For some reason I’m on a mailing list called “Conservative News.” I have requested a couple of times to be taken off the list, but somebody keeps signing me up again. Anyway, today, “Conservative News” is announcing “The Conservative Exodus Project.”
I am copying and pasting this from the Exodus web page. Make of it what you will.
The Pledge
We, the undersigned, petition the Republican Party to support real conservative candidates for the 2008 presidential nomination.
In the belief that the Republican Party has become too liberal, we pledge, unless a suitable candidate is selected for the GOP 2008 presidential nomination, to stay home or vote third party (e.g. Constitution Party).
Returning to its liberal roots, the GOP has recently become the party of big business, neoliberal globalism, and unwise interventionism – not the party of conservatism.
The following presidential candidates are UNACCEPTABLE: John McCain, Rudolph Giuliani, Mitt Romney, Newt Gingrich, Sam Brownback, Mike Huckabee, Chuck Hagel, Condoleezza Rice, et al. They all support the third-world invasion of the United States.
Unless a candidate is chosen who is tough on immigration (e.g. Ron Paul, Tom Tancredo, Duncan Hunter, or another candidate yet to announce), we shall have no choice but to vote third party.
We would like to stress these five points.
(1) We oppose the third-world invasion of the United States, and reject amnesty and any path to citizenship for illegals. We support deportation, attrition, and massive reductions in legal immigration, especially from the third world.
(2) We oppose free trade, the support of which has become an ideological suicide pact. Free trade is both destroying our economy and undermining our sovereignty. Historically, conservatives have opposed free trade, and they should, but many in the GOP have been “neoconned” on this issue.
(3) We support a moral candidate, critical of secularism, who embodies the virtues of the Christian Western tradition.
(4) We oppose the illegal neocon war in Iraq. The transformation of the Middle East to liberal democracy is Jacobin, not conservative.
(5) We wish to see big government reduced in size – in all three branches – and for many offices and functions to be returned to the states, where they Constitutionally belong.
Unless the above criteria are met, we pledge to stay home or vote third-party in 2008.
Point #4 is especially fascinating — “The transformation of the Middle East to liberal democracy is Jacobin, not conservative.” “Conservative News” needn’t worry; the Middle East is more likely to be transformed into an Islamic theocracy than anything else.
Granted, “Conservative News” may be one old curmudgeon and not a mighty hoard. But this isn’t too far away from the stuff Richard Viguerie has been cranking out lately.
BTW, the elephant art is from a 1911 Puck cover. The fellow in the top hat in the background is President Taft. In 1912 Republicans renominated Taft, after which Theodore Roosevelt cut his ties to the GOP and became the Progressive Party nominee for President. This split Republican votes and enabled the election of the Democrat, Woodrow Wilson.
Interestingly, no mention of terrorism.
These people are crazy. Sam Brownback does not deserve to be dumped into the same pile of irrelevance as RINO Rudy Guiliani, Flipper Romney and Madman McCain. Whether one likes him or dislikes him (even for ideological reasons), nobody can deny that Sam Brownback is a principled person with strongly held beliefs.
He has worked with such liberal icons as Paul Wellstone, Ted Kennedy, Barack Obama, Gloria Steinem and many others.
Maha, if I may call you that, I saw you on C-SPAN some time ago, and while we may not see eye-to-eye on all the issues of the day, you came off very well. You seem like a very down to earth person who sincerely holds your views and is not afraid to advocate for them.
For that, I salute you.
I hope you will consider visiting our blog somethime soon and learn more about what a true conservatism is. I don’t agree with President Bush about everything. And I suspect you will find you have more in common with Sam Brownback than you think.
Respectfully,
Psycheout.
what’s funny is in many ways I could not agree more however I never stupidly voted in the crap we’ve had 1980-92 and 2000 to present
I knew better
i just wish more people had known better. What did they think they were voting for anyway?
I think this bunch was the core of the “Promise Keepers”., they were easily lead to support the war in Iraq after 9/11, and only now realize the folly. Now they realize the precarious situation our economy is in, and that Bush/Cheney are mutants, no where near what the old right stood for.The bastards played a major roll in getting this cancerous Bush/Cheney axis of a-holes installed.It ain’t all about Gay marriage and abortion, time to quit THAT shit! Sorry for the outburst, but these idiots have done some horrific damage to the U.S., and it was all about “liberal bashing”.Throwing a big nasty party may be fun, but cleanup the morning after is a real bitch.
The amusing part is who they have to pick from, a bunch of hippocrits! And Newt is the icing on the cake…..
I must admit to kind of liking Ron Paul, the man makes a lot of sense, but I’d sure like to know much more about him.
Ron Paul is a great American. He’s more Independent than most. He’s like our version of Bernie Sanders. I’d search YouTube and C-Span for video of him. He’s someone both sides would really like, if only they got to know him better. But he’s not spotlighted by the MSM. I wonder why.
Hold the judgment on Newt…He’s still in the transformation process. Jesus is cleaning him up and purging him of his lusts of the flesh. Come the 2008 election Newt’s insatiable whore mongering will be as far from him as the East is from the West..hopefully. Falwell and Dobson both have given Newt the anointing as the prodigal son.
Swami — you’re too much.
Psycheout — thank you for the kind words, but I can’t take Brownback seriously after this.
Well, two can play at that game, Maha.
Sam Brownback Speaks To Progressives (from PoliticsTV)
http://youtube.com/watch?v=GcIEpyem6XY
And an interesting juxtaposition of Brownback and Clinton announcing their respective candidacies (Jan 20, 2007):
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V1gNZQgujZY
Sam Brownback (like him or not) comes across as genuine while Hillary Clinton comes across as an opportunistic phony. Well, that’s because that’s exactly what she is.
Now don’t force me to break out the bad 80s music videos! 😉
What I don’t get is why none of the repub candidates have put no distance between themselves and bush. As of right now you could brand any of them MORE OF THE SAME.
Funny, but many democrats have said the same thing about staying home or voting 3rd party if Hillary is the democratic nominee.
If we are smart, we ditch Hillary quick and are assured a victory in 08.
An Obama in 08 is good.
I do feel the republican party is going through some massive changes and growing pains. But, the reagan conservative movement is dead and what will take it’s place is nowhere to be seen yet.
maha may I?
#1 We support deportation, attrition, and massive reductions in legal immigration, especially from the third world.
… legal immigration? and they call us ‘elitist’.
#2 We oppose free trade, the support of which has become an ideological suicide pact. Free trade is both destroying our economy and undermining our sovereignty
… you obviously haven’t been following the Senate for the past few years, Byron Dorgan (Take This Job and Ship It) comes to mind…
#3 We support a moral candidate, critical of secularism, who embodies the virtues of the Christian Western tradition
…then you’re shit out of luck with what you’re being served up for the 2008 cycle – the only one that hasn’t been married more than once is the Mormon…
#4 We oppose the illegal neocon war in Iraq..
…where were you for the 2003 elections?
#5 We wish to see big government reduced in size…
….ditto #4
Unless the above criteria are met, we pledge to stay home or vote third-party in 2008….
PLEASE DO!!!
#4
#2 Returning to its liberal roots, the GOP has recently become the party of big business, neoliberal globalism, and unwise interventionism – not the party of conservatism.
The operative word here is ‘recently’. Where has this person been for the past six years. We could’ve used these people in 2000 voting for the ‘third party’. It might just have been the tipping point that we needed.
Psycheout — Let me say delicately that Brownback makes my skin crawl. His stands on most issues are abominations.
Other than that, I suppose he’s OK.
Seriously, it’s going to take a whole lot more than hell freezing over before I spend two second considering Brownback as President.
Sam Brownback (like him or not) comes across as genuine while Hillary Clinton comes across as an opportunistic phony. Well, that’s because that’s exactly what she is.
I sincerely hope that Senator Clinton is not the nominee. I have problems with her, too. But she’d do a better job in the office than Brownback. Unlike Brownback, she has a brain.
Please disregard everything after “PLEASE DO”. Didn’t proofread before posting.
Well Maha, we can agree to disagree on Samuel Brownback, for now. LOL. But we do agree on Hillary Clinton. We both hope she is not the Democratic nominee. Plenty of voters dislike her candidacy, on both sides of the aisle.
Thanks for the good discussion. We didn’t call each other names. That in itself made my visit most worthwhile. 😉
I’ll certainly drop in again sometime. Have a great weekend!
http://www.playfuls.com/news_10_18230-Gingrich-Says-His-Affair-Unlike-Clintons.html
A wise old man once told me you are judged by the company you keep……
IIRC, Thomas Frank in What’s the Matter with Kansas paints Brownback as a country club republican who got wingnut when he realized that was selling better. Ever since Reagan, acting has been an important part of political training. “Authenticiy” ain’t so easy to detect anymore.
Ron Paul is so far right that on some issues, he wraps around to being progressive. On other issues, however, he’s strictly neanderthal.
“True” conservativism will never dominate. If a busload of people needed to select a driver, would they select the guy that hates wheeled transportation (and would he accept the responsibility)? No way. Hating government makes for pithy stump speeches, but no sincere “true” conservative would have the necessary ambition to power to get elected. Ergo, you get people like Bush.
One last thought:
I’d like to see a mandatory “test” for presidential candidates.
They would need to be able to pass the test that every immigrant takes to become a citizen,but with a perfect score.
They would need to pass a drug and alcohol screening test, and a test to determine if they ever did drugs like cocaine and heroin.Recent history tells us it is far worse to have smoked grass “without inhaling” than to have been a binge drinker and coke snorter for 20 years.
They would have to write an essay of at least 2,000 REAL words (without spell check) on why they want to be President, and what the will do if they win the race.(can you imagine……)
They would need to pass a polygraph test
There would be a math section where they would demonstrate a knowlege of basic math with fractions, percentages, and decimal equivalents.
Their arrest record and military service record will be made public.
And last but not least, they would be required to recite the constitution from memory.
They must post a bond guaranteeing they will do what they promised during the race for the presidency.
In short, we need to get serious and stop running popularity contests based on looks , personality, and how much money they raise.
This is not too much to ask of the man or woman that wants to be the most powerful person on the planet.
If these ideas are implemented, it would certainly limit the field to persons of solid character, and the bond requirement would hold their feet to the fire.They would have to actually go to congress to start war, not just be a “decider”.
All this will happen the day pigs sprout wings…..
If you look at all the presidents we have had since the fifties, it is difficult to find a really good one. Carter and Ford were as close to good as they got.Clinton did some good things, but he is a scoundrel for cheating on his wife, punishing Iraq with sanctions and bombings, and “word smithing” under oath.Uncle Ronnie planted the seed that gave us this noxious Bush.
As an ex-Kansas resident, I seem to recall Mr.Brownback took a lot of money from out of state donors when running for office.hhhmmm ask yourself why a texas energy company would have such an interest in brownback being elected in Kansas???.It seems to me , also , there were a lot of close ties between brownback and tom delay.I would like to have believed in my guy but he turned out to be as dirty of a rat as roberts is.I was glad to leave Kansas the people who represented me made me so ashamed.
When people say”whats wrong with Kansas” the faces of brownback and roberts spring into my mind.
I know that the right is having some trouble picking a new hero to prop up to the “above the law” status..but surely they can do better than this……I mean tom tancredo??Holy crap, his staff members were wearing confederate flag lapel pins that they hid from cameras.(or tried to)at CPAC…with candidates like that the people in that party lack the room to say ANYTHING about Hillary .My advice to the right is clean your own house before you comment on how dirty mine is.Snarky, yes, but true.
I am supporting Ron Paul at this point. He is the only candidate for the Republicans or the Democrats that I think has even read the Constitution.