Republicans?

The American system is a mess. There are too many veto points where a dedicated opposition party can sit, wrecking the place, while blaming the president for not fixing the problems.

We would be better off with a parliamentary system. It can be much more directly responsive to the demands of the people.

The fact that we only have two major parties, and that this has been the normal state of affairs for the entirety of our system, is I think a reaction to the system of government in place. Coalitions get built before the election in the us system. In Westminster style systems, the coalition can be built after the election. This gives smaller parties much more of a potential voice than they can ever have in the us.

 

I am a conservative, by inclination, and therefore find myself aligned with the Republican party more often than not. My views are evolving, since coming out, however. Let me add that I trust neither party. Both parties are in bed with big money, and therefore, against the people they're supposed to represent. There is only the lesser of two evils.

That being said there are intelligent, morally responsible Republicans, who are appalled at the hijacking of our party by the rabid social conservatives and the likes of the media pundits. I am old fashioned Rockefeller Republican, sometimes referred to as a country club Republican, and, derisively, as a RHINO. I'll even admit to Neocon leanings in the Middle East. The alternative is too scary not support Israel

This has been the party of my family for years with judges and a D.A. My grandfather thought FDR was the devil incarnate. It's tough to go against a tradition. Becoming an Episcopalian and leaving the Catholic Church was not seen as any great betrayal, but voting for a Democrat, would be to become a kind of Judas. It's tough to change that kind of indoctrination.

I was in D.C. during the Clinton years, and a more duplicitous couple I can't imagine. The gift grab at the end of their term was an embarrassment. To see Hillary making another possible run at the presidency turns my blood into ice water.

Like anyone, one votes for the person who best butters your bread. As a gay man, there certainly are reasons to support some Democrats. As I become more involved in this new life and become knowledgeable of the issues I face, things will change. They will change pragmatically, but I doubt that my political philosophy will change. I am proudly an Hamiltonian and Jeffersonian politics hold little interest for me.

 

:eusa_clap:eusa_clap:eusa_clap:eusa_clap:eusa_clap

 

The old moderate-centrist Republican party is "Gone With the Wind". All that is left is a number of weasels who are election-by-election running the remaining moderates out of the party, using money from the Koch brothers to fund the individual media blitzes state-by-state. They then use control of the state government to Gerrymander districts in such a way that Republican candidates vetted by the Koch brothers as representing their personal interests get all the money they need to buy out media advertising and flood the local area with propaganda against their opponents, first in the primaries, then in the general elections. THAT is why we currently have a Republican controlled House and Senate even though we have a Democrat majority in the public. The media blitz focussed on the ignorance of their voter base, assisted by some of the best purchased help from Madison Avenue using Koch money, turns their voters out using pumped up outrage about what the big bad black man in the big White house is doing to them, when it is in fact their own party which has been screwing a lot of their own "base".

The Republican Party no longer has anything to do with the long-term interests or future of America, or the middle or lower income population, only the short-term interests of a few Billionaires and a larger number of Millionaires whose interests are mostly aligned with the Billionaires. Their base is too ignorant to see this, and constantly brainwash themselves with extreme right-wing drivel from talk radio and Faux News. Most of them are incapable of deducing that they spray themselves with this BS at this point.

The fact that the Republicans having been fighting gay interests, is only collateral damage from pandering to the Religious-Right, which is one of the easily and inexpensively pandered-to sub-groups; all you have to do is say "I'm against gay rights (never "equal civil rights of gay people", always GAY rights as though we seek special privileges instead of equality), and abortion" and you have it done. Throw in a little support for gun rights and it is a done deal, because the Democrats are dumb enough to NOT support gun rights, or even to keep their mouths shut on this issue, delivering another sub-group to the Republicans on this single issue.

 

This is one of the funniest, one sided, political posts I have read in a while. Brilliant. And to think, the Koch brothers did sign on in support of Marriage Equality. I think someone is watching too many movies and reading to many propaganda blogs. Perfect laugh for the end of the day today!

 

Onthehighway,

You're going to say that someone is reading too many "propaganda blogs" in defense of the Koch brothers?

:roflmao::roflmao::roflmao:

 

Do we really think the Democrats are any different, that somehow they're not in bed with big money? Look at what Johnson's "Great Society" has given us. It has created a permanent underclass relying on government subsidies. It destroyed the families, because if was no longer beneficial to be married, rewarding those with the most children, and an education system more segregated and less efficient than during the 1960's. Rotting inner cities ringed by the lush green of the suburbs. Why has this been allowed to exist? The cynical answer and the one closest to the truth is that it ties these voters to the Democrats, champions of the disenfranchised. How much does it cost them to champion the poor. Just a few scare tactics that benefits will be cut. How can we afford to continue buying votes like this. Bread and circus.

Unfortunately, I believe we will end with another revolution; the fault of both parties. This time it will be like the France's or Russia's. A revolution fought not for liberty, but for food and housing. The billionaires and such will go into exile, creating room for the reformers with too little too late, and then the terror. Who will suffer the middle class, the educated classes, the bourgeoisie. Eventually, the dogs will turn on their masters, and a new oligarchy will arise. Philistines who'll tear down the our culture, our values and replace them with some form of materialism and redistribution of wealth. Whose to say we'll keep our newly found rights?

Now doesn't New Zealand look good. Make's the problem of a Republican congress seem like a very First World problem.

 

Oh man, I love it when people can articulate what I'm thinking, because politics is one area where I know what I think but can't seem to communicate it well. I was moderately left of center in college (at the University of Wisconsin in Madison--could I have been anything else?), but gradually drifted to the right the more I started considering all the things you listed. Thank you!

 

The Koch brothers elect right-wing Tea Party extremists with their money. It does not matter that they have "signed off" on any phony token gesture accommodation document when their actions and money speak much louder than their words.

If anyone has swallowed the Kool-Aid that the Republicans are somehow "good" for poor people because they fight against funding Medicaid, Affordable Care, Social Security, veterans benefits, as they constantly treat people as "trash that just doesn't want to work" while they simultaneously pass trade bills that ship jobs to China, and start military conflicts that poor people end up joining the military to fight for them, then the Kool-Aid has already made them brain dead.

The country worked pretty well economically under Republican President Eisenhower with top tax brackets at 91% for the very wealthy. The notion that the current Republicans bear any relationship to THAT Republican Party or their recent candidates to THAT Republican President may be nostalgic, but it has no basis in reality.

 

Not sure how relevant this is, but I have a gay cousin who is Republican. And he's going to school to (eventually) be a politician. He even worked on the Romney campagin in DC for the 2012 election. I'm not all that close to him (because we never lived closely), so I don't know how he deals with the anti-gay sentiments that many of his fellow Republicans hold.

 

Republicans have their sources of money, and the democrats have their own. George Soros comes to mind instantly on the democratic side. You don't think he does not have his own agenda? C'mon, let's not be naive nor hypocritical. It's the way politics work. Big money picks a side, and then invests to make sure their views are "heard", regardless of what self interest they are pursuing.

The Koch brothers get hammered in the media while Soros is able to hide better under the cover of his friends in the media.

And don't get me wrong, I am not saying I am a fan of neither, I am just being realistic on how the system works and recognising it for what it is.

 

The party itself is not against LGBT, individuals are. There is no "mother ship" of any party that dictates the views of everyone. There are factions, and subgroups, each with their individual views and objectives. The media likes to focus on the "religious right" no doubt, but that is just one group.

Even in the democratic party, you will find Anti-LGBT groups. I am not going to name names on that, just simply out of respect, but they are easy enough to identify.

The notion that someone should pick a party solely on the basis of one issue, goes back to my original point that no party in a two party system can properly represent everyone.

so in the end, each person needs to weigh the pros and cons.

That said, rest assured, during the last mid term elections, 12 pro equal rights republican candidates won positions. I am proud to say I contributed to each and everyone of their campaigns.

Better to help create change, where there is more resistance (this much I will absolutely agree with), then only focus on the pros of on party and ignore the cons.

 

I would respectfully disagree; do your research rather than simply listening to media "talking points"........

at same time, listen to what politicians say and do not say. They craft their messages very carefully to try and target one message with one group and another with another group.

 

It's not just a" talking point" when the RNC votes to support banning same sex marriage by a voice vote. Republican Party Says No to Same-Sex Marriage | TIME.com

Even if Republicans are trying to pander to social conservatives, it is bad for gay people when these people get into office. Imagine Rick Santorum or Mike Huckabee as President.

 

My brother is a registered Republican and very involved in local politics, with some state aspirations. Long before I came out, he said he wished the Republicans would back off on their gay marriage stance because it was a losing battle and was going to make them look bad in the end. He's a very traditional guy and has told me that he will probably always feel awkward about the fact that I'm gay--but he was also sensible enough to recognize that he might as well be on the right side of history, and recent events would seem to indicate that he's not the only Republican politician thinking that way.

Personally, I'm not a one-issue voter. If I feel one candidate is going to be more effective at bolstering the economy or keeping ISIS at bay or protecting personal freedoms as a whole, that's who I'm going to vote for. If that candidate supports gay rights, so much the better, but I'm not going to consult the Big Gay Handbook and use it to make the final yea or nay in my voting decision and override all the other issues.

I didn't come out of the closet to jump into a rainbow-colored straitjacket and be told that because I'm gay, I must now vote Democrat, renounce my religion and start sacrificing unicorns at the altar of the Holy Trinity of Judy, Bette and Madonna. I did it to be who I am, and that includes who I vote for. I am many things, and gay is only one of them. That fact may color my political decisions, but it doesn't dictate them.

 

See Below:

http://www.google.co.uk/url?sa=t&rc...WWqr65X3k8YzCTA7iowqUFA&bvm=bv.87611401,d.ZGU

http://www.google.co.uk/url?sa=t&rc...bqcovKZAfACkvKazfoo8sgg&bvm=bv.87611401,d.ZGU

http://www.google.co.uk/url?sa=t&rc...F9UTO4Vz3SztS6C96Z_lq_g&bvm=bv.87611401,d.ZGU

And now look at these (even the ones, dare I say it, about Hillary and Obama):

http://www.google.co.uk/url?sa=t&rc...4Ma6DSqjoLFq25OKrsD7GhQ&bvm=bv.87611401,d.ZGU

http://www.google.co.uk/url?sa=t&rc...W83QpA-YBUEANN-9rqgp6NA&bvm=bv.87611401,d.ZGU

http://www.google.co.uk/url?sa=t&rc...EWlHYcjMbTqmf-CSgOzzrMw&bvm=bv.87611401,d.ZGU

 

Thank you I couldn't have said it better myself.

Am I to support Hillary and ignore her Nixonian faux pas in Benghazi? Do you think I will be in lock step in support for the 47 senators who disrespected the office of the presidency and flirted with treasonous behavior? I hope no one would find me that unthinking or blindly loyal to any party. :tantrum: