Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
This is one thing that always kills me about republicans. I'm not saying they are all that way, and it generally seems to be the older group. If you have one liberal view, even at all, you are instantly shouted at as being liberal, i can't even take that stuff, how are you suppose to talk to some one if all that is going to happen is name calling and silly labeling. sorry for the rant
I think thats the problem with the GOP. We have this group, whom I would say is the minority of the party, getting all the attention. I consider myself conservative, but HATE some of the things the talking head like Rush, Coulter, Etc.. have to say. I think you have it on both sides, where if you don't agree with them your the worst person in the world. I like to think I can sit down with some one of the opposing political ideology and discuss, with out acting like a child, the differences and how each feels they could help the country. I believe, and I hope I am right, that at the end of the day everyone wants whats best for the United States. I just wish we could communicate in a constitutive manner.
Location: On the "Left Coast", somewhere in "the Land of Fruits & Nuts"
8,852 posts, read 10,456,964 times
Reputation: 6670
Well, as far as "true" Republicans, I think you also have ask which era. The "southern strategy" of Lee Atwater & the Reagan era
is certainly alot different than the time of Lincoln (also a Republican). As Eisenhower was very different from Nixon.
Just personally, I think it would be good for the country to have some constructive dissent or alternatives to the Dems, since some
sort of balance always seems to work best, regardless who's in power. The trouble though, is that whether you're talking fiscal,
social or libertarian conservatives, none of those has any credibility anymore in the Post-Bush era. And as noted above, the hysteria
of the right-wing isn't helping things either.
No such thing. This is simply absolutism and the judging of the world from perfection down as opposed to chaos up.
I will never understand this desire for labels today as there is almost nothing in politics that is pure. Terms people throw around like Marxist, Fascist, Liberal, Conservative, Socialist, etc... are at best extremely general and best used when painting barns and you need a huge brush. The ultimate conclusion of this absolutist and puritanism is being witness by the current Republican Party, which at its current rate will end with two guys in a room arguing over who is the most "Republican".
Ultimately a Republican is someone who calls themselves a Republican.
Location: Jonquil City (aka Smyrna) Georgia- by Atlanta
16,259 posts, read 24,763,471 times
Reputation: 3587
Most of them can be put into 2 categories- they are either racist or religious nutcases. That is about 95% of the party. The other 5% are folks like Jack Kemp, Olympia Snowe and others who hang on to the illusion that the Republican Party can ever be anything but the "white southern male" party it has become.
Location: On the "Left Coast", somewhere in "the Land of Fruits & Nuts"
8,852 posts, read 10,456,964 times
Reputation: 6670
Quote:
Originally Posted by TnHilltopper
What is a true Republican?
No such thing. This is simply absolutism and the judging of the world from perfection down as opposed to chaos up.
I will never understand this desire for labels today as there is almost nothing in politics that is pure. Terms people throw around like Marxist, Fascist, Liberal, Conservative, Socialist, etc... are at best extremely general and best used when painting barns and you need a huge brush. The ultimate conclusion of this absolutist and puritanism is being witness by the current Republican Party, which at its current rate will end with two guys in a room arguing over who is the most "Republican".
Ultimately a Republican is someone who calls themselves a Republican.
Huh?! So it stands for nothing in particular and it's only a name...?
Actually, that may be technically accurate at the moment, but it seems hardly desireable.
If you look at the two party platform which as many satnces on many isuues and some core satcnes over time you can decide on whcih you agree most with. If you then vote for that party you are defind by that vote. Youc an always disagree based on whether you beliefs fall to the left ;cneter or roight od any party. Just as they have caucuses such as the bluedog democrtic caucus in the democratic party.There is always a fight within a party for control of the platform and it changes and is added on to constantly.
Huh?! So it stands for nothing in particular and it's only a name...?
Actually, that may be technically accurate at the moment, but it seems hardly desireable.
What does it stand for? In the past there was a time when Republicans were more Conservative and traditionally this meant they were less inclined to intervene in other peoples foreign affairs or the internal struggles of other nations. In the past there used to be a thing known as fiscal responsibility, but today Republicans can only tout "lower taxes", as though this is a solution to every fiscal matter. There was a time when Repubilcans shared sentiments with what we refer to today as tree huggers, as they wished to preserve our nations beauty and natural wonders for future generations. (you know Conservationist - Conservative, the root is a give away) There was a time when Republicans championed liberty and fought against government intrusion into citizens private lives, yet today most Republicans seem to have no problem with the government monitored every private phone call in the name of national security for the motherland.
So, what it is to be a Republican has changed somewhat because what the party once advocated isn't entirely what it advocates today. So a Republican of 1950 may in principle and philosophy, nothing like a contemporary Republican. One of the reasons I make the attempt to accurate define or differentiate terms, labels in the manner in which I do.
Today's Republican's do have an ideology and set of beliefs, but as I pointed out, those beliefs and philosophy change, so the use of a label like "Republican" isn't static and final but only serves to describe people in the most general sense. The OP asked what is a 'true' Republican, and that is something that is unanswerable because it is something different to nearly anyone you ask. This is like asking, what is the best color?
I'm baited quit often and am not a poster child. But this post is for Repub haters. Don't feed it my friends. Dems, you have the floor.
How is this thread a troll thread as you insinuate? I posted a valid observation that is very relevant to this forum on post I see every day since I joined up. Social struggles are certainly not foreign to the democractic nor the republican party. To suggest otherwise your only fooling yourself. I pointed my experiences first hand like it not.
Most of them can be put into 2 categories- they are either racist or religious nutcases. That is about 95% of the party. The other 5% are folks like Jack Kemp, Olympia Snowe and others who hang on to the illusion that the Republican Party can ever be anything but the "white southern male" party it has become.
What a tool.
Thats like saying dems are one of two things 1) gay 2) welfare recipients
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
