It’s funny because the current administration has grown government and corporations are increasingly dependent on government handouts. Pro school vouchers and what you call “other things” betray a poor commitment to core constitional values like the separation of church and state and individual or state rights.
The Republicans aren’t Republicans anymore. They’re big-spending, big government, and anti-freedom. Unfortunately, a lot of people are still too goddamned stupid to see that, or are more into hating gays and Arabs to wonder what their core values really are.
If the Pubbies succeed in gutting Social Security, I’m sure there’ll be a lot of “You can’t hold us ALL responsible for the actions of a few fanatical Republican leaders” but I don’t think anybody’ll listen. I don’t think anyone should.
As for the fact that Bush hasn 't destroyed any civil rights, if a man fires a gun at you and misses, should you think him a better person than someone who has better aim?
(To be honest, I don’t think Bush is out to destroy civil rights for their own sake, I just don’t think he gives a shit about them. Like most rich folks, he’s well aware that such things don’t apply to HIM.
Nah, they’ll just find a way to blame it on Jimmy Carter or Michael Moore. It won’t matter how erroneous it is, since Republican voters are complete lacking in reflectiveness and intellectual inquiry of the sort that isn’t looking at ways to shift blame and make excuses.
Preventative war - The authorization to use force, given to Bush by Congress, was given by both Democrats and Republicans.
Torture - It’s still being investigated how far up the chain of command it went. And even if it gets to Rumsfeld or even Bush himself, it would be a Bush Administration thing, not a Republican thing.
Larger government - This, again, is a Bush Administration thing. Republicans are supposed to be about smaller government, less taxation, and less spending. Yeah, he pushed through some tax cuts, but that’s about it. After Republicans took over both the House and Senate, about 10 or 11 years ago, we had a balanced budget. Bush ruined that.
Intrusions on individual rights - Debatable, and if you’re talking about the Patriot Act, it either wouldn’t have gotten approved, or would have been a hell of a lot harder to approve, if the Democrats had stood united against it.
Global warming - Yeah, well, you got us. We want the planet to get hotter and hotter until human life can no longer be supported. Damn, we thought we could sneak that one past you, but it looks like you’re too cleaver for us.
Party power over competent leadership - You’ll have to give me some examples, but in general, that sort of thing is more of a politician thing, and is done by both Republicans and Democrats.
In my opinion, the Bush administration != Republican party. Although I will admit that there are probably plenty of Republicans who give Bush a pass on a lot of things, simply because they like having controll over both Congress and the White House, and would like to maintain that control, even if it means having Bush as president. Kind of like how Kerry didn’t really have support of his own, but instead had a lot of people voting for him, simply because “He isn’t Bush.”
Funny, I didn’t write any such claim. Perhaps you should read the words I put down instead of listening to the voices in your head.
As for willfully and deliberately doing evil, I still maintain that deliberately starting a war using false pretenses has to be on the Top Ten List of Evil Things That A Man Can Do™. And it reflects very poorly on the GOP that they would embrace such a person wholeheartedly as a candidate…
Well, pro school vouchers quite obviously are a scheme to get taxpayers to subsidize religious education. Overall, the “family values” crowd opposes individual rights – whether it’s women or homosexuals or athiests. This doesn’t even get into the post 9/11 assault on freedom in the guise of national security.
I completely agree. That’s why I’m a liberal who isn’t a member of the Democratic Party. Some of their mandates make me cringe. Blind allegeance to anything you don’t personally support is wrong.
TVeblen, I don’t think bringing up conservative principles is necessarily useful until there are actually Republican leaders that follow them. Right now it seems like true believers are disgusted with their own party and jumping onto the libertarian bandwagon, which… too soon to tell if that will bolster or hurt the Libertarians. It hurt the Republicans in previous elections, but Bush was enough of a centrist (despite the people around him) to do some repairs, electorally.
Hate makes people blind. Terrorists and Democrats alike. I know foul, racist people who vote for Kerry and support things like gay marriage, and I don’t welcome that support. I don’t think Republicans should welcome the support of people like Ann Coulter, but I’m more interested in cleaning my own house. I don’t think we should be using hate as a tactic because it’s useful. What is it they say about using the weapons of your enemy that’s doomed to fail?
No, not really. See, the way the current system works, is that the government takes money from us and uses it to pay for public schools. The idea behind school vouchers is that parents decided themselves which school their money goes to. So if they want to support a public school, they can. If they want to support a private school, they can, and if yes, they could even send their child to a religious school, but it wouldn’t be government subsidization of a religious school, it would be allowing individual parents the right to choose which school their child goes to.
Good lord, does anyone really think that just because someone votes Democrat that they are neccessarily in favor of legal abortions? Or allowing same-sex marriages?
It’s not what you believe anymore. These days you get equated with the most reprehensible-sounding person who shares any one of your beliefs, no matter what else differentiates you from them. At least, if you’re not a conservative. E.g. if you were against invading Iraq, you were “objectively pro-Saddam”. If you dislike Bush, you must be in love with Michael Moore, and suddenly it’s your responsibility to disavow anything Michael Moore ever says. In this environment, it shouldn’t be surprising at all to learn that yes, there are people who think that just because someone votes Democrat they are neccessarily in favor of legal abortions and allowing same-sex marriage. Because some Democrats are in favor of those things, and so anyone who doesn’t actively disassociate themselves from such people by not voting Democrat is “objectively pro-abortion”.
Obvious caveat: there is nothing reprehensible about being in favor of same-sex marriage and keeping abortion legal. But some people perceive those things as being reprehensible, and thus the “logic” follows.
But of course, it doesn’t work the other way. Chris Cox can stand in front of prominent Republicans including the Vice-President and claim we continue to find facilities in Iraq for producing WMD’s, and Ann Coulter (another CPAC speaker, dontcha know) can continue to canonize McCarthy and call Barbara Boxer “learning-disabled”, but it would be preposterous, naturally, to call Republicans “objectively pro-wingnut”.