Guys (and gals, by all means),
In the "do you believe" stream we have narrowed down the focus of possible solutions to a 3rd party vote. I, 416Rigby, alias Devil's Advocate, am here to tell you that the Country is not ready for it.
I believe it was CMOS who made the comment that, as nice as it would be, and as pure and idealistic it would sound, the greatest majority of the public would still vote either Republican or Democrat.
I wholeheartedly agree with him. Remember '92? The republican basis was nauseatede by the titubation of G Bush, and some of the Dems (especially the FDR dems) were sucpicious of Clinton. I too fell prey to idealism and supported Perot. The result?
8 YEARS OF THE WORST, MOST CORRUPTED, MOST ANTI-CONSTITUTIONAL, PARTISAN, LYING, DIVISIVE AND INCOMPETENT ADMINISTRATION I CAN REMEMBER.
Am I saying that it is NEVER possible that a 3rd party will prevail? Heck, no. But before throwing away our vote, it is essential to educate the public on the underlying buttresses of a different ideology, one with which a lot more people than us can identify with. And that time is far from ripe now. Believe me. Vote 3rd party and we will have another 4, perhaps 8 years of a gun-grabbing, alienating, lying and cheating socialist government.
I HEREBY PLEDGE THIS. IF PROVEN WRONG (i.e. if a 3rd party like the Libertarians get elected in 2,000) I WILL PERSONALLY SEND $10 TO EVERY MEMBER OF THIS FORUM SO THAT THEY CAN HAVE A COLD ONE (or a burger & fries)ON ME.
Instead, what we should start doing is what someone suggested. We should get organized and get some media attention in support of our cause. We should "peacefully harrass" using the same tactics that the 1960's liberals used to support their cause. We should boycott, act as victims, sue, march, whatever it takes to create awareness. Look, the media are expressly against us, so it will take a fight - a good fight and a long fight.
We can not expect total victory from a completely defensive position!
OK, since we like analogies, and we have kinda beaten the dog one to death, here's another.
Voting third party now, without first creating a grassroot support for it would be like being in a trench, wanting to win the war, and throwing away your life in a suicide attack; a handful of determined men, full of ideals and zeal wanting to take a well-entrenched, excellently-armed, numerous foe. The result? Sure death, not a heckuva lot of change, another victory for the enemy and perhaps a medal to your widow.
Instead, like in every other successful battle, the following steps need to be taken.
1) Weakening the adversary through taking away their support (in our case steering more and more people away from their cozy liberal, pc view of the world);
2) Building up numbers. First you have to have an army, THEN you attack. Once our ammunition (voting) is spent in the 2,000 election, that's it!!! Once we are "killed in action" or "taken prisoner", that's it until the next election 4 years away!!!
3) Making sure the battlefield is clear of mines that can stop us before we even make it to the opposing trenches. This means clearing the air of the media-bias agains us as much as possible.
4) Before you attack, pounding the opposition with as much barrage fire as possible so that, when you attack, they are already weakened.
THEN, we may have arealistic shot at victory.
Now, let me make one thing clear. Once and for all, I am not inherently tied to the Republican party. They have let me down in the past and they continue to do so now. But keeping them in power until a realistic 3rd party option is in place is to me the sensible thing to do. Look, I am not going to argue with wome of you who think that Repubs and Dems are identical on issues. I just disagree, and let's leave it at that. Let's just say that Liberalism implies pacifism and an inherent horror for guns, nukes and force in general, so the only way to reason with these guys is to sorely defeat them. Let me tell you, the likes of Brady and Company won't stop until all of our guns are confiscated. I was in England when it happened to them, and believe me, it can happen here. The Repubs (some of them, at least) may too believe in gun-control, but only for a purely pragmatic (versus ideological) reason. Does this make a difference? Heck yes! If killings were on the serious decline, repubs would be less likely to propose GC legislation because "the current laws must be working". Instead, it wouldn't matter a lick for the Liberals. A gun is an inherently immoral thing, an instrument of death and to them it is probably worse that some people "dare" enjoy them than the fact that they are used in crime (..."after all, that's what they are for").... So, regardless of crime stats always expect confiscation as the ultimate goal for the Democrats. Not so for the Republicans. Period. Full stop.
So, my point is that UNTIL, we lay the groundwork for a likely Libertarian victory (which is unlikely as of today, and we all know it, whether we admit it or not, unless we live in total isolation) we HAVE TO STOP THE DEMOCRATS FIRST.
Let me do yet another analogy. We are the Partisans of the Constitution. We are the Freedom Fighters of the American Way. But at present, our land is occupied by the Nazi Army of PC/liberalism; it controls our media, our schools, our Government etc. What do we do? We come down from the mountains and get us killed in small groups, or we join the Allies? Sure, Communist Russia (the more liberal Repubs) is among the allies, but a lot of other good nations make up the majority of the allied forces. My solution is to join the allies for THE CRUCIAL BATTLE JUST AHEAD (2000 election), while starting to drum-up support for our own cause for a more realistic "partisan" victory in the years to come.
Doing otherwise would be political suicide.
------------------
SI VIS PACEM, PARA BELLVM
Constitution-RKBA=a weakened document!
In the "do you believe" stream we have narrowed down the focus of possible solutions to a 3rd party vote. I, 416Rigby, alias Devil's Advocate, am here to tell you that the Country is not ready for it.
I believe it was CMOS who made the comment that, as nice as it would be, and as pure and idealistic it would sound, the greatest majority of the public would still vote either Republican or Democrat.
I wholeheartedly agree with him. Remember '92? The republican basis was nauseatede by the titubation of G Bush, and some of the Dems (especially the FDR dems) were sucpicious of Clinton. I too fell prey to idealism and supported Perot. The result?
8 YEARS OF THE WORST, MOST CORRUPTED, MOST ANTI-CONSTITUTIONAL, PARTISAN, LYING, DIVISIVE AND INCOMPETENT ADMINISTRATION I CAN REMEMBER.
Am I saying that it is NEVER possible that a 3rd party will prevail? Heck, no. But before throwing away our vote, it is essential to educate the public on the underlying buttresses of a different ideology, one with which a lot more people than us can identify with. And that time is far from ripe now. Believe me. Vote 3rd party and we will have another 4, perhaps 8 years of a gun-grabbing, alienating, lying and cheating socialist government.
I HEREBY PLEDGE THIS. IF PROVEN WRONG (i.e. if a 3rd party like the Libertarians get elected in 2,000) I WILL PERSONALLY SEND $10 TO EVERY MEMBER OF THIS FORUM SO THAT THEY CAN HAVE A COLD ONE (or a burger & fries)ON ME.
Instead, what we should start doing is what someone suggested. We should get organized and get some media attention in support of our cause. We should "peacefully harrass" using the same tactics that the 1960's liberals used to support their cause. We should boycott, act as victims, sue, march, whatever it takes to create awareness. Look, the media are expressly against us, so it will take a fight - a good fight and a long fight.
We can not expect total victory from a completely defensive position!
OK, since we like analogies, and we have kinda beaten the dog one to death, here's another.
Voting third party now, without first creating a grassroot support for it would be like being in a trench, wanting to win the war, and throwing away your life in a suicide attack; a handful of determined men, full of ideals and zeal wanting to take a well-entrenched, excellently-armed, numerous foe. The result? Sure death, not a heckuva lot of change, another victory for the enemy and perhaps a medal to your widow.
Instead, like in every other successful battle, the following steps need to be taken.
1) Weakening the adversary through taking away their support (in our case steering more and more people away from their cozy liberal, pc view of the world);
2) Building up numbers. First you have to have an army, THEN you attack. Once our ammunition (voting) is spent in the 2,000 election, that's it!!! Once we are "killed in action" or "taken prisoner", that's it until the next election 4 years away!!!
3) Making sure the battlefield is clear of mines that can stop us before we even make it to the opposing trenches. This means clearing the air of the media-bias agains us as much as possible.
4) Before you attack, pounding the opposition with as much barrage fire as possible so that, when you attack, they are already weakened.
THEN, we may have arealistic shot at victory.
Now, let me make one thing clear. Once and for all, I am not inherently tied to the Republican party. They have let me down in the past and they continue to do so now. But keeping them in power until a realistic 3rd party option is in place is to me the sensible thing to do. Look, I am not going to argue with wome of you who think that Repubs and Dems are identical on issues. I just disagree, and let's leave it at that. Let's just say that Liberalism implies pacifism and an inherent horror for guns, nukes and force in general, so the only way to reason with these guys is to sorely defeat them. Let me tell you, the likes of Brady and Company won't stop until all of our guns are confiscated. I was in England when it happened to them, and believe me, it can happen here. The Repubs (some of them, at least) may too believe in gun-control, but only for a purely pragmatic (versus ideological) reason. Does this make a difference? Heck yes! If killings were on the serious decline, repubs would be less likely to propose GC legislation because "the current laws must be working". Instead, it wouldn't matter a lick for the Liberals. A gun is an inherently immoral thing, an instrument of death and to them it is probably worse that some people "dare" enjoy them than the fact that they are used in crime (..."after all, that's what they are for").... So, regardless of crime stats always expect confiscation as the ultimate goal for the Democrats. Not so for the Republicans. Period. Full stop.
So, my point is that UNTIL, we lay the groundwork for a likely Libertarian victory (which is unlikely as of today, and we all know it, whether we admit it or not, unless we live in total isolation) we HAVE TO STOP THE DEMOCRATS FIRST.
Let me do yet another analogy. We are the Partisans of the Constitution. We are the Freedom Fighters of the American Way. But at present, our land is occupied by the Nazi Army of PC/liberalism; it controls our media, our schools, our Government etc. What do we do? We come down from the mountains and get us killed in small groups, or we join the Allies? Sure, Communist Russia (the more liberal Repubs) is among the allies, but a lot of other good nations make up the majority of the allied forces. My solution is to join the allies for THE CRUCIAL BATTLE JUST AHEAD (2000 election), while starting to drum-up support for our own cause for a more realistic "partisan" victory in the years to come.
Doing otherwise would be political suicide.
------------------
SI VIS PACEM, PARA BELLVM
Constitution-RKBA=a weakened document!
) that the third parties will have their highest vote totals ever at the next presidential election. We can give our money to Rich to hold. Who wants to take a chance?