The Cellar - Future of Republican Party

The Cellar (http://cellar.org/index.php)

- Politics (http://cellar.org/forumdisplay.php?f=5)

- - Future of Republican Party (http://cellar.org/showthread.php?t=28259)

Stormie - I stand corrected. A tip of the hat to you. Yes, that program began in the Clinton administration and the cellphones are subsidized by the Universal Service Fee.

piercehawkeye45 - from the whitehouse.gov site, "If a petition meets the signature threshold, it will be reviewed by the Administration and we will issue a response." Yes the response will probably be a laugh, but it does indicate a division in our country.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Stormieweather (Post 838894)

This popped up on my Facebook feed, and, although I'm pretty sure I've read it before, it sort of fits...right about now.

Wait, wait just a minute. That means the blue states still end up with Trump. Or will he be something they'd have to tolerate, like horseflies in a barn?

Quote:

Originally Posted by Cyber Wolf (Post 838892)

I've always wondered... if Texas does leave the US and become its own entity, how would they stop Mexico from invading and retaking land they once had up through 1836? Does Texas have an army? They won't be able to use the US army, oh no. They'd have to ask for assistance and then there would be 'occupation' to make sure Mexico stays where Mexico is. Or would they request we 'nation build' so they can take care of themselves, because they couldn't when they left the union in the first place?

Or would they allow the current US bases to stay and enjoy by-proxy US protection without actually being part of the country?

And I know they have oil and cattle and some farms there, but what else would their GDP be based on? Tourism? Could US citizens get in on a driver's license or would passport be needed? Would they even have open borders?

Secession is stupid, of course. But the Texas secessionists have been around a long time, and have thought all these questions through before, believe me. Texas has a healthy GDP, based largely in oil and beef, as you say, plus also a surprising piece of the tech industry. And of course Texas would have an army if they seceded--nevermind the fact that many if not most families already own multiple guns, everyone currently on a Texas military base would just change their letterhead, that's all. Unless you're imagining that Texas secedes but somehow has to hand over everything within our borders, which you may be sure they wouldn't agree to. And Mexico wouldn't invade, they'd just keep sending immigrants here at a staggering rate like they have been. More likely, Texas would offer amnesty to any Mexican willing to join this new Texas army, to fight in the inevitable civil war that breaks out when the federal government tries to take back its fighter jets.

Another fact the secessionists throw out quite regularly is that Texas is the only state with a completely independent power grid. Life wouldn't be as good, but Texas could definitely survive on its own. The biggest threat to their success would be how much Great White Flight takes place. How many liberals in Dallas/Ft. Worth, Houston, and Austin would flee to a northern state? Depends mostly on whether the feds let Texas go quietly or not. I honestly think most people wouldn't uproot their lives, unless they were being drafted for a bloody civil war.

Given all that, if they're so ready, I wonder what's taking them so long to split. If it's a matter of a petition and a nod from the White House to do it peacefully, do they really think they'll get it now? Or in the next 4 years?

If they want to fight their way out, that should be quite interesting. They just better keep the fighting out of Louisiana.

Why aren't red states patriotic?

Quote:

Originally Posted by Cyber Wolf (Post 838926)

Because the vast majority of us are not morons. No one here is even talking about the petition, only the news outlets from out-of-state. In a state this big, it's a given that there will be over 25,000 dumbasses in favor of any issue. No one here pays the secessionists any mind, they've been around forever.

Secession will never happen. It is simply a way of making a political statement.

Spexxvet - It all boils down to States' Rights

Quote:

Originally Posted by Cyber Wolf (Post 838917)

Wait, wait just a minute. That means the blue states still end up with Trump. Or will he be something they'd have to tolerate, like horseflies in a barn?

Just to show that we're not above listening to the opposition - "self deportation".

Quote:

Originally Posted by Clodfobble (Post 838929)

In a state this big, it's a given that there will be over 25,000 dumbasses in favor of any issue.

Not to mention the fact that anyone can sign any state's petition, so all you need is 25,000 dumbasses total, let alone from one state.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Clodfobble (Post 838918)

~snip~ everyone currently on a Texas military base would just change their letterhead, that's all. Unless you're imagining that Texas secedes but somehow has to hand over everything within our borders, which you may be sure they wouldn't agree to. ~snip~ More likely, Texas would offer amnesty to any Mexican willing to join this new Texas army, to fight in the inevitable civil war that breaks out when the federal government tries to take back its fighter jets.

Minor point, but I find it pretty unlikely that everyone on Texas military bases would just change their letterheads. Military personnel stationed on bases in any of the 50 states are from all over the US - not just the state that their current duty assignment happens to be located in. Plus, members of the military are generally rotated to different places every 3 years. Their loyalty is to the Pentagon and the US as a whole – not to Texas and not to any other state they might find themselves stationed in.

And the Pentagon is going to withdraw American troops from what is now a foreign country unless the decision is made to fight Texas to force it back into the Union. The departing troops will be ordered to take all weapons, tanks, fighter planes, aircraft carriers etc. with them – you never ever leave equipment for enemy forces to use if it can be avoided. Anything that can’t be shipped out will be destroyed.

The Texans can try to capture sophisticated US weaponary with their hunting guns and their coon hounds, but even with the help of the Mexican mafia, they’ll be outgunned.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Big Sarge (Post 838939)

Spexxvet - It all boils down to States' Rights

I wonder how many states would have opted out of the Iraq war?

They had the option of not sending National Guard troops

Goodbye to All That: Reflections of a GOP Operative Who Left the Cult

Quote:

Both parties are rotten - how could they not be, given the complete infestation of the political system by corporate money on a scale that now requires a presidential candidate to raise upwards of a billion dollars to be competitive in the general election? Both parties are captives to corporate loot. The main reason the Democrats' health care bill will be a budget buster once it fully phases in is the Democrats' rank capitulation to corporate interests - no single-payer system, in order to mollify the insurers; and no negotiation of drug prices, a craven surrender to Big Pharma.

But both parties are not rotten in quite the same way. The Democrats have their share of machine politicians, careerists, corporate bagmen, egomaniacs and kooks. Nothing, however, quite matches the modern GOP.

To those millions of Americans who have finally begun paying attention to politics and watched with exasperation the tragicomedy of the debt ceiling extension, it may have come as a shock that the Republican Party is so full of lunatics.

...

It should have been evident to clear-eyed observers that the Republican Party is becoming less and less like a traditional political party in a representative democracy and becoming more like an apocalyptic cult, or one of the intensely ideological authoritarian parties of 20th century Europe. This trend has several implications, none of them pleasant.

...

A couple of years ago, a Republican committee staff director told me candidly (and proudly) what the method was to all this obstruction and disruption. Should Republicans succeed in obstructing the Senate from doing its job, it would further lower Congress's generic favorability rating among the American people. By sabotaging the reputation of an institution of government, the party that is programmatically against government would come out the relative winner.

...

This constant drizzle of "there the two parties go again!" stories out of the news bureaus, combined with the hazy confusion of low-information voters, means that the long-term Republican strategy of undermining confidence in our democratic institutions has reaped electoral dividends.

...

Thus far, I have concentrated on Republican tactics, rather than Republican beliefs, but the tactics themselves are important indicators of an absolutist, authoritarian mindset that is increasingly hostile to the democratic values of reason, compromise and conciliation. Rather, this mindset seeks polarizing division (Karl Rove has been very explicit that this is his principal campaign strategy), conflict and the crushing of opposition.

As for what they really believe, the Republican Party of 2011 believes in three principal tenets I have laid out below. The rest of their platform one may safely dismiss as window dressing:

1. The GOP cares solely and exclusively about its rich contributors.
2. They worship at the altar of Mars.
3. Give me that old time religion.

It's a good article, substantial. It was written about 14 months ago so some of it feels like we've seen the ending (of the most recent episode) already. But the article is still well worth reading. I don't know what it says about the future of the Republican party, but it sure hits the nail on the head as to their past and present.

That was really interesting, V.

That lost me in the first four words, but I read on.
Then it lost me again at the end of that first paragraph.

Quote:

- no single-payer system, in order to mollify the insurers;
and no negotiation of drug prices,

The single-payer status is accurate, but the justification is not.
That was the compromise by the Democrats in order to get even
a single Republican Senator to vote in favor of Obamacare.
The second is solely the previous Republican President's banner to bear.

But I do realize these are the meanderings of one misguided Republican soul.
Oh wait, I'm being redundant :rolleyes: