Republicans - Deep Down, They Hate Our Freedom

page: 1
0
<<   2 >>

log in

join

posted on Sep, 5 2004 @ 01:40 PM
link   
I just read the following op-ed:

www.iht.com...

and the author makes an interesting point. Deep down, many Republicans must hate America. They must hate our freedoms.

Otherwise why would they want to ban abortion with no regard for the life of the mother? To ban gay marriage? Something about our free American way of life bothers them very much, and they want to change it.


Why are the Republicans so angry? One reason is that they have nothing positive to run on (during the first three days, Bush was mentioned far less often than John Kerry).

The promised economic boom hasn't materialized, Iraq is a bloody quagmire, and Osama bin Laden has gone from "dead or alive" to he-who-must-not-be-named.

Another reason, I'm sure, is a guilty conscience. At some level the people at that convention know that their designated hero is a man who never in his life took a risk or made a sacrifice for his country, and that they are impugning the patriotism of men who have.

That's why Band-Aids with Purple Hearts on them, mocking Kerry's war wounds and medals, have been such a hit with conventioneers, and why senior politicians are attracted to wild conspiracy theories about Soros. It's also why Hastert, who knows how little the Bush administration has done to protect New York and help rebuild it, has accused the city of an "unseemly scramble" for cash after Sept. 11. Nothing makes you hate people as much as knowing in your heart that you are in the wrong and they are in the right.

But the vitriol also reflects the fact that many of the people at that convention, for all their flag-waving, hate America. They want a controlled, monolithic society; they fear and loathe the nation's freedom, diversity and complexity.

The convention opened with an invocation by Sheri Dew, a Mormon publisher and activist. Early rumors were that the invocation would be given by Jerry Falwell, who suggested just after Sept. 11 that the attack was God's punishment for the activities of the American Civil Liberties Union and People for the American Way, among others. But Dew is no more moderate: Earlier this year she likened opposition to gay marriage to opposition to Hitler.


-koji K.

[edit on 5-9-2004 by koji_K]




posted on Sep, 5 2004 @ 01:43 PM
link   
There are republicans that still believe in Freedom


They are called Libertarians now



posted on Sep, 5 2004 @ 01:45 PM
link   
Well, you have discovered only half the story. The other half is to realize that democrats hate our freedom too. Realize that, and the truth becomes more apparent.

However, I'm one who is against abortion, but not if it means the mother's life. That is a valid reason for it. If one will die anyway, the mother or child, the mother should be spared of course, to live on and hopefully have another child some day. But that's another topic I guess.



posted on Sep, 5 2004 @ 01:47 PM
link   

Originally posted by SimpleTruth
Well, you have discovered only half the story. The other half is to realize that democrats hate our freedom too. Realize that, and the truth becomes more apparent.


This is what I keep telling those who parrot the "lesser of two evils" song



posted on Sep, 5 2004 @ 02:33 PM
link   
I don't agree that one political party favor more or less liberties than other, I believe that both political parties are afraid that people in this nation will wake up one day and realize that the ruling parties in this country is doing anything for the people and decide to go against them.

That is one of the reasons that our civil rights has been tampered and poke to see how far the citizens will react to it, if not reactions are derived from this poking and tampering more and more of our civil rights will be taking away until it will be one totalitarian government under the umbrella of "democracy", and we the people will have to answer to every single move we do in this nation, kind of what is going on now if you want to protest you had to follow the "rules" or received the "consequences" for your actions so next time you think twice if you want to do it again.



posted on Sep, 5 2004 @ 02:54 PM
link   

Originally posted by SimpleTruth
Well, you have discovered only half the story. The other half is to realize that democrats hate our freedom too. Realize that, and the truth becomes more apparent.


Exactly!
To say that Democrats love freedom is equally preposterous. At least the Rebublicans will ignore you (unless you're a homosexual couple wanting to get married); the Democrats want to micromanage you, making you get approval from the government for everything you do in life.



posted on Sep, 5 2004 @ 04:45 PM
link   

Originally posted by ThunderCloud
Exactly!
To say that Democrats love freedom is equally preposterous. At least the Rebublicans will ignore you (unless you're a homosexual couple wanting to get married); the Democrats want to micromanage you, making you get approval from the government for everything you do in life.



How can you say that with the Patriot act and all?

You might have been able to say that in the past but the Republicans have shown themselves to be EVERY bit as controling as the Democrats



posted on Sep, 5 2004 @ 04:57 PM
link   

Originally posted by Amuk
How can you say that with the Patriot act and all?

You might have been able to say that in the past but the Republicans have shown themselves to be EVERY bit as controling as the Democrats


Good point. We need to throw both parties out on their butts, and put two new parties in place!



posted on Sep, 5 2004 @ 04:58 PM
link   
Yeah, koji_K, I'm sorry but you must not know that much about the positions of the political parties. Liberals, or left-wingers are KNOWN to want the government more involved in our lives. They want the government to make everything better most of the time. Republicans would rather live lives seperate from the govt. Of course, you would have to go more in depth to REALLY explain this...but I don't want to right now haha.



posted on Sep, 5 2004 @ 06:04 PM
link   
A thread of authoritarianism does indeed run through all major parties but the Libertarians. Anti-authoritarianism is their driving ideolgy, equally against the Dem kind, the Republican kind, the Constitutionalists kind, the Green kind, etc.

The biggest difference happening between the Dems and Republicans are the Democrat authoritarian measures are typically either trying to keep people safe or make corporations better citizens. Restricting the freedom to be stupid or hurt others. All secular initiatives but value judgements nonetheless, though they adamantly oppose moral authoritarianism. When people say they want a Philospher King, this is what it would be like. Green is even moreso, and Nader would would be off the chart. He thinks he knows everything.

Whereas the Republican kind is moving more and more toward moral authoritarianism. Making laws based on moral judgements. Restricing the right to be "immoral" in their value judgement, though they adamantly oppose secular authoritarianism (or used to). Hard to say anymore with some of their laws and crackdowns. The Constitution Party would be moreso. It's as close to a Theocracy in America as you'll get outside of Texas.

I'm personally very libertarian minded (small "l") except when it comes to corporations. Here, in my mind, the Libertarians brand of ideology would just empower them to run roughshod over all of us. The Republicans are no better on this issue. Though they lose my vote just on the basis on forced morality alone, they are in bed with evil when it comes to corporations. That's the only reason I can see why corporate polluters aren't financing the sympathetic LP. Why bother? They have the Republicans in their pocket already.

So in that regard I acknowledge a healthy amount of Democratic authoritarianism (the least objectionable alternative of all to me) and embrace it...because I like the idea of a Philosopher King in a way.


Because people are basically stupid. The Libertarian arguement that they aren't and should be allowed to run their own lives would be alot more impactful if people didn't overwhemingly disagree with LP on this point.


A vote for the Dems says people are stupid and corporations are evil. Protect me from them.

Whereas, a vote for the Republicans says people are evil. Protect my corporation from them.


The overwhelming majority of Americans want to tell someone else what to do one way or another. That's pretty much America in a nutshell isn't it?

What good are we if we don't boss someone around?



posted on Sep, 5 2004 @ 06:17 PM
link   

Originally posted by RANT
Here, in my mind, the Libertarians brand of ideology would just empower them to run roughshod over all of us. The Republicans are no better on this issue. Though they lose my vote just on the basis on forced morality alone, they are in bed with evil when it comes to corporations. That's the only reason I can see why corporate polluters aren't financing the sympathetic LP. Why bother? They have the Republicans in their pocket already.



Not really, the Libertarians would strip a LOT of the protections the republicans give to corporations and mostly just level the playing feild between them and us. I could see how the Democrats would think this but a closer look at our platform would dispel this.



posted on Sep, 5 2004 @ 06:19 PM
link   
I appreciate you not jumping on me Amuk, if I'm indeed just mistaken.

I'll have to look at that.



posted on Sep, 5 2004 @ 06:29 PM
link   
www.lp.org...

Here is a good place to start.

We basicaly do not believe in corporate welfare either or protecting business from the results of their greed.

In other words if you make cars that explode you will get sued out the ass.
If you make medicine that kills people you will get sued out the ass.

ETC

We believe in a Level playing field for EVERYONE



posted on Sep, 5 2004 @ 06:37 PM
link   

Originally posted by Herman
Yeah, koji_K, I'm sorry but you must not know that much about the positions of the political parties. Liberals, or left-wingers are KNOWN to want the government more involved in our lives. They want the government to make everything better most of the time. Republicans would rather live lives seperate from the govt. Of course, you would have to go more in depth to REALLY explain this...but I don't want to right now haha.


I disagree. All I can hear coming from the Republican platform is how we need new rules for this and new rules for that, and practically every one is a curtailment of some previously existing liberty, be it the right to an attorney, the right to choose, the right to marry the partner of one's choice, the right to unfettered access to government records where there is no possible harm involved.

And I know what Republicans traditionally stood for, but like it or not, Bush has expanded the size of the Federal government more than any other president save LBJ, and Ashcroft has intervened in state's rights issues more frequently, if less obviously, than any other Attorney General before him.

It is clear that the Republicans feel that there is something fundamentally
"unRepublican" about America and they want to remould it in their image.

-koji K.



posted on Sep, 5 2004 @ 06:54 PM
link   

Originally posted by Amuk
www.lp.org...

Here is a good place to start.

We basicaly do not believe in corporate welfare either or protecting business from the results of their greed.

In other words if you make cars that explode you will get sued out the ass.
If you make medicine that kills people you will get sued out the ass.

ETC

We believe in a Level playing field for EVERYONE


See I like the idea and principle (especially if you don't want to limit consumer recourse like the lawyer bashing Republicans)
but for me it just goes too far.


The Principle: In order to achieve a free economy, in which government victimizes no one for the benefit of any other, we oppose all government subsidies to business, labor, education, agriculture, science, broadcasting, the arts, sports, or any other special interest.


I like funding science, art, education and ad free broadcasting.
There's that Philospher King in me again.
It may be hypocritical of me, as the LP is much more logical and consistent than any other party


...but I just can't accept all the consequences. Not yet anyway. Keep plugging away though. I do hope we get where this becomes the obvious solution.



posted on Sep, 5 2004 @ 07:02 PM
link   
This is utter non-sense. The Republican's stand more for freedom than the current Democratic Party. There was a time when I would have agreed with this statement, but this is not the seventies. The Republican Party has been reborn and the Democrats have embraced hard-core Socialism, which has never been the hallmark of liberty.



posted on Sep, 5 2004 @ 07:07 PM
link   
Being jailed indefently without trial or a lawyer
Wire Taps without a judge
Home searches without a warrent
Government snooping into your internet veiwing, what books you read, etc


Sounds like freedom to me



posted on Sep, 5 2004 @ 07:15 PM
link   
Is it so much the fault of the "Republicans" though? Or the fault of a small bunch of Fascist-like Neo-Republican's and a party of disillusioned Democrats? I just want to ask this question because generally speaking, I don't see many Republicans as freedom haters and evil, but many of the one's that are controlled by big business and money are just that. Same with the Democrats as well, of course!

Many Republicans seem more like they are o.k. with the current situation because maybe they are fearful of the repercussions from the smaller, however more powerful group.

I personally do not see any resemblance between the modern "big money" Republican and the traditional Republican. I think the definition of what it means to be a Republican has expanded to the point where small government and a more Libertarian philosophy has now grown into a party of money, greed, and capitalism. Nevertheless, the same thing could be said of many Democrats as well.

Also, maybe its not so much a point of "Republicans" being bad, per say, but a few individuals who want to cause the party harm and disrupt the Democratic process. Many Republicans are open-minded in their political philosophy, but have found a way (to use an old cliche') "jump on the bandwagon" of a small minority that has grown since 9/11.

Maybe I'm wrong, if so correct me. Any thoughts?

[edit on 5-9-2004 by Jazzerman]



posted on Sep, 5 2004 @ 07:27 PM
link   
I dont see how EITHER party can escape responsabilty for the direction this country is going.

The Republicans control EVERYTHING so most of this is THEIR IDEAS but on the other hand the Democrats are not doing a DAMN thing to stop it either as a matter of fact as long as their agenda, More Government, is being followed by the Republicans they are happy to go along for the ride.

I myself cant tell the two apart



posted on Sep, 5 2004 @ 07:47 PM
link   

Originally posted by Jazzerman
Is it so much the fault of the "Republicans" though? Or the fault of a small bunch of Fascist-like Neo-Republican's and a party of disillusioned Democrats? I just want to ask this question because generally speaking, I don't see many Republicans as freedom haters and evil, but many of the one's that are controlled by big business and money are just that. Same with the Democrats as well, of course!

Many Republicans seem more like they are o.k. with the current situation because maybe they are fearful of the repercussions from the smaller, however more powerful group.

I personally do not see any resemblance between the modern "big money" Republican and the traditional Republican. I think the definition of what it means to be a Republican has expanded to the point where small government and a more Libertarian philosophy has now grown into a party of money, greed, and capitalism. Nevertheless, the same thing could be said of many Democrats as well.

Also, maybe its not so much a point of "Republicans" being bad, per say, but a few individuals who want to cause the party harm and disrupt the Democratic process. Many Republicans are open-minded in their political philosophy, but have found a way (to use an old cliche') "jump on the bandwagon" of a small minority that has grown since 9/11.

Maybe I'm wrong, if so correct me. Any thoughts?

[edit on 5-9-2004 by Jazzerman]


I certainly agree with you. The Republican party, while never espousing the ideals that would lead me to vote for them, wasn't always like it is now. It's been hijacked by the necons from PNAC and AEI. Kristol, Perle, Wolfowitz, Feith, etc.

However, I tar them with the same brush because the Republican leadership has accepted this. It was part of their strategy to embrace the far-right, something the left didn't do following the rise of the New Left under Clinton, and is why they "lost" the last election. Unfortunatly, they went too far, and our country, particularly our foreign policy, has been allowed to be determined by the neocons. The State Department is practically a vestigal organ of the Bush administration these days.

The Republicans are in the best position to stop what's happened to them, but they won't, because most of their supporters don't seem to realize what's going on, or don't care.

And yes, the Democrats have a role to play in this too, as many of them voted to grant Bush his "war powers".

-koji K.





top topics
 
0
<<   2 >>

log in

join