Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Wingnut Editorial

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Editorials & Other Articles Donate to DU
 
Ms Chicklet Donating Member (141 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Mar-06-05 10:38 PM
Original message
Wingnut Editorial
From the Waterbury (Conn.) Republican-American. They're not kidding about the "Republican" part.

Copyright © 2005 Republican-American

They're called partisan realignments, periods of seismic shifts in U.S. politics like the one that began in 1936 with the re-election of Franklin Roosevelt and ushered in six decades of liberal Democratic dominance. Many political observers believe a new realignment started with the Republican Revolution of 1994 and is accelerating under the Bush presidency. One of the more recent ruminations on this subject came in a USA Today op-ed by Ross K. Baker.

Noting President Bush's three rounds of tax cuts and his re-election, as well as the success of the Iraqi elections, Professor Baker postulated that continued GOP control of government "might well produce more conservative social legislation, a relaxation of regulations on business and environmental rules and more truculent policy toward countries that sponsor terrorism. If he could pull it off, Bush would find himself in the select company of such presidents as Jefferson, Lincoln and Franklin Roosevelt -- all of whom engineered realignments."

Before President Bush's likeness is chiseled into Mount Rushmore, consider four factors working against the GOP domination:

President Bush has not yet learned how to say no to wasteful spending.

The party has too many "Nancy Johnson Republicans." It has an entire left wing of politicians who claim to be fiscal conservatives and social moderates. Since those are competing philosophies, social liberalism usually wins out because the resulting government largess is the surest way to ensure incumbency. It explains Rep. Johnson's support for the Medicare prescription-drug benefit and a good many other costly social programs during her long congressional career. Though small in number, NJRs are the swing voters on important legislation, which positions them to water down reforms, lard-up social programs, etc. Consequently, true fiscal constructivism cannot rule the day as long as NJRs are in the way.

Liberals continue to dominate two key cultural institutions: the public schools and the news media. Until conservatives can end the indoctrination of children and the propagandizing of adults, even modest, sensible reforms such as partial voluntary privatization of Social Security will be next to impossible to achieve.

Liberals reign supreme in America's courts. If recent rulings on the Ten Commandments, the Pledge of Allegiance and same-sex marriage have taught Americans anything, it's that Republicans can pass conservative legislation, relax business and environmental rules, and enact tort-law reforms all they want. But before sanity can be restored to the judiciary, Republicans must purge the system of the left-wing loonies and replace them with jurists interested in upholding the rule of law instead of legislating from the bench. In the interim, liberals always will be able to find a judge to strike down conservative reforms as unconstitutional.

It may well come to pass that we are seeing the dawn of a new political era for America. But even if Republicans can overcome these considerable obstacles, it will be decades before the fruits of their labors will be evident.



Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
Erika Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Mar-06-05 10:42 PM
Response to Original message
1. The fruits of the GOP labors will be a USA banana republic
Edited on Sun Mar-06-05 10:44 PM by Erika
Complete with a caste system and a theocratic government. The theocratic government will not be Christian.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Name removed Donating Member (0 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Mar-06-05 10:44 PM
Response to Reply #1
2. Deleted message
Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.
 
NMDemDist2 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Mar-06-05 10:57 PM
Response to Reply #2
3. "our children" ?? whose children are you speaking of exactly? n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Erika Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Mar-06-05 11:03 PM
Response to Reply #2
4. Republicans for Pro-Choice, Catholics for Choice, etc.
Edited on Sun Mar-06-05 11:04 PM by Erika
Abortion is not a party issue, it's a woman's issue.

The partisan Republicans put their faith in bigger government roles to legislate laws hostile to the rights of the woman.

Democrats push for education and family planning funds to assist women in their decisions.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
readmoreoften Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Mar-06-05 11:11 PM
Response to Reply #2
6. hello sir, I would like to work with you on this issue!
For many years I thought that I was pro-choice. But I recently realized that I, too, am pro-life and fundamentalist. I think that you may agree with me on some of these ideas. I hope we can work together to reclaim the Democratic party for pro-lifers like us!

I think the key problem with getting liberals to our side is all this stuff about 'rape'. Let's be honest, rape does happen and it really is cruel to force our American women to carry the babies of rapists. I think stopping RAPE is a huge key to getting liberals on our side about the issue of killing babies.

I have found a solution and it is totally BIBLICALLY SOUND.

Did you know that Jesus said, "But he said unto them, All men cannot receive this saying, save they to whom it is given. For there are some eunuchs, which were so born from their mother's womb: and there are some eunuchs, which were made eunuchs of men: and there be eunuchs, which have made themselves eunuchs from the kingdom of heaven's sake. He that is able to receive it, let him receive it." (Matthew 19:11-12)

In the The Scholar's Version of the Holy Bible it says: "There are castrated men who castrated themselves because of Heaven's imperial rule. If you are able to accept this (advice), do so."

Do you agree, sir, that men should not be engaging in pre-marital sex? Pre-marital sex IS a huge problem. We could stop that. I think that we could get liberals in this country to accept our pro-life stance if we as Americans embraced a BIBLICAL POLICY of temporary chemical castration of men before marriage (as Christ suggests).

When marriage is agreed upon, our boys can be restored to masculine wholeness and embrace the role of father and head-of-house. Of course, we need to be vigilant about making sure that the few men who fall from God's grace are punished after marriage. How we can do this is keep men's DNA on file and punish any married man who violates our daughters with permanent castration.

Woulnd't you love to protect your daughters like this! We can stop rape! We can stop the murdering of innocent little babies! We can even stop pre-marital sex! We can restore morality to America through Jesus' words. And I think the liberals will even go along with this.

What do you say! Let's go to work on this! :)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Erika Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Mar-06-05 11:20 PM
Response to Reply #6
8. Ah, Castration. Just the far right right wing answer to abortion
Enjoyed your post.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
readmoreoften Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Mar-06-05 11:26 PM
Response to Reply #6
10. Are you there? I'm so eager to spread the word of God
Let's get to work on this! Don't worry about the effects of the temporary castration. It's like being on the pill. It's not an invasive surgery, just hormones. We will be such a godly country.

Our women are vessels. They are fragile and easily broken. CLEARLY, the onus is on the man and his body. If we want to stop abortion, we must teach our unmarried men to be chaste.

When Jesus said, "He that is able to receive it, let him receive it" He was living in a time where hormones were not understood and castration was painful and not reversible.

But now it IS reversible and what man would not 'be able to receive it'. In fact, if any liberal gets in our way of pre-marital men who want to stay physically 'chaste' we can sue them on the bounds of religious liberty.

I believe castration is the answer.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
HeatherG. Donating Member (102 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Mar-06-05 11:26 PM
Response to Reply #2
9. Aborting Potential Democrats
Republicans do tend to have more children than democrats. It is largely do to democrats using birth control though. Not because we are always having abortions. I am not planning on having any kids ever. I don't think I would have the energy to be an ideal parent. If I did get pregnant, I would go through with it though. I can't imagine myself having an abortion.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Erika Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Mar-06-05 11:40 PM
Response to Reply #9
13. Abortions are not political
They are private. As far as I know, no woman has ever been asked as to their politics. Please also post stats where Republicans have larger families than the Democrats. How many kids did Bobby Kennedy have?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
HeatherG. Donating Member (102 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Mar-07-05 12:04 AM
Response to Reply #13
17. Wasn't Trying To Offend
I was just responding to the guy who thinks democrats are aborting potential democrats. It is a suspicious post, but I'll give him the benefit of the doubt. There is no guarantee that they would even grow up to be democrats. I don't know if any stats on how many children republicans have versus democrats is in existance. I could look for one. The population in the red states is increasing faster than in the blue states. Part of this is due to migration, but I suspect it is also from republican families breeding heavily. Married people are more likely to be republican, and married people have more kids. So, I am making an assumption based on evidence. I know that there are exceptions. I know that large families were very common a few decades ago. I am being kicked off the computer so I will have to respond to any questions tommorow.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Erika Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Mar-07-05 12:08 AM
Response to Reply #17
19. So show us your evidence
Tomorrow will be fine.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
HeatherG. Donating Member (102 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Mar-07-05 03:52 PM
Response to Reply #19
24. Just Got Home From Work
This is what I found doing a yahoo search. Gore states have an average replacement rate of 1.89 births per woman. The average rate in the Bush states is 2.06. In 2004 55% of married women voted for Bush, and 44% voted for Kerry. It goes without saying that married woman have more kids. Remember that 58% of white people voted for Bush and 41% voted for Kerry. The 19 states with the highest white birth rates voted for Bush.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
genieroze Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Mar-07-05 01:44 AM
Response to Reply #9
22. Everything you just said would be your choice. I'm personally
against abortion but I'm pro choice. My answer to anti choice people is if you don't believe in abortion, then don't have an abortion.
:shrug:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Name removed Donating Member (0 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Mar-06-05 11:27 PM
Response to Reply #2
11. Deleted message
Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.
 
readmoreoften Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Mar-06-05 11:37 PM
Response to Reply #11
12. No, I want to talk with him about alternatives to abortion...
like medical chastity for males...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Erika Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Mar-06-05 11:42 PM
Response to Reply #12
14. Like locked jockey straps and chastity belts?
Or maybe just public flogging would help control sexual urges.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
readmoreoften Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Mar-06-05 11:59 PM
Response to Reply #14
16. no that won't be necessary
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bemildred Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Mar-07-05 12:06 AM
Response to Reply #16
18. I was thinking we could bring back the stocks in the public square.
Or dunking stools. There are a lot of good ideas in History
once you start thinking about it. But I think you are right,
compulsive chemical castration for all but the legally
married and monogamous should take care of it. Think how
much simpler life will be, and we menfolk can take all of the
burden on our own shoulders.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
readmoreoften Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Mar-07-05 12:27 AM
Response to Reply #18
20. It's a much simpler solution...
I really want to see this become an extreme RW talking point. They believe in JC and this is a command not from the OT but from the New Testament. Since they are demanding a theocracy, at least we could benefit. Get them to believe that temprorary castration is What Jesus Would Do. They want a theocracy?

I say bring it on.

If we can get them to obey their Lord and become the sect of locust-eating castrati (TRUE FUNDAMENTALISM), then Dems will be the reasonable party that fights for Men's Rights... and how popular will Men's Rights to an erection be? We'll have progressives in office for 500 years and reproductive freedom will be safe forever. Once-upon-a-time-the-end.

The key to win abortion is shift the focus off of women's bodies and onto men's...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bemildred Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Mar-07-05 12:30 AM
Response to Reply #20
21. Yeah, women are vessels of corruption anyway, Men are pure. nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
joefromcanada Donating Member (5 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Mar-06-05 11:05 PM
Response to Original message
5. Wingnut Eh!
Or maybe it's just an aberation, politics gone ugly and corrupt, and your next 2 elections will(hopefully) correct itself..
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
applegrove Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Mar-06-05 11:18 PM
Response to Original message
7. The Elites have been trying to take back power for eons. For the
last 500 years they have lost big time. Why would that change. Some day soon even the wingnuts will wake up and wonder where their America went.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bemildred Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Mar-06-05 11:50 PM
Response to Original message
15. Drool. Not a fact in the entire piece. Some unintentional irony though:
Edited on Sun Mar-06-05 11:50 PM by bemildred
"until conservatives can end the indoctrination of children
and the propagandizing of adults"
meaning only ideas we like
will be allowed.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
newyawker99 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Mar-07-05 10:07 AM
Response to Original message
23. Hi Ms Chicklet!!
Welcome to DU!! :toast:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
hadrons Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Mar-07-05 05:16 PM
Response to Original message
25. the Republican cult of victimization strikes again ....
jeez, what a bunch of whiners
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Thu Apr 18th 2024, 01:56 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Editorials & Other Articles Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC