Quote :

" Christian conservatives taking look at third party The Associated Press Some of the nation's most politically influential conservative Christians, alarmed by the prospect of a Republican presidential nominee who supports abortion rights, are considering backing a third-party candidate. More than 40 Christian conservatives attended a meeting Saturday in Salt Lake City to discuss the possibility and planned more gatherings on how they should move forward, according to Richard Viguerie, the direct-mail expert and conservative activist. Rudy Giuliani, who supports abortion rights and gay rights, leads in national polls of the Republican presidential candidates. Campaigning in New Jersey on Monday, Giuliani brushed aside talk of a third-party effort. ... Other participants in the meeting included James Dobson, founder of the Focus on the Family evangelical ministry in Colorado Springs, Colo., and, according to Viguerie, Tony Perkins, head of the Family Research Council, a conservative policy group in Washington. ... Viguerie would not give specifics of the proposal or reveal additional names of participants, but he said President Bush "would not have been elected in '04 without the people in that room." "There is such jaundiced feelings about any promises or commitments from any Republican leaders," he said. "You could almost cut the anger and the frustration with a knife in that room it's so strong. Because [the Christian conservatives] don't know what else to do, they're talking third party." A spokesman for the Republican National Committee did not respond to a request for comment. The participants were in Salt Lake City for a separate meeting of the secretive Council for National Policy, a group of conservative leaders co-founded years ago by Tim LaHaye, [evangelical] author of the [pre-millenaialist apocalyptic] "Left Behind" series of books. Vice President Dick Cheney arrived Friday to address the group, according to The Salt Lake Tribune. "

--http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/nationworld/2003917981_thirdparty02.html



If the GOP splits, they're over. Historically, this has been the only way a third party has ever succceded. Hell, its how the GOP became one of two major parties to begin with. Whigs, anyone? Now, does anyone know of a third party poised to fill in the void of an imploded GOP?


But while I'm all for the dissolution of the GOP ... goddamn, i'm at a loss for words on that last paragraph.







[Edited on October 3, 2007 at 3:09 PM. Reason : ]

10/3/2007 3:07:44 PM

I feel like a lot of moderate voters would be more likely to support the GOP if they dropped all of the pro-life anti-gay pandering towards christian conservatives. Most republicans I know want the republican party to return to a stance of conservative government and not pushing their morality on others.

I don't see this changing much. Eventually the religious types will realize that they're throwing their vote away. Although I would love to see a legitimate third party here.

[Edited on October 3, 2007 at 3:13 PM. Reason : ,]

10/3/2007 3:13:09 PM

Did someone say 'death-knell'?

We need a doctor!



And Rudy will never be nominated.

[Edited on October 3, 2007 at 3:28 PM. Reason : a]

10/3/2007 3:25:47 PM

Many thought that the Republicans were done after Hoover
They thought the Democrats were done after Carter
They thought the Democrats were further done after Reagan
They will repeat this exercise again today
And it will still be the same 2 parties tomorrow.


[Edited on October 3, 2007 at 3:30 PM. Reason : .]

10/3/2007 3:30:13 PM

^Exactly.

I was even going to use some of those same examples.

10/3/2007 3:32:50 PM

Quote :

"More than 40 Christian conservatives attended a meeting Saturday in Salt Lake City to discuss the possibility and planned more gatherings on how they should move forward"

good riddance. They'll soon realize they aren't as powerful as they once thought they were and either keep failing to elect Alan Keyes or come back to the Republican Party.

Not like it matters much anyways. Two sides, same coin.

10/3/2007 3:39:19 PM

A rant I wrote elsewhere in response to what someone else stated, that Christian conservatives would and should remain pragmatists and vote for Giuliani if nominated. (My rant is in response to the quote.)

Quote :

"If it weren't for the likelihood of Hillary Clinton being the Democratic nominee, then they might split. But since she is clearly the frontrunner across the board, it'll be a "hold your nose and vote for Rudy" scenario for the Christian right. I am an evangelical who is endorsing Rudy, because of his strong stance on terrorism, despite that I disagree on the issue of abortion. He'd be smart to pick Huckabee as VP. Thompson is a deadweight, and I think my conservative friends will see that Rudy is the only republican who can win, and Romney wont make it either "

If the Religious Right do that, fine for them. However, I will remind every last one of them til the day I die they supported a person that believed in abortion for President.

Look, I am Christian, and I believe abortion is wrong. But I do not base my politics around that, partly cause I realize abortion will always exist regardless of my opinion of it. It's why I think everyone that donates money to pro-life and pro-choice groups are idiots. What are you donating your money for? Do you honestly think your donation is going to make abortion illegal or keep it legal, respectively? We had a Republican-controlled Congress and a Republican President from 2001-2006, did they do anything to make abortion illegal? NO!

So why do we waste so much time talking about it? Because if abortion was ever made illegal permanently, the Religious Right and groups like NARAL would lose a major source of their fundraising income. The cynical part of me sometimes wonder if congressmen and these groups get together in "a smoke-filled backroom" sometimes to game out their strategy when funds are running low so they can fan the flames and receive more money. It's far more profitable and electorally beneficial for Republicans for them to always have abortion legal, cause it'll always ensure they can rope in a few saps that think their money is making a difference. Likewise for Democrats and the threat of abortion being made illegal.

So if the Religious Right, a cluster of groups that have profited handsomely from said arrangement, support a person that is for abortion, they really have no purpose for existing in my opinion. Abortion to the Religious Right is not like an "oh, by the way" issue, it is one of THE issues. People donate money to the Religious Right based on them standing for Christian principles. That is the only reason they even exist to start with! You don't pick and choose where your core principles apply. There are things in this world people should be principled with, doesn't matter if you're a fascist or a socialist or a moderate. Otherwise we end up with these Third Way or 1984-type politicians that stand for nothing except for anything that will help them retain power. The Religious Right have chosen their principles, they should stand next to them or just dissolve.

By the way, I don't delight in gotcha stuff. But the Religious Right, if they do support Giuliani, will truly have a "the Emperor has no clothes" moment for the movement.

[Edited on October 3, 2007 at 3:57 PM. Reason : /]

10/3/2007 3:57:17 PM

Yeah, I never understood abortion as a single-issue discriminator. There are more pressing problems than people deciding that the world doesn't need another unwanted baby.

10/3/2007 4:01:58 PM

like stem cell research.

10/3/2007 4:06:26 PM

Isn't raising a child out of wed-lock in a one parent home just as unchristian as taking some medicine that flushes a 3 week embryo out. Thus, allowing the otherwise mother another opportunity to be responsible get married and have the perfect Christian nuclear family.

10/3/2007 4:07:58 PM

^ To me, no.

Sex outside of marriage is a sin. But the person doing the abortion would be doing another sin on top of that.

Now, it would be more socially acceptable to a church congregation and the general public for the latter case, cause you would imagine in the latter case that the congregation would not know of the abortion and they can carry on being blissfully ignorant. However, like in the "Scarlet Letter", the resulting child would remind everyone constantly of her past.

[Edited on October 3, 2007 at 4:22 PM. Reason : /]

10/3/2007 4:13:01 PM

I would love it if the religious right formed their own Batshit Party.

Then maybe the GOP can go back to their conservative fiscal roots and go moderate on social issues.

10/3/2007 5:03:02 PM

Quote :

"I feel like a lot of moderate voters would be more likely to support the GOP if they dropped all of the pro-life anti-gay pandering towards christian conservatives. Most republicans I know want the republican party to return to a stance of conservative government and not pushing their morality on others."

exactly

10/3/2007 7:16:45 PM

hope this happens -- need Bill the fiscal disciplinarian back in the white house

10/3/2007 7:21:01 PM

i heard jesus was behind a comet!

10/3/2007 7:30:59 PM

^^ ahahahahaha, baby bonds and socialized health care.... we don't know the definition of deficit until Hillary gets elected... and if we're not running ourselves into the ground with deficits, then we'll be running ourselves into the ground with unjust taxes that removes any incentive to do anything productive.

10/3/2007 9:50:37 PM

money is the biggest enemy of productivity.

most rich people are lazy assholes.



[Edited on October 3, 2007 at 9:57 PM. Reason : and overall bad people]

10/3/2007 9:56:55 PM

The Christian conservatives are the ones holding the GOP back

10/3/2007 9:59:18 PM

^^^out of lowered taxes & increased spending vs raised taxes & increased spending, one does make a little more sense than the other

but I agree with the overall sentiment I'm hearing in this thread, and I am a democrat more because of the social issues than the financial side.

10/3/2007 10:34:11 PM

Quote :

"We had a Republican-controlled Congress and a Republican President from 2001-2006, did they do anything to make abortion illegal? NO!"

Bush put in two judges who'd likely make it illegal. I believe Sandra Day O'Connor is sticking around until 2008 just so her seat won't go to a conservative.

10/3/2007 11:10:44 PM

Quote :

"we don't know the definition of deficit until Hillary gets elected."

Oeuvre, are you congenitally stupid, or do you have to work at it?

the only time we've NOT had a deficit in the past 50 years was when the CLINTONS were in the White House

dumb fuck.







[Edited on October 4, 2007 at 12:19 AM. Reason : ]

10/4/2007 12:15:12 AM

Quote :

"Bush put in two judges who'd likely make it illegal. I believe Sandra Day O'Connor is sticking around until 2008 just so her seat won't go to a conservative."

That comment ranks right up there with what Republicans told the country 10 or so years ago that once we have a Republican Congress and President at the same time the country would have fiscal discipline with less spending and a balanced budget.

Still waiting...

10/4/2007 12:17:23 AM

^^ it sure is easy not to have a deficit when you get to preside over the biggest technological boom ever and leave right before that boom busts. Also doesn't hurt that the previous president set him up for that prosperity... notice that the boom for Clinton starts during Bush I's term...

10/4/2007 1:14:55 AM

le sigh....

come on, man.

next thing you'll be tellin me, the recession of the early 90's was Reagan's fault.

:rolly:

anyhow....

Quote :

"it sure is easy not to have a deficit when you exercise fiscal responsibility, unlike a certain "cut-and-spend conservative" we all have grown to know and love"

fixed it for ya.





[Edited on October 4, 2007 at 1:23 AM. Reason : ]

10/4/2007 1:18:26 AM

if by "exercise fiscal responsibility" you mean "tax the hell out of everybody and reap enormous benefits from a tech boom for which you bore no responsibility," then sure...

10/4/2007 1:37:01 AM

don't worry aaronburro...joe_schmoe wears womens underwear...he's clearly a closet conservative who thinks about larry craig while he's fucking his beard wife...moving to seattle is like moving to chernobyl

10/4/2007 1:40:45 AM

Debt is neither good nor bad--it is simply a tool. The return on debt is what matters.

If you go into debt to buy a house, is that "bad"? I mean, you get a house, right? If you go into debt to build a shelter to feed and clothe those in need, is that "bad"?

In any event, this country can readily service its debt. The United States GDP was ~$13 million for 2006 with over 3% growth--our economy can more than handle some annual budget deficits and even significant long-term debt, as long as we get a positive return for it.

And you forget that despite the deficits, the Reagan years were some of the most prosperous the United States has ever seen. And Reagan's economy sure beat the shit out of Carter's gasoline lines, stagflation, and misery index.

KEY DIFFERENCE BETWEEN REAGAN AND CLINTON: Under Reagan taxes went down, but the economy was still booming. Under Clinton, taxes went up--even though he had continually promised a middle-class tax cut during his campaign. I mean, what constituency didn't Clinton lie to?

10/4/2007 1:46:23 AM

no, see. the Carter recession, was Nixon/Ford's fault.

the Reagan prosperity was because of Carter's strategic planning.

the Bush-the-Elder recession was Reagan's Fault.

...

i mean, clearly this is how it is. Aaronburro says so.

10/4/2007 1:49:38 AM

didnt reagan have high interest rates for a time or something?

didnt nixon have high inflation or something?

10/4/2007 1:54:11 AM

^^ Please STFU.

^ Can't you fucking Wiki or something? I mean, you do it for most of your coursework, right?

10/4/2007 2:23:23 AM

git off mah thread.

10/4/2007 2:42:53 AM

Quote :

"Yeah, I never understood abortion as a single-issue discriminator. There are more pressing problems than people deciding that the world doesn't need another unwanted baby."

Yeah, I don't understand why people are outraged that the government turns a blind eye to the murder of the unborn. I can't understand why people would care about that if they actually valued the unborn as human beings and not just inconvenient lumps of tissue.

It's not like the function of government is to protect the defenseless or anything.

10/4/2007 6:36:45 AM

It always makes me laugh that the same people that are for making abortion illegal don't seem to give a fuck about the kid after it's born. Who cares if the parents will neglect the unwanted kid? Who cares if the kid doesn't have insurance? Who cares if all these factors will probably lead the kid to jail?

Oh yes, put them up for adoption, that has no long-term effects on the child either. None of them will live in an orphanage, none of them will lead bad lives. If they're born everything is great right? So force that woman to have that kid, she should have been abstaining anyway right?

10/4/2007 7:28:13 AM

Quote :

"I don't understand why people are outraged that the government turns a blind eye to the murder of the unborn."

If every Christian in the United States would adopt a child, instead of having their own, so that there were no un-wanted babies . . . I'd buy your argument. Get crackin. I don't accept the argument that a drug that causes the body to reject a mass of dividing cells is the equivalent of murder.

10/4/2007 7:57:24 AM

Quote :

"Yeah, I don't understand why people are outraged that the government turns a blind eye to the murder of the unborn. I can't understand why people would care about that if they actually valued the unborn as human beings and not just inconvenient lumps of tissue. It's not like the function of government is to protect the defenseless or anything. "

So I take if Rudy Giuliani is nominated by the Republican Party for President, you will vote for probably the Constitution Party to protest a Republican nominee that is pro-choice?

[Edited on October 4, 2007 at 8:15 AM. Reason : .]

10/4/2007 8:13:13 AM

How exactly did the internet bubble affect federal budget spending? Is it because a substantial number of citizens made higher incomes, thus paying more in taxes to the government over that period of time? Or did a lot of these internet companies purchase U.S. Bonds?

I'm not saying that the two weren't related, I just don't understand how the two were related. Any clarification would be appreciated.

[Edited on October 4, 2007 at 8:16 AM. Reason : A little bit late to the party. ]

10/4/2007 8:13:52 AM

remember kids, murder is OK as long as it is to remove an inconvenience...

10/4/2007 8:15:32 AM

You mean like Saddam Hussein? Or do you mean insurgents? Or do you mean the Taleban? Or Al-Quaeda? Or do you mean our own citizens?


Oh wait, you only care about babies, right.

10/4/2007 8:27:47 AM

^haha, ftw

Quote :

"I feel like a lot of moderate voters would be more likely to support the GOP if they dropped all of the pro-life anti-gay pandering towards christian conservatives. Most republicans I know want the republican party to return to a stance of conservative government and not pushing their morality on others."

exactly

Quote :

"I would love it if the religious right formed their own Batshit Party."

me too; how can we all help this happen?

Quote :

"Then maybe the GOP can go back to their conservative fiscal roots and go moderate on social issues."

exactly exactly

Quote :

"The Christian conservatives are the ones holding the GOP back"

true true true

Quote :

"I am a democrat more because of the social issues than the financial side"

right, which is why many democrats would change parties if the GOP dropped the abortion/gay crap

Quote :

"murder"

oh please, come on
even if it is murder, it's not the proper role of government to intervene; women will still do it, albeit unsafely
btw, GTFO of this thread with that crap

10/4/2007 8:51:35 AM

I'd jump at the chance to vote Republican if they lost the religious right.

10/4/2007 9:00:21 AM

Quote :

"even if it is murder, it's not the proper role of government to intervene"

I agree that it is the government's job to prevent crimes of this nature, I just disagree that all abortions are murder.

10/4/2007 9:16:38 AM

To me abortion is what keeps the religious right wingers on thier side. I dont believe they would ever do anything about it, bc they need that issue. I hate that voters would be turned off by one issue, but its thier choice. I, like many here, think that if they do break from the republican party it will only make it stronger over time. Abortion has been ruled on, and they are now setting restrictions on it(as thier should be), so its time to move on.

As far as clinton and the surplus. If bush raised taxes to a record level like clinton did, we might also have a surplus..but it kills the economy. You cant continue to penalize workers and expect good things to happen. Clinton wasnt nearly as bad a president as repubs like to say, bush is pretty horrible, but simply bc he is more liberal than clinton on spending. If he would have lobbed a couple of cruise missles into afghanistan and been for gay civil unions he would be the greatest democratic president in their history.

10/4/2007 9:49:23 AM

Quote :

"but it kills the economy"

Yeah, boy did the economy ever stink under Clinton.

10/4/2007 9:54:16 AM

Clinton had the benefit of one of the larger bubbles in recent memory. The strength of growth was such that it could handle the increased taxes.

The economy today? Not so much.

10/4/2007 10:01:03 AM

Quote :

"I feel like a lot of moderate voters would be more likely to support the GOP if they dropped all of the pro-life anti-gay pandering towards christian conservatives. Most republicans I know want the republican party to return to a stance of conservative government and not pushing their morality on others."

Unfortunately, Mr. Joshua, your friends, who are also the same as my friends politically, don't show up when it matters, which is the GOP primaries.

10/4/2007 10:03:37 AM

screaming bloody communism at democrats is not only myopic, but flat out wrong -- but hey, it makes for great bumper stickers!

git r dun'

10/4/2007 10:14:46 AM

boone, the economy was on an artificial roll. Massive fraud in accounting drove the stock market which propelled the economy. Sure you can see that. People had more money for a time. Hell you could have thrown a dart to pick a stock that would have made you money at that time. I do think having a budget surplus does help the economy as a whole(market, etc) but working class having less money from labor is not a good thing.

10/4/2007 10:16:44 AM

they haven't had a conservative presidential candidate in more than twenty years

rip gop

10/4/2007 11:46:24 AM

Quote :

" It always makes me laugh that the same people that are for making abortion illegal don't seem to give a fuck about the kid after it's born. Who cares if the parents will neglect the unwanted kid? Who cares if the kid doesn't have insurance? Who cares if all these factors will probably lead the kid to jail? Oh yes, put them up for adoption, that has no long-term effects on the child either. None of them will live in an orphanage, none of them will lead bad lives. If they're born everything is great right? So force that woman to have that kid, she should have been abstaining anyway right? "

Yes because if I don't want the government to help people that means I don't want anyone to help people. Or maybe I just want private charities to help because then those who were truly in need would receive help and the rest could stop leaching of the government.

You know what else, we should just kill people rather than put them in jail. After all they are probably going to have a decreased quality of life, you know it's hard to keep a job once you have a record, and they are likely to commit crimes again. We should just abort them from society for their own good. Great argument.

Quote :

" If every Christian in the United States would adopt a child, instead of having their own, so that there were no un-wanted babies . . . I'd buy your argument. Get crackin. I don't accept the argument that a drug that causes the body to reject a mass of dividing cells is the equivalent of murder. "

and

Quote :

" oh please, come on even if it is murder, it's not the proper role of government to intervene; women will still do it, albeit unsafely btw, GTFO of this thread with that crap "

yes I get it, I know you guys do not think abortion is murder. My point is you should not be surprised and/or appalled when those who do act ideologically in kind. Let's think hypothetically for a moment, if I was a politician who advocated that the government do nothing about the murder of
Mexicans I would assume that you would not support me because my stance would be reprehensible.
This is no different. If you accept that we (prolife peoples) believe abortion is murder then you should not be at all surprised it becomes a pivotal issue for us.

[Edited on October 4, 2007 at 11:50 AM. Reason : .]

10/4/2007 11:49:05 AM

Quote :

"Oeuvre, are you congenitally stupid, or do you have to work at it? the only time we've NOT had a deficit in the past 50 years was when the CLINTONS were in the White House dumb fuck."

lol, when was the last time HILLARY was in office? She tried her healthcare plan in the 90s and the Republican senate blocked it.

Wait till this time around.







And you are just about the most ignorant son of a bitch I have ever talked to.

10/4/2007 11:50:33 AM