Titus, enough already with the, "I'm still not a conservative or a Republican." ENOUGH I say dear fellow ... yield to the inevitable. That isn't going to fly here, I'm not buying it and you shouldn't be selling it. EVEN were I to concede that outside of the 2nd amendment interpretation you have remained static in your ideology, you are still left with the reality that the TERMS and their definitions have changed.
Case in point: you have repeatedly referred to your opposition of the "reason de gurre" the Bush administration put forth for the invasion of Iraq, as proof positive that you are no right winger. Faulderale I say. Poppycock. For you see, your ideology, which is what we are discussing when bandying about the terms "conservative" and "liberal, is simpatico with the Bushies on national defense. You are a hawk. You want a robust military. You wanted to go on (& remain) on offense in the global war against Islamo-fascism. You view that struggle as a "hot war", not a law enforcement issue. Your disagreements with Bush & co break down around STRATEGY. Both the PR offensive the administration used to justify the March 03' invasion, and militarily on the ground in Iraq. You see the difference? Ideology, same. The strategy to effectively engage that ideology, different. Furthermore you want to win in Iraq prior to leaving. Again that denotes your National Security "hawkish" credentials.
Now you can argue until you're blue in the face and hoarse in the throat that you fancy yourself a Truman, Scoop Jackson Democrat ... all fine and well, but in November 2008 THAT makes you a conservative, and for better or worse (worse lately I would argue), the Republican Party is the best and most available vehicle to further that ideology, PERIOD. The labels and definitions their in have shifted. The Parties have shifted. You may have remained the same by and large, but the name you (should) use to identify yourself has NOT.
So do the only honorable thing. Do what Jambo did in 1996. Declare yourself a conservative and join the GOP. To do anything less would be to continue the charade that the Democrat Party does, or ever will again, represent your values.
And given your reputation as a stickler for technical definitions, such an ideological admission and Party realignment would be, if nothing else, a more accurate description of one Titus G. Puff-in-Stuff.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
3 comments:
Technically I did not register as a Republican until 1997 when my voting status in Biloxi became official. (As did my permanent residence. At the time there was a chance of opening another casino and it wasn't until mid 97 that my transient status became permanent.) BUT...
I did not vote for Dole in 96. I voted Clinton both times. And I know this will turn Ryan's stomach, but I voted for Gore in 2000 because I enjoyed the economic boom of the 90's and wanted more of the same. More on that later.
You voted for WHO????? I guess I be ashamed for you. Clinton...and Gore??? I think I just puked.
I know you're a Clinton hater and your reasons are well documented, and I'm not arguing those. But remember when we were talking social security, and what needed to be done? Name the last president that placed himself in the position to do what needed to be done to social security. That's right, Clinton. Here's a clear cut case of domestic fiscal responsibility trumping other presidential mistakes (too numberous to name here.) Name the NEXT president that will be able to do what needs to be done to social security. WELL?
Post a Comment