists supports both Private and Universal health care. For example, there are privately run hospitals in Canada, and many private medical clinics. According to the Canadian health act, they are illegal, but they don't get shut down. The rich who are using the private facilities also contributes to the Universal health care system... through their individual taxes.
The Centrist Conservative will no longer make an effort to struct down gay marriages...they have other priorities, and they don't want to talk about it.
The Centrists won't make an effort to struct down abortion laws...they have other priortities, and they don't want to talk about it.
The Centrists supports a "negotiated", and a fair regulated free market system. For example, they have negotiated a deal on repatriating tax heaven dollars...every dollars repariated will be used to lower the corporate tax rate in Canada.
The Centrists are fiscally responsible, and will cut spending in every government demartments.
The Centrists supports existing social programs, and will continuously eliminate waste, and find new solutions to improve program iffeciencies.
The Centrists beleives that the middle class, and small businesses are the economic engine to an economy...if they compensate the middle class, they will also compensate business owners, no preferential treatment.
The Centrists will suppors the Canadian Oil and Gas industry, and also support a made in North America environment cap and trade system, but Obama favors much tougher rules set by the Canadian conservative government.
The Canadian Conservatives supports our mission in Afghanistan, but leaning towards a detailed plan transferring our troops' role to Afghan troops.
Conclusion: IMO, staying on the far right is a failure recipe.
[Edited 7/2/2009 7:24:32 AM PST]
| | 7/2/2009 7:28:42 AM | GOP, a party of yesterday | | 
stargazzer
Creighton, NE
age: 61
| You must be feeling the pressure of the progressive and their failings.
| | 7/2/2009 7:36:33 AM | GOP, a party of yesterday | |
rig216
Red Deer, AB
age: 47
| The Canadian Conservatives were once on the far right, but they have adapted, and lukewarmed their traditional beliefs. That is why we are now considered centrist/moderate Conservatives.
[Edited 7/2/2009 7:37:32 AM PST]
| | 7/2/2009 7:43:40 AM | GOP, a party of yesterday | | pariah2
Spring, TX
age: 42
| Well, ok Mr. Rig 216: You keep on believing that and i will keep on believing that Canada still is a third rate country as compared to ours and it always will be. Moreover, our brand of conservatism works and has a proven record. What record does your country have? Looks to me as if you guys are still behind us in... hmmmm...I don't know..let's say, everthing? You say that minorities are becoming the majority in this country? Well, you are right. They bring their beliefs here when migrating from other countries. In those other countries they of course, blame everthing on the rich for their irresponsible behaviors. i.e having babies they cannot afford to raise, because of their irresponsible sexual appetite. When those minorities get to this country, they join the other native haters of this country to impose what they say is consevative and try to redefine it for us. You know, the truth is, conservatism cannot be redefined. It is what it is. We will allow your liberal government to try and destroy this country as Carter almost did, then you hopefully will undestand that moderation in the pursuit of liberty is no virtue. Let me ask you this...could Canada withstand a militry invasion from the United States? Nuff said. Quit bashing a country that will defeat any country in the world because the far right always put military first. You got a problem with a huge military?
[Edited 7/2/2009 7:55:47 AM PST]
| | 7/2/2009 8:02:03 AM | GOP, a party of yesterday | | bravehart64
Gainesville, FL
age: 45
| As I have stated before rig .They are a wounded animal still a threat. And once they reorganize could stage a come back . Would never consider them down for the count ..brave
| | 7/2/2009 8:04:58 AM | GOP, a party of yesterday | |
rig216
Red Deer, AB
age: 47
| Well, ok Mr. Rig 216: You keep on believing that and i will keep on believing that Canada still is a third rate country as compared to ours and it always will be. Moreover, our brand of conservatism works and has a proven record. You say that minorities are becoming the majority in this country? Well, you are right. They bring their beliefs here when migrating from other countries. In those other countries they of course, blame everthing on the rich for their irresponsible behaviors. i.e having babies they cannot afford to raise, because of their irresposible sexual appetite. When those minorities get to this country, they join the other native haters of this country to impose what they say is consevative and try to redefine it for us. You know, the truth is, conservatism cannot be redefined. It is what it is. We will allow your liberal government to destroy this country as Carter almost did, then you hopefully will undestand that moderation in the pursuit of liberty is no virtue. Let me ask you this...could Canada withstand a militry invasion from the United States? Nuff said. Quit bashing a country that will defeat any country in the world because the far right always put military first. You got a problem with a huge military?
pahiah2, I'm explaining the change of the Canadian political landscape. We once had the Canadian reform party, a right wing Christian conservative traditionalist party, and they never were able to capture a majority in the House of Representatives. They finally merged with the Canadian Conservative progressive party to become the Canadian Conservative Party of Canada. Many right wing reformers left after the merger, and since then, the current governerning Conservative party have become more centrist.
We also have a far left party called the New Democratic Party of Canada, and many are saying that they will never form a majority nor a minority government, but they have made a major political contribution in terms of policing.
The Canadian Liberal party presently sits in between the far left and the middle. Therefore, in Canada we no longer have a far right political party. Note that the current Conservative government were once known as a pro-business, pro-rich political party.
| | 7/2/2009 8:20:23 AM | GOP, a party of yesterday | | bravehart64
Gainesville, FL
age: 45
| rightway123. "46% called themselves conservative " So ? Do you know there are conservative Democrats stupid ? Who is Liberman ? Do you know there are liberal Republicans ? Just becuase someone claims to be conservative that does not dictate which way they will vote .Otherwise you would of one correct ? ..brave
| | 7/2/2009 8:32:52 AM | GOP, a party of yesterday | |
rig216
Red Deer, AB
age: 47
| rightway123. "46% called themselves conservative " So ? Do you know there are conservative Democrats stupid ? Who is Liberman ? Do you know there are liberal Republicans ? Just becuase someone claims to be conservative that does not dictate which way they will vote .Otherwise you would of one correct ? ..brave
That's just it. Right wing Conservatives are interpreting this poll as a surge of conservatives jumping to the right, and that's false.
| | 7/2/2009 8:39:17 AM | GOP, a party of yesterday | | 
skysoldier1cav
Indianapolis, IN
age: 61
| This is the problem that comes from labels.I know many people who say they are conservative--but being conservative does not automatically make you a Republican or ensures thats how you vote (remember the LAST election). Votes are cast in many cases as a result of issues--conservativism in America is fraught with WEDGE issues.When things are percolating along good most people will seize a wedge issue and vote a certain way because of it.But in times of war or financial crisis they are less passionate about wedge issues and tend to vote for whats in their own interest or helps their pocketbook most. Its no different for Democrats--the label "LIBERAL" DOES NOT necessarily make someone a Democrat except in the mind of hardcore haters of liberalism.Lots of Democrats (like me) are socially liberal and yet strong on defense or foreign affairs. Its only retards like Rush who thrive on labeling people who disagree with his dogmatic mantra and thats what is hurting the GOP.The party of the "Big Tent" is dwindling because certain elements in the party are trying to force a one view ideaology on its rank and file,and politics in America are more nuanced and complicated than they are prepared to accept. Until the GOP moves from "pale,male and stale" and embraces the new demographic realities of the country and recognizes that the "party of Lincoln" cannot survive. If it remains Balkanized in the old south the Republicans will continue to suffer drubbings in elections across the board. JMHO.
| | 7/2/2009 8:48:02 AM | GOP, a party of yesterday | | pariah2
Spring, TX
age: 42
| The bottom line is...when liberals have control of power all of a sudden conservatism is dead, and vice versa. This topic should not even be discussed. The current and future demographics of this country should be a major concern for conservatives if they want to have power. Conservatism cannot die, but eventually, and I must admit that Rig is right, you keep letting in poor people in this country from Mexico and elsewhere, you give them the right to vote, they will join and always vote for democrats that already hate this country and soon this country will be third rate as Canada is now. Those are the facts.
[Edited 7/2/2009 8:50:18 AM PST]
| | 7/2/2009 9:06:05 AM | GOP, a party of yesterday | | monty_python
Bridgeport, CT
age: 55
| So do you think the people who came over here and made a civilization out of this wilderness were mostly rich, or mostly poor?
How about all those people who braved the unknown as they migrated west, creating farms and then towns. They scratched at the earth to plant their crops. They cleared the forests and carved roads through the mountains and all kinds of stuff that heroes are made of.
How many of them do you think were poor? How about most of them. Seems to me they did a pretty good job of creating a third degree country, eh?
| | 7/2/2009 9:11:20 AM | GOP, a party of yesterday | |
rig216
Red Deer, AB
age: 47
| The bottom line is...when liberals have control of power all of a sudden conservatism is dead, and vice versa. This topic should not even be discussed. The current and future demographics of this country should be a major concern for conservatives if they want to have power. Conservatism cannot die, but eventually, and I must admit that Rig is right, you keep letting in poor people in this country from Mexico and elsewhere, you give them the right to vote, they will join and always vote for democrats that already hate this country and soon this country will be third rate as Canada is now. Those are the facts.
Here are some facts;
1. It seems that the U.S. will soon be following the same path Canada did in the early 1980's...recognizing multicuturalism in our Constitution, and bilingualism. Within 15 years, and according to many U.S. demographic trend studies, the Hispanics will have a significant political voice, about 30% of your population. If hispanics are currently/largely leaning towards the democrats, how can the GOP lure them to their party?
2. Take a closer look at every polls, the strongest supports for abortions and gay marriages comes from citizens under age 40. Therefore, it is inevitable that this population, and their children will support a moderate view on both issues.
And by the way, what do you mean Canada is a third rate country?
[Edited 7/2/2009 9:14:43 AM PST]
| | 7/2/2009 9:27:33 AM | GOP, a party of yesterday | |
rig216
Red Deer, AB
age: 47
| rig
Why would any American in his right mind want to be like Canadians. LOL You are so funny.
Here you go. Your now labelling centrists as being Canadians?????? and/or, if you don't want to be a right wing, go live in Canada. With that mentality, good luck in 2010 and 2012.
And by the way, this thread is not about Obama. I'm talking about "outdated" political ideologies of the far right.
[Edited 7/2/2009 9:52:16 AM PST]
| | 7/2/2009 10:00:25 AM | GOP, a party of yesterday | |
rig216
Red Deer, AB
age: 47
| Here you go. Your now labelling centrists as being Canadians?????? and/or, if you don't want to be a right wing, go live in Canada. With that mentality, good luck in 2010 and 2012.
And by the way, this thread is not about Obama. I'm talking about "outdated" political ideologies of the far right.
Here's another example. Some Conservative DH members believes in a non-regulated financial industry. Well, IMO, that's political suicide.
| | 7/2/2009 10:52:39 AM | GOP, a party of yesterday | |
rig216
Red Deer, AB
age: 47
| rig
You got that wrong. It was the liberals who refused to regulate Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. Just what we need.......a Canadian revisionist.
I would think that a canadian that is totally clueless would refrain from giving his opinions but it is clear he will anyway. Want me to tell you all how to perform brain surgery? LMAO@rig
Are you ever lost! Your trying to make this thread a partisan issue, and I'm not. Once again, I'm talking about moderate Conservatives.
Again, using this 2009 Gallup poll on Conservatism in America;
www.gallup.com/poll/120857/conservatives-single-largest-ideological-group.aspx
"Conservatives" are single largest ideological group
Thus far in 2009, 40% of Americans interviewed in national Gallup poll surveys describe their political views as Conservative, 35% as moderate Conservatives, and 21% as Liberal Conservatives.
HELLO HELLO HELLO
This thread is about "Moderate Conservatives", and this is not a dillusion...this poll clearly states that 35% among Conservatives considered themselves as "Moderate Conservatives".
By the way, if you think that financial regulations is limited to Freddie and Fannie, then you certainly have a selective partisan memory.
Is it possible to carry out an intelligent conversation in this forum, and without the partisan bullshit.
[Edited 7/2/2009 11:11:19 AM PST]
| | 7/2/2009 12:21:33 PM | GOP, a party of yesterday | | march4
Cameron, MO
age: 41
| The Landmark Civil Rights Act of 1964, which ended the Jim Crow era in the South, would not have passed without the support of Senate Republicans and their leader Everett Dirksen, who worked with liberal Democrats to break the Southern Democrats' filibuster and bring the bill to the vote.
It was Richard Russell, a Democrat from Georgia, who said, "We will resist to the bitter end any measure or any movement which would have a tendency to bring about social equality and intermingling and amalgamation of the races in our (Southern) states."
Little-told stories such as these are good to remember when Democrats start talking about GOP Original Sin.
The Democratic Party has other history it would rather live down, such as its confused response to Soviet aggression and its post-Vietnam defeatism.
Southern whites did migrate to the Republican Party as the party turned to the right in 1964. But it took much more than the so-called "Southern strategy" to explain Richard Nixon's landslide win over George McGovern in 1972, when McGovern won only Massachusetts and the District of Columbia. Then, as in other years of decisive Republican victories (1980, 1988 and 2004), the Democratic candidate was seen as weak or vacillating and the Republican won on a platform (and perception) of strength.
A tradition of upholding American interests with a second-to-none defense has been part of Republican DNA at least as far back as Teddy Roosevelt.
If Obama finds a way to reestablish the Democratic Party in the voters' mind as a party of strength, the Republicans are in big trouble. But if he's not so inclined, or if he's stymied by the left wing of his party, then the GOP may come back sooner than its critics would ever have dreamed. And race won't have anything to do with it.
| | 7/2/2009 5:48:15 PM | GOP, a party of yesterday | | pariah2
Spring, TX
age: 42
| Rig: how is the belief in God outdated? How is small govenment and self-responsiblity outdated? How are keeping taxes low and your money in your pocket outdated? How is maintaining a strong military outdated? How is capitalism outdated? How is keeping babies alive when they are born, outdated? It seems as if you are outdated.
| | 7/2/2009 5:55:18 PM | GOP, a party of yesterday | |
rig216
Red Deer, AB
age: 47
| Rig: how is the belief in God outdated? How is small govenment and self-responsiblity outdated? How are keeping taxes low and your money in your pocket outdated? How is maintaining a strong military outdated? How is capitalism outdated? How is keeping babies alive when they are born, outdated? It seems as if you are outdated.
You've listed good points, but it doesn't explain why 35% among Conservatives calls themselves Moderate Conservatives. What makes them Moderates? On what issues?
I've managed to find one ideological definition of Moderate Conservatism in the U.S., and it's on the abortion issue.
Moderates Conservative don't believe that abortion is murder for the following abortions;
Incest;
Rape; and
the life of Mother is in danger.
Note that in the last Gallup abortion poll, 23% of Americans believes that abortion for any reason is murdering.
[Edited 7/2/2009 6:06:52 PM PST]
| | 7/2/2009 6:00:11 PM | GOP, a party of yesterday | | 
noredneckhere
Knoxville, TN
age: 49
| Here are some facts;
1. It seems that the U.S. will soon be following the same path Canada did in the early 1980's...recognizing multicuturalism in our Constitution, and bilingualism. Within 15 years, and according to many U.S. demographic trend studies, the Hispanics will have a significant political voice, about 30% of your population. If hispanics are currently/largely leaning towards the democrats, how can the GOP lure them to their party?
2. Take a closer look at every polls, the strongest supports for abortions and gay marriages comes from citizens under age 40. Therefore, it is inevitable that this population, and their children will support a moderate view on both issues.
And by the way, what do you mean Canada is a third rate country?
Yes, you may be right, but realize this, right now, the expression goes "If the U.S. sneezes, Canada gets the flu." Imagine when the U.S. gets the flu.
| | 7/2/2009 6:24:21 PM | GOP, a party of yesterday | |
rig216
Red Deer, AB
age: 47
| Yes, you may be right, but realize this, right now, the expression goes "If the U.S. sneezes, Canada gets the flu." Imagine when the U.S. gets the flu.
We already have a deficit fever. A Canadian election may be called in November 2009 because Canadians are worried about a growing deficit. Here are the numbers explaining why we're bitting our nails:
Current national debt ($474 billion) or $14,000 per citizen.
Per capita, our national debt would equal to approx. $4.74 trillion {U.S.}, and for Canadians, that's way to high. The current Canadian Conservative government will soon be tabling spending cuts proposals, and a comprehensive plan to return to surplus budgets. Although that I voted Conservative in the last two Federal election, when it comes to fiscal responsibility, I'm not loyal to any political party.
| | 7/2/2009 7:03:34 PM | GOP, a party of yesterday | | 
linkitty
Bozeman, MT
age: 53
| someone deleted my last comment. In your dreams baby.
| | 7/2/2009 7:09:20 PM | GOP, a party of yesterday | | pariah2
Spring, TX
age: 42
| Rig: Ok, so now we know that it is the abortion issue that you have a problem with conservatism. How's this... no christian lady should kill the child so that she could live. Christ died for her, so she can die and let the child live. Since this country is over 80% christian, this should not be an issue. But it is because not all christians are true to Christ. Secondly, if woman gets raped and pregnant, so kill the baby? Is it the baby's fault? So something good came out of something bad. So, you believe the baby which is good, should be killed? Where is your values. Your putting the woman over the innocent child who can't defend itself. Third, if people wouldn't have irresponsible sex, and wait till they are married and financially stable to raise a child, perhaps abortions would not be necessary. But wait, that is another value from God that actually works. No sex before marriage. Marry when you are ready to support your wife and future children. How is that morally wrong and outdated? Again, you liberals are out of touch with mainstream america. And another thing...abortion is not a far right issue. There are many conservative democrats who believe the same on abortion. So, get your facts right. This is a moderate belief.
[Edited 7/2/2009 7:17:21 PM PST]
| | 7/2/2009 7:15:57 PM | GOP, a party of yesterday | | kevin99999
Oshkosh, WI
age: 41
| Rig: how is the belief in God outdated? How is small govenment and self-responsiblity outdated? How are keeping taxes low and your money in your pocket outdated? How is maintaining a strong military outdated? How is capitalism outdated? How is keeping babies alive when they are born, outdated? It seems as if you are outdated.
 Very well stated
| | 7/2/2009 8:07:36 PM | GOP, a party of yesterday | | bravehart64
Gainesville, FL
age: 45
| Is it possible to carry out an intelligent conversation in this forum, and without the partisan bullshit.
No conversation with you involved is intelligent.
OK now, Henry Waxman,Nancy Pelosi, Harry Reid, Obama , you.......Now which one is moderate???????
lmao
what a freaking joke. Obama is the moderate stupid .He has pissed of the far left. If you would bother reading a little you would know what the facts are but you are blinded by youre stupidity . Has he givin gays the right to marry ? Are openly gay folks allowed in our military ? Has he amended the constitution ? Has he takin youre right to keep and bear arms away ? His approval rating among liberals has fallen a few nothches but you wouldnt beleive me if I posted the figures so I am not going to waste my time ..brave
[Edited 7/2/2009 8:08:40 PM PST]
| | 7/2/2009 9:49:04 PM | GOP, a party of yesterday | | michael061
Columbia, SC
age: 59
| Perhaps you are right. Perhaps America will fall as many great Countries have fallen in the past. It is very possible that we will fall from power much as England did.
The thing you are not considering is that somewhere in the world there are people who will stand and fight against slavery. Communism will never rule the world because free men will fight to regain their freedom.
It just might be that Socialism/Communism will spread from Canada to America. You might hold us down for fifty years. (Like you did the folks in Poland and the rest of Eastern Europe.)
But in the end, Communism will fall under it's own weight. Many Americans will be ready to crush you when you start to crumble.
So go ahead and gloat. Today is your day. Communism is making a great comeback. You have total control of our government. You have finally elected a Socialist, (To give him the benifit of the doubt.), to the Presidency. (And he is trying to make it so he can stay in office forever, by getting rid of the two term limit.)
But don't expect your day to last very long. There are a heck of a lot of red necks, with a heck of a lot of guns, just waiting for you to take a walk out in the country. Go ahead, just take a little walk in the woods.
| | 7/2/2009 10:09:11 PM | GOP, a party of yesterday | | 
layla22
Peoria, IL
age: 55
| michael , slowing down your bandwagon speech here, but obama couldn't be wanting a constitutional amendment to allow himself more than two terms.
he would be ineligible, as the incumbent, when it was passed.
IF it would even pass, as about 7 efforts have been made since 1990, and all died a-borning.
| | 7/3/2009 4:39:05 AM | GOP, a party of yesterday | |
rig216
Red Deer, AB
age: 47
| Rig: Ok, so now we know that it is the abortion issue that you have a problem with conservatism. How's this... no christian lady should kill the child so that she could live. Christ died for her, so she can die and let the child live. Since this country is over 80% christian, this should not be an issue. But it is because not all christians are true to Christ. Secondly, if woman gets raped and pregnant, so kill the baby? Is it the baby's fault? So something good came out of something bad. So, you believe the baby which is good, should be killed? Where is your values. Your putting the woman over the innocent child who can't defend itself. Third, if people wouldn't have irresponsible sex, and wait till they are married and financially stable to raise a child, perhaps abortions would not be necessary. But wait, that is another value from God that actually works. No sex before marriage. Marry when you are ready to support your wife and future children. How is that morally wrong and outdated? Again, you liberals are out of touch with mainstream america. And another thing...abortion is not a far right issue. There are many conservative democrats who believe the same on abortion. So, get your facts right. This is a moderate belief.
"out of touch with mainstream america"
How can you say that?
the Roe v wade decision haven't been overturned since 1972, so I would say legal abortions is part of your culture now. According to your last Gallup poll, 23% oppose abortion for any reason, and 29% supports abortions in the event of rape, incest, and if the life of the mother is in the danger, and the other 48% are clearly pro-choice, therefore Roe v Wade, and results from abortion polls representents mainstream America. How can a political party deny these facts, and pledge re-visting Roe v Wade in the next election? Lets put it this way, if an important issue such as illegal immigrants were not discussed/debated and swepted under a carpet by both presidential candidates, then I don't think Roe v Wade will be an election issue in 2012.
Also, I'll bet you anything that gay marriages will not be an election issue in 2012.
Watch! your 2012 GOP presidential candidate will avoid talking/debating these issues, and that's politics. It will certainly be a party of yesterday if abortions and gay marriages are prioritize in the next election.
And by the way, you spoke about the GOP believes in lowering taxes, but which political party owns the patent on lowering deficits and the debt, Shame.
[Edited 7/3/2009 5:08:08 AM PST]
| | 7/3/2009 5:49:42 AM | GOP, a party of yesterday | |
rig216
Red Deer, AB
age: 47
| Yes, you may be right, but realize this, right now, the expression goes "If the U.S. sneezes, Canada gets the flu." Imagine when the U.S. gets the flu.
noredneckhere, your right, but you forgot one thing; Canada has medications against the flu....we still have a $700 billion line of credit (per capita, $7 trillion U.S), but we don't want to use it, we rather see Americans get well soon.
| | 7/3/2009 6:02:59 AM | GOP, a party of yesterday | | 
hspbuy1
Hicksville, OH
age: 49
| the GOP is just getting younger, they'll be back. It happens every so often,some of the older leaders just don't want to leave quietly,who can blame them,they've things their way for so long ,it's hard to change.
| | 7/3/2009 6:11:55 AM | GOP, a party of yesterday | |
rig216
Red Deer, AB
age: 47
| the GOP is just getting younger, they'll be back. It happens every so often,some of the older leaders just don't want to leave quietly,who can blame them,they've things their way for so long ,it's hard to change.
hspbuy, good points. The GOP needs an injection of young members, a generation who will seriously tackle economical problems...the oldest GOP generation had their chances, but didn't have the guts.
hspbuy, do you believe the young GOP members are largely Moderates?
| | 7/3/2009 6:36:27 AM | GOP, a party of yesterday | |
hspbuy1
Hicksville, OH
age: 49
| hspbuy, good points. The GOP needs an injection of young members, a generation who will seriously tackle economical problems...the oldest GOP generation had their chances, but didn't have the guts.
hspbuy, do you believe the young GOP members are largely Moderates?
I don't know if moderates is the right term,young voters just see things differently. My son & I agree & disagree on alot of different issues. I remember GB1 losing to bc,& hearing a lot of this same rheatoric.
| | 7/3/2009 6:47:24 AM | GOP, a party of yesterday | |
rig216
Red Deer, AB
age: 47
| I don't know if moderates is the right term,young voters just see things differently. My son & I agree & disagree on alot of different issues. I remember GB1 losing to bc,& hearing a lot of this same rheatoric.
hsbuy1, thanks for your honesty. Same for my three kids 28/25/23...they don't want to debate moral issues, they didn't want the teaching of creationism impose on them when they were in high school, like you've said, they see things differently.
| | 7/3/2009 8:13:49 AM | GOP, a party of yesterday | | pariah2
Spring, TX
age: 42
| Rig: About Gop deficits...it was a Newt Gingrich and Tom Delay house of reps that kept Bill Clinton and your beloved democrats from spending this country into oblivion, which is what they are doing now. When Bush came into office he tried to appease the dems by spending more money on education and medicare than any other president in the history of these two programs. And, guess what? The dems still weren't satisfied. Democrats such as yourself can never be satisfied. So, Bush and his congress were not fiscal conservatives. And one more thing, you sure like paying attention to poles. You like poles or something? GOP GOP GOP
| | 7/3/2009 8:27:10 AM | GOP, a party of yesterday | |
rig216
Red Deer, AB
age: 47
| Rig: About Gop deficits...it was a Newt Gingrich and Tom Delay house of reps that kept Bill Clinton and your beloved democrats from spending this country into oblivion, which is what they are doing now. When Bush came into office he tried to appease the dems by spending more money on education and medicare than any other president in the history of these two programs. And, guess what? The dems still weren't satisfied. Democrats such as yourself can never be satisfied. So, Bush and his congress were not fiscal conservatives. And one more thing, you sure like paying attention to poles. You like poles or something? GOP GOP GOP
pariah2, I know the whole story about Clinton and his Republican Congress on fiscal responsibilities. Too bad that this Republican Congress, who did a good job under the Clinton administration, didn't oppose President Bush spending requests. Don't try to make this a partisan issue...me and other Conservatives in this forum have already debated this issue long time ago, and we all agreed that Bush made huge mistakes, and abandoned many conservative roots. 
| | 7/3/2009 8:37:53 AM | GOP, a party of yesterday | | pariah2
Spring, TX
age: 42
| Rig: Why do you keep using the word partisan. You damn right every issue needs to be addressed from a partisan point of view. The days of reaching across the isle to democrats is over. Have you ever seen a democrat reach across any isle? The only reaching out they do is to take money out of your pocket. So, take your partisan crap and flush it. This is you: "oh please reach out to us democrats...waaahhhhh!!!! please work to gether with us...wahhhhh" Let me attach a freakin smiley for you...   And one more thing...quit calling youself a conservative because you are not a conservative. A moderate is a democrat and nothing else. We real conservatives are going to show you what happens when you stick you your guns! We lost control of Washington, not because of conservatism, it was because of moderates like yourself and George Bush who had no idea on how to fight a war and no idea on how to be fiscal.
[Edited 7/3/2009 9:00:09 AM PST]
| | 7/3/2009 9:01:09 AM | GOP, a party of yesterday | |
rig216
Red Deer, AB
age: 47
|
Relax pariah2, let me explain the Canadian political situation, and that will give you a better understanding where I come from on partisan issues.
Since 2003, Canadians have elected "minority governments" meaning the current governing Conservative party are basically walking on egg shells, meaning they don't have an elected majority, the opposition parties have the majority, and if they lose confidence in the governing Conservative party, the opposition may call an election anytime.
Now, Since 2003, all political parties managed to work well together, and managed to introduced/co-sponsored bi-partisan bills "without" earmarks. So far, the governing Conservative party received a good report card, but who knows, they may not have the guts to introduce drastic spending cuts to offset and/or reduce a deficit, therefore an election may be called in November.
Sorry, sometimes I tend to relate our current political situtation to yours, but tell me...would you wish that the Democrats be in the same fragile situtation as our governing Conservative party? 
| | 7/3/2009 9:03:40 AM | GOP, a party of yesterday | | pariah2
Spring, TX
age: 42
| Rig: You just don't get it do you?   There is no room for moderation. Moderation applied in pursuit of liberty is no virtue. Do you not comprehend what that means? You speak of co-sponsored bill? McCain/Feingold,,, McCain/Kennedy,, These bills did nothing to help anyone but the Democrats. Do you see what is happening?? Republicans are told to be moderate and a moderate like McCain got nominated and still lost. So, don't sit there and tell conservatives what works. You obviously have forgotten what happened to the moderate democrat John McCain..he got smashed by a far left-wing loon of a man name Barry Hussein Osama. Quit preaching to us!!!
[Edited 7/3/2009 9:09:16 AM PST]
| | 7/3/2009 9:16:21 AM | GOP, a party of yesterday | |
rig216
Red Deer, AB
age: 47
| Rig: You just don't get it do you? There is no room for moderation. Moderation applied in pursuit of liberty is no virtue. Do you not comprehend what that means?
Perhaps in the U.S., but not in Canada. I've just explain to you in my previous post why there is room for moderation in Canada, and it's because our current Conservative government have no choice, but to moderate their views in an effort to remain in power, and it works.
If there was 50 republican and 50 democrat senators, do you think the democrats would be able to approve anything they wanted? Sometimes, parties have to moderate their views, and/or add porks if they want a bill to land on the President's desk.
That's not preaching, that's reality!
[Edited 7/3/2009 9:18:35 AM PST]
| | 7/3/2009 9:22:03 AM | GOP, a party of yesterday | | pariah2
Spring, TX
age: 42
| Rig: Yeah, and the reality is that your country is still third rate as compared to ours. Just keep yourself and your views in Canada. We have been the top dog in this world for sometime now. Don't expect that to change. I think we are done here.
| | 7/3/2009 9:38:40 AM | GOP, a party of yesterday | |
rig216
Red Deer, AB
age: 47
| Perhaps in the U.S., but not in Canada. I've just explain to you in my previous post why there is room for moderation in Canada, and it's because our current Conservative government have no choice, but to moderate their views in an effort to remain in power, and it works.
If there was 50 republican and 50 democrat senators, do you think the democrats would be able to approve anything they wanted? Sometimes, parties have to moderate their views, and/or add porks if they want a bill to land on the President's desk.
That's not preaching, that's reality!
And here's the definition of moderate....medium, fair, centrist
Example,
Suppose the Democrats only wants a Universal health care system, and abolish the private system. If they had strong Republican opponents in the Senate, the bill could die, and/or the Republicans may agree to establish a Universal health care system, but they would also want their private system to exist permanently, and in this case;
The DEMOCRATS WOULD HAVE TO "MODERATE" THEIR VIEWS on health care if they desperately wanted their Universal health care system to be approve. HELLO
[Edited 7/3/2009 9:40:02 AM PST]
| | 7/3/2009 9:44:10 AM | GOP, a party of yesterday | |
rig216
Red Deer, AB
age: 47
| Rig: Yeah, and the reality is that your country is still third rate as compared to ours. Just keep yourself and your views in Canada. We have been the top dog in this world for sometime now. Don't expect that to change. I think we are done here.
By the way, you've never explain your definition of a third rate country, and you keep mentioning it. 
Last, you're not the only one who told me to keep my nose off U.S. politics. See you later, and thanks for your input.
[Edited 7/3/2009 9:48:24 AM PST]
| | 7/4/2009 12:15:05 PM | GOP, a party of yesterday | | walter555
Albuquerque, NM
age: 52
| bRave
you are a moron. Vermont elects a socialist every election by the name of bernie Sanders. he runs as a socialist and wins as a socialist. Only one senator had a more extreme voting record than he did..........Obummer.
Nationalizing banks,car companies, cigarette tax, cap and trade tax, taxing company paid cell phones, taxing company paid benefits, freeing a terrorist who is responsible for 17 deaths and an awkward attempt to free even more that his own party felt compelled to stop. He has never once crossed the aisle as a senator and he still hasn't as president. Only a retard would call this man a centrist.
Bernie Sanders makes more sense than 40 Republican Senators combined.
I bet the lobbyists hate Bernie because he calls them what they truly are...
parasites. He cares more about the welfare of the American people than any
Republican.
| | 7/4/2009 12:16:47 PM | GOP, a party of yesterday | | 
poet756
The Plains, OH
age: 53
| Walter
You support a communist???? What a shock.
lmaolmaolmaolmaolmaolmaolmaolmaolmaolmaolmaolmaolmaolmaolmaolmao
| | 7/4/2009 10:59:37 PM | GOP, a party of yesterday | |
layla22
Peoria, IL
age: 55
| 
not even fox's GOP lineup---malkin, coulter, o'reilly, hannity, rivera, nor limbaugh---were able to fully unite behind their republican candidate.
not only are the conservatives living in the past, their in-fighting prevents any chance of unity.......
[Edited 7/4/2009 11:01:01 PM PST]
| | 7/5/2009 12:43:35 AM | GOP, a party of yesterday | |
poet756
The Plains, OH
age: 53
| layla
John McCain is not a conservative so i don't know what you are talking about. It's time the republicans did away with crossover voting in the primaries. people could have gotten behind Romney.
| | 7/5/2009 1:08:05 AM | GOP, a party of yesterday | |
layla22
Peoria, IL
age: 55
| poet, in a presidential election, it's republican vs. democrat.
when the republican party splinters and a schism developes within the party, the moderates swing away from the far right, and guess what happens?
a democrat will be elected.
same as when ross perot stole the election from bush I and handed it to clinton.....
| | 7/5/2009 3:08:53 AM | GOP, a party of yesterday | |
rig216
Red Deer, AB
age: 47
| poet , in a presidential election, it's republican vs. democrat.
when the republican party splinters and a schism developes within the party, the moderates swing away from the far right, and guess what happens?
a democrat will be elected.
same as when ross perot stole the election from bush I and handed it to clinton.....
Good points layla.
Here's another example of MODERATION of conservative ideology;
When the Canadian Conservative Finance Minister made a public anouncement about the Canadian government owning shares in Chrysler, he said;
"We are unproud owners of Chrysler...we've studied all options, and we had no choice"
Why did our Conservative minister specifically used the word "UNPROUD"?
Because government interference in the private sector goest against conservative ideology.
That is why the Canadian Conservatives won the last two elections...they had to moderate their views on many conservative ideologies, adapt, and lure more votes.
Here's another example of MODERATION of conservative ideology;
Prime Minister Stephen Harper was interviewed on FOX NEWS, and he was asked a question on financial regulations, and this is what he said;
"I am a Conservative, but I believe in fair, (give and take) regulations in the financial industry".
Note: Financial regulations in Canada saved our institutions from a crisis.
| | 7/5/2009 3:54:18 AM | GOP, a party of yesterday | |
poet756
The Plains, OH
age: 53
| rig
The only regulation or lack thereof that hurt us was Fannie and Freddie because they set the standard for the industry. While it is true Canada keeps higher reserves in it's banks it's also true that you pay much higher interest on mortgages. On a 30 year mortgage for a 200k house you end up paying 195 more than we do.
The democrats need to stop using the FM twins for their social engineering.
[Edited 7/5/2009 3:55:09 AM PST]
| | 7/5/2009 4:26:27 AM | GOP, a party of yesterday | |
rig216
Red Deer, AB
age: 47
| rig
The only regulation or lack thereof that hurt us was Fannie and Freddie because they set the standard for the industry. While it is true Canada keeps higher reserves in it's banks it's also true that you pay much higher interest on mortgages. On a 30 year mortgage for a 200k house you end up paying 195 more than we do.
The democrats need to stop using the FM twins for their social engineering.
Poet, first of all, Congress should have never Chartered Freddie and Fannie as a quasi-government private entities/GSEs, "and the way they were structured", they are anti-conservative, anti-free market, and anti-capitalist...governments should not chartered private companies that competes directly with the private sector with the following exemptions;
a. Special tax exempt status
b. They didn't have to registered their stocks with the SEC, and be subject to SEC regulations
c. The only private companies in America who didn't have to reveal their financial difficulties to the public.
d. Their liabilities were fully secured by the tax payers;
e. They were allowed to issue company bonds that were fully secured by the tax payers.
f. They were allowed to secure mortgage pools, and other government financial transactions with the tax payers money.
Freddie and Fannie should not be regulated, they should be dismantled/disected, and sold to the private sector.
Poet, most conservatives, and liberals on DH would agree with me on the above.
Last, Freddie and Fannie had nothing do to with the un-regulated Credit Default Swaps market, the predatory lending practices in the private sector, the non-supervised credit assigning agencies, and the reserve requirements banks must hold.
[Edited 7/5/2009 4:46:27 AM PST]
| | 7/5/2009 5:04:38 AM | GOP, a party of yesterday | |
rig216
Red Deer, AB
age: 47
| rig
The only regulation or lack thereof that hurt us was Fannie and Freddie because they set the standard for the industry. While it is true Canada keeps higher reserves in it's banks it's also true that you pay much higher interest on mortgages. On a 30 year mortgage for a 200k house you end up paying 195 more than we do.
The democrats need to stop using the FM twins for their social engineering.
In response to Canadians paying more interest on their 30 year mortgage than a U.S. citizen. I'm not going to look and compare, all I will say is; if that's the case, then good for you guys.
Hey, Compare to the U.S., Canadians are used to pay more in individual taxes, more on other payroll deductions, more on interest payments, more on our goods and services, and we don't organize TEA Parties, nor tax revolt days.
But, we are very concern about a deficit in 2009, and our national debt currently stands at $474 billion (per capita, approx. $4.74 trillion U.S.), and at this level, it is unaceptable, therefore an election may be called in November...depending on the spending cuts proposals the governing conservatives will soon introduce.
[Edited 7/5/2009 5:31:29 AM PST]
| | 7/5/2009 8:57:16 AM | GOP, a party of yesterday | |
poet756
The Plains, OH
age: 53
| Well Obama is raising the debt by a minimum of 2 trillion this year alone and he is the one you sing praises to.
I did check the rates. Your 5 yr mortgage rate is about the same as our 20
| | 7/5/2009 10:18:44 AM | GOP, a party of yesterday | | monty_python
Bridgeport, CT
age: 55
| Rig: Yeah, and the reality is that your country is still third rate as compared to ours. Just keep yourself and your views in Canada. We have been the top dog in this world for sometime now. Don't expect that to change. I think we are done here.
It this kind of arrogance that give us a black eye.
I hardly think we can call ourselves the top dog anymore.
| | 7/5/2009 12:23:10 PM | GOP, a party of yesterday | |
poet756
The Plains, OH
age: 53
| Monty
Take my word for it, you are not top dog. But we Americans are.
| | 7/5/2009 12:55:33 PM | GOP, a party of yesterday | | jenn47
Gainesville, FL
age: 47
| rig216 Why would you think the GOP is a party of yesterday? The election of 2008 proves without a doubt that Lincoln's reason for starting a Republican party have been realized. PRESIDENT OBAMA can vouch for this FACT. On the contrary, The GOP are alive and kicking.
| | 7/5/2009 6:11:32 PM | GOP, a party of yesterday | | monty_python
Bridgeport, CT
age: 55
| Monty
Take my word for it, you are not top dog. But we Americans are.
I see. In your America, someone who sees differently isn't really an American. How nice of you to embrace freedom of thought and speech here.
And while it might rub your back the wrong way, I am an American. As patriotic as you are. In my America, you are free to disagree with me on any issue and speak your mind about that. I'm glad to consider what you think. Make a convincing enough argument and I'll even support your view, because I'm free to change my mind, as you are.
I only ask that you effect change within the scope of the Constitution.
| | 7/5/2009 6:21:22 PM | GOP, a party of yesterday | |
rig216
Red Deer, AB
age: 47
| rig216 Why would you think the GOP is a party of yesterday? The election of 2008 proves without a doubt that Lincoln's reason for starting a Republican party have been realized. PRESIDENT OBAMA can vouch for this FACT. On the contrary, The GOP are alive and kicking.
Thank you for posting about Moderate Republicans. Lets talk about Lincoln;
"Moderate" Republicans believe in community, compassion, pragmatism, common sense, political fellowship, and most important, intellectual honesty. This passion is pursued within the broad framework of enlightened Lincolnian principles. Moderate Republicans stand in a crowded room, with the burning spirit of Lincoln in their seats. Truth, fairness, Justice, and limited compassionate government, moderates are loyal to serving the greater good.
| | 7/5/2009 6:33:47 PM | GOP, a party of yesterday | |
rig216
Red Deer, AB
age: 47
| I see. In your America, someone who sees differently isn't really an American. How nice of you to embrace freedom of thought and speech here.
And while it might rub your back the wrong way, I am an American. As patriotic as you are. In my America, you are free to disagree with me on any issue and speak your mind about that. I'm glad to consider what you think. Make a convincing enough argument and I'll even support your view, because I'm free to change my mind, as you are.
I only ask that you effect change within the scope of the Constitution.
Monty, in my opening statement, I've explain why the Canadian governing Conservatives had no choice but to moderate their views on many issues, and taking a centrist stand won them two elections.
It seems that the word "Moderation" is offensive to many right wing conservatives.
| | 7/6/2009 10:11:34 PM | GOP, a party of yesterday | |
layla22
Peoria, IL
age: 55
| (from right wing nuthouse website)
5/19/2009
GOP MORE POPULAR THAN AT ANY TIME SINCE YESTERDAY
True to my newly minted oath to report only good news about the Republican party, I am pleased to tell you that the popularity of the GOP is the highest its been - since yesterday:
The decline in Republican Party affiliation among Americans in recent years is well documented, but a Gallup analysis now shows that this movement away from the GOP has occurred among nearly every major demographic subgroup.
Since the first year of George W. Bush’s presidency in 2001, the Republican Party has maintained its support only among frequent churchgoers, with conservatives and senior citizens showing minimal decline.
Hooray! We are now officially the old, white, male, southern, protestant party! Well, that might be a little optimistic.
My question is where are all the conservatives hiding? I mean, according to the current logic being propounded by a lot of smart people, the key to a GOP comeback is to run candidates that the base finds acceptable.
(If they can find any. Their ever narrowing definition of “conservative” and vastly expanded definition of “RINO” would make finding enough candidates to fulfill that mandate an exercise in futility.)
Then, people will come flocking back to the GOP like geese returning from their winter quarters in Tijuana. Those invisible northeastern Republicans will show up at the polls to vote for “true” conservatives.
Those midwestern conservative farmers will dig themselves out and rush to the polls in order to cast their ballot for “real” candidates from the right.
And all those college graduates and holders of secondary degrees will come out of their coma and realize what they’ve been missing in life; voting for a “genuine” conservative.
Of course, if all those candidates were, by bad luck, to lose their elections it would force “real” conservatives back to the drawing board where they no doubt they will come up with the brilliant idea that the defeat was because those candidates just weren’t “conservative enough”.
This will require an even narrower definition of who can wear the non-union label of “true” conservative.
Eventually, there will be so many litmus tests for who can call themselves a conservative that the base will start eying even Rush Limbaugh with suspicion.
Do real conservatives smoke cigars? And what about all those divorces? I don’t know any true conservatives who have ever been addicted to anything.
The point is simple, my friends. There aren’t enough “true blue” conservatives in the country who would vote for your idealized, highly (and rigidly) ideological conservative candidate to win many elections outside of the old south and the Goldwater west.
Stacey McCain makes sense here but I don’t think even he grasps the difficulty of creating a coalition where membership is so exclusive that running candidates that appeal to only one segment of the group will lead to failure:
This is something that the Nutroots figured out in 2004: If the Democratic Party’s liberal base were going to sit around passively while the out-of-touch party elite and the “expert” consultant class kept “reaching across the aisle” (and predictably losing) then they were on the superhighway to political irrelevance.
Nothing succeeds like success, and nothing fails like failure. A political party that is disloyal and disrespectful toward its core constituents, as the GOP was during the Bush/Mehlman era, will not attract new adherents. Who wants to sign up to be treated like a doormat?
The Bush-era GOP believed that its base would be satisfied with superficial gestures (e.g., the Terri Schiavo drama) and ignore the party leadership’s pursuit of policies (e.g., McCain-Feingold, No Child Left Behind, Medicare Part D) which were directly at odds with the party’s fundamental principles.
I don’t recall national Democrats “reaching across the aisle” at any time in the last 25 years.
The liberal party picked up 50+ seats in the House and 10 senate seats in the last two elections.
While some of the base grumbled, the netroots largely got behind the effort to find attractive, more moderate candidates to defeat conservative Republicans.
If the national Democrats had listened to their base, they would still be in the minority.
|
|