No Matter Who Wins, The Republic is Dead

W

wormtown

New member
No matter who wins, the republic is dead, freedom is in great jeopardy and future generations of Americans will live in an America much different from that of today, and worlds apart from what the Founding Fathers intended.

This election is one of the closest in history, and considering that I suspect we are lost where it matters the most: in the spirit of what it means to be free Americans. Let's forget about the separate issues such as abortion, gun rights, land rights and lump them all into one category called "freedom". It seems the liberals always are in favor of giving up freedoms in return for the promise of some government social program. This policy always breeds a larger government, more taxes and more erosion of rights. These social programs operate under the guise of "empowering" the "underprivileged", but in truth foster dependency and apathy. They are very devisive and pit race against race, rich against poor, young against old, urban against rural and so on. They foster an attitude of entitlement, and freedom from responsibility. These are not the values that founded this counrty, these are not the values that kept this country free and these are not the values that will allow America to survive the next 200 years. What shocks me the most is that 50% or more of the voting public enthusiastically supports these debiliting ideaologies. This trend seems to indicate we are rushing headlong into fullblown socialism and complete dependency on big government. When that happens, I suspect we will be quite like most of the countries of Europe: powerful nontheless, but mere shadows of their former selves, despearately clinging to memories of greatness and better days gone by.

And if George Bush wins, don't think we are saved. The republicans may be better in many areas than the Democrats, but it's not enough to turn things around. And Hillary Clinton manage to carpetbag, snadbag and dirtbag her way into the Senate. You can bet your last dollar she will make a run for the presidency in 2004, and guess what? Al Gore will be back. Make no mistake about it, we will be seeing a Gore/Clinton(Hillary) or a Clinton/Gore ticket 4 years from now. And I will be very surprised if they don't win.
 
I agree and call me "discouraged" this election has divided our country even more,
we are moving to socialism and in 2004 with
Hillary we "will" be at that point and make
no mistake this is what it is all about.
Very very sad to see a great country going
down.I am also sorry to see women in our
country embrace socialism so easy, somehow
the education systems has failed big time.
 
Very well said WORKTOWN (OK now thats a screenname and a half) I cant count the number of times last night that I said
'its sickening that that socialist pig had a chance.
But.....as he lost my state of TN I can die happy yet while like you extremely dissappointed in an america greatly desiring to be further enslaved or in their words
'taken care of' taken from the working give to the poor and the rich continue to control all and relinquish none to those that accomplished all that makes america great
and once free.
 
Assuming this outcome holds (!?), I'm confident that Bush will run an extremely bipartisan administration. That's his inclination, plus he really has no choice given the way this election went. Anything that is not mutually agreed upon will be gridlocked immediately, and I think that will include any names put forward for the Supreme Court.

There are two ways this can go from here. It can be a rancorous mess, with lots of partisan bitter-ending and score settling. Or, it can lead to a lot of cooperation, with everybody up on their best bipartisan tippy toes. Which way it goes depends mostly on how the Gore camp responds while this gets sorted out. If Al and his folks handle this with class and restraint, and if the Bushies respond with grace and generosity, we could be in for a pretty good period. If it goes the other way, the public will be repulsed and Bush will have no chance for re-election.

Meanwhile, the relationship between Hillary and Al will be fun to watch, as they vie for leadership in the Democratic Party. They aren't buds to start with.
 
I agree that a Bush victory is better than Gore, but in the long run only slows down an inevitable trend.
The next generation don't have what it takes, been around kids and seen it. There are some great ones, but most don't even know how to play outside without being told what to do.
And as a guy mentioned to me the other day, women will vote percieved security over Freedom damn near every time.

[This message has been edited by Dave D (edited November 08, 2000).]
 
Patisanship reduces the damage congress can do. What's so bad about that? I would love a congress and president that never got anything done.
 
<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by BTR:
Patisanship reduces the damage congress can do. What's so bad about that? I would love a congress and president that never got anything done.[/quote]


I concur. Unless there's some crisis to resolve, I would prefer that the fedgov not do much of anything and be quiet about it!
 
Gridlock is a wonderful thing, I agree completely. But I'm afraid if it is too rancorous, the Dems will make the "let's stop the bickering" appeal next time around and get back into office. I really, really don't want another Demo administration because they can do so much harm through regulative fiat and executive order. I hate to think what the list of banned firearms and parts prohibited from import will look like after Al or Hillary has had a few years in office with HCI perched on their shoulder.
 
I'm kinda glad Hillary won, in a perverse sort of way.

I assume she will run for President in 2004. If she is the Democratic candidate, I think she will be easy to beat on a national level.

She won in a heavily democratic state. But I do not believe she can carry moderate democrats. I hope we're running against her in 2004.

[This message has been edited by Dave R (edited November 08, 2000).]
 
I agree that freedom is in great jeopardy, but the republic is not dead!

A Bush victory means that we have avoided another step down the slippery slope. We haven't moved any closer to safety, but by not moving, we have bought four more years of time to try and change the Republican Party from within.

Wormtown, your post is well thought out and makes sense to me. It is also a reminder that the fight for freedom will never be won. It must be fought for continually, without fail.

The price of freedom is eternal vigilance. We must guard and defend this rare and precious gift that we have received from our Founding Fathers. Our war Veteran's know what this means, they have each helped to preserve this freedom, and pass it down to another generation to fiercely guard.

I hope that we can be as brave as the men and women who have fought, and died, to preserve this freedom. I hope that we are up to the task. For our children's sake. I hope.
 
We have definitely picked up velocity while traveling down "The Road to Serfdom".

To demonstrate how antedeluvian my thoughts run in this age of moral/intellectual atrophy, I think only taxpayers should currently have the right to vote. They are the people who pay for the country's government. Franchising non-taxpayers has led to the ever expanding welfare state and tyranny of the masses (mob democracy).

We live in a trust and parrot society where learning how to think and reason is untaught.
Too many just listen and repeat what they are told, skipping any mental analysis. This is what the schools do, and sad to say, they've done a great job of it.
 
BTR,
I agree. I breathe easy when they are out of session.

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by BTR:
Patisanship reduces the damage congress can do. What's so bad about that? I would love a congress and president that never got anything done.[/quote]
 
Y'know, as an immigrant, and taxpayer before being allowed to vote, I expressed the opinion that MY opinion was worth more than a deadbeat on welfare who's political status is effectively that of a child--the state (specifically me the taxpayer) being their parent.
You should have heard the liberals scream that I "didn't know what I was talking about." (their typical rant, followed by their standard refusal to explain why I was wrong)
 
Although he was a senator at one time, President Truman said something along the lines that all Congress did, when they did anything at all, was to upset the affairs of the nation. I think that could be applied to presidents, also. I wonder what a better system could be? And don't get me going on the judiciary; they need help, too.

------------------
Hoka-hey
 
She won in a heavily democratic state. But I do not believe she can carry moderate democrats. I hope we're running against her in 2004.

Dave R, I agree with you. No way Hitlery can win the Presidency. NY is one of the few states in this country that would put her in any kind of office.
 
If Hillary were to run today for president
she would be elected most women voting would
be those under 40 and they love a victim....
Make no mistake she could be and probably
will be elected pres. in time.
 
I think that Hillary will divorce Bill in a few years. He's been the hobo on the gravy train all along. Look for a Rodham/Cuomo ticket in the '04 or '08 elections. That is, if we still have elections.
 
<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by TheBluesMan:

The price of freedom is eternal vigilance. We must guard and defend this rare and precious gift that we have received from our Founding Fathers. Our war Veteran's know what this means, they have each helped to preserve this freedom, and pass it down to another generation to fiercely guard.

I hope that we can be as brave as the men and women who have fought, and died, to preserve this freedom. I hope that we are up to the task. For our children's sake. I hope.[/quote]

Excellent and well said Bluesman. Did you write that or is that a quote? The only thing I have trouble agreeing with you on, and I am a pessimist, is can we be as brave as need be? As individuals, perhaps. But as a nation? I doubt it. There are just too many people looking for handouts and percieved security. I am shocked that the popular vote was as close as it is. I knew Gore would carry our left coasts, and that he would carry states with large urban areas, but I was quite shocked to see that Bush's margin in the states he won was so thin. That means there are a lot of people out there who swallow the new socialist claptrap hook line and sinker. We are truly a nation divided, and I fear the rift is so great, so deep, so fundamental, we will never bridge it.

The young generations (that's me) are the future's hope, but I don't think we got what it takes. I'm not military, but when I hear about sensitivity training in the military, "stress cards" and different standards for different sexes, it makes me want to puke. We have gone soft. Very soft, and I'm not so sure the damage can be repaired in time. And at least in my state, people my age who think like me are few and far in between (The greatest concentration is found at the range usually).

Sorry to rain on your parade. Hope is not lost, but it's wearing thin.
 
That being said, I would like to second the idea of only taxpayers voting. You should have to earn your franchise.

And once we abolish the IRS, I'll go with Heilein's idea: you have to serve to earn your franchise.

We'll get to that right after we teach the world to sing in perfect harmony, aging is outlawed, Clinton admits he's a liar, and the clouds are made of fulffy pink cotton candy.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top