Marc and Sean,
The Contract with America also had lots of supporters in the GOP. They signed on, they claimed the moral high ground, they took credit for saving America, and they never actually accomplished the major provisions of the contract. They never intended to make significant changes. It was all just a ploy to get control of congress and it worked.
If members of congress are signing on because they feel pressure from their constituents then great. That does not mean they are telling the truth to their constituents. I support the Fair Tax but believe that it will only be passed when the pressure from constituent results wrestling control of government from the hands of Republicans and Democrats.
The only way my attitude defeats the purpose of the movement would be if the purpose of the movement was to help Republicans. If that is your purpose then I guess you fall into the second category.
Nancy, thank you for not taking offense. People have called me foolish for years as I have spent time and money working to advance the Libertarian Party. While we may choose different tactics to achieve our goals, at least we can recognize the sincerity of those goals. If you truly believe the cause is attainable through the existing two political parties, then by all means carry on and fight the good fight. If you succeed, I will be among the first to congratulate you.
Maybe I should rephrase or clarify: I think it may be possible with the two existing primary parties, but I leave room for flexibility. I think it may be very possible for a new to party to take shape.
The RNC platform more closely matched my beliefs and understanding, however, most Republican leaders are do nothing, go alongs that play the same destructive game that most do in the beltway. Most politicians are dancing to music of the dance band on the Titanic and ignoring the iceberg that's dead ahead. They choose their ignorance, or have a very scary agenda.
Referring to the third paragraph about helping Republicans: I don't care which party supports the Fair Tax, so long as they get passed. If were Republicans were truly savvy about bolstering their favorability ratings, they'd be all over this; but then so would Democrats, Libertarians, etc.
Any way you look at it, politicians want to politicize the issue. I will not foster partisanship about the Fair Tax plan, it's simply a non partisan issue.
Yesterday, we had a Fair Tax float in a Mem. Day in Springfield, OH. The majority of us were walking the crowd passing out Fair Tax literature. Toward the end of the parade, some guy in the crowd said something about cleaning up the elephant poop. My response: oh, the Fair Tax is a non partisan issue, sir, and I kept on walking. Besides, I'm an equal opportunity critic, without regard to party.
By the way, the float was wonderful! Thanx, Barb and Jack Wilson, for your tireless committment and work! And thanx, to all of the rest of us that helped with the work to make this a success. Next time, I'm going carry a shoulder bag or something so I don't run out of literature!!
Checked out Gov. Mark Sanford. He's the guy that turnt down some of the $. Rubio's gotta "100 good ideas," but I couldn't get to a search on that and another site he had I found no fairtax. Don't know much more than that about these 2guys.
I don't get this big love fest I see w/ Ron Paul so I really appreciate the discourse. I've been on his site. It's okay, but like the tea folks I see a lot of complaining and no solution.
Thanks David, I went back and read their platform for a 3rd time. I was dismissing most as rhetoric. I didn't see the part where they'd get rid of the UN, DoE, etc. But I guess 3's a charm. They had it. Just not list form. So mostly what they lack is FairTax. That's where i fell out w/ them last election. (Got stuck w/ Bugs 'cause I don't look like Mae West and #2 son can't figure out how to take it off.)
MSNBC is that spooty thing that came on the computer when I used to work @ IRS building of death downtown Atlanta. I hated internet because of them. Clinton News Net-not since they was givin' away our strategies and fellas on telly in 1st Gulf War. So I can't tell y'all what a joy it is to hear the other view w/out all the insipid "as well's, duh's, and ah's.
Miss Nancy, Hope your boy & folks knows how much we appreciate their service. Tell him, welcome home. I get the same around this Holiday. Was disappointed not to see more shows of the old guys. Wanted to see that Battleship Wisconsin again. Other than the states responsible for charity, you sound Libertarian.
Saw a pie chart of political parties on wikipedia: 42million Independent, 55m R's, 72m D's. At a glance the chart is almost 1/3. Wonder if 30m folks are mad about taxes and how many D.'s are registered in name only. Here in Ga a few years ago, about 300,000 of my fellow GA's registered Dem & voted the worst Dems out 1st in the primaries, then switched to Republocrat later. Lost count on the acorn vote fraud.
What was that, 2002, Mr. Girty? Was trying to remember. Truce-breakers. The only Republocrat I trust to pass it is Huckabee. Well now I'm being unfair to King & Linder. Both are passionate
Crud. Thought the co-sponsor list had topped 60 total. Where is this biggie list of 134?
Thanks Mr. Bohemier! knew there had to be 1spelling word for our gov. P.P.P.
What a great discussion. All of you have expressed interesting ideas and stimulating comments.
I would like to throw out the argument that many of the problems with the politicians in government and Washington is because we have allowed them to become the selfish people that they are. We allowed the temptation to grow and many have achieved their pinnacle of power and prestige.
I see in your comments that all are fed up with it and all would like to see change. The premise of the solution is to develop a new party.
I grew up in the Republican Party and my reaction is that I have to work harder in my party to develop candidates the voters can have faith in. I also read here that other parties feel the same so I can say we as Republicans,Democrats, Libertarians or constitutionalists can work together to force candidates to be better by raising the bar and setting standards that we demand be met.
I have blogged elsewhere and pointed out that in any election there will be independents, Libertarians, conservatives and moderates voting either Democrat or Republican and they will affect the candidate that is in the final election much like the program suggested by the revoting of the top two by one of the groups.
I think Glen Becks's program of standards are an effort to improve all politicians. Hannity had a program last night about 6 programs for the Republican party. Right now there is not a hot candidate for the Republicans, the Democrats have an electable candidate but the tide will turn as the bills come in. Limbaugh is a conservative, he does not lead the Republican Party and the comments of the press about the Republicans being weak and devided is pushed to help destroy us. I have studied the election results and we did pretty good under the circumstances. Don't get sucked in by the politcal activism of the main street press. The next election will suprise you.
My great grandfather was involved in the grass roots movement that formed the Republican party and it had 2 purposes, the main one being to end slavery. My Father was active in the Republican volutnteer group and he took me to my first campaign assignment in the late 30's when Dewey ran against Roosevelt. I remember him being heartbroken when a Republican was found to be doing something wrong and embarrassed the party. I had friends who experienced the same thing in the Democrat Party. I ran as a Republican and was elected to public office and worked with several others in their campaigns. I have feelings about many of the solutions you mention but feel we must work together to declare what we want from all parties and politicians.
The constitution gave us the power to do something. We have the congress to write laws, the Supreme court to interpret the compatibility of the laws with our constitution and the President has the power to veto laws he does not feel are good for us. However, the constitution gave the public the ability to be closer to and influence the House of Representatives but also gave us the power to influence our local reps in our state governments and through it to guide the state government with clarification and adaptation of our constitution. The states have the right to ask for a constitutional convention and this gives you and I great power to affirm our constitution and guide the interpretation of it.
I have given comments on this subject at this site.
I will continue to try to influence my party which is Republican. I apologize for our weakness and allowing our candidates to act like greedy politicians and I am trying to do something about it. You can work in your own party to do the same. We can be good friends and good neighbors and enjoy our conversations even though our main philosophy might differ we all have a lot in common and we all want honest representation.
One way to fight back is to abandon the corrupt organization that has turned it's back on you. You can always rejoin later, but as a demonstration of your frustration hit them where it hurts. The evidence cited above proves that more and more citizens are turning away from the two(one) party rule. Until our leaders are ready to confront the changes that need to be made you are just being used.
Someone said earlier that they trust Huckabee to do the right thing. That may well be true. There are some good people within two(one) party structure. It is the institutions that are corrupt. The corruption is pervasive and every time it becomes a hot issue the solutions are in the form of some kind of "campaign finance reform" that only serves to further entrench the corruption.
Yeah, I said that about huckabee, Mr. Girty. I trust him to pass FairTax. And at the same time it irks me that he's still a Republocrat, soliciting $ for same. I wish he and all the likeminded crats would just join up w/ Libertarians. That goomer they have as head has not impressed me yet. What's it been 6mos?
So is it the $ that keeps them in line? That don't sit well w/ me.
I would think that we are better off staying non-partison. Trying to get the majority of congress is tough enough with out drawing battle lines between parties. We need to get both sides to favor this bill. I am not sure how that would play out. America has long backed those 2 parties and not many will change for any reason.
That all sounds wonderful and high minded Randy, but I just don't see it working. Your plan is to radically alter the status quo by getting all the people who created the status quo and who benefit from the status quo to just agree to destroy the system that has made them rich and powerful. Why would both sides favor this bill? Some individuals on both sides might favor this bill, and some might pretend to support this bill, but there is too much at stake for them to all rally around this, just because it is the right thing to do.
Yes, but it will take many years to get the support needed to to have a third party so great in number that they will have control of enough votes. That third party could soon be corrupted by lobbyists in the long run and we have the same mess. Many bills have passed with enough bi-partisanship in the past and we MUST remain NON-PARTISAN. Remember our goal is to get support enough to get the bill passed.
It is not so much the parties we are fighting, it is the lobbyists and their power!
If we could get a third party could overcome the power and money flowing from the lobbyist, then we could do it without a third party possibly faster!