Topic: The Republican Party Explained

[trapeze]

This guy says (very well, I might add) what I have come to believe over the last year.

The thing is, though, that even if you explained this to the party faithful, even if you laid it all out like this guy does, most of them are gonna ignore it...pretend that it isn't reality because for them the truth is just not acceptable. They will continue to live in their little dream world repeating to themselves over and over, "Next time we are going to win...next time." They can have it.

Personally, I'm sort of done. I'll vote for the best candidate in any given election but I'm not fooling myself anymore as to the reality of the GOP. Screw them. Not another dime of my money and not another minute of my time.

The Republican Party became lost in the political currents and found itself stuck with a populist base that opposed most of its values. The contradictions were paved over with rhetoric. The GOP would pretend to represent the values of its base on social and economic issues, even as [it] worked against them. And no matter how often this baffling betrayal takes place, it's always a shock to a base that imagines that the Republican Party must stand for the same values as its voters. It doesn't. It never did.

The GOP is still basically the same party that it was after the Civil War. It believes that big government can make the country work, that centralizing everything will make the country more modern and that anything that contributes to growth must be good. And it's stuck with a base of Jacksonian Democrats who are highly suspicious of centralized power, value their independence and don't think that anyone should tell them what to do. Meanwhile the Republican Party's donors come from a more traditional Republican brand of politics.

Every now and then, a Republican Party leader must feel tempted to stand up and say. "Folks, you've got us wrong. We don't really stand for any of the things that you think we do. We like small business, in theory. But we like big business more. That's about all we have in common. Also we're still against Communism, not that it matters anymore. But we're fine with having a lot of government agencies. We created most of them. And we like abortion and gay rights. We're also on board with Global Warming, illegal immigration and some international law."

So the choice is now very clear to me. It's between "bad" and "worse" and I don't care for either. So my choice is going to be something else. I don't know what it is but that's what I'm going for as soon as I know what it is.

EDIT: As an aside, you can mark the "definitive" moment when our country gave up on greatness. It was when we gave up on space exploration. We turned inward and stopped doing truly great things. Now we can't even build a frickin' fence. Pathetic.

[Libertas]

So, basically "greatness" ended under Clinton, right?  I mean that was the age of robotocized space exploration and the start of hitching rides on Rooskie rockets to the ISS.  Oh, and Newt the Great began backslidding on promises and exposed himself as a Big Government guy.  For me the decline in greatness really began to take root when GWH Bush exposed himself to be a fraud.

The GOP is the Chicago Cubs of politics...they always look to next year...but after so much losing their fan base is in even worse shape, more Miami Marlin like.

GOP can't die fast enough to save the nation...surviving the collapse and aftermath and then rebuilding, that is where our energies are most needed.

[trapeze]

So, basically "greatness" ended under Clinton, right? 

I was leaning more in the direction of manned space exploration. We sort of stopped doing that at the end of the Apollo program. I should have said and emphasized "manned." I remember when I was younger thinking that by the time I retired we would have a permanent outpost on the moon, etc. We gave up on that kind of stuff under Ford/Carter and no one has had any real "vision" for great things since. As I did say, though, we can't even build a fence so why should we expect to do anything "great?" The funny thing is that all of the greatness in the space program took place under Democrats. The drive to the moon was initiated by JFK. Today we have O'BongoCare as a measure of presidential greatness. We have turned inward. We have been in decline for decades. It just took a socialist buffoon to drive a stake into the heart of the country to finish the job. A buffoon aided and abetted by the fecklessness of the establishment GOP.

[Libertas]

So, basically "greatness" ended under Clinton, right? 

I was leaning more in the direction of manned space exploration. We sort of stopped doing that at the end of the Apollo program. I should have said and emphasized "manned." I remember when I was younger thinking that by the time I retired we would have a permanent outpost on the moon, etc. We gave up on that kind of stuff under Ford/Carter and no one has had any real "vision" for great things since. As I did say, though, we can't even build a fence so why should we expect to do anything "great?" The funny thing is that all of the greatness in the space program took place under Democrats. The drive to the moon was initiated by JFK. Today we have O'BongoCare as a measure of presidential greatness. We have turned inward. We have been in decline for decades. It just took a socialist buffoon to drive a stake into the heart of the country to finish the job. A buffoon aided and abetted by the fecklessness of the establishment GOP.

Oh I agree, and I knew you meant "manned" spaceflight...my only point on that score being that we did have the Space Shuttle (the "bus"), it was manned, no comparison to Apollo though...under Clinton we took the bold leap of exploring solely by remote control...about as official an admission as we will get that great things are over, dreams of manned missions to Mars or anywhere else gone forever...social welfare program entitlements and the debt (progressive big government clowns in both parties) killed any hope to real greatness.

[trapeze]

No, I meant manned space exploration. The shuttle was a bus, not a vehicle for true exploration. We really stopped developing space exploration vehicles while we had the shuttle. And the shuttle turned out to be incredibly dangerous as designed...lose a tile and you can't re-enter the atmosphere and survive. It was an amazing technological innovation when it was designed and created...in the 1970's. A comparison would be Boeing creating the 747 and then just stopping at that point.

[Libertas]

No, I meant manned space exploration. The shuttle was a bus, not a vehicle for true exploration. We really stopped developing space exploration vehicles while we had the shuttle. And the shuttle turned out to be incredibly dangerous as designed...lose a tile and you can't re-enter the atmosphere and survive. It was an amazing technological innovation when it was designed and created...in the 1970's. A comparison would be Boeing creating the 747 and then just stopping at that point.

Oh, manned "exploration", yeah, that ended December 19, 1972 when Apollo 17 (Challenger LEM) left the moon...here we are 41 years later...

[ChrstnHsbndFthr]

Capitalism is the key. In our early times, even before the institution of our republic, the kings and emperor's of the time, gave deeds to those who would own the land, who would pursue its wealth. What if Congress, and the President would acknowledge the right of whoever would set foot upon it?  Would this unlock our pioneer spirit again? What you could claim there would be YOURS as assuredly as it was to the early settlers. We could do a 400 square mile, to be arbitrary, limitation, with all mineral rights included. Would that be sufficient to entice exploration again?  If an asteroid was smaller, the corporation who claimed it would have FULL rights to ALL of it. If they managed to reach Jupiter, or Mars, or Venus, they could have all they could control. Each man of the corporation could make claim. What might it open up? The spirit is not dead, the law is. We must recognize that spirit and once again reward it.

[Glock32]

This is it in a nutshell:

It's the wasted energy and votes of its base who might have been able to make a difference that it has siphoned off in multiple elections. The voters who might have been able to save America instead wasted their votes and energies on the likes of Marco Rubio and Paul Ryan

This guy is singing my song.  It just so happens that it's also the GOP's swan song. They corral the conservative vote, then systematically deny it any power and influence in government.

If there is an historical retrospective on where "we" went wrong, it was in listening to the dire warnings about going 3rd party for all those years.  In retrospect, wouldn't it have been nice to chuck the GOP back when the electoral consequences weren't as severe?  Sure, it would have benefit the Democrats in the immediate term, but within a few election cycles the GOP's heir apparent would have become the new heavyweight and the GOP gone mercifully the way of the Whigs.

The deplorable state we are in now as a civilization is, I think, due more to Republican ineptitude than to Democrat aptitude. They are the authors of this crumbling house of cards.

[trapeze]

Oh, manned "exploration", yeah, that ended December 19, 1972 when Apollo 17 (Challenger LEM) left the moon...here we are 41 years later...

Yeah, that's what I was driving at. What are we known for in the world today? We are known for making movies. We are also known for developing state of the art military hardware and for having the world's best special forces. We used to be known as having the world's best medical system. But we don't do big impressive stuff anymore. Apparently that was a one off.

But getting back to the real topic of this thread (since that was an aside)...

It is becoming more and more clear as time goes on that the Reagan years were an aberration and that Nixon, Ford, GHWB and GWB (not to mention Dole and Romney)  have been the real faces of the GOP.

I'm old enough now and I've seen enough that I know these things to be true. And I have decided to stop playing that game. Will the country go into the toilet because I'm not going to fight anymore? It's going into the toilet if our guys win so what's the point? It just goes into the toilet faster if the Democrats win. After watching our side virtually surrender on immigration and healthcare there is just no denying it. So I'm gonna go sort of a modified Galt. I'm not physically going somewhere to hide out but I am beginning to live my life as if the country is going to fail in a way similar to Detroit. I'm allocating my resources accordingly.

The guy who wrote that article is right. It's been this way for many, many decades and it isn't going to change. There will have to be a collapse. There will be darkness and it will be bad. I say "bad" because you just can't have a major world power collapse and not have far reaching consequences. Plus, something will fill the vacuum that our collapse represents and it will not be better or the same. It will be worse. That's just human behavior and human history.

The United States was a terrific experiment but it has failed and it failed because there were not enough good people willing to stand and fight. I don't blame the Democrats anymore than I blame a tiger for being a tiger. There was never any doubt about who they were and where they wanted to take the country...not since FDR, anyway. I do blame the GOP for pretending to be that which it is not and for lulling its followers into a false sense of security, for giving them hope, for taking their donations and using them against them. I blame the Bob Doles and the John McCains of the party for where we are and for where we are now ultimately and inevitably heading. They lied to us and they sold us out. They remind me of (the largely fictional account of) the Scottish clan chiefs who sold out William Wallace in "Braveheart." We could have won but we didn't even try to fight and now it is largely too late to do anything.

Best case scenario: The country comes to its senses and throws all Democrats out of office and replaces them with actual conservatives who immediately restore all individual freedoms and something approaching fiscal sanity. We still lose because the debt is now so enormous that we are crushed under its weight. The country still dies but it dies slower and with a good conscience.

Of course, that will never happen. We will still be stuck with the best minds the Democrat party has to offer and there will be enough GOPers willing to cooperate with them that the country is finished. So basically a choice of driving at 100 mph directly over the cliff to certain death or braking a bit and turning the wheel slightly and plunging over the edge at only 95 mph again, to certain death.

Depressing? Yes. Yes, it is. But I'm accepting it, now. I am sorry for my children and grandchildren (yet to come) for I have failed them in that I didn't see the fraud. I was fooled for years and now it's too late.

[trapeze]

Capitalism is the key. In our early times, even before the institution of our republic, the kings and emperor's of the time, gave deeds to those who would own the land, who would pursue its wealth. What if Congress, and the President would acknowledge the right of whoever would set foot upon it?  Would this unlock our pioneer spirit again? What you could claim there would be YOURS as assuredly as it was to the early settlers. We could do a 400 square mile, to be arbitrary, limitation, with all mineral rights included. Would that be sufficient to entice exploration again?  If an asteroid was smaller, the corporation who claimed it would have FULL rights to ALL of it. If they managed to reach Jupiter, or Mars, or Venus, they could have all they could control. Each man of the corporation could make claim. What might it open up? The spirit is not dead, the law is. We must recognize that spirit and once again reward it.

I don't see how any Earth-based government could have any legal say over any extraterrestrial property. But, that said, I agree that space exploration should now be left to private concerns. The problem is, as it always has been, that space exploration is scary expensive mainly because it is so difficult to leave Earth's gravity well and so dangerous coming back. It's physics and that's that. But there are now signs that private enterprise is moving in that direction. Unfortunately they are also liberals.

[BigAlSouth]

There are few individuals who can save the GOP. Very, very few. Immigration is weeding out the smiling back-stabbers. There is one politician who has more electability that Rand Paul, although they are on the same very small constitutionalists team.

Guess whom I'm supporting?

[Predator Don]

There are few individuals who can save the GOP. Very, very few. Immigration is weeding out the smiling back-stabbers. There is one politician who has more electability that Rand Paul, although they are on the same very small constitutionalists team.

Guess whom I'm supporting?

Ted Cruz?

[benb61]

Capitalism is the key. In our early times, even before the institution of our republic, the kings and emperor's of the time, gave deeds to those who would own the land, who would pursue its wealth. What if Congress, and the President would acknowledge the right of whoever would set foot upon it?  Would this unlock our pioneer spirit again? What you could claim there would be YOURS as assuredly as it was to the early settlers. We could do a 400 square mile, to be arbitrary, limitation, with all mineral rights included. Would that be sufficient to entice exploration again?  If an asteroid was smaller, the corporation who claimed it would have FULL rights to ALL of it. If they managed to reach Jupiter, or Mars, or Venus, they could have all they could control. Each man of the corporation could make claim. What might it open up? The spirit is not dead, the law is. We must recognize that spirit and once again reward it.

I don't see how any Earth-based government could have any legal say over any extraterrestrial property. But, that said, I agree that space exploration should now be left to private concerns. The problem is, as it always has been, that space exploration is scary expensive mainly because it is so difficult to leave Earth's gravity well and so dangerous coming back. It's physics and that's that. But there are now signs that private enterprise is moving in that direction. Unfortunately they are also liberals.

Not just liberals, wealthy liberals.

I relate the story of Orville and Wilbur Wright to people that say "Why can't private industry start exploring space?".  In the late 1800's and early 1900's there was a large number of people that were experimenting with flight.  It was easy and inexpensive (relatively).  All an industrious person needed was time and a little cash and they could attempt to build their own aeroplane. There was no incredibly harsh environment you needed to survive in, and the costs/knowledge associated with building an aeroplane were relatively low.  To go to space, now that is a different story.  You need to be able to survive in a no atmosphere/no pressure/no gravity environment which requires pressure/environment suits, you need to travel outside the Earth's gravity well or at least to the edge of it which requires speed (lots and lots of speed), you need to be able to control your vehicle which requires an attitude control system (rocket motors are not cheap), you need to be able to return home which requires a re-entry and landing system (thermal survival for the re-entry and some sort of attenuation system to keep the landing loads low on the occupants).  All of this requires lots and lots of money.  Even Elon Musk can't afford to do all of this on his own dime (he has a few Space Act Agreements (SAA's) with NASA) so the government provides him some funds.  All these things put Space Exploration out of the hands of entrepreneurs (with the exception of the extremely rich with gov subsidies), you can not build a rocket in your backyard capable of space exploration.

[warpmine]

I thought we had a permanent base on the moon because in short if not where are all these moonbats coming from?

[trapeze]

I heard Rubio on Levin today. Levin made it clear up front that they were not going to discuss immigration and the only explanation for that is that it was a pre-condition for the interview. So they talked about embassies being closed and other mostly BS. I was a bit disappointed in Levin for doing the interview with Rubio, pre-condition or not. I wouldn't give Rubio a second of my time. He deserves to be shunned by conservatives.

He is not worthy of us.

A sellout.

A liar.

The perfect establishment GOP politician.

EDIT: Also this evening, HotAir featured this link in their headlines area about whether or not Rubio can win back the GOP base. I didn't see it before it was almost off the main page so I didn't bother commenting. But others did. There were almost two full pages of comments and that's pretty good for an item that didn't get a writeup from one of their inhouse writers. The comments are about what you might expect...most everyone hates Rubio now. The overall consensus is that the low intelligence voters in the GOP might support him but the true conservatives will give him the finger.

This business about Rubio "winning back" the base is a new one when you think about it. Wasn't that long ago that the conventional wisdom was that only Rubio could lead on immigration in the GOP (sort of like only Nixon could go to China, I suppose). Only Rubio could win over the base with his new thinking on immigration or amnesty or something. Now he's trolling for support in any place he can find it. If he was "man overboard" though, most of us would gladly toss him an anvil.

[Libertas]

Many anvil-worthy types abound, Rubio is but one of them.

And when is J-Mac gonna stop jerking everyone off and officially leave the GOP?  It might not save the GOP but it would be more honest...and others could follow that asshat.  But whatever, the GOP is in deadspin, whatever I would like to see has no practical effect and is merely for amusement.

[Predator Don]

I heard Rubio on Levin today. Levin made it clear up front that they were not going to discuss immigration and the only explanation for that is that it was a pre-condition for the interview. So they talked about embassies being closed and other mostly BS. I was a bit disappointed in Levin for doing the interview with Rubio, pre-condition or not. I wouldn't give Rubio a second of my time. He deserves to be shunned by conservatives.

He is not worthy of us.

A sellout.

A liar.

The perfect establishment GOP politician.

EDIT: Also this evening, HotAir featured this link in their headlines area about whether or not Rubio can win back the GOP base. I didn't see it before it was almost off the main page so I didn't bother commenting. But others did. There were almost two full pages of comments and that's pretty good for an item that didn't get a writeup from one of their inhouse writers. The comments are about what you might expect...most everyone hates Rubio now. The overall consensus is that the low intelligence voters in the GOP might support him but the true conservatives will give him the finger.

This business about Rubio "winning back" the base is a new one when you think about it. Wasn't that long ago that the conventional wisdom was that only Rubio could lead on immigration in the GOP (sort of like only Nixon could go to China, I suppose). Only Rubio could win over the base with his new thinking on immigration or amnesty or something. Now he's trolling for support in any place he can find it. If he was "man overboard" though, most of us would gladly toss him an anvil.

It's hard to win back that he really didn't own.

[trapeze]

I was behind him until the immigration betrayal. And that is most certainly what it was. He campaigned on an "enforcement first...seal the border...no amnesty" platform and raised lots of money and won his senate seat. A lot of people supported him over Crist when it looked like he was going to lose. A lot of people gave him a lot of money.

And this is how he returns the favor. I think he did have the base. I know that he has lost it. I don't think there is any going back.

[IronDioPriest]

I was behind him until the immigration betrayal. And that is most certainly what it was. He campaigned on an "enforcement first...seal the border...no amnesty" platform and raised lots of money and won his senate seat. A lot of people supported him over Crist when it looked like he was going to lose. A lot of people gave him a lot of money.

And this is how he returns the favor. I think he did have the base. I know that he has lost it. I don't think there is any going back.

He was either a betrayer from the start, or he came to believe the eGOP hype that he was the GOP's Great Hispanic Hope. It seems that he thought that his heritage gave him some unique ability to broker amnesty that both sides would accept.

He was too stupid to realize that the GOP isn't that smart... See what I did there?

[Pandora]

I was behind him until the immigration betrayal. And that is most certainly what it was. He campaigned on an "enforcement first...seal the border...no amnesty" platform and raised lots of money and won his senate seat. A lot of people supported him over Crist when it looked like he was going to lose. A lot of people gave him a lot of money.

And this is how he returns the favor. I think he did have the base. I know that he has lost it. I don't think there is any going back.

He was either a betrayer from the start, or he came to believe the eGOP hype that he was the GOP's Great Hispanic Hope. It seems that he thought that his heritage gave him some unique ability to broker amnesty that both sides would accept.

He was too stupid to realize that the GOP isn't that smart... See what I did there?

Floridians told us from the start that when he was in the FL legislature, he was pro-illegals; it's a matter of record.