-- GOP breakfast honors homosexuals
-- The View from the Colonel's Saddle
-- GOP base: Time to lock and load
Some reasons the Republicans lost were the party kissing the boots of diversity, if people consider themselves a nationality other than American then we don’t want them voting, if they are not tourists or legal workers, we don’t want or need them in our country. If you come to live here speak English.
Then there is this in the news: “Mel Martinez has agreed to become the next general chairman of the Republican National Committee, GOP officials said.” Why are Republican "Leaders" trying to hide up their own butts. Martinez is a damn liberal and will do nothing to advance Conservative Causes. He supports giving amnesty to illegals, he supports the Supercorridor, and he is perceived as supporting giving half the US to Mexico.
|Home Back Top|
| GOP base: Time to lock and load
June 2, 2007 By Patrick J. Buchanan © 2007
"I hold it that a little rebellion now and then is a good thing, and as necessary in the political world as storms in the physical." So said Jefferson. It would appear to be time again for a little rebellion in the Grand Old Party – this time against George II.
For President Bush has attacked his own loyalists for a lack of patriotism. "If you don't want to do what's right for America," he said of opponents of the Bush-Kennedy immigration bill, "if you want to scare the American people, what you say is the bill's an amnesty bill. That's empty political rhetoric, trying to frighten our citizens."
But if the 12 million to 20 million illegal aliens are instantly legalized, what other term is there to describe that than amnesty?
Not only are opponents not doing "what's right for America," their courage is in question: "People in Congress need the courage to go back to their districts and explain exactly what this bill is all about. The fundamental question is, will elected officials have the courage necessary to put a comprehensive immigration plan in place?"
Where, one wonders, was "Bush's Brain," Karl Rove?
For, worse than a crime, this attack on his base was a blunder. The people Bush is savaging – columnists, commentators, talk-show hosts, congressmen fighting his bill – have been the frontline troops in his fight to sustain funding for the war.
And if there were any doubt whom Bush had in mind, his surrogate, Linda Chavez, cleared it up:
"Some people just don't like Mexicans – or anyone else from south of the border. They think Latinos are freeloaders and welfare cheats who are too lazy to learn English. They think Latinos have too many babies and that Latino kids will dumb down our schools. They think Latinos are dirty, diseased, indolent and more prone to criminal behavior. They think Latinos are just too different from us ever to become real Americans.
"Unfortunately, among this group is a fair number of Republican members of Congress, almost all influential conservative talk radio hosts, some cable news anchors – most prominently, Lou Dobbs – and a handful of public policy 'experts' at organizations such as the Center for Immigration Studies, the Federation for American Immigration Reform, NumbersUSA, in addition to fringe groups like the Minuteman Project."
Reagan speechwriter Peggy Noonan cites other attacks by Bush surrogates on the conservative base: "Sen. Lindsey Graham has said, 'We're gonna tell the bigots to shut up.' ... Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff suggested opponents would prefer illegal immigrants be killed; Commerce Secretary Carlos Gutierrez said those who oppose the bill want 'mass deportation.' Former Bush speechwriter Michael Gerson said those who oppose the bill are 'anti-immigrant' and suggested they suffer from 'rage' and 'national chauvinism.'
"Why would they speak so insultingly, with such hostility, of opponents who are concerned citizens? And often, though not exclusively, concerned conservatives?" asks Noonan.
Because, Peggy, down deep where they live, they don't like the right, never did and have always sought to be seen by the Big Media as the progressive children of a dysfunctional and retarded family.
Bush's attack on the motives and character of conservatives tell us it is Goldwater-Rockefeller time again – time to split the blanket. Conservatives need to declare their independence of Bush and to repudiate Bushism as the philosophy of their movement and party.
While Bush's court appointments, setting aside the Harriet Miers mess, have been superb, while his tax cuts have been Reaganite, while his stand on traditional values is courageous, beyond is a vast wasteland as far as the eye can see.
His free-trade zealotry has led to five straight record trade deficits. While America's economy is now growing at under 1 percent, China's is booming at 10 percent. His refusal to defend and secure the borders is well-nigh impeachable. His compromises with Teddy Kennedy on No Child Left Behind have doubled the size of the Department of Education without any appreciable gain in test scores. His "Big Government Conservatism" marks him as his father's son, not Reagan's heir. In Ward Connerly's courageous battle against reverse discrimination, the Bushes have all been on the other side.
His bungled war of choice on Iraq has left us with 3,400 dead, 25,000 wounded, hundreds of billions deeper in debt and an Army on the point of breaking. Relations with Europe, Russia, and the Arab and Muslim world are worse than they were when he took office.
His clandestine drive to merge Mexico, America and Canada in a "Security and Prosperity Partnership of North America" – a North American Union modeled on the European Union – entails the loss of sovereignty and end of the republic as we know it.
The damage Bush has done to his party is beginning to rival that of Herbert Hoover. If the Clintons were doing this, would conservatives be mute? Time to lock and load.
Pat Buchanan was twice a candidate for the Republican presidential nomination and the Reform Party’s candidate in 2000.
He is also a founder and editor of The American Conservative. Now a political analyst for MSNBC and a syndicated columnist, he served three presidents in the White House, was a founding panelist of three national TV shows, and is the author of seven books.
|Home Back Top|
The View from the Colonel's
Every Friday @ SierraTimes.com
Why Don't Republicans Fight? by Colonel Dan - 08.03.01
"You can observe a lot just by watchin" Yogi Berra
Have you ever wondered why Republicans don't put up much of a fight —for anything? Why do they let the Democrats run rampant and never appear to make any real progress in their battle for the small government they say they want and represent? The Democrats say and do anything, facing only blustery and hollow Republican protests while government grows larger and more intrusive every day.
Why won't the GOP, as a unified party, really go on an all out attack against the many instances of immoral, criminal and deceitful behavior on the part of Democrats? Why doesn't the GOP stand up and show America what these socialists are really all about? Why is the GOP now allowing the Democrats to set the agenda in Congress for an even greater expansion of government? Why isn't the GOP exercising its muscle and Bush using the bully pulpit to reduce the size and power of government and return us to the constitutional republic our founders intended?
In my long gone youth, I thought it might be because they had no gumption for the struggle—no real desire to lead or ability to mount an effective PR campaign to win the public over to their point of view.
Thoughts in my later years however lean decidedly toward stating the obvious and tend to burst the bubble of many diehard Republicans — the GOP, like the Democrats, clearly want more government, not less. Unfortunately, all too often in politics, it's the most obvious that needs the most observation. Paraphrasing Yogi, I'm simply observing the obvious just by watchin'.
The GOP says it stands for small, honest government, less taxation, less regulation and is a staunch supporter of the Constitution. Yet a look at the fruit they hand us at harvest time, tells a significantly different story.
Government has been expanding for years and grew even larger since the GOP took control of Congress in 1995. The Department of Education that they once said should be abolished was given the largest of all increases in the recent Bush budget.
The income tax they once said should be replaced with a flat tax or national sales tax remains very much alive. It was only out of fear of the adverse publicity they would incur from the death of a hunger striker that they even agreed to consider questions publicly about its legality and the ballyhooed Bush tax cut, spread over 11 years, is virtually meaningless — it will be dismantled long before the full effect can be realized.
The Republicans prosecuted a felonious president with all the observable ineptitude of a district attorney on the take. They had Clinton handed to them on a platter and couldn't or wouldn't see it through! The GOP continues to allow the 10th Amendment to be ignored, they turned their collective backs on the 4th when Elian was snatched by Clinton's INS. They tout support of the 2nd Amendment, and in all fairness, under Bush/Ashcroft, there have been a few recent points of encouragement on that issue. But overall, how many of these "common sense compromise" gun laws —infringements— have been added to the books in the last 40 years?
In the latest example, House Republicans recently backed down on their pledge to overturn scores of last minute regulations imposed by Clinton during his final days in office saying the balance of power has shifted dramatically since Bush took office and they now can't muster the votes. Because of one Jim Jeffords? Bullchips!
The harvested fruit just doesn't match the flowery promises and I'm a firm believer in the biblical advice to judge a tree by its fruit. Take note that the Bible doesn't advise to judge that tree by its blossoms. Blossoms, although pleasing to the eye for a short while, have no lasting substance—their superficial appearance has nothing you can sink your teeth into. It's the same with the Republican's rhetoric.
I don't believe any national political party can be that inept, leaderless and politically stupid over such an extended period of time by accident. It's clear to me that there is another reason behind this lack of fight in the GOP and the only conclusion I can draw is they obviously want the same thing as the Democrats—the centralized power of socialism. Based on facts, results, actions and performance, I don't see how any reasonable person can draw any other conclusion.
The difference between the GOP and the Democrats is that the GOP allows the Democrats to take point and be the target of blame for leading America down this trail while Republicans sit back and enjoy the fruit of the Democrat's labor— enhanced political power.
If my assertions about the GOP are accurate, then they are hypocrites following the more disingenuous course of instilling socialism. They don't have the courage to reveal/admit that what they really crave is more government, while crying for less. I have very little regard or patience for leaders that can't muster the necessary courage of their convictions to be honest with the people they lead. Those with only a "made for TV" set of ideals have but a shallow veneer of honor and such leaders are unworthy of followers.
Anyone that would rather have others take the heat while they sit back to enjoy the shade and eat the fruit deserve little if any respect from this old cavalryman or from anybody worthy of their spurs as I see it.
Just the view from my saddle…
|Home Back Top|
Breakfast Honors Homosexuals
'If we can forget color as a barrier, we can forget sexual orientation'
Editor's note: In collaboration with the hard-hitting Washington, D.C., newsweekly Human Events, WorldNetDaily brings you this special report every Monday. Readers can subscribe to Human Events through WND's online store.
By John Gizzi © 2001 Human Events
WASHINGTON -- National Republican Congressional Committee Chairman Tom Davis, Va., keynoted a Washington, D.C., breakfast the day before President Bush's inauguration that was designed to honor what its sponsors say were the more than 1 million homosexuals who voted for Bush. The breakfast, which drew a crowd of 400 to 500, was emceed by former GOP Sen. Alan Simpson of Wyoming.
It was sponsored by the just-formed Republican Unity Coalition, which, according to its spokesman, was founded to "promote the inclusion of gay and lesbian Republicans in Republican politics," and to bring together "Republicans -- both straight and gay -- to educate, advise and assist Republican leaders and lawmakers."
Among the Republicans lending their names to the Host Committee for the Unity Coalition breakfast were: New York Gov. George Pataki, New York City Mayor Rudy Giuliani, Sens. John Warner, Va., and Gordon Smith, Ore., presidential counselor Mary Matalin and nationally syndicated columnist James Glassman. The Host Committee also included such well-known conservatives as Grover Norquist of Americans for Tax Reform, California State GOP Chairman John McGraw and former Reagan speechwriter and California political strategist Ken Khachigian.
"I lent my name to the Host Committee and attended the breakfast because Brian Bennett [a gay California Republican and an organizer of the meeting of gay leaders with Bush] asked me," said McGraw, known as an outspokenly conservative party chieftain. "Brian is a close friend of mine and, as you know, friendship comes first with me."
Norquist said he signed on with the Unity Coalition and attended the breakfast "because it is a way to bring libertarians together. I'm certainly not for preferences or special treatment, and neither, I believe, are free-market gays. They just want to be left alone by government, as most conservatives do."
Davis said, "I don't believe we should pass laws that discriminate against gay Americans, but do I support laws that give preferential treatment to gays such as ENDA? Of course not!
"And that's what I told the breakfast -- that we have groups that agree with us on most things on our agenda, such as tax cuts, and disagree a little. High-tech people and Hispanics are in that category. I was out there to market us a little."
Davis added that he does not believe "Republicans should have an entrance examination for the party" and that "while there are Republicans with a checklist who would say no if you're not with them on every item, I don't find many in elective office."
Reached via phone at his home in Cody, Wyo., Simpson initially balked at giving an interview to Human Events. ("I don't know if I want to get into this with you -- Human Events can get pretty homophobic," he claimed.) But he then said he felt sympathy for gay Republicans "because they're always getting stereotyped, and I know how that feels. I'm always called a 'baby-killer' by folks on the right and it p----s me off. People who use the word 'baby-killer' must have learned a lot of evil at the breakfast table."
Simpson was referring to his own pro-abortion stand -- a position he brought up in his remarks at the breakfast.
"He assumed the largely gay audience was also all pro-choice," said a Washington, D.C., attorney who belongs to Gays for Life. "Well, I thought his comments on this subject were gross."
Would Simpson advise his friend George W. Bush to appoint homosexuals to federal offices?
"I would not have the slightest reluctance to do so," Simpson said. "If we can forget color as a barrier, we can forget sexual orientation as well."
But former GOP presidential hopeful and Reagan White House aide Gary Bauer was critical of the meeting, saying, "Either the Republican Party is the defender of family values, or it is at a breakfast such as this to sensitize its members to gay-related issues."
|Home Back Top|