printMCCAIN: He was the wrong man; a progressive, as opposed to a conservative. He followed an equally wrong, wretched administration (Iraq), from which he deviated only slightly—and then to the left (global warming).
The GOP: It is no longer conservative, but neoconservative. “Strategists” hostile to principles, the Karl Rovians, have sought to “attract” intractably hostile minorities to the party by relinquishing philosophical coherence. While trying hard to appeal to minorities, who seldom vote Republican, GOPers worked overtime to marginalize the Republican base—issues most important to conservatives were mocked out of meaning and never mentioned. Immigration, for one. (Watch the chilling testimony of an architect of the central plan to overthrow America.)
As minorities move into a majority position, thanks in no part to Republican immigration policies, the GOP will become redundant.
Update: WHO’S RACIST? Here are the exist polls by race (and sex).
Related: “Why Weep For Joy?”
Yes, it is good to see the treacherous party of Lincoln go down hard. They have proven themselves as bad as the Democrats painted them. Also, I believe there is more historical precedent for honest banking from the Democrats (e.g. Jefferson and Jackson) than from Republicans.
Now, it is time for the Demos to reform or face a similar fate.
The forces of constitutional limited government (Grover Cleveland) lost out in 1896 to the “populist” or progressive Bryan in the Democratic party. McKinley and the plutocratic empire builders triumphed for the Republicans – whom, under Teddy Roosevelt, co-opted the “progressive” label. Since then, it has been a monotonically increasingly ugly blend of fascism, socialism, and capitalism dominating both parties. Aside from Ron Paul, it is difficult to find any real coherent philosophy (or even a de facto philosophical pragmatism) within the GOP. While we must endure Messiah Obama as penitence, the silver lining was to remove the warmongering, incompetent, statist, corrupt, demagogic plutocrats from power … with the exception of the Republican’s shining light – Ted Stevens, who is still around to steal from the public coffers until such time as he gets expelled. Romney, Giuliani, and Huckabee would have also been as lame (only Fred Thompson even remotely non-socialistic) as Warmonger McCain.
The wheel has turned one more time.
Down go the pigs; up the swine.
The bankers don’t care
with their money-from-air.
Left or right they’ve done fine.
The Republicans had it coming. It’s not as if they believe in small government, free markets and personal freedom any longer. We already have Democrats and it makes more sense, in the name of efficiency, to let the Republicans hang.
If our republic is to survive we must have an opposition party that represents more then a skeptical version of Democrats. The only real difference between the two parties is that Republicans insist on minding everyone else’s business all over the planet by fighting wars and threatening anyone who doesn’t agree with us. I bet the RINOs who run the party won’t see this in their after election analysis.
Reports of the GOP’s death might be highly exaggerated. After two years of Clintonista rule, the GOP took over Congress for the rest of Clinton’s two terms. If we’re still having elections after two years of Obammunist rule, something similar might occur.
Fumbled and hit the button too soon…
Will the Republicans become true philosophical opponents of the Democrats? Nah! People will vote for the Republicans because the Democrats will have worsened their economic suffering, just as they voted against the Republicans on Tuesday. The great irony is that Barry the Bolshevik had more to do with the economic disaster than any Republican, if anyone had noticed.
[Not true, although I understand why this would be the neocon line. Here on BAB we deal in non-partisan truth and the natural laws of economics. See “Bush & The Bailout Bandits,” and other articles about Bush economics in our archive.–IM]
Pardon me, ma`am. I certainly never meant to absolve the Republicans, who never repeal any socialist legislation and enact some of their own, from their well-deserved share of the blame. The primary assertion in the article linked above is that ACORN and Barack Obama successfully lobbied the Clinton administration to violate the laws of economics by forcing Fannie and Freddie to securitize dodgy loans. It certainly sounds like a lefty thing to do. Even a broken clock can be right twice a day, and even a neocon might have something truthful to say once in a while, on subjects other than foreign policy.
[As appealing as it is to blame lobbyists for everything unconstitutional government does–and most of what it does qualifies–it is up to almighty government to say, “no,” and follow the Constitution.–IM]
I disagree with EN on calling Ted Stevens and the other plutocratic-socialists “RINO”. They are the real Republican party – Ron Paul is, sadly, a RINO whose name was not allowed to be uttered and whose dozen votes were not even counted this year. Lew Rockwell captured the nature of the beast – see:
http://www.lewrockwell.com/blog/lewrw/archives/022625.html . I appluad Ilana for her non-partisan response to Gringo Malo. The Republicans and Democrats are co-conspirators in the Welfare-Warfare State. Now its Obama’s turn to expand government (regrettably) while the Republicans go on their well-earned sabbatical.
I certainly don’t blame lobbyists or “special interests” – whatever those might be – for the unconstitutional acts of our elected officials. I merely noted the irony of electing to the presidency a former lobbyist – one who lobbied for the disastrous government intervention in the mortgage market – in reaction to said disaster. It strikes me as ironic, anyway.
Of course, the ultimate blame for the sorry state of American government lies with the electorate. Many Americans really like being the beneficiaries of unconstitutional income transfer programs and other preferences. Politicians who fail to accommodate those folks tend to have short careers, and every politician I’ve ever seen wants to stay in office as long as possible.
For example, even Ron Paul is on record for “Keeping Promises to Seniors“. We all know that the Ponzi scheme known as Social Security is as unconstitutional as it is unconscionable. It’s also unworkable. No Ponzi scheme can enroll enough new suckers to sustain itself forever, even if the operator can force the marks to play. Surely a man of Dr. Paul’s intelligence knows all this at least as well as we do. Yet here we see him promising dim-witted constituents that he’ll defend their Social Security benefits, presumably because he couldn’t be elected otherwise.
[Good points; thanks.–IM]