For me a Republican was always in support of the following:
1. Balanced Budgets/Fiscal Conservativism
2. States Rights/non intervention of Federal Gov.
3. America focused, non/interventionist.
4. Small Government.
It seems like the big names have all jumped ship. William F. Buckley, John McGlaughlin, George Will
Even Bob Barr the man who lead Clinton's impeachment is now a Liberatarian.
2006-12-19
00:51:24
·
9 answers
·
asked by
Patrick B
3
in
Politics & Government
➔ Government
Even Tom Friedman and Brooks conservative columnists on the NYT are anti-Bush.
2006-12-19
00:58:09 ·
update #1
Yes you are right.. tax cuts but there is a strong argument to be made that even those have not really impacted the majority of America. So if it is just cuts for rich Americans then that seems to go against the theory as well.
It just seems like there is this incredible gap between people that call themselves Republican and core Republican idealogy.
2006-12-19
01:01:31 ·
update #2
The point is that the Republican party is no longer persuing the historical Republican agenda. So if you believe in that, how can you be a Republican? Maybe a Liberatarian. There seems to be some kind of major disconnect that the Republican intellectuals are figuring out and stepping away from.
2006-12-19
01:16:16 ·
update #3
You do not have to be a Republican to support the President. You also do not have to agree with everything the man stands for in order to support him. You post is somewhat dishonest in the fact that it attempts to put all the blame for government at the feet of the President when in reality it is the Congress who is more to blame for the things you mention than the President. The simple fact is that many Republicans are not acting like Conservatives. This fact has not gone unnoticed by the electorate. As evidence please review the results of the last election.
Edit: Okay I am not a Republican, but rather a Conservative Independent, but I am willing to play devil's advocate. What would you suggest the Republican electorate do.
1) Join the Democrats or Libertarians? Democrats do not hold conservative ideas as a whole and in fact denigrate the things most conservatives believe in at every possible opportunity. Liberatrians are also not conservative, although they do hold some conservative ideas.
2) Act in the manner afforded to them by voting against Representatives who are not true to their values? Again, refer to the last election.
3) Abandon the Republican Party as a whole and form a new party?
It is easy to point out what is wrong, but it is much more difficult to propose workable solutions based within the framework of what is realistically possible.
Edit: With the exception of Bob Barr name one major Republican defector. What I see is that prominent people in the party are calling attention to the disparagie. I view this as an attempt to steer the party back unto the course embraced by their supporters. People have certain beliefs which are embraced by the ideas of the Republican Party. Just because some Representatives are not acting true to those beliefs does not change the core ideas the party was founded on, nor should it necessitate any shame on the part of the electorate, unless knowing that your will has been subverted you continue to vote for the same Representatives again and again. Republicans sent a message to the party in the last election it is now up to the leadership to either embrace or deny this message. I am betting you will see a reinvigorated party in the next election with a return to core values.
Old Adage: You don't throw the baby out with the dirty bath water.
2006-12-19 00:59:06
·
answer #1
·
answered by Bryan 7
·
3⤊
1⤋
Even though I do not agree with some of the "Republican agenda" things, Bush has done the opposite of all of those things, especially small government and balanced budgets
2006-12-19 03:53:12
·
answer #2
·
answered by greencoke 5
·
1⤊
0⤋
before each and everything he isn't any longer former he's President. you protect the identify for lifestyles. i'm no longer ashamed of him he develop into undesirable fiscally, yet in different ideas, say nationwide protection he's been stellar. no longer a unmarried attack on American soil considering that 9/11 no longer too shabby. Presidents typically go away with a low score. Obama has a worse approval score than Bush did this far into his presidency. And it might no longer maximum historians. Historians can't style an opinion yet as his presidency is infrequently history. it truly is been below a twelve months, and also you want to ascertain it in a larger context. How did he fail in Iraq? We knocked of Saddam (who develop into as villainous as feasible get) and set up a sensible Democracy in below 2 years. it is rather surprising. Wars value funds. Obama has spent 3 trillion income below one hundred days and could very in all likelihood reason inflation. i ask your self who's doing worse in that branch. Our coaching develop into in undesirable structure far earlier Bush got here a lengthy. No baby Left in the back of does look lacking, yet he did not fail in coaching over all. President Clinton develop into presented Osama 8 cases and refused each and every of them. i'd positioned the onus on that attack on his shoulders. it truly is Congress that holds the handbag strings and fiscal concerns. in case you'll bear in mind, it develop into about the surprising 2 years of his presidency at the same time as issues began to disintegrate. about the same time that the Democrats took it over. weird and wonderful huh?
2016-11-27 19:50:08
·
answer #3
·
answered by ? 4
·
0⤊
0⤋
You left out Tax Cuts for working people.
That is the Most Important principle of the Republican Party.
Too Important for you to have left out.
2006-12-19 00:56:12
·
answer #4
·
answered by Anonymous
·
2⤊
1⤋
You forgot Republicans favor those who provide the jobs for people who WANT to work not get a handout like the Democrats are famous for.. They want ALL the people to keep more of their money.They want this country strong & yes they allow desent in the ranks unlike the democrats.Point of fact look at the disaray in the dems & they just took over.
2006-12-19 01:04:30
·
answer #5
·
answered by BUTCH 5
·
0⤊
4⤋
and your point is, id rather have a republican in the oval office than a democrat, if Clinton wins we are in for some major problems
2006-12-19 00:56:03
·
answer #6
·
answered by paki 5
·
2⤊
2⤋
Its because of Bush that I call Myself a DEMOCRAT!!!!!
2006-12-19 00:57:36
·
answer #7
·
answered by Anonymous
·
4⤊
1⤋
mass confusion
2006-12-19 00:53:48
·
answer #8
·
answered by canada1usa0 5
·
1⤊
0⤋
i ask myself the same thing!!
2006-12-19 03:31:08
·
answer #9
·
answered by × 7
·
1⤊
0⤋