Please, explain what it means to be republican

[ChocolateCitySkin]

On a fundamental level I agree with "classic" republican fiscal policies -- However, it seems that those don't really exist within the party anymore. The republican party seems more of a religious movement and making the most out of their stances on things such as gay marriage and abortion. Meanwhile expanding the governments roll and dolling out corporate bailouts left and right...

The democrats appear far more conservative these days than the republicans -- hence my shift towards the democratic party ages ago. I know that the ron paul supporters out there want the republican party to return to those core values but from my perspective the party seems to intertwined with the church these days that this completely impractical.

I'm just trying to figure the values that the republican party offers that make a person apt to align themselves with...

[iheartskins]

1. Love freedom; know you're free

2. Hate the French

3. Be pumped about Jesus

[Koolblue13]

CCS, I agree that religion has influenced the party, but I think Oil has been worse.

[BigMike619]

1. Love freedom; know you're free

2. Hate the French

3. Be pumped about Jesus

Did you get the handbook too? :laugh:

[Dictator]

On a fundamental level I agree with "classic" republican fiscal policies -- However, it seems that those don't really exist within the party anymore. The republican party seems more of a religious movement and making the most out of their stances on things such as gay marriage and abortion. Meanwhile expanding the governments roll and dolling out corporate bailouts left and right...

The democrats appear far more conservative these days than the republicans -- hence my shift towards the democratic party ages ago. I know that the ron paul supporters out there want the republican party to return to those core values but from my perspective the party seems to intertwined with the church these days that this completely impractical.

I'm just trying to figure the values that the republican party offers that make a person apt to align themselves with...

I'm a registered republican. I don't agree with the direction they've moved in. They claim they want to be small government, but every move they makes seems to be to the contrary. They are no longer fiscally responsable either.

Ron paul really is a true republican. But because he isn't a "yes" man, his own party blackballed him in the election.

[Drakkhim]

I consider myself more of a Dem than a Republican but I'm not registered with either party. Watching the news has normally been boring to me but I'm forcing myself to stay up with current events more and more. I watched a few Ron Paul interviews on TV 6-8 weeks ago and his views are really rock solid.

[SkinsHokieFan]

Because its the team I cheer for!

Serious answer: The party has lost its way and a lot of people need to go (I just won't talk about it on a public messageboard, similar to how I won't bad mouth the Skins on www.cowboyszone.com)

Tom Davis has had some very pointed and interested quotes about "The Republican Brand" the past few years, google it and you'll get your answer

[iheartskins]

Did you get the handbook too? :laugh:

Actually I forgot this addendum:

3. Be pumped about Jesus, but not Jésus

[Koolblue13]

This is very long, but a well written blog from a friend of mine. I posted a bit of it a while ago in a thread just like this. It's about being a conservative moreso than a Republican, because I put more water into having principles instead of having a party line.

It seems these days of Republicrats and Demicans where liberals transform themselves into the "early 20th Century Progressives" (i.e., fascists, eugenicists and other sympathizers of tyranny) and conservatives hedge their identity as "compassionate" (as if we were not prior to this), we need to once again define with clarity just what a conservative is.

A conservative American values three basic human rights: Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness. Each of these rights, as communicated within the Declaration of Independence, also delineate the three principles upon which conservatism rises and falls -- indeed, upon which America rises and falls. Without all three principles bearing an equal amount of weight, by analogy, the stool of conservatism will collapse. Moreover, each human right becomes the basis upon which the next is establish.

One cannot have Liberty without Life, nor can one Pursue Happiness without Liberty. Finally, the circle is closed when we observe that true Happiness is established in the Good, that is, the objective Good, which always and at once communicates both Love and Life. Thus when we Pursue Happiness we promote a Life-giving Love and a Love which bears Life. To understand this, one needs to only go to the ideas of Teddy Roosevelt, who believed firmly that the strength of a nation was determined by large, robust families and a strong national defense. In this, we would secure our future stability and welfare and deter our nations enemies from war or invasion.

Life: The Conservative Social Policy

A conservative is first and foremost Pro-Life. This means that in all matters of civic and private behavior, we defer to the sanctity, protection, dignity and noble status of each human being, whether man or woman, white or black, young or old, born or unborn. We hold human life in such high regard because we recognize that it is not the government nor the individual who has the power to give life or take it, but rather, that power is reserved to our Creator. He alone has the authority over life and death.

A conservative is secondly, Pro-Family. The smallest economic and social unit is the family, that is, a mother and a father and their natural, adopted or entrusted children. We are not unrecognizeable and indistinguishable individuals devoid of any attachment from one other. Rather a conservative believes that manhood and womanhood are both distinguishable from each other and complimentary. In other words, we are human persons possessing a nature and a gender and not simply nature-less, gender-less individuals.

Moreover, we believe a child is most properly socialized and trained to be exemplary citizens by their own parents and not by the State. Therefore, every public policy should be developed so as to support and encourage growing, strong and vibrant two-parent homes. More than that, every effort must be made to "promote the common good" especially for the sake of children raised in single-parent homes, the orphans, the abused and the neglected.

Third, a conservative is Pro-Industry. We believe in the value of work and personal industry. Men and women should benefit from the efforts of their labors and be rewarded in kind. The government ought not to intervene and discourage sound industry. Nor should it burden families with usurious taxation and regulation of industry so as to exclude men and women from various fields based upon lack of education, licensures and money. Each human being is free to exercise his will and talents to the benefit of his family, his community and his nation. Moreover, he is free to dream, to explore and to better the lives of himself, his family, and his nation.

Fourth, a conservative is Pro-Creative. Government should not establish laws and restraints upon the citizenry and the industry in which they engage so as to deter the creation, nurture and development of children. Parents should not be punished by the government for having children, for educating them, providing them a reasonable welfare, and rendering inheritances to them.

This further extends into the intellectual realm. A conservative believes a nation grows and is strengthened by new ideas -- the "children" of great minds. These ideas must not be stymied by over-regulation and paternalistic government controls. The success of any given idea or invention ought to be judged by its own merits and the inward desire for its success by its creator, not by legislative influence or control.

From these basic principles flow the cultural and social policy of conservatism -- the first leg of the stool. We believe that the Constitutional injunction to "promote the common good" is an indirect injunction meaning that the government ought not to usurp the authority and rule of families, communities, and the individual States, but rather, it should move out of the way and encourage and promote a form of "subsidiarity" which affirms that the responsibility for the rearing of children resides first in the family and then, in matters which are too great in scope for the family, the local and State authorities.

By no means is the Federal government to consider itself directly responsible for the birth, nurture and development of each child. Any government which seeks to act in any manner which is anti-Life, anti-Family, anti-Industry and anti-Creative is essentially acting against itself in self-deprecatory and self-destructive ways. Moreover, it is acting in such a way that is repugnant to the founding of our nation and the Constitution which each public servant has sworn to defend. The result of such behavior is the dismembering of society and the dissolution of human liberty and the Republic itself.

Liberty: The Conservative Fiscal Policy

The Book of Common Prayer, in its Ash Wednesday Penitential Office as well as in its Eucharistic Office, states, "it is [God’s] property to always have mercy."

Inasmuch as mercy is God’s property, so also is it man’s property to always be free. Liberty, the second leg of the Conservative stool, is fundamental to our nature as human persons. Each person possesses Liberty -- whether he be a slave or a free man in his own nation. For inasmuch as one can exercise one’s will toward a single free thought, one is free indeed. Though one is made to bow before a Tyrant, imprisoned, tortured or sentenced to die, he remains ever and always a free man. For thus we were all created by Almighty God. No man nor earthly authority can remove this indelible mark of our humanity and our creation from us. For indeed we bear the image of He who is absolute Liberty.

When one discusses what it means to be a Conservative, not only must one accept the fundamental Right to Life, but one must also accept and defend the Right to Liberty. This Liberty is not to be misconstrued as license or licentiousness. For Liberty can only exist, both personally and within a given social context or nation, so long as three principles of Life are established; that is, Personal Property, Personal Responsibility and Personal Virtue. Without all three of these principles of Life -- or any of them individually or two excluding another -- one can never be free as one ought to be free.

Personal Property, as enumerated in the Bill of Rights includes:

1. One’s own religion -- both in belief and in private, and/or public practice or lack thereof;

2. One’s own speech, thoughts, words, and ideas -- whether they be common or uncommon, conventional or unconventional;

3. One’s own free associations with other individuals, friends, colleagues or groups;

4. The public square -- the media and other public places;

5. One’s own weapons of defense and, if without recourse, offense;

6. One’s home and land;

7. "Persons, houses, papers, and effects;"

8. One’s good name and reputation;

9. One’s own monies, assets, and capital;

10. One’s own human dignity;

11. One’s own rights not enumerated in the Constitution.

A Conservative believes that in order for men to be free, they must have all of these elements of Personal Property in their own possession, to do with them as he or she sees fit so to dispose of them.

Personal Responsibility must always serve the use of one’s Personal Property. This means that each one is responsible for his own lot in life. It means that it is immoral and despicable to confiscate the property of others and give it to those who are irresponsible or lacking in virtue.

In our present struggle, both the irresponsible and those lacking in virtue inhabit the hallowed halls of our legislatures and other branches of government. For when these men, full of self-righteous "good intentions" come around each election season to rummage through the pockets of the poor, to rape and pillage the property of the rich and to disallow, with their re-distributionist practices, those who are neither rich nor poor, to succeed, or otherwise acquire wealth and assets, they commit a crime against humanity -- indeed a crime against God Himself, and will stand to account for their activities which have denied Liberty to a nation.

Government ought not to be involved in the personal affairs of property -- whether its aquisition or sale, its keeping or maintenance, or in the legalized confiscation of property -- legal theft -- in order to promote an injust form of equality; that is, an equality of outcome rather than an equality of opportunity.

Personal Virtue dictates that justice and injustice exist and that a measure of moral judgment and courage must fill the people so as not to allow tyrannical governments to steal from one fellow citizen of his hard-earned labors and give it to another who has not so earned it. Personal Virtue also safeguards from the evil use of Personal Property and encourages Personal Responsibility in its handling. Men and women of sound moral character, with a thankful heart to God, will of necessity share of their goods with those in need, without the imprecatory arm of a Tyrant whose desire is only to spread misery evenly among his people. It is out of a sense of bounden duty that men act toward noble ends and live virtuous lives of charity, giving and all other such activities that would secure the common good.

The government is not meant to secure the common good, but only to "promote the common good." The security of this good can only spring from grateful hearts and free wills that desire to act in real and tangible ways to give a hand up out of misery and a finger pointing the way to inward change, education and success.

Ultimately, he who secures the common good, is he who is, at first, in a state of deriliction and misery, and, like the Prodigal Son, "comes to his senses" and rises to face the consequences of his actions previously as well as the opportunity afforded him in a free society.

This is what a Conservative believes. We believe that Life and Liberty are indivisibly linked -- as well with the Pursuit of Happiness. These cannot be divided from one another, nor can they be mixed. Each is a distinct and real aspect of Conservatism.

Inasmuch as the Right to Life is concisely the social policy of a Conservative, so also is the Right to Liberty the definition of the fiscal policy of a Conservative. In essence, our fiscal policy desires that a nation be filled with strong persons and families and a small and manageable government.

This, by application, means that the government fears the will of the people. Whereas the Progressive desire is that human persons and families fear the government. As we have seen, this sort of rule by fear is the self-same rule by which a Tyrant rules.

Do you fear the government today? You ought not.

The Pursuit of Happiness: The Conservative Defense Policy

A Conservative believes in the Right to the "Pursuit of Happiness". By definition and in contrast to Progressive thinking, a "pursuit" is not equivalent to the apprehension of what one pursues. Herein lies the distinction between the two major philosophies or our time.

A Progressive yearns for Tyranny. They desire above all else the rule of the Tyrant -- an all-pervasive totalitarian state. Some Progressives may possess the principles of Personal Responsibility and/or Personal Virtue, thus protecting them and those they lead from the rule of an absolute Tyrant, but they more often than not despise the possession of Personal Property. They will use such terms as "public good," "global community," "eminent domain" or some other form of collectivism that denies the possession of private property.

Like their "Founding Fathers", such as Woodrow Wilson and Franklin Delano Roosevelt, they believe the United States Constitution to be an incomplete document and no more than a rubber nose to be formed and shaped according to personal or corporate opinion.

President Roosevelt spoke these words:

"In our day these economic truths have become accepted as self-evident. We have accepted, so to speak, a second Bill of Rights under which a new basis of security and prosperity can be established for all—regardless of station, race, or creed.

"Among these are:

"The right to a useful and remunerative job in the industries or shops or farms or mines of the nation;

"The right to earn enough to provide adequate food and clothing and recreation;

"The right of every farmer to raise and sell his products at a return which will give him and his family a decent living;

"The right of every businessman, large and small, to trade in an atmosphere of freedom from unfair competition and domination by monopolies at home or abroad;

"The right of every family to a decent home;

"The right to adequate medical care and the opportunity to achieve and enjoy good health;

"The right to adequate protection from the economic fears of old age, sickness, accident, and unemployment;

"The right to a good education.

All of these rights spell security."

(Excerpt from President Roosevelt’s January 11, 1944 message to the Congress of the United States on the State of the Union.)

In contrast to President Roosevelts words, a Conservative believes that each of the enumerated rights above, according to the Constitution, is "reserved for the people." A Conservative believes it is an act of irresponsibility to surrender one’s own liberty to pursue the happiness of, say, a good education, to the government. Nor do we believe the human person ought to suurrender these rights to the purview of the government. This amounts to an abdication of Personal Responsibility and a flight from the development of Personal Virtue. For how else do we remain free, unless we first take responsibility for our own freedoms and live as Reason and our faith dictates in a virtuous and harmonious manner with our neighbor?

According to the thinking espoused by Progressives, it is far better for the State to raise, feed, clothe, house and care for children. Moreover, they propose, it ought to be that we beg our government for our rights rather than exercise them as free men and women ourselves. Senator Clinton has even made remarks to the effect that there will come a day when there is no such thing as "somebody else’s child". By virtue of simple logic, this means also that there is no such thing as my child, or your child. Thus we all become children of the Tyrant -- the State.

This destroys the Right to the Pursuit of Happiness and replaces it with an inferior government-ordained right to the guarantee of happiness. This is a guarantee that has no basis in reality for its fulfillment. Simply consider at which time in human history in any part of the world has a human government been able to provide for the happiness of its people. Of all things, human governments -- especially those envisioned by the Progressives -- have only acheived the highest levels of human misery and corruption.

The Progressive ideal as highlighted in President Roosevelt’s speech above, is "security." Safety and security are the buzzwords of Tyrants. My drill sergeant once told us, "Safety is an illusion that is best to be forgotten." We are neither safe nor secure under the watch care of any entity of the State. We can only be safe and secure by first promoting Life on all fronts -- specifically one’s own family life -- and then exercising Personal Virtue and Personal Responsibility to protect and defend our Personal Property -- and our family.

When once asked, "How are you today?", my first boss once said, "I’m holding my own; nobody else will." This is true. Nobody else can hold your own as well as you can. It is a moral imperative that we must look out for our own -- family, home, town, state, and nation. The moment that we surrender our liberty to the State in order to do what only we ought to do, we begin to become slaves of the State.

A Conservative eschews slavery on every level of human society. President Roosevelt’s words above sound enticing, but so also did the words of the Serpent in the Garden of Eden. Yielding to both leads to slavery and misery. For when we surrender control of housing, food, education, health care, etc. to the State, we surrender our freedom to choose those things for ourselves. And without personal investment in the moral (that is, virtuous) and responsible use of property, corruption springs forth in a society like a virus.

The Pursuit of Happiness is the defense policy, and the third leg of the Conservative stool, of Conservatism. Our best defense comes when we are all free to pursue, and defend the pursuit of, our own happiness. Therefore, each family defends its home, each town defends its jurisdiction, each state regulates militias (national guardsmen) and the nation establishes a standing army, navy, air force and other armed services. It enforces border security and port security so that no malevolent force may enter the nation to destroy our ability to pursue our own Happiness.

Moreover, when the nation’s armed services are strong and the borders are secure and manageable, allowing only persons who wish to join us to enter, we provide an environment for the birth, nurture and development of children. Thus we move full-circle in Conservative thought: Large, strong, vibrant families, who promote and live a culture of Life, inculcating the principles of Personal Virtue, Responsibility and Property, and then sending out mature, responsible men and women who pursue their own Happiness, freely, without the interference of the Tyrant, and defend those liberties from all enemies, "both foreign and domestic."

This is what a Conservative is. I am a Conservative. If someone calls themselves by this word, but fails on any of these three points, he is neither Conservative, nor a free man. For he enslaves himself to a culture of death, bondage and/or the equal spread of misery to all.

Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness are indivisible and are not ordained by man. They are ordained and endowed directly to each human person by God Himself. No government or individual, no matter how strong or fearful they may be, has the authority in heaven or in earth to remove these Rights from any human being on planet earth. Moreover, we have such responsibility, according to our nature as God’s image, to withstand -- by force of Reason and with courage and moral judgment -- any human government or individual who would attempt to remove these Rights from the people.

[BigMike619]

Actually I forgot this addendum:

3. Be pumped about Jesus, but not Jésus

NIIIIIIIICE!!

Hey Zues!!

[alexey]

I think the "Republican Philosophy" started off as a reasonable and much needed counterbalance to hippies who took things way too far.

With time it developed a number of internal inconsistencies. This happened because it was used as a political tool instead of being refined and applied as a philosophy.

As expected things got bad as people who used this this mutated dishonest caricature of a once great philosophy to get elected actually had their chance to wield power.

[ChocolateCitySkin]

Actually I forgot this addendum:

3. Be pumped about Jesus, but not Jésus

omg that had me rolling on the floor laughing.

[joeknows]

republicans claim one thing and live by another

republicans have become inheretly untruthful.....

if they say they wont do something...... expect a year later for them to do and blame the dems as to why...

f**K the republicans!!

[BigMike619]

republicans claim one thing and live by another

republicans have become inheretly untruthful.....

if they say they wont do something...... expect a year later for them to do and blame the dems as to why...

f**K the republicans!!

Way to randomly hate when the man was asking a serious question. Not even one thread without the random hating huh. :doh:

[Dictator]

Way to randomly hate when the man was asking a serious question. Not even one thread without the random hating huh. :doh:

you should thank him. Now you know that you can just skip his posts because they probably don't contain anything worth reading in the first place.

[alexey]

Koolblue13,

That blog did a great job describing American Values. I am a little confused, however, as to why it referred to them as "Conservative".

Also, the part about "Progresives" really takes away from the overall quality of the essay. Hopefully some day your friend will have the respect to actaully examine other people's views.

[Midnight Judges]

You're not going to get much of an answer. 99% of the Republicans on here claim to be independents.

Here's my honest take:

Pro Iraq war

limitless tax cuts

limitless military funding

make abortion illegal

No gay marriage

Pro-lappel pins

anti-journalism

anti-UN

anti-social security

pro-gun

pro-evangelical

[BigMike619]

so in order to be a member of a politcal party that has been around for a very long time you have to wear a flag pin and be for the Iraq war.

Wow.

[Koolblue13]

Koolblue13,

That blog did a great job describing American Values. I am a little confused, however, as to why it referred to them as "Conservative".

Also, the part about "Progressives" really takes away from the overall quality of the essay. Hopefully some day your friend will have the respect to actually examine other people's views.

Because they are "conservative" views. What was once the basis of the Republican values, has been sold out to big business(mostly oil) and more control of the population. At least in my opinion. I understand where he is coming from with the "progressive" talk. I believe he is referring to the Noe-Cons as well as the Democrates, just those who are focused on increasing the role of Federal government in all of our daily, personal lives.

Thanks, he is a great writer. We were pretty good friends from kindergarden to high school, but lost touch when he joined the Amry and I joined the Navy. He came out extremely religious(JW I think) and I came out drunk.

[Kilmer17]

You're not going to get much of an answer. 99% of the Republicans on here claim to be independents.

Here's my honest take:

Pro Iraq war- Yep.

limitless tax cuts- Im definitely a supply side guy.

limitless military funding- interesting, because I hear mostly Liberals complaining that our troops need more "armor etc". I think our military is underfunded.

make abortion illegal- Nope, in fact I think Dems are too limiting as well. Make it all legal all the time.

No gay marriage- I think we need to do more to recognize the union of any people that want to be considered a family. I have issues with granting any people the same status as a single man and a single woman who wish t unite.

Pro-lappel pins- blah.

anti-journalism- Im for acknowldging the biases of journalists. On any side. I dont believe there are any unbiased sources any more.

anti-UN- Nope. Keep your friends close and your enemies closer.

anti-social security- Not really a political stance for me. But Id like for everyone to at least acknowldege that at some point, a generation is going to get screwed. It's a ponzi scheme that will eventually crumble.

pro-gun- Like most of the Bill of Rights, they are not limitless. I think I have the right to bear arms. But I dont think I have the right to my own arsenal of whatever I can get my hands on.

pro-evangelical- Used as a battering ram tool by the left to marginalize right thinking people.

[Midnight Judges]

so in order to be a member of a politcal party that has been around for a very long time you have to wear a flag pin and be for the Iraq war.

Wow.

The lapel thing was kind of a joke. But seeing as how 99.5% of the Republicans in congress voted for the Iraq war, and that is the most hotly debated issue of the last 5 years, I don't see why you think including it is so far fetched.

[BigMike619]

The lapel thing was kind of a joke. But seeing as how 99.5% of the Republicans in congress voted for the Iraq war, and that is the most hotly debated issue of the last 5 years, I don't see why you think including it is so far fetched.

Im just shocked that you are limiting that to Republicans.

[headexplode]

A republican is someone who believes in a republican form of government, where power is divided and limited, thereby offering the best protection against tyranny. If you're asking what it means to be a Republican, well, I think iheart summed it up pretty well.

[Burgold]

I think this is the most accurate symbol for the modern Republican Party. Happily, they stole him. He used to be a Dem. Today, he is the mastermind and architecht of the Republican economic philosophy.

As you can see, they already are using him in McCain campaign pins.

[Special K]

Being an ignorant redneck...at least that's what I've been told. :laugh:

Oh yeah, I'm totally against Hey-Zeus too.

*In a all seriousness though, I consider myself a CONSERVATIVE rather than a Republican. Republicans just so happen to carry more conservative views than the democrats...although I'm not too happy with the too many of the Republicans these days though.