Greater Phoenix Tea Party Patriots

Patriot Groups throughout the Maricopa and North Pinal County area.

When I look at all the activity on Tea Party sites and then see how the political landscape remains the same, it’s clear that we’re not effective. Many Tea Party organizations seem to be only a forum featuring the same old gripe sessions with the same old gripes: Obama’s turning us into a socialist, communist, authoritarian, Fascist or other type of nation; he’s killing the economy; he’s spying on citizens and keeping enemies lists; he’s running operations against his own country and all the rest of it – and it’s all true. Then there’s the “Boehner’s a traitor” dialogue. Boehner’s this, that or the other thing, none of it good. Ditto McCain, Graham, the New England senators and , heck, you know the rest because you see it in print and read it every day, day in and day out – and it’s all true. Breitbart, Fox, CNSnews, Drudge, Daily Caller and a host of other sites we know which bypass the mainstream media give us the updates on the daily outrages. Rush, Hannity and their wannabes keep it all alive on AM radio across the nation day and night – and it’s all true.


The info from this alternative media, the dialogue and the networking the Tea Party sites provide is terrific and vital, but...we’re not drawing conclusions and then doing anything about it. We’re paralyzed. At least, we’re not doing the obvious thing…

What’s the obvious thing to do?

Form a party to replace the GOP!

This is all happening because of the GOP, the Republican Party establishment. There’s no other reason for it. The Democrats are who they are and they aren’t going to change. However, we can control our side. Yet, with the opportunities when the GOP held power a few years back and with the opportunities since they took the House majority, what conservative action has this party accomplished? I mean accomplished, not spoken about. Since 1994 what conservative legislation have they won which still stands? What government agencies have they cut? Where have they reeled in regulations? Have you ever heard a senior Republican call a Democrat the things that Establishment figures called Sarah Palin? Ever hear failed presidential candidate Senator McCain call Democrats out, accusing them of racism or any of the things that get hurled at us by Democrats? What about senate minority leader McConnell? It doesn’t happen. They save all their vitriol, all their outrage for conservative Republicans. For those few of you who missed it, that destructive aggression against members of their own party was front and center during the GOP presidential primaries last year. The GOP leadership also helped to pummel conservatives by getting their surrogates in the press to do their dirty work. Can you imagine otherwise why Candy Crowley would be permitted to be involved in Republican primary debates, or any other of the liberal talking heads? And why not Rush Limbaugh, David Limbaugh, Mark Levin, Mark Stein, Ann Coulter, Walter Williams, Hannity or any of many, many conservatives, intellectual or otherwise? All these GOP leaders can come up with is Candy Crowley and people like her? There’s a reason for that… When the GOP leadership enables Democrats (by failing to stop them or by voting with them in enough numbers to ensure the bill passes) and bashes conservatives, ladies and gentlemen…isn’t there a clear, even very clear message there?

So why are we paralyzed? Why haven’t we replaced the GOP? There are several reasons, but here are the two main reasons: People who want to maintain the status quo, those who like what’s going on now and merely pose as “conservatives” tell us “third parties always lose”. Well, no, they don’t. The GOP was a third party which started up in 1854 when the nation was as divided on slavery as it is divided today on other issues. In six years, they had replaced the Whig party and had a president in the White House. That’s not failure! Like today, they had both numbers and a valid reason to found the new party: the Whigs weren’t strong enough in their anti-slavery stance.

The other reason these “conventional wisdom” slingers tell us we can’t form a new party is that “we’ll split the vote!” OMG, not that!!!! (Ladies and gents, looking at our political landscape, what difference would it matter if it was “split”? The Democrats win anyway. They even won when we had the House, Senate and White House!). Even so, with the new party and its commitment to conservative values, it’s doubtful that the votes would be split. Conservatives would likely win. The new party would replace the GOP, which would then wither away as the Whigs did. However, even if the vote actually did split somehow, and yet a new party got off the ground which replaced the GOP, it would still be a win because we know that if we fail to replace the GOP, we can only expect more of the same: more losses, more double-talk, more legislative thrashings. The Establishment and their surrogates have been using fear to keep us in line, yet having established that new party, we would certainly prevail in the next round of elections. Here’s why…

A 2012 Pew Research Poll says that 66% of registered Republicans identify themselves as conservatives. Gallup’s 2012 poll shows that 71% call themselves “conservatives”. A year or so ago there were approximately 55 million registered Republicans. That’s anywhere from 36-39 million upset Republican voters. Of course this doesn’t count the Independents. Following last year’s pathetic election campaign show, I re-registered as an Independent. It seems that most Independents are also “conservatives”, perhaps in a like or higher percentage than those among registered Republicans. Finally, take a look at the approval ratings for congress in general: it’s a bleak picture. Republican voters are not happy with their choices.

RINOs know they can – and do – routinely lie to us and remain in office as they also remain in good standing with the party. Ever notice how just enough of them defect, voting with Democrats at important junctures, to get the big issue to go the Democrats’ way? It’s a calculation. They can decide who is safe enough in their district to make such a vote and get re-elected in spite of it. The rest vote with the party platform, but still, because of the few, the Democrats win the day. As for those who voted with the Democrats, they know that come election time, when we’re faced with voting for them or the Democrat challenger, we’ll vote for them. So, what good is a party platform – the statements we rely on when we go to the polls – when members of that party can vote in opposition to it without consequence?

Speaker of the House Boehner hosted a closed-door meeting with Republican congressmen recently on the amnesty bill. I strongly suspect it was to make just such a calculation. That is, that they were trying to find out who could safely vote with the Democrats on the Amnesty Bill, guaranteeing its passage, while the rest voted against. Why else would the meeting have been “behind closed doors”? Who are they keeping the content of the discussion from? Democrat congressmen? What would it matter if they heard it? It won’t change how anyone votes. Is it a matter of national security? No. Then who are they keeping the discussion from? Whose ears is it not meant for? It’s you and me who are not supposed to hear the talk! It is we Republican voters who they want to be sure don’t hear the conversation. How do you like your party now?

We often think of our elected officials as responsible to us. Really? How are they responsible? How do you explain McCain, Rubio, Boehner, Cantor, Ryan, the two Bush presidents (“read my lips…”) and others past and present? They are not at all answerable to us. We’re told “you can vote them out” and yes, that’s true. The reality, however, is that the Establishment circles the wagons around such people and sends in extra money to defeat conservative primary challengers. (slightly different context, but didn’t we just see that money pour in for former lobbyist and RINO congressman Jeff Flake in order to defeat conservative challenger Will Cardon?) Having defeated the conservative primary challenger we’re stuck with voting to (re)elect them or voting for the Democrat. In the case of senators, in for six years, a lot of people forget just how bad they were over that time and the money coming in at election time takes care of the rest. That’s not enough to make people truly accountable. Let’s make it so they are truly accountable, now – without waiting for the next election and its results.

The new party – call it the New Founders Party – will have rules with teeth. Here is the main one: the party sets the national agenda and puts it in print at campaign time. Its candidates campaign on that agenda and sign a publicly available pledge to maintain and uphold that agenda. If they attain office and then fail to honor that pledge – say, turning around on Amnesty or the Farm Bill and voting with Democrats for example– they are immediately expelled from the party, no second chances, no re-admittance as a candidate. Of course, they would remain in office for the rest of their term, but they would lose their committee seats and their chances of re-election would be slim to none. What we would end up with would be people who we could count on to vote the way we would want them to vote, the way they led us to believe that they would vote when they asked us to put them in office. Now they work for us! Now they are answerable! Now they are accountable to us!

Who among us does whatever he wants at work for his paycheck, from top corporate executives in Fortune 500 companies to people doing manual day labor? If we don’t do what we are told and deliver the service we were hired to perform, we are fired! Why should congress be any different? There is no valid reason. This idea for a new party is such a simple idea, one wonders how we ever allowed ourselves to get to this point. Yet here we are. Is our plan to simply lay down and let the Democrats, the unions, the RINO leadership and their lobbies run us over and steal our nation for themselves while we stand around griping about it? Or are you willing to change your thinking and act in the formation of a party to replace the GOP? It’s up to us. Waiting for the GOP or listening to them is a waste of time. If they were going to change, it would have happened long ago. Haven’t we listened long enough? Haven’t we played Charlie Brown to their Lucy, having the football yanked away at the last minute, leaving us heaving on our backs – haven’t we played that role long enough? Haven’t we held our noses and tried to quiet our stomachs when we voted yet again for a GOP senator only because we thought of him or her as the lesser of two evils? Hasn’t that gone on long enough? Have we failed to understand the message of the 2012 GOP presidential primaries? When you hear Republican leaders tell us what they are going to do, simply put, how on Earth can you any longer believe them? Are they even talking about doing what needs to be done? Unfortunately the answer to both is a resounding “no!”

The Boston Tea Party and the men who took part in it were the agents of change who went on, unafraid, to fight and defeat the King of England and found the United States. Our fight is a different fight, but the stakes are the same: freedom, liberty and the guiding precepts of the Declaration of Independence and the US Constitution. We call ourselves “Tea Party”. Let’s act “Tea Party”. Let’s be those agents of change. Let’s do what we know in our hearts is required and found a new party dedicated to winning for everyone, but especially, to winning that which is right and correct for a free people.

Jeff Dover
July 17, 2013

Views: 541

Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

KAREN: Thanks for taking a look at "Sense of Citizens". Could you be specific as to which of my comments here contradict what is in Sense.  The solution proposed in Sense is Consolidation of the Conservative Movement and I thought that was what I was promoting here by speaking against splintering it. DUANE

Karen Gevaert said:

Duane I checked out your "Sense of Citizens."  Your mission and other steps very well done, and showed some common sense objectives.  I'm confused, your statements here are a contradictory to your "Sense of Citizens---What gives?

Duane, why would you put the good apples in with the bad?  If you want to consolidate conservatives, why not simply do that under their own aegis?  Here's why:

http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Government/2013/07/30/Karl-Rove-100-Do...

Though I don't know who the individuals are, I'm certain that they are people with a lot of money.  They're attempting to bribe our GOP congressional delegation to support legalizing the illegals.  However, they know that they don't need all those GOP votes, because the Democrats will finish it for them.  There's no loyalty to a plan or a platform in the GOP.  We can count on nothing from them.

Their platform (GOP.com) says that they oppose Cap & Trade, but here's their 2008 presidential candidate endorsing it on film!   http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-UPJlJcxa4Q

Re. immigration reform, it's notably absent in the platform.  Is that because it's not an issue?  I would say it's precisely so that they can do what they're doing now with it, that is, pretend they want secure borders etc. at election time to appease conservatives and then go with Democrats in the vote.  Once again, not all of them...but just enough of them to see it through.

You'll also see that their platform makes no mention of budget, taxation or smaller government -- huge issues that they can dance around all day -- as Boehner has done ad nauseum.

So why do you think you can be a part of this and have success in dealing with any of these issues?  They'll only blindside you...only it won't be truly "blindsiding", because it's perfectly predictable.

If we're going to end up with Democrat policy whether Republicans or Democrats are running things in Washington, what difference does it make which party wins?  What's at risk in forming a party most present Republicans and Independents would join?

Why not form a party made up of conservatives only, where every candidate and elected member must adhere to a detailed, publicly available legislative agenda and position statement -- or be expelled?  In such a party, the money those Rove gazillionaires are bringing wouldn't matter.  Ditto lobbyists.  I know of no other way to keep discipline to a preset and determined course.  The GOP has no plan, no goals.  It only has the whims of the strongest within it.  That's not serving us well, if at all.  A ship without a chart is simply adrift or on the shoals.  There's no guiding vision driving the GOP.  We have one, but they do not.  Let's cut 'em loose.

JEFF: Thank you for your thougtful and cogent comments. Let me respectfully respond.

  1. I too believe it is bad to put good apples in with the bad. I take your analogy to mean that constitutional conservatives are the good apples and constitutional subversives are the bad apples. Just so you know, I am by most standards a very conservative guy and you seem to be too. But the difference between you and I is that you seem to consider those who are not as conservative as you, to be "bad apples"; while I consider them to be "green apples". If we eliminate all the green apples, soon we will run out of ripe apples and all you will have left is bad apples. I believe it is wise to keep the "green apples" and nourish them with good information until they ripen into good apples. I also believe the bad apples should be thrown out.
  2. I read your Breitbart.com reference to Rove and his 100 who are pushing for Comprehensive Immigration Reform. You need to realize that Carl Rove works for the Senate and House Republican Reelection Committee and that is not the Republican Party. The difference is subtle but important. Rove raises money for the election of the Republican Incumbents, and while that is usually a good thing, it does have its bad aspects. It is for example why McCain keeps getting re-elected even when the majority of the Republican Party Members would rather have a more conservative guy in that seat -- the money McCain gets from the Senate Re-election Committee is so much that he can "buy" the votes of Independents and Ignorants. Nonetheless, Rove and his 100 have an opinion on immegration reform (which I do not agree with), but it is their right to think what they think and to lobby their thinking and to contribute money to advance their thinking -- that is politics.. Jeff if you want to play the game of politics by trying to start a third political party, you need to know how the game is played.
  3. The reason why the Republican Party has no plank on Immigration Reform is that the Republican Party does not believe Immigration Reform is necessary. Current immigration law is quite sufficient, all that needs to be done is to somehow get the Obama Administration to start enforcing it; or the other option would be to oust that administration and install an administration which is more law abiding (that would be a Republican administration). .
  4. I don't know what platform you are referring to. The Republican Party Platform contains the following titles: 
  5. After you read the above Republican Party Platform carefully, then lets talk again about what the GOP is for and not for.
  6. You say, "Why do you think you can be a part of this and have success". The reason is that I I work for little victories here and there, and I remain optimistic for the future of our beloved America. The alternative is to side with the subversives and I am not going to do that. I am also not going to waste my time and energy siding with those who are pissing into the wind.
  7. You say, "Why not form a party made up of conservatives only, where every candidate and elected member must adhere to a detailed publicly available legislative agenda and position statement." Wow! That sounds a lot like the French Revolution, are you going to bring back the guillotine too? Also sounds like the National Socialist Party of Germany just prior to WWII, do you really want that?  Not me, I fight Democrats with all my might, but I will also die for their right to exist.

SENSE OF CITIZENS .   


Jeff Dover said:

Duane, why would you put the good apples in with the bad?  If you want to consolidate conservatives, why not simply do that under their own aegis?  Here's why:

http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Government/2013/07/30/Karl-Rove-100-Do...

Though I don't know who the individuals are, I'm certain that they are people with a lot of money.  They're attempting to bribe our GOP congressional delegation to support legalizing the illegals.  However, they know that they don't need all those GOP votes, because the Democrats will finish it for them.  There's no loyalty to a plan or a platform in the GOP.  We can count on nothing from them.

Their platform (GOP.com) says that they oppose Cap & Trade, but here's their 2008 presidential candidate endorsing it on film!   http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-UPJlJcxa4Q

Re. immigration reform, it's notably absent in the platform.  Is that because it's not an issue?  I would say it's precisely so that they can do what they're doing now with it, that is, pretend they want secure borders etc. at election time to appease conservatives and then go with Democrats in the vote.  Once again, not all of them...but just enough of them to see it through.

You'll also see that their platform makes no mention of budget, taxation or smaller government -- huge issues that they can dance around all day -- as Boehner has done ad nauseum.

So why do you think you can be a part of this and have success in dealing with any of these issues?  They'll only blindside you...only it won't be truly "blindsiding", because it's perfectly predictable.

If we're going to end up with Democrat policy whether Republicans or Democrats are running things in Washington, what difference does it make which party wins?  What's at risk in forming a party most present Republicans and Independents would join?

Why not form a party made up of conservatives only, where every candidate and elected member must adhere to a detailed, publicly available legislative agenda and position statement -- or be expelled?  In such a party, the money those Rove gazillionaires are bringing wouldn't matter.  Ditto lobbyists.  I know of no other way to keep discipline to a preset and determined course.  The GOP has no plan, no goals.  It only has the whims of the strongest within it.  That's not serving us well, if at all.  A ship without a chart is simply adrift or on the shoals.  There's no guiding vision driving the GOP.  We have one, but they do not.  Let's cut 'em loose.

Duane, you need  to think this through and not get so carried away with hyperbole...

 "Wow! That sounds a lot like the French Revolution, are you going to bring back the guillotine too? Also sounds like the National Socialist Party of Germany just prior to WWII, do you really want that?  Not me, I fight Democrats with all my might, but I will also die for their right to exist."

That's what you wrote in response to my thought that a party should set the agenda and the elected party members act as its instrument.  Your response was ridiculous.   Understand that I am talking about rules for a political party, not the constitution nor the law of the land.  Neither would the party be monolithic, such as the Nazi party or the Communist Party of the Soviet Union, for example, which permitted no other parties.  There's no relation to those regimes.  The intent is that voters should know when they vote for candidate that the candidate is going to follow through on his and his party's positions.  Do you believe that when a person is elected to office they suddenly ought to have sole discretion in how they vote?  I do not.  Like anyone else performing a service for which they are paid, they should be accountable, immediately, to the people who hired them and if they do not do the job, should be fired -- but not two or six years later.  Get 'em out of the party now.  They'll finish their terms but they won't be re-elected.

Do you enjoy having people reverse themselves on a position once in office?  Do you like the thrill of losing, time after time, by just a thin margin, the difference being the GOP politicians who defected or failed to show for the vote?

We're in a battle to save our constitution and our way of life.  It's not just about the budget or a treaty with a foreign power.  We cannot afford to simply be "optimistic".  I have optimism, but it ends with the GOP.  As for the platform, yeah, I missed that extra link today.  However, I've read it.  How much of it are they delivering as they control the House of Representatives, which controls the nation's purse strings?   They don't think immigration reform is necessary so it's not in the platform?  Does that mean the issue goes away and we won't have to worry about it?  Do they believe that our borders should be secure?  Bush didn't.  Has anything changed?   To what do you hold these people accountable?  Cashing their checks and it ends there as long as they have an "R" next to their name?

You keep coming back to this term "constitutional subversives".  I can see Obama and his henchmen in that role.  Not sure about RINOs.  I think they're more in line with huge money, but not sure.  What I am sure of is that none of is good and none of it is acceptable.  Something needs to be done and the GOP ain't doing it.  Again, you pursue your way, and I'll pursue mine.
 
Duane Engdahl said:

JEFF: Thank you for your thougtful and cogent comments. Let me respectfully respond.

  1. I too believe it is bad to put good apples in with the bad. I take your analogy to mean that constitutional conservatives are the good apples and constitutional subversives are the bad apples. Just so you know, I am by most standards a very conservative guy and you seem to be too. But the difference between you and I is that you seem to consider those who are not as conservative as you, to be "bad apples"; while I consider them to be "green apples". If we eliminate all the green apples, soon we will run out of ripe apples and all you will have left is bad apples. I believe it is wise to keep the "green apples" and nourish them with good information until they ripen into good apples. I also believe the bad apples should be thrown out.
  2. I read your Breitbart.com reference to Rove and his 100 who are pushing for Comprehensive Immigration Reform. You need to realize that Carl Rove works for the Senate and House Republican Reelection Committee and that is not the Republican Party. The difference is subtle but important. Rove raises money for the election of the Republican Incumbents, and while that is usually a good thing, it does have its bad aspects. It is for example why McCain keeps getting re-elected even when the majority of the Republican Party Members would rather have a more conservative guy in that seat -- the money McCain gets from the Senate Re-election Committee is so much that he can "buy" the votes of Independents and Ignorants. Nonetheless, Rove and his 100 have an opinion on immegration reform (which I do not agree with), but it is their right to think what they think and to lobby their thinking and to contribute money to advance their thinking -- that is politics.. Jeff if you want to play the game of politics by trying to start a third political party, you need to know how the game is played.
  3. The reason why the Republican Party has no plank on Immigration Reform is that the Republican Party does not believe Immigration Reform is necessary. Current immigration law is quite sufficient, all that needs to be done is to somehow get the Obama Administration to start enforcing it; or the other option would be to oust that administration and install an administration which is more law abiding (that would be a Republican administration). .
  4. I don't know what platform you are referring to. The Republican Party Platform contains the following titles: 
  5. After you read the above Republican Party Platform carefully, then lets talk again about what the GOP is for and not for.
  6. You say, "Why do you think you can be a part of this and have success". The reason is that I I work for little victories here and there, and I remain optimistic for the future of our beloved America. The alternative is to side with the subversives and I am not going to do that. I am also not going to waste my time and energy siding with those who are pissing into the wind.
  7. You say, "Why not form a party made up of conservatives only, where every candidate and elected member must adhere to a detailed publicly available legislative agenda and position statement." Wow! That sounds a lot like the French Revolution, are you going to bring back the guillotine too? Also sounds like the National Socialist Party of Germany just prior to WWII, do you really want that?  Not me, I fight Democrats with all my might, but I will also die for their right to exist.

SENSE OF CITIZENS .   


Jeff Dover said:

Duane, why would you put the good apples in with the bad?  If you want to consolidate conservatives, why not simply do that under their own aegis?  Here's why:

http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Government/2013/07/30/Karl-Rove-100-Do...

Though I don't know who the individuals are, I'm certain that they are people with a lot of money.  They're attempting to bribe our GOP congressional delegation to support legalizing the illegals.  However, they know that they don't need all those GOP votes, because the Democrats will finish it for them.  There's no loyalty to a plan or a platform in the GOP.  We can count on nothing from them.

Their platform (GOP.com) says that they oppose Cap & Trade, but here's their 2008 presidential candidate endorsing it on film!   http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-UPJlJcxa4Q

Re. immigration reform, it's notably absent in the platform.  Is that because it's not an issue?  I would say it's precisely so that they can do what they're doing now with it, that is, pretend they want secure borders etc. at election time to appease conservatives and then go with Democrats in the vote.  Once again, not all of them...but just enough of them to see it through.

You'll also see that their platform makes no mention of budget, taxation or smaller government -- huge issues that they can dance around all day -- as Boehner has done ad nauseum.

So why do you think you can be a part of this and have success in dealing with any of these issues?  They'll only blindside you...only it won't be truly "blindsiding", because it's perfectly predictable.

If we're going to end up with Democrat policy whether Republicans or Democrats are running things in Washington, what difference does it make which party wins?  What's at risk in forming a party most present Republicans and Independents would join?

Why not form a party made up of conservatives only, where every candidate and elected member must adhere to a detailed, publicly available legislative agenda and position statement -- or be expelled?  In such a party, the money those Rove gazillionaires are bringing wouldn't matter.  Ditto lobbyists.  I know of no other way to keep discipline to a preset and determined course.  The GOP has no plan, no goals.  It only has the whims of the strongest within it.  That's not serving us well, if at all.  A ship without a chart is simply adrift or on the shoals.  There's no guiding vision driving the GOP.  We have one, but they do not.  Let's cut 'em loose.

JEFF I have given this much thought and have even written and published a book about it and I try not to speak in Hyperbole. I can see that I am getting nowhere with you so I wish you well and will go my way. DUANE 

Jeff Dover said:

Duane, you need  to think this through and not get so carried away with hyperbole...

 "Wow! That sounds a lot like the French Revolution, are you going to bring back the guillotine too? Also sounds like the National Socialist Party of Germany just prior to WWII, do you really want that?  Not me, I fight Democrats with all my might, but I will also die for their right to exist."

That's what you wrote in response to my thought that a party should set the agenda and the elected party members act as its instrument.  Your response was ridiculous.   Understand that I am talking about rules for a political party, not the constitution nor the law of the land.  Neither would the party be monolithic, such as the Nazi party or the Communist Party of the Soviet Union, for example, which permitted no other parties.  There's no relation to those regimes.  The intent is that voters should know when they vote for candidate that the candidate is going to follow through on his and his party's positions.  Do you believe that when a person is elected to office they suddenly ought to have sole discretion in how they vote?  I do not.  Like anyone else performing a service for which they are paid, they should be accountable, immediately, to the people who hired them and if they do not do the job, should be fired -- but not two or six years later.  Get 'em out of the party now.  They'll finish their terms but they won't be re-elected.

Do you enjoy having people reverse themselves on a position once in office?  Do you like the thrill of losing, time after time, by just a thin margin, the difference being the GOP politicians who defected or failed to show for the vote?

We're in a battle to save our constitution and our way of life.  It's not just about the budget or a treaty with a foreign power.  We cannot afford to simply be "optimistic".  I have optimism, but it ends with the GOP.  As for the platform, yeah, I missed that extra link today.  However, I've read it.  How much of it are they delivering as they control the House of Representatives, which controls the nation's purse strings?   They don't think immigration reform is necessary so it's not in the platform?  Does that mean the issue goes away and we won't have to worry about it?  Do they believe that our borders should be secure?  Bush didn't.  Has anything changed?   To what do you hold these people accountable?  Cashing their checks and it ends there as long as they have an "R" next to their name?

You keep coming back to this term "constitutional subversives".  I can see Obama and his henchmen in that role.  Not sure about RINOs.  I think they're more in line with huge money, but not sure.  What I am sure of is that none of is good and none of it is acceptable.  Something needs to be done and the GOP ain't doing it.  Again, you pursue your way, and I'll pursue mine.
 
Duane Engdahl said:

JEFF: Thank you for your thougtful and cogent comments. Let me respectfully respond.

  1. I too believe it is bad to put good apples in with the bad. I take your analogy to mean that constitutional conservatives are the good apples and constitutional subversives are the bad apples. Just so you know, I am by most standards a very conservative guy and you seem to be too. But the difference between you and I is that you seem to consider those who are not as conservative as you, to be "bad apples"; while I consider them to be "green apples". If we eliminate all the green apples, soon we will run out of ripe apples and all you will have left is bad apples. I believe it is wise to keep the "green apples" and nourish them with good information until they ripen into good apples. I also believe the bad apples should be thrown out.
  2. I read your Breitbart.com reference to Rove and his 100 who are pushing for Comprehensive Immigration Reform. You need to realize that Carl Rove works for the Senate and House Republican Reelection Committee and that is not the Republican Party. The difference is subtle but important. Rove raises money for the election of the Republican Incumbents, and while that is usually a good thing, it does have its bad aspects. It is for example why McCain keeps getting re-elected even when the majority of the Republican Party Members would rather have a more conservative guy in that seat -- the money McCain gets from the Senate Re-election Committee is so much that he can "buy" the votes of Independents and Ignorants. Nonetheless, Rove and his 100 have an opinion on immegration reform (which I do not agree with), but it is their right to think what they think and to lobby their thinking and to contribute money to advance their thinking -- that is politics.. Jeff if you want to play the game of politics by trying to start a third political party, you need to know how the game is played.
  3. The reason why the Republican Party has no plank on Immigration Reform is that the Republican Party does not believe Immigration Reform is necessary. Current immigration law is quite sufficient, all that needs to be done is to somehow get the Obama Administration to start enforcing it; or the other option would be to oust that administration and install an administration which is more law abiding (that would be a Republican administration). .
  4. I don't know what platform you are referring to. The Republican Party Platform contains the following titles: 
  5. After you read the above Republican Party Platform carefully, then lets talk again about what the GOP is for and not for.
  6. You say, "Why do you think you can be a part of this and have success". The reason is that I I work for little victories here and there, and I remain optimistic for the future of our beloved America. The alternative is to side with the subversives and I am not going to do that. I am also not going to waste my time and energy siding with those who are pissing into the wind.
  7. You say, "Why not form a party made up of conservatives only, where every candidate and elected member must adhere to a detailed publicly available legislative agenda and position statement." Wow! That sounds a lot like the French Revolution, are you going to bring back the guillotine too? Also sounds like the National Socialist Party of Germany just prior to WWII, do you really want that?  Not me, I fight Democrats with all my might, but I will also die for their right to exist.

SENSE OF CITIZENS .   


Jeff Dover said:

Duane, why would you put the good apples in with the bad?  If you want to consolidate conservatives, why not simply do that under their own aegis?  Here's why:

http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Government/2013/07/30/Karl-Rove-100-Do...

Though I don't know who the individuals are, I'm certain that they are people with a lot of money.  They're attempting to bribe our GOP congressional delegation to support legalizing the illegals.  However, they know that they don't need all those GOP votes, because the Democrats will finish it for them.  There's no loyalty to a plan or a platform in the GOP.  We can count on nothing from them.

Their platform (GOP.com) says that they oppose Cap & Trade, but here's their 2008 presidential candidate endorsing it on film!   http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-UPJlJcxa4Q

Re. immigration reform, it's notably absent in the platform.  Is that because it's not an issue?  I would say it's precisely so that they can do what they're doing now with it, that is, pretend they want secure borders etc. at election time to appease conservatives and then go with Democrats in the vote.  Once again, not all of them...but just enough of them to see it through.

You'll also see that their platform makes no mention of budget, taxation or smaller government -- huge issues that they can dance around all day -- as Boehner has done ad nauseum.

So why do you think you can be a part of this and have success in dealing with any of these issues?  They'll only blindside you...only it won't be truly "blindsiding", because it's perfectly predictable.

If we're going to end up with Democrat policy whether Republicans or Democrats are running things in Washington, what difference does it make which party wins?  What's at risk in forming a party most present Republicans and Independents would join?

Why not form a party made up of conservatives only, where every candidate and elected member must adhere to a detailed, publicly available legislative agenda and position statement -- or be expelled?  In such a party, the money those Rove gazillionaires are bringing wouldn't matter.  Ditto lobbyists.  I know of no other way to keep discipline to a preset and determined course.  The GOP has no plan, no goals.  It only has the whims of the strongest within it.  That's not serving us well, if at all.  A ship without a chart is simply adrift or on the shoals.  There's no guiding vision driving the GOP.  We have one, but they do not.  Let's cut 'em loose.

Ron Paul - Rand Paul 2016

"Conservatism shouldnt be attached to a person  but to ideas,,,,,,"

Precisely.
 
John White said:

well you missed my essence.... Lots of people love Obama too..peoples "love" can be so easily manipulated by the cunning

I bet Hitler was loved too.... and Jesus was crucified (so much for popular opinion)

If you are satisfied with  Maha rushee I understand why AMERICA  is on the brink of suicide..... and who the he two sticks are you to command me to mind my own business???.. such fanaticism makes me wonder if this is a liberal blog.... Sometime I think the USSR  died  but has reincarnated here.

Conservatism shouldnt be attached to a person  but to ideas,,,,,,

The real problem, we have, is there is no real two party system at the national level. It's all a shell game for the stupid, dumb public. In the last two presidental elections, McCain, Romney and the Republians made sure Obama was elected and re-elected. Neither candiate in 2008 or 2012 run a hard hitting campaign  that told the American people the truth about Obama. Now Sarah Palin comes out and says the GOP refused to let her talk about Rev. Wright or Bill Ayers in the 2008 election. After Romney didn't bring up the 4 Americans killed in the middle east at the last debate, I know the fix was in again. Later, I was able to watch a GOP Hit Video on Obama that could have won the election for Romney. The only problem was that the Republicans never ran the video.

Thank you, you are a100% right on. What are you thinking of or willing to do to correct the corrupt two party system. Do you want to help in recall of flake and mccain???

Joe Green said:

The real problem, we have, is there is no real two party system at the national level. It's all a shell game for the stupid, dumb public. In the last two presidental elections, McCain, Romney and the Republians made sure Obama was elected and re-elected. Neither candiate in 2008 or 2012 run a hard hitting campaign  that told the American people the truth about Obama. Now Sarah Palin comes out and says the GOP refused to let her talk about Rev. Wright or Bill Ayers in the 2008 election. After Romney didn't bring up the 4 Americans killed in the middle east at the last debate, I know the fix was in again. Later, I was able to watch a GOP Hit Video on Obama that could have won the election for Romney. The only problem was that the Republicans never ran the video.

Our country is in such a mess, I wish Sara Palin, or anyone would start a third party the time is right.

Somebody needs to, but how long do we WAIT? Are we doing all we can?? A good site for discussions and lerning of opportunities, anything would be great help.
 
Karen Gevaert said:

Our country is in such a mess, I wish Sara Palin, or anyone would start a third party the time is right.

First, we need broad agreement among conservatives that the GOP doesn't offer us a solution.  It's very clear to us that it does not, but there are GOP people out there -- some sincere, some not -- trying to thwart that conclusion.

Continue to spread that gospel, showing that there is no evidence to suggest that the GOP can take us where we want to go (demand proof of skeptics -- they'll come up empty-handed every time).  One or two senators is not enough.  A party which permits its members of congress to vote in opposition to its very platform, and remain in the party,  is unacceptable.  Again, the reason is that it only takes a few dissenting votes on our side to swing things to the Democrats.  We can no longer accept that -- and it's always at critical junctures that it happens.  We have to be absolutely certain that the people we send to congress 1) vote in office as they lead us to believe that they will vote when they ask us to elect them and, 2) cannot be corrupted, blackmailed or otherwise compromised to vote otherwise (under penalty of expulsion from the party).

If you visit other sites -- teapartynation.com, for instance -- I think you'll see that momentum is building.

Reply to Discussion

RSS

© 2020   Created by Kelly Townsend.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service