"As conservatives we should not be (to borrow a line from Reagan) 'raising a banner of pale pastels, but bold colors which make it unmistakably clear where we stand on all of the issues troubling the people.' If conservative candidates run for office on conservative issues and are capable of articulating their conservative views to the American people, they will win elections. The American people want solutions, not a progressive agenda that is scaled back slightly so it can be considered bi-partisan."If walking with God, how can one be bipartisan with the devil. In government, what right does our chosen conservative representatives have to compromise in the name of bipartisanship with the progressive leftist socialists.
Matt Ross, Conservative Hideout: With all the talk of bipartisanship lately, have we been missing a larger point? We’ve talked about it being inauthentic, a trap, and a farce. All of those are likely quite true. But is the larger question, “Should Republicans even try?”All through 2009, this blog, and thousands of others, chronicled what the Democrats wanted. We used video footage, quotes, excerpts, and good old fashioned “connecting the dots,” to show what the end-goals of the Democrats were. We knew that the public option was supposed to lead to single payer. We knew that the Porkulus was a massive pay off. We knew that the bailouts were meant to achieve control of as many industries as possible. We knew that they want to control the media and Internet. We knew that they mean to get card check as a payoff for their union goon supporters. The list could go on and on.
Not only were we able to discover the Democratic goals for 2009, but we can also safely assume that the goals have not changed. They may re-name the initiatives and legislation, but the intent is the same. Just as the oft mentioned “second stimulus” morphed into “the jobs bill,” they will use subtle (or not) changes in language to re-define and re-frame debates. When, in reality, they are presenting the same tired “progressive” ideas in alternate packaging. In this manner, they will attempt to increase their control over the everyday lives of all Americans. Bit by bit, piece by piece, they will eventually come to control everything we do. They will bide their time when they must, and they will take large chunks when they are in power, or can when they can exploit a crisis that they likely caused in the first place.
So then, let’s assume that there is some bipartisan “progress” on health care. Will this not be part of a socialist plan that is either a direct attempt at control, or a Cloward-Piven plan designed to create an exploitable future crisis? Will a watered down “progressive” policy still be fascist & socialist? Will any concessions or assurances made by the Democrats be broken once the vote is taken?
To be realistic, bipartisan legislation will undoubtedly slow down the march towards the nanny state. But, we’ve already gone too far in that direction. Each step brings us all closer, and far too many steps have already been taken. We can afford no more of the slow slide towards control. Instead, the powers of government must be rolled back, not simply expanded more slowly. The left is too close to their end goals, hence their desire to use whatever means necessary to get there. They can literally taste it.
It cannot be ignored that we are dealing with the left. They have shown again and again that they believe that the end justifies the means. They have repeatedly lied about their intent, and have been trying to deflect the blame for their many failures. The GOP should have no motivation to deal with another party that have repeatedly failed to honor the most simple of promises.
The promises of bipartisanship coming from the left are as empty as all the other broken promises. They should be considered as such.
To share or to post to your site, click on the date / link for the post. Please mention or link to us. Thanks! http://arranewsservice.com
0 comments:
Post a Comment