If you are a conservative…

Then this is the question of the year.

Should the republican party be LARGE and inclusive? Should we welcome ALL people, no matter if they are pro- choice on abortion? Or homosexual and looking to vote for gay marriage..??

What if a person believes in some kind of a national health plan? Should we welcome their voice..??

OR…

Should the republican party become purer..??

Should we tell “pro- choice” people to “hit the road.”

Should we tell people who favor some government programs: “you are outta here.”

Should we tell homosexuals: “It is my way, or the highway.”

I was going to add a poll question here to see what you think.

Unfortunately, not all the blog systems that my site is seen on will handle poll questions.

So, after this paragraph, some of you will see the poll question, others will see a link to the poll question.

http://www.polldaddy.com/p/1609120/

Basically, the poll question is: Should the republican party become purer, or larger?

This will probably be the most lopsided poll I have ever done. Most conservatives believe that we need to return to the basic principals. (Smaller government, less taxes, more personal freedom, etc.)

Any liberal who reads my site will laugh and vote for a purer republican party. Democrats; believing that if republicans become an exclusive club for conservatives ONLY, republicans will never win another election- ever.

And many moderates probably voted for Barack Obama in 2008. They are not really interested in the “republican party house cleaning”, and moderates haven’t paid enough attention to politics to even CARE what republicans do next.

If we cleanse the republican party, we may pick up a few seats in the House and “maybe” the Senate in 2010. But democrats will still hold a strong majority.

If we stick to strict conservative principals, (and President Obama still holds a 51 to 60 % approval rating), we will lose the 2012 election.

(Which means 8 years of Barack Obama, and others.)

However, if we stick to conservative principals, and we have the right candidate, we will win in 2016. By then, even the stupidest moderate will realize that giving money to the government doesn’t fix things. So why give more than you have to..??

The only way that a republican can win in 2012, is to sound like a “liberal version of the republican party.” (Or, Obama has to fail miserably.)

Let’s face it…

The media is in love with President Obama.

Average Americans, (who do not pay as much attention to politics as we do) think that President Obama is doing fine.

Barring some huge scandal, Barack Obama will have no problem winning a reelection.

In my humble opinion, we need to get back to conservative principals. So what if we lose in 2010 and 2012? We have to offer an alternative to democratic socialism. “Republican lite” just isn’t working.

This reminds me of an “old time” method for teaching children not to like something.

My grandfather was “old school” when it came to lessons on life.

He was “old school” on many issues and made his own wine and beer. I was about 7 or 8 years old, and I was fascinated by this “stuff” that my grandfather was brewing. I had noticed that my grandfather would whistle, and seem happy after having a few glasses of this “secret” stuff.

One day my grandfather caught me with an open bottle of his wine, and I was sniffing the contents.

I was sure that he would be mad, but he wasn’t. Instead, he poured two glasses of homemade wine and slid one to me.

In a heavy Italian accent, he said: “You gonna drink with the big boys..??”

I was proud, yes…

I was going to “drink with the big boys.”

Grandpa chugged his glass of wine. (Yes, grandpa’s wine was sooo strong, that you chugged it like whiskey.)

So I did the same.

I was NOT prepared for the “taste” of homemade booze.

I went running for the door and spit up every last drop of that vile drink.

Never again, did I ever go anywhere near grandpa’s homemade brew.

And he knew that.

(I always wondered what grandpa’s lesson for “sex” would have been..?? Maybe I don’t want to know? I could have become a forty year old virgin.)

Maybe this is what America needs..??

Americans NEED to taste the democrats’ homemade brew.

After hearing their democratic president say he will close Gitmo. (But Obama doesn’t REALLY close Gitmo.)

After hearing their democratic president say he will end the war. (But he doesn’t really end the war.)

Obama says he is sympathetic to gay rights, however he hasn’t done anymore than Bush did on the issue. (Or Clinton, for that matter.)

Obama says he cares about the poor. However, taxes and prices will rise on power, (electricity, heat, fuel). These increases in price on the necessities of life will effect the poor, most of all.

Once Americans remember that democrats “talk about doing things”, but never seem to get around to “doing those things”, we conservatives will have nothing to worry about.

However, it may take 8 years.

I vote for strict conservative principals.

Smaller government.

Lower taxes.

More personal freedom.

When I say “more personal freedom”, I mean “more freedom for everyone.”

comments:

NotaLiberal-NotaDemograft-Ever

I am a Conservative. I am an Independent. I do not believe that changing your beliefs to get people to vote your party does anyone justice. Look what Obama did. He out and out LIED about everything and now since the people that voted for him did no do their homework or listen to those of us who did we are in real trouble as a country.

Did his lying or "changing" do us justice? NO!

I think if you want to vote for one party or another you have to realise you aren't going to get everything YOU want that is why we are a republic. WE THE PEOPLE decide NOT you the person.

WE THE PEOPLE need to get back to the basics very quickly or AMERICA will no longer be recognisable as America.

NotaLiberal-NotaDemograft-Ever: "WE THE PEOPLE need to get back to the basics very quickly or AMERICA will no longer be recognisable as America."

I agree, Nota, but back to ALL the basics. Two which come immediately to mind are:

1) Always vote, and vote informed / responsibly. It is a holy responsibility or our original form of government, American Democracy (if you will allow me to say that), takes a big negative hit.

2) Always vote the overall lesser of evils for the short term. This because a single long-term issue, like abortion and/or illegal aliens prevents too many from voting at all if their candidate is not perfect on the issue. That is a complete insanity, for it is like double-voting for the opposition party which is now Socialist, that is, truly against ALL of our USA's foundational American principles.

Chas. / Argugonian 

You have a point there, Chas.

The last election proves that.

I had no choice BUT to vote for John McCain. (The lesser of two evils.)

I vote we stand on our principals  and stay true to the smaller government  , less and smaller "TAXES" , strong "Defence"  , but we can be open to people who may differ with us on some of the smaller things on the fringes of our plank, there is room for gays if they do not want to parade around in drag yelling for the right to marriage , and we sure have a lot in common with Libertarians (BUT not legal drugs) so we can enlarge our party  and still stay TRUE to our "PRINCIPALS" !!!!

************************************************************

Argugonian

Yes! That sort of inclusiveness will be absolutely necessary for a rehab / resurgence of the Repub party. Among us we agree on 80% or more of the issues...let's quit squabbling and get together on what we agree on...and go for it!

We might also think about losing some of the stodgy old repub codgers who are waaay into special interests.

Chas. / Argugonian 

Like the Blue Blood Country Club RINOs ,,,,,,,,

**************************************************

Argugonian

Yes, indeed!

Chas. / Argugonian

Good comment Joe..!!

Really, we need conservative politicians.

However, there is room for everyone who wants to vote republican.

I vote to stay with our core principles and if people don't like it too bad. We are a party of conservative values and morals.

********************************

Argugonian

Then we'll surely keep losing to the Un-American dirty fighters: Libs / /Marxists / Socialists, etc. The repub war cry would be "Stand on our principles and die with them".

Chas. / Argugonian 

Over the past few weeks, liberals have been SHOCKED to find out that religious women have breasts.

This must be true because look at the “out- rage” over Carrie Prejean, Miss California, and modeling pictures that she took years ago.

I was NOT shocked to find this information out because I already knew that Christian women had breasts. (I discovered it years ago.)

Liberals were also stunned to learn that Christian men enjoy looking at women’s breasts. (This too, I already knew about.)

So it was a learning experience for our democratic friends.

Liberals learned that Christian women have breasts.

And progressives learned that Christian men enjoy the female body.

(Sorry, but I just do not find the SHOCK value in this story that our progressive friends do..??)

Hypocrisy..??

Hypocrisy…

That Religious people might except nudity..??

Michelangelo, who happened to be religious, lived 500 years ago, AND PAINTED PEOPLE IN THE NUDE.

The church, (remember, this was 500 years ago) the church; knowing that Michelangelo painted and sculpted people naked, the church HIRED (commissioned) Michelangelo to paint churches.

Liberal / progressives; you really do not know anything about us religious people, do you..??

You do not study history.

Liberals have this strawman image of what a religious / conservative person is. They do not research further than “media matters” or “truth dot org” or “move on dot org.”

“..If somebody put it on a web site, it must be true. Because I read it on the Daily Kos..”

This whole story was about free speech.

Nothing more or nothing less.

Free speech.

Miss California, Carrie Prejean; spoke her mind using her belief system which she described as the “way that she was raised.” (That marriage should be between a man and a woman.) No offence to anyone.

Angry Gay boy; Perez Hilton, didn’t like her answer, and began calling Miss California a: “Bitch.”

The media, along with the “thought police” (1984, anyone..??) didn’t like Miss California’s answer, either.

You see…

Today, in America, YOU MUST all think the same way. You cannot be an individual. (We will have none of that.)

If you do not think like we do, you must be taken down.

Destroyed.

Semi- nude photos surfaced of Carrie Prejean.

The media, along with the “thought police” and members of the progressive / liberal community used these pictures to destroy Miss California.

Hypocrisy…!! (They shouted.)

But it didn’t work.

Yesterday, Donald Trump “ruled” that Miss California can keep her crown. She broke no rules.

Today, Miss California is BIGGER than the girl who actually won the pageant.

And I want to sift through this mess to make a couple of points, on my web site: The Angry Republic.

First: Carrie Prejean is searching for her 15 minutes of fame. That is true and lets make note of it.

However, so is Perez Hilton, and Donald Trump. (Trump is actually searching for his 50 years of fame..!!)

So we can remove “fame” from the equation, because everyone involved is looking for “stardom.”

“..Marriage should be between a man and a woman..”

Free speech means: “The freedom to speak your mind.” You may not like the answer, but they have a right to speak it.

(Which, by the way, so does Perez Hilton.)

On the issue of “gay-ness.”

I do not want to see a man having sex with another man. It sickens me.

Then again, I do not want to see a man have sex with a goat. That sickens me too.

Why can’t you understand that..??

If I do not want to except these images, why do you feel that you MUST force me to except these things..??

What is ingrained in your mental make-up that causes you to believe that I MUST except the image of a man having sex with another man, (or a goat)..??

What causes you to think that way..??

You do not like it when a religious person “preaches” to you. So why would you preach to me..??

Let me put it another way…

After the election, I was very close to excepting gay marriage. You know, what the hell..??

I said, on this web site, that: “Republicans may have to consider getting out of people’s bedrooms..”

Republicans might want to drop the issues of gay marriage and abortion on a federal level.

If a media hack asks a future republican candidate: “Where do you stand on gay marriage..??”

The future republican could answer: “It is really none of my business. Gay marriage isn’t a federal issue. States must decide these kinds of issues. I do not agree with gay marriage but the issue shouldn’t be a federal one. Let the states decide..”

That’s it. You are done..!!

Get the issue out of the White House.

But…

Along comes the Angry Gay Boy: Perez Hilton.

To think that: before Perez Hilton made those statements about Miss California, I was considering that the republican party DROP the issue of “right and wrong” with gay marriage.

But after Hilton’s statements…

I will get off the couch and RUSH down to the voting booth, to vote NO for gay marriage.

Before Hilton, I might have Not showed up to vote, or even given a yes vote on gay marriage. Because really; I don’t give a shit about what you do in the privacy of your house.

You lost my vote because of Perez Hilton.

To the gay community…

I do not really think that you understand how badly Perez Hilton crippled your cause..??

Sure, I am “one voice.”

But how many millions of Americans were “standing on the fence”, with the issue of gay marriage.

With an election that was filled with “hope and change”, the first Black President; how many Americans were thinking about voting for gay marriage..??

But then the Angry Gay Boy: Perez Hilton, trashes a girl for using free speech, and your whole cause gets flushed down the toilet.

The “gay rights” issue is dead, for now.

President Obama is not going to push for gay rights. (But you already knew that, because he told you.)

President Obama MUST appeal to the Black community and the religious democratic voters. (He already has your vote.) So, Barack will not show any favoritism to your cause.

Sure, you can pretend that “Perez Hilton” didn’t say what he did, or that it isn’t “that important.”

You could point to Maine and now New York State voting for gay marriage, and you could give yourself a false sense of security.

Yet, you are smart enough to know that states were voting for gay marriage during the Bush presidency. So, nothing has changed.

How many people were “turned off” by Hilton’s statements..??

We will soon find out..!!

Your first mistake was to let Miss California drown in a media swamp, just because you didn’t like her “free speech.”

Your second mistake was to allow Perez Hilton to grab his 15 minutes of fame, while you giggled in the background, and did nothing to oppose him.

Your third mistake was trying to destroy a person with semi- nude pictures. (You thought that we would be upset over nude pictures..?? The “church” excepted nudity 500 years ago.)

It didn’t work, did it..??

Miss California won her cause. Perez Hilton lost his cause.

Miss California is MORE famous than the winner of the pageant, and Perez Hilton.

Hard lessons learned.

While I’m on the subject; why is the gay community allowing “gay- exploitation” on TV and movies..??

In the 1970’s, we had “Black- exploitation” films that showed a Black person with a big afro and all “pimped out” in rags. He would say things like “right on” and “that’s groovy man..” Usually he was portrayed as a pimp, or a hustler of some kind.

Today, the gay community is shown this way in movies and TV. The gay man is dressed in traditional “gay-ness” type outfits. He is emotional and cries at the drop of a hat. He “shops” and is a natural at home decorations.

I know several gay people and they are nothing like this.

Why do you stand silent while TV, the media, and Perez Hilton destroy your cause..??

I’m just asking..??

OK…

You could argue that I am “milking the clock”, on my web site, with the topic of torture / enhanced interrogations.

However, it is a very important issue to me. And, considering that the topic has generated 16 pages of comments from the readers, it MUST be an important topic for you, as well.

Besides, everything has a beginning..!!

If the movie: “Star Wars” can have 3 prequels;

If “Batman” can have a beginning;

Well, then my crappy little web site can also present a beginning for my editorials on “Torturing you silly.”

Where did “this” all begin..??

I know that progressives and liberals WANT to believe that President Bush and VP Cheney were sitting in a dark, dirty room at the White House.

Picture Dick Cheney speaking in a monotone voice. George Bush is sitting next to Cheney; giggling like a little school girl, in the background:

“..I like to watch people suffer..” says Cheney.

“..I want to torture someone..” Cheney continues. All the while, Bush can be heard laughing in the background.

“..Nothing blows wind up my skirt more than hearing someone scream in pain..” Cheney offers.

Bush says: “..Don’t worry, Dick. I am the decider. We’ll water board those towel heads. We’ll find out every thing, including where they tied their goat..”

When you read the comments and posts from liberals, this is the impression that is given. That the liberals believe that Bush and Cheney picked these interrogation methods out of thin air, and made the decision (on their own, without constitutional guidance) to use these methods of interrogation.

Nothing could be further from the truth.

I will explain, but first; we must return to the relevant time in history.

America had just received the worst attack since Pearl Harbor.

For the first time in American history, we had a NEW problem…

This enemy didn’t wear uniforms. They didn’t identify themselves. They were living amongst us FOR YEARS, before they strike.

The pile of rubble, that once was the World Trade Towers, was still smoking from the fire, while letters filled with anthrax began arriving in the mail; to prominent American’s offices.

To top it off, someone was killing innocent people around Washington DC. They were using a high- powered sharp shooter’s riffle and acting like an assassin.

It looked as though America was under a FULL attack.

The battle in Afghanistan was in it’s beginning stages and we had rounded up a few “key” terrorists.

We needed to know two things, and we needed to know them right away:

“Were there any MORE al Qaeda sleeper cells in America?” We COULD NOT allow another 9 /11 attack.

And: “Where is bin Laden?”

The problem was, the terrorists that we had captured were not talking.

We MUST find out what the enemy will do next.

If President Bush couldn’t stop another attack on America, then he would have failed at his primary job to protect and defend the United States.

We needed to know where the enemy was.

The CIA had methods of interrogation that had been effective in the past. All of the enhanced interrogation technics offered to the Bush administration by the CIA, were authorized by past US presidents. (With, maybe, the exception being water boarding.) LINKS BELOW.

The Bush administration charged John Choon Yoo with the job of finding out whether “water boarding” was constitutionally acceptable. And if water boarding detainees would break our agreements with the Geneva Conventions. (War Crimes Act.)

John Yoo argued that detainees were NOT prisoners of war. That “modern” water boarding did not cause any permanent injuries, death, or any permanent metal injuries, therefore; water boarding was constitutionally acceptable and did not break the War Crimes Act.

At the time (2001 to 2003), John Yoo was in the Department of Justice’s Office of Legal Council.

Before that time, John Yoo was a professor of law at the University of California, Berkeley.

Now…

Before you think that I am trying to “pass the buck” and blame John Yoo for this whole mess, don’t get ahead of me.

President Bush was the one who signed off on all of this. After all, Bush is “the decider.” Right..!!

However, a president isn’t necessarily a constitutional scholar. It isn’t part of the job description.

So a president must rely on his Department of Justice.

I agree with John Yoo’s assessment of enhanced interrogations.

Most conservatives also agree with John Yoo’s legal argument.

Considering the fact that no other country is formally charging the United States with “torture”, I must conclude that John Yoo’s legal argument could hold up.

However, the progressive left does not agree with John Yoo.

So, for the liberal left; I want to talk about Mr. Yoo.

A guy like John Yoo doesn’t just pop out of the womb and enter a courtroom, sighting constitutional law. We do not create a “John Yoo” in a conservative laboratory fill with smoking test tubes and machines that make a “buzzing” noise.

They MUST learn the trade- somewhere..??

For John Yoo, this education came from Akhil Reed Amar.

Akhil Amar is said to be one of America’s premiere constitutional scholars.

Why heck, the TV show: “The West Wing” used Amar as a technical adviser.

I tried to study and take a “crash course” on the history of Akhil Amar.

Here is some of what I have found:

Amar argues that the Oklahoma City bomber: Timothy McVeigh’s trial was unconstitutional.

What..??

Amar suggests that the whole McVeigh trial was unconstitutional BECAUSE they moved it to a different state.

Amar states that the constitution protects each state and gives each state THE RIGHT to try, and convict their own criminals. Therefore, moving the McVeigh trial to another state violated Oklahoma’s State rights.

OK, I can understand what Amar is saying. But I do not agree with him. Do you realize how dangerous this line of thinking is..??

If we didn’t have the death penalty, (Which Amar is strongly opposed to) if McVeigh were alive today; he could use Amar as a way to form an appeal.

Timothy McVeigh could become a free man by using Akhil Amar’s logic. (Being that his trial was deemed “unconstitutional” by Akhil Amar.)

Let me give you some of Akhil Amar’s own words:

“…Europeans are increasingly challenging Americans on the issue of the death penalty and claiming the moral high ground.

This approach to the Eighth Amendment raises an obvious question: If American judges may properly canvass the evolving principles and practices of democratic states on this side of the North Atlantic, why shouldn’t they also consider the evolving norms of other advanced democracies? When regressive States lag, the Constitution brings them up to speed; shouldn’t judges also be concerned when America as a whole lags behind the civilized world?..”

If you have read my site for any length of time, you know that I am NOT a “one world order”, globalization type guy.

I hate it.

“One world order” destroys the individual. It hampers personal freedom. And it cannot be tolerated in America.

To the liberals who read my web site:

You will hear many of us conservatives talk about the “permanent constitution.”

We do not believe that the constitution is a “living- breathing” document, that is meant to be changed. A “ball of wax” that can be shaped by future generations.

Akhil Reed Amar wants to change the way America does things.

Matter of fact, as I write this, Akhil Amar is attending a conference in New York City TODAY- May 4^th 2009.

What is the topic of this debate, you might ask..??

“Is the American Constitution Obsolete..??”

OK…

To be fair…

I have no idea what Amar might say at this conference. (Because it hasn’t happened yet. It’s happening later today.)

For all I know, Amar might defend the constitution as it was written.

However, if people walked up to me and asked: “..Would you like to attend a conference on whether the US constitution is obsolete..??”

I would smile and say, as kindly as I could; “..That question is so f**king stupid, get the hell out of my face..”

Why would you give this conference any attention, Mr. Amar..??

Folks, if you really want to get to the bottom of this whole “torture” topic, you must follow the money.

Yes, Bush was the president and made the ultimate decision to use these technics.

However, who gave President Bush the legal advice that water boarding was not torture..??

John Yoo.

Where did John Yoo gain his knowledge, which formed his educational foundation, which allowed Yoo to come to this conclusion on water boarding..??

From Akhil Reed Amar.

Again, I believe that John Yoo is correct in his thinking. However, you the liberal, does not. You believe that Yoo was very, very wrong.

So you must ask yourselves where John Yoo developed this “thinking outside of the box” mentality when it comes to the constitution..??

I have given you the answer.

The next time you hear conservatives talk about “strict constitutionalism,” understand this…

This isn’t something that we say for the hell of it, or to make ourselves sound “patriotic.”

It is a way of life. Of freedom.

There is a danger in “rethinking the constitution”, and “beefing up the constitution to fit modern times.”

The Danger: You might not agree with the guy that is doing the “rethinking.”

As I just proved to you today.

Written by AR Babonie for The Angry Republic

LINKS:

All of the enhanced interrogation methods had been approved before.

Article: Presidents do not prosecute their predecessors.

Akhil Reed Amar- in his own words

Who is John Yoo..??

Happy Days..??

New York City is debating whether the constitution is obsolete..??

Comments:

 

truth-recon

What I have seen the left say about waterboarding and that the US should be morally superior and morally upstanding and not do as they do but play by the rules reminds me of..........

In the early 1930's the US Navy Dept. refused to put any further research into submarines because they considered submarines to be...what??...you guessed it, sneaky, underhanded, and not an honorable way to fight.  Sinking merchant vessels was "barbaric".  The US Navy forced the subs to be nothing more than scouts for the battleships and cruisers.  Guess what else?  About that same time and on into the 1930's, the Germans were building subs by the hundreds!!! The US Navy, playing by the "rules", had tied their own hands.

How well did the convoys from the US to the UK do during the first few years of the war in the North Atlantic??  The German subs were sinking merchant vessels by the dozens.  Not until the US Navy FINALLY got wise and stopped playing by the rules, did they become successfull against the German subs.

What are we doing today?  Tying the US Military's hands behind their backs once again in the name of "playing by the rules" when the enemy HAS NO RULES!!!  How stupid is that????

I knew that we were miles behind in submarine technology in the 30's, but I didn’t know why..??

Thanks for the info. Great lesson..!!

Well, you know what they say...

AND...

"..Those who DO learn from history, (are doomed to WATCH history repeat itself because of the stupid leaders who never learned from history.)

animalfarmbyorwell

Thanks for the information.

All of these stupid liberals have no idea of what torture is  , give me a raghead muslim terrorist  and I will tie him to a metal bed spring sitting in water  , and start sticking bamboo splinters under his finger nails  if that does not work I will then set fire to the splinters , if I still don't get the information I will apply electrical shocks to his nuts, still don't want to talk  I will turn the electricity on the bed springs  , NOW if the liberals still insist  that water boarding is torture  these simple things should not upset them at all, how ever there are many more things I can use if they want to see "Torture"

Evidently these people think they are smarter than our Founders who penned the Constitution and will try to mold it to fit their twisted Agenda....what arrogant, ignorant fools.

Yoos mistake was turning to Amar.  Why did he turn to  him?

Yea, I have never figured out why some people always want to change things that already work..??

Amar was John Yoo's college professor. It is from Amar that Yoo learned his legal trade.

*********************************************



4Bliss

Thanks for the opinion post.... excellent. I have posted a new video with Condeoleezza Rice, taking on a liberal student on these issues... she is smart and calls him on his lack of facts and his argument is clearly based on talking points.

We need a formal ACLU "smackdown".

These people are dangerous beyond belief.....and I would LOVE to see every damned one of them deported to the Commie country of their choice.

Failing that, good Americans need to all understand that the ACLU is not dealing with a full deck. They would turn us over to enemies in a heartbeat. Why are they not being investigated for unAmerican activities?

*********************************************


RaggedyAnn

Good post and very interesting. I like reading Joez's responses.

I would not want to be an enemy soldier that got caught by Joe's troops.

Give me water boarding any day over what Joe would do..!!

**************************************************

centurion

When you're on a roll - it's as smooth as Leon Redbone.

That's funny..!! Thanks..!!

"I do like Mr. Leon Redbone's music and sound..!!

"..Those who do NOT learn from history are doomed to repeat it.."