I know that some folks reading this vote Republican, because they claim to be single-issue tax voters, or “Teddy Roosevelt” Republicans, etc. However, you should really consider the core beliefs that currently mark the philosophy of the party.
To vote Republican, you must believe:
Jesus loves you, & shares your hatred of homosexuals and Hillary Clinton.
Saddam was a good guy when Reagan armed him, a bad guy when Bush’s daddy made war on him, a good guy when Cheney did business with him, and a bad guy when Bush needed a “we can’t find Bin Laden” diversion.
Trade with Cuba is wrong because the country is Communist, but trade with China and Vietnam is vital to a spirit of international harmony.
The United States should get out of the United Nations, and our highest national priority is enforcing U.N. resolutions against Iraq.
A woman can’t be trusted with decisions about her own body, but multi-national corporations can make decisions affecting all mankind without regulation.
The best way to improve military morale is to praise the troops in speeches, while slashing veterans’ benefits and combat pay.
If condoms are kept out of schools, adolescents won’t have sex.
A good way to fight terrorism is to belittle our long-time allies, then demand their cooperation and money.
Providing health care to all Iraqis is sound policy, but providing health care to all Americans is socialism. HMOs and insurance companies have the best interests of the public at heart.
Global warming and tobacco’s link to cancer are junk science, but creationism should be taught in schools.
A president lying about an extramarital affair is an impeachable offense, but a president lying to enlist support for a war in which thousands die is solid defense policy.
Government should limit itself to the powers named in the Constitution, which include banning gay marriages and censoring the Internet.
The public has a right to know about Hillary’s cattle trades, but George Bush’s driving record is none of our business.
Being a drug addict is a moral failing and a crime, unless you’re a conservative radio host. Then it’s an illness and you need our prayers for your recovery.
You support states’ rights, but the Attorney General can tell states what local voter initiatives they have the right to adopt.
What Bill Clinton did in the 1960s is of vital national interest, but what Bush did in the ’70s and ’80s is irrelevant.
9 Replies to “Consider Your Vote….”
I think the term “must believe” is overdoing it. To vote one way or the other doesn’t REQUIRE a set of beliefs.
From your local bleeding-heart liberal Canadian.
Fair enough. How about “if you vote Republican, you’re endorsing the following beliefs” — since that’s the biggest problem I have: Otherwise reasonable people, voting conservative for traditional conservative reasons….despite the fact that the NeoCons they’re putting into power aren’t traditional conservatives at all.
Unfortunately, I’m sure you could take a close look at Democrat policy in the past and find a suitable list of offensive policies to discourage voters from voting Democrat.
My recent hate-on for democratic societies of course is discolouring my perspective here, but I find it doubly difficult to come to terms with it in a two-party system like the US – at least I have the fiction of being able to vote for a variety of political parties here in Canada, where four different parties (plus one independent) currently have seats in our government.
The sad reality is that some people, like my parents, will continue to vote Republican because Ted Kennedy’s economic policies scare the hell out of them, and they don’t honestly care about any of the issues listed. They are strictly voting with their wallets, as they always have.
I’m a registered Democrat because social issues are more important to me than economic ones.
Currently, I think both parties stink horribly. They should really be named “Special Interest Group #1” and “Special Interest Group #2”. Because that’s how both parties operate.
> To vote Republican, you must believe:
Your statement is predicated on the assumption that in order to support a political party, one must support all of its constituents’ beliefs, and justify all of its members’ actions. Our political process makes 3rd party candidates protest votes (at best), or spoiler votes (at worst). Given that situation, and allowing unique exceptions like Perot in 1992, the rational voter considers the merits and track records of the two parties able to govern, and votes according to whatever trend they believe that information represents.
The current leadership of the GOP, including the President, have more weaknesses than strengths. The party suffers from an inherent conflict of interest (how can a party that wants to reduce the size of government limit its own access to the levers of governmental power?). The party has not evolved a mechanism of purging itself of corrupted officials before their corruption becomes scandalous. The party has not separated the difference between being “for the free market” and at the same time being beholden to specific corporate interests based on campaign financing cashflows.
On the other hand, they are the party that espouses a rational tax policy (the reason all tax breaks at this point “unfairly help the rich” is that the tax code irresponsibly taxes the rich at a far higher marginal rate than everyone else, so that most of the taxes collected from the government come from “the rich” – so ANY tax reform helps them disproportionately.) They are the party that is willing to stand behind a difficult foreign policy, even when it gets messy and ugly. They are the party pushing for reform of social security and medicare, which any accountant will tell you will happen one way or another, and well within our lifetimes. They are the party that understands that the market economy is working well when companies make record profits – that the benefits of that economic activity lift the whole population through tiers of common wealth. They are the party that is willing to try to break the cycle of spending more money in schools that can’t be fixed by spending money. They are the party that offers a clear basis for how it wants the laws of the land interpreted by jduges (as written, not as “guidelines”.)
Paraphrasing Winston Churchill once observed about the democratic process, “it’s the worst of all possible options, except all the others.” The GOP is clearly an imperfect and deeply flawed (and clearly broken) institution. At least it isn’t the Democratic party though!
The rational voter now has two options: Stick one’s head in the sand and pretend everything is ok, and just let it get worse, or work within the two party system to fight for change. We’re approaching a tipping point (the 2006 elections will begin it), and the period of disrutpion will extend at least through the 2008 presidential election campaign. Now is the time, therefore, regardless of party preference, to get involved.
They are the party that understands that the market economy is working well when companies make record profits – that the benefits of that economic activity lift the whole population through tiers of common wealth.
Ryan, I’d love to say that I’m surprised to see you espousing the morally corrupt line of Trickle-Down Economics, but, sadly, I’m not. At all.
I’m not one of those people who says “reduce the tax rate to 0% for everyone and convert all government services to for-profit businesses” – heck, I’m not even a “flat taxer” in the Forbes mode. But I do bow to the reasonably well prooven economic philosophy that says that lowering marginal tax rates within reason] stimulates economic activity, and that the activity stimulated on the whole is universally beneficial.
Look at places where widespread private investment is rewarded, and you find places where poor people’s lives are getting better. In some admixture, you usually find freer press, freer political assembly, and more upward mobility. Gender equality tends to be more equal (not equal, but more equal). Tolerance for alternative religion, ethnic background, and sexual identity tends to be more widespread.
On the other hand, the converse is usually true in areas where private investment is limited.
The Laffer Curve suggests that the rational tax policy is to maximize tax rates for government income. Too many Republicans ignore this limit to the function and assume that any and all reductions are good reductions and they engage in reductions without rationale. That’s where “trickle down economics” breaks and becomes morally corrupt. Is the theory above that point morally corrupt? That’s a very hard argument to support with facts and history.
Reasonable people disagree on where the maximum value point on the curve occurs, and that point certainly shifts with the economic cycle, and requires constant adjustment. The GOP tinkers down, the Democrats tinker up. The difference is that the GOP is tinkering because they believe in the prediction of the theory that such tinkering will increase tax revenue and stimulate the economy to grow whereas the Democrats are tinkering because they perceive differences in wealth levels as being evil and they seek to use the tax policy of the government to effect wealth transfers.
That’s a big reason I vote GOP vs. the competition.
(I deleted the previous post because it didn’t format the way I wanted it to.)
That’s a big reason I vote GOP vs. the competition.
Well, now I can sleep at night, with that mystery solved.
….and here I thought it was because of a shared propensity for illegal eavesdropping.