Thread: Defending America: Do Republicans no Longer Care?

Defending America: Do Republicans no Longer Care?


As a recovering liberal, I thought I had stopped beating myself up when I registered Republican.

After all, the GOP is the party of strong defense, lower taxes, small government, and respect for America and it symbols.

GOP----The party that celebrates America’s greatness and sovereignty.

So I thought.

Little by little, America’s alleged war on terror President, George W Bush, and my adopted GOP family began chipping away at my devotion.

My devotion to the GOP, but not my loyalty to America, the Beautiful.

Reckless spending, soaring trade imbalances and overall failed fiduciary stewardship of US taxpayer money started to erode the “conservative” image of Republicans in the White House and Congress.

Nevertheless, we were fighting the most dangerous war in history against a billion or so wackos led by Islamic extremists intent on taking civilization back to the seventh century.

So we gave Republicans a pass because they still seemed less anti-American than Democrats. If Democrats were in power, one reasoned, there would be a white flag flying at the White House, signifying surrender to Osama bin Laden and Islamofascisim.

Better to grin and bear Bush et al, knowing “This too shall pass.”

But then came PortGate and the unbelievable attempt to sell management of US port security without adequate thought or regard for homeland security.

And now, egged on by our RINO president and key RINO senators, America may end up sacrificing American sovereignty and independence, as well as homeland security, on the altar of cheap labor.

It is now abundantly clear that the greatest priority of moderate and liberal Republicans is to assure an uninterrupted supply of slave labor from the third world.

Republican senators and the president no longer even pretend to care about American language, culture and borders.

The “Rule of Law” is being supplanted by the “Rule of Gold.”

If the abomination passed by the senate on May 25, or any bill with amnesty, is signed into law, I will never---NEVER---again vote for any Republican.

That means NO REPUBLICAN...... at any level!

I am hardly alone in my revulsion and revolt.

If Bush signs amnesty legislation, he will begin 2007 with a Democrat House and perhaps a similarily brain-dead senate.

That configuration, by the way, would include votes casts by yours truly for California Democrats.

Mind you, I have avoided such electoral malfeasance for a long while, proudly calling myself 'clean and sober' since voting for Slick Willy in 1992.

But the sight of GW Bush signing amnesty legislation, surrounded by beaming wackos like John McCain, Bill Frist, Harry Reid, Ted Kennedy, and Nancy Pelosi would be too much. Relapse would be inevitable.

Before foolishly signing a bill to essentially turn America over to Mexico, GW Bush needs to consider the following: If Democrats conquer Congress in January 2007, the first and greatest national priority will be the impeachment of GW Bush.

And if GW Bush signs an amnesty bill, this voter will root enthusiastically for the impeachment and removal of GW Bush.


Republicans still have time to do the right thing----but do they have the guts?


John W Lillpop is a Recovering Liberal....and Revolting Conservative!

Do Republicans no Longer Care?

No, the leadership does not.

For the Republicans, the challenge has often been that the grassroots had the vision, and the history and the principles, but the Leaders had the money.

Those leaders used to be referred to as the ROCKEFELLER WING of the Republican Party.

Why is that ?

It is because this is a reference to the former Governor of New York, Nelson Rockefeller. It was well known at the time that for the most part, rockefellers could never get elected to anything...but they could BUY their way to the top.

This was also a reference to Gerald Ford, because He is the President who appointed Nelson Rockefeller to be his Vice President.

However, it ALSO has the meaning to signify that it is the Big Money Interests that control the Party (for that matter, they control BOTH parties).

The Republicans had this problem back in the 1960s, and before. If there is one group that leads the way for Globalism, it is Rockefeller Republicans.

And that is no secret. Now look at who is in the White House.

The positions of power are held by those who came from the Ford Presidency, including Cheney and Rumsfeld. These ARE the Rockefeller Republicans, and they are the ones who run Bush.

It is clear that it is global wealth that commands allegiance in the Republican Party, and the business interests are fronted by the Commerce Dept. AND the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, that SUPPORTS the illegal Invasion.

These groups are fronts for the industrialists who have taken the factories built with American Labor and moved those to China and India.

That illustrates the difference between Immoral Wealth and Moral Wealth.

Moral Capitalism is the creation of wealth that is obtained and used for moral purposes such as helping others.

Immoral Capitalism is the kind of Capitalism that comes from monopoly markets, and illegal concentrations of wealth that are then used for wrong purposes, like destroying the USA.

Unfortunately, most of the Rockefeller wing of the Republicans are far more concerned with wealth and power, than they are with any kind of moral outcome that would help either the people or the Nation.

-

I left the DEM party in 1994 when I heard Pete Wilson in CA speak out about ILLEGALS in California. As a gringo who attended a Hispanic Cathlic Youth Group in SO CA I met illegal after illegal. Nice people but illegal. They had NO FEAR of deportation in 94 and they don't now.

I grew up with the lies and promises of the DEM party. The DEM party is the party of the victim mentality.

However, now it is to the point that neither party represents my interest.
Are all the politicans reallly the same? Only interested in re-election?
They will kiss you baby one day and steal the babies lollypop the next?

The DEM party has gone wacko left and the REP party is going thatway too?

How many citizens can go to a $1,000 a plate fundraiser? So who do they bow to? The monied interests.

If there is any amnesty where the illegals do NOThave to return to their country of origin first then I will not vote for any candidate of either party because it shows they care more about ILLEGALS of COLOR than they do all citizens regardless of COLOR!

Why should we pay taxes, stop at a stop sign or obey the law if ILLEGALS do not and these politicans cater to them? Why do I need a passport to enter another country? They enter ours illegally and many of these illegals have come in on tourist visas and NEVER left when the visa expired. The politicans do nothing to round them up.

People have told me for years that voting is stupid and a waste of time....I am almost at that point...

If the Republican party wants to act like DEMS and give amnesty and let 50 million more in over the next 20 or 30 years then let the DEMStake over so we Republicans can snicker at wimpy Reepublicans like Frist!

I am a registered Republican. I am disgusted (to say the least) with many so-called Republicans. However, I've seen more Republicans vote AGAINST amnesty, than I've seen Democrats vote against amnesty. I consider myself a conservative. To me, that means I believe in limited government, limited social services, equal enforcement of the laws, self support, Pro-America, no amnesty, etc. So when I see someone like GWB sign into law more entitlements and when I see him encourage amnesty, I get livid. He is no more a Republican than is Ted Kennedy.

I won't vote against all Republicans, just the ones who side with amnesty, and the other things I think violate our Constitution. I WILL support and vote for any third party candidates who more represent my philosophy. One thing that I have learned, and learned well, is to research as much as possible any one before I vote for him/her.

Um, look at the vote. About 60% of the Republican senators voted AGAINST this bill, while only FOUR Democrats voted against it. So yes, we have a problem with about 40% of the Senate Republicans, but we have a problem 90% of the Senate Demonrats.

In the House, it was the Republican majority that passed their version of the bill that was strong on border security and did not allow for amnesty.

Folks, it's disappointing that we don't have a Republican Party that is foursquare against illegal immigration and amnesty, but we have no sound alternative to at least supporting those who by and large vote our will. The VAST majority of Dems are in the Mexican camp. Unless you believe that you can manage to get a slate of anti-immigration independents elected, you have better stand behind the Republicans and the few Democrats who vote with the American people on this issue, and you had better vote out the Republican AND the (vastly larger number of) Democrat traitors who are voting against us.

A bitter truth: The Republican party has had control of the US Congress and the White House for a few years now.

Yet, the GOP controlled Congress passed that disaster on May 25. Because our president is an idiot and because 24 RINO senators voted with the liberals.

How in the world can our nation be on the brink of immigration suicide with OUR party in control?

Originally Posted by saveamerica

A bitter truth: The Republican party has had control of the US Congress and the White House for a few years now.

Yet, the GOP controlled Congress passed that disaster on May 25. Because our president is an idiot and because 24 RINO senators voted with the liberals.

How in the world can our nation be on the brink of immigration suicide with OUR party in control?

It hasn't been passed yet. There are many bad bills that never get through committee when trying to resolve differences between the two versions (House and Senate). The Republican House passed a pretty darned good bill. We just have to make sure that the final bill looks more like that one than then Senate bill. Also, Congress is comprised of two houses, one of which appears to be trying to do its job relative to immigration. Furthermore, the house (Senate) that has failed us has done so due to the 90% treason rate of the Dems, compared to only 40% of Republicans voting for the treasonous Senate bill.

I still cannot understand these partisan shots at the Republicans when the vast majority of the GOP members of Congress support our position while the even greater majority of Democrats oppose us and favor the illegals.

I am equally disgusted with both parties.

My family has always been Republican - back when Texas belonged to the "Yellow Dog Democrats". I thought my family was the only ones who would even utter Republican in TExas until Ike ran.

The reason I am more angry with Republicans is because I expected more of them. They are the ones who have let me down. I expected nothing less from the Democrats.

I am not sure about the majority of Republicans being against amnesty - that really remains to be seen.

I do realize that this President is neither a Republican nor a conservative.

These lawmakers have had 20 years, since the last 'amnesty' to fix this problem. The Republicans, even in the minority, were a pretty powerful group. WE have had a Republican Presidents and 8 years of a Democratic President. It has essentially been a non-issue for our lawmakers.

I have to conclude that not a majority of Republicans are against it. I think some have put their finger in the wind and see their seats slipping away - and have become 'enlightened'. It just may be 20 years too late.

The Republican lawmakers fully understood what this PResident planned to do about the illegals - he made that known in one of his first policy speeches and his very strange relationship with El Presidente Fox.

Why didn't they do something then?

No, they sat in the Congress and listened to Vicente Fox speak to them and demand they give certain rights to his people here in America. Not a one of them walked out.

Perhaps they have found their backbones - I hope so - but as I said - it may be too little too late.

If anyone thinks for one minute, that I would trade off
Tancredo
Inhofe
Colburn
Poe
Sensenbrenner
Sessions
For
Teddy
Boxer
Clinton
Schumer
Reid.
Feinstein
YOU HAVE GOT TO BE NUTS!

SESSIONS.......I know that Sessions is already talking "guest worker" and was extremely disappointed. I heard him with the past 48 hrs.

The House is by no means solid. Their arms get bent, they get a good deal offered behind closed doors and BAM........guest worker sounds good.