Taking Over the Republican Party »
Posted By Radiofreeeuropa 9 months, 1 week ago in Political NewsA history of the transformation of the Republican party from a political organization to a loony cult.
Read Full Story at theocracywatch.org »
906 Views Share Story 105 Comments Report
Submitted By:
Radiofreeeuropa
All progress comes from unreasonable people.
Rats live on no evil star!
Wasilla: All I saw...
Sorry, just palindroming around with terrorists.
Are you still ...
RSS Join the Discussion
+ Add CommentComments So Far: 105 (view all)
-
95%
Radiofreeeuropa9 months, 1 week ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
FTA-"A group of Republican strategists who had worked on Barry Goldwater's 1964 presidential campaign were worried. Goldwater had been soundly defeated, and the strategists feared that the base of the Republican Party -- primarily southern segregationists and the very wealthy -- was too narrow. So they set out to expand the base calling themselves the New Right. Goldwater was not part of the New Right.
Reply
One member of the New Right, Republican Strategist Paul Weyrich, founded the Heritage Foundation in 1973 -- a think tank to promote the ideas of the New Right. Weyrich also founded ALEC, The American Legislative Exchange Council in 1973 to coordinate the work of Religious Right state legislators. ALEC initially positioned itself as a counterweight to liberal foundations and think tanks, focusing on social issues like abortion and the Equal Rights Amendment, but became a magnet for corporate lobbyists.
ALEC gives business a direct hand in writing bills that are considered in state assemblies nationwide. Funded primarily by large corporations, industry groups, and conservative foundations -- including R.J. Reynolds, Koch Industries, and the American Petroleum Institute -- the group takes a chain-restaurant approach to public policy, supplying precooked McBills to state lawmakers. Since most legislators are in session only part of the year and often have no staff to do independent research, they're quick to swallow what ALEC serves up. In 2000, according to the council, members introduced more than 3,100 bills based on its models, passing 450 into law.
In 1979 Weyrich coined the term "Moral Majority." Their goal was to politicize members of fundamentalist, Pentecostal and charismatic churches - a constituency that had been basically apolitical.
Not all members of fundamentalist, Pentecostal and charismatic churches support the Religious Right, but those were the groups targeted by the New Right. And some members of churches outside of those mentioned support the Religious Right, while many other Christian leaders strongly oppose them."-
mntnman444Comment removed: Spammer, Hard Banned3 Replies
-
-
100%
gamahuche9 months, 1 week ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
A very impressive find, RFE!
Reply
I don't have time to read it through tonight - tough long piece of work to finish - but have diligently bookmarked it and when/if I finally get to bed this night I will say a prayer that we remain the 2nd most pagan country in Europe.. [Lithuania ranks #1 - they hug trees; we pick mushrooms].
Separation of Church and State should be the basis of all government - and anyone who tries to subvert the same deserves crucifixion if they're Christians, beheading if they're Moslems, etc.. [And that's speaking from my pacifist standpoint.]
-
-
-
mntnman444Comment removed: Spammer, Hard Banned
-
75%
memestryker9 months, 1 week ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Not many classic liberals in the democratic party, either. They've been replaced by a mix of leftists and a growing number of evangelicals.
Reply
I don't like where I see any of the main political parties headed, and I don't see anything presenting a viable alternative. People have to accept too much responsibility to be libertarians, and I think some of their economic views and things like separation of school and state would have unintended negative consequences.
We all are very ignorant in most areas, and we don't like to admit it. Even insiders are mostly only "talk" knowledgable and not really experienced on the ground. It's always an experimental cr*p shoot. -
-
-
-
-
67%
memestryker9 months, 1 week ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
The far right and the far left are similar to the taliban in the sense that they are autocratic, dictatorial, and tyrannical, but the republicans overall are not equivalent to the taliban. The taliban are more analogous to the clergy who perpetrated the Spanish Inquisition, ordeals, and witch hunts and killings.
Reply
-
-
FrauBlucherComment removed: Retracted by user10 Replies
-
-
100%
memestryker9 months, 1 week ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
I don't think people really get it. There is a large population who actually believe a fundamentalist interpretation of the Christian bible and who strongly support the so-called republican platform. They would have actually elected Huckabee president--a man who openly believes in young earth creationism and is a minister in one of the most misogynistic fundamentalist Paulist religious sects in the U.S.
Reply
They liked Palin's religious views (they call it "values" rather than "indoctrination"). But they didn't like McCain because he's been bi-partisan in his behavior too frequently, even though he advocates leaving a child in an orphanage to grow up rather than allowing a loving gay individual or couple to adopt him or her and let the child experience a family's love.
-
-
93%
Jeboba9 months, 1 week ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Those of us who keep ourselves informed have been screaming our heads off since Reagan was elected but to no avail. The 'dumbed down' average American fell for every piece of CRAP the Republicans held out. Witness 8 years of Bush!
Reply
EVERYONE better hope Obama suceeds or we'll be right back in the same barrel!-
20%
memestryker9 months, 1 week ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
The U.S. has had so many tyrants, ideologues, and imbeciles in the White House over the years that I'm not sure why you suggest it began with the Reagan administration!
Reply
I do hope Obama succeeds in working with all the branches of government and internationally to get the U.S. back on track economically and scientifically. I'm somewhat concerned that he hasn't shown any strong knowledge of or attachment to the U.S. Constitution he swore to protect, although he's marketed himself as an expert on it. I hope he'll fill in those gaps before he really gets moving on policy-making. -
-
-
-
26%
simonsez9 months, 1 week ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
70 million voted Obama, 60 million didn't and the 60 million were not particularly enthused about the candidate running.
Reply
The country is still up for grabs next time around.
Obama will have a brilliant term based on style, but weak or lacking in substance.
I have a feeling he likes to be liked and may have problems making unpopular decisions.
You have become the party of the "have nots". You contribute the least to government, depending on the more productive to foot the bill. You show your disdain for those who succeed in life. You think everyone who does well was "lucky" and doesn't really deserve what they have.
The Democrat party has become the loony party, immersed in self pity and hatred. You are destined to fail because you don't understand the nature of capitalism.-
-
91%
Radiofreeeuropa9 months, 1 week ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
The nature of capitalism? Is it to nationalize debt while privatizing profits?
Reply
Is it to demand de-criminalization of unsound harmful business practices? (de-regulation).
Corporations exist ONLY as an entity at the discretion of the state, why should the state not be entitled to protect the people from unfair practices? The idea that all profits are good profits is a fallacy if the cost to the many is too great. The very idea that government exists to assist the "haves", to use your terms, while turning a blind eye to the majority's needs is not American.
It is feudalism.
"I hope we shall crush in its birth the aristocracy of our monied corporations which dare already to challenge our government to a trial by strength, and bid defiance to the laws of our country."
Thomas Jefferson
“The mischief springs from the power which the monied interest derives from a paper currency which they are able to control, from the multitude of corporations with exclusive privileges which they have succeeded in obtaining...and unless you become more watchful in your states and check this spirit of monopoly and thirst for exclusive privileges you will in the end find that the most important powers of government have been given or bartered away…."
Andrew Jackson -
-
100%
jordan119 months, 1 week ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
You contribute the least to government, depending on the more productive to foot the bill.>>>>
Reply
Now that's FUNNY! Do you have any idea which states contribute the most to our GDP? Which states pay the most taxes? Which states get back more than they pay in?
CA contributes the most to our GDP. They get back 81 cents for every dollar they put into federal taxes. Here's a list of the top 9 states in terms of money back for every dollar they pay;
North Dakota; 2.03
NM: 1.89
Mississippi 1.84
Alabama 1.82
W. Virginia 1.74
Montana 1.64
Alabama 1.61
South Dakota 1.59
Arkansas 1.53
Speaking of the "more productive" footing the bill, you'd best hope liberals hang on to their impressive history of pouring money into government with taxes, cause red states will be in deep doo doo without them. -
89%
gamahuche9 months, 1 week ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
"You are destined to fail because you don't understand the nature of capitalism"
Reply
On the contrary some of us know it far better than we would wish to!
And of course when the RED REVOLUTION comes we'll put all the capitalists into cages and toss peanuts and apple cores at them, just like they've been doing to us for the last half-century.
-
-
20%
Georgia509 months, 1 week ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
I don't have a problem seeing how our political differences today line up with the concepts embraced by the founding forefathers. Of course I realize that asking a liberal to take seriously the words of a long-since dead white man who came here to commit genocide is asking way too much of said liberal.
Reply
Still, if we're going to brandish terms like "loony cult" around, then I for one would thoroughly enjoy putting the term to its proper, demonstrative, and actual use. -
-
ShixaComment removed: Retracted by user
-
-
23%
vettenut9 months, 1 week ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
FTA:
Reply
Joe Conason wrote: "....in Santa Clara Country, another slate of "biblically oriented" candidates--committed to the death penalty for such sins as homosexuality and abortion....."
This is simply a lie. A pile of garbage! No "biblically-oriented" candidates took that stance.
This is not like "painting with a broad brush," it's like saying that "all Democrats advocate confiscation and re-distribution of all the land of all the 'corporate farms' in the US!"
RFE: This article is far from objective!
Either put up (evidence that Conason is right by providing names and quotes) or shut up (distance yourself from this remark)!
BTW, abortion IS a DEATH SENTENCE (for the aborted one), and resembles a death sentence by daily-administered small doses of strychnine for the mother!-
-
90%
Radiofreeeuropa9 months, 1 week ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
My opinion hinges not on this one remark in any sense and the thesis of the article does not either, (Though I have not the time to research this right now, I don't see any reference in your statement to a candidate who did not run on said platform either) my personal opinion is that in a concerted effort to bolster it's ranks of voters, the Republican party, has been outed by it's redheaded stepchild, the theocrats who in turn are manipulated by another contingent previously not aligned with American Conservatives. The Neocon faction. Where are the moderates? If there are any, they have been silenced or toe the line of the radicals merely to keep their jobs. (McCain comes to mind, candidate McCain in 2000 was no bible thumping wingnut, in 2008 he unconvincingly pretended he was. Who knows where he really stands?)
Reply
And who on earth is pro abortion? No one. As you know in your heart, it will go on regardless of whether it is a medical procedure or an act of butchery. It's a matter of who will profit. I am a man, it's easy for me to say make abortions illegal. I will not be having one ever.
I suspect no one takes this route lightly. It is not MY business however, I make no claim that I know more than doctors or women in this matter and I would argue that medical advice is superior to the advice of some hack with a clothes hanger. Besides if abortions are illegal what prison sentence will you give the mothers? How much time will they have to do?
If you feel strongly about this, council women in need. Offer to adopt. Educate.
I doubt the number of abortions would change by making it unsafe,the amount of deaths would rise certainly though.
Unless you know when consciousness comes into play, you can't really say with any certainty anyway. A single cell is alive. You kill millions by washing your hands or brushing your teeth. Not to trivialize this in any way. But no one is for abortion. No one. I prefer to have it be a medical issue rather than a government issue.
-
-
80%
memestryker9 months, 1 week ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
The Republican party has clearly been hijacked by religious and ideological extremists. Those being called RINOs are actually the ones closest to the traditional Republican philosophy. William F. Buckley was one who advocated key elements of the philosophy.
Reply
Unfortunately, the democrats also tend to be ideologues, only their weakness is a lack of understanding/acceptance of human nature and economics. It seems like many like to think of themselves as having the intellect of Michael Kinsley, and the vast majority don't.
And elites are elites--from both parties. That doesn't change--people typically act in their own best interest and in ways that reward loyalty.
The Libertarian message goes too far in trusting the average citizen to have the capacity to understand complex issues and make informed decisions. We see the impossibility of this with the recent stimulus talks, where politics trumped reason in many instances. We also see it when children are not properly socialized by parents.
I still think Ron Paul has the most correct view on most issues, although I strongly disagree with him on some, such as abortion (I think it's a private issue between a woman and her doctor and the government should back off). Even when I think he's off target, I think he's closer to it than most.
Obama's basically a good guy, and although he was never a team player (check his record in the Illinois legislature), nor quick at noticing the political essence of issues, he's trying to act in the best interest of the world and the country. I think he's a little heavy on the dictator/totalitarian/oligarch side of things, but Bush was very heavy on the dictator/totalitarian/fascist side (except for his base), so oligarch as a trajectory at least moves the pendulum through the center on it's way to the target.
And Obama does eventually read issues and generally acts responsibly when he finally develops a larger picture--although not always.
I think that one-sided views fail to acknowledge the essence of what's good on all sides.-
libsRfunnyComment removed: Hard Banned8 Replies
-
-
38%
tadair9199 months, 1 week ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
This is a good article. Funny thing is, however, that the Democrats don't see how their party was taken over, too.
Reply
Their team doesn't stink. Elected to get out of war, now want to invade Pakistan and continue the endless war on terror. Pelosi was supposed to impeach Bush but then "took it off the table." We don't like Bush's bank bailouts, but Obama's are fine.
Whatever.
Oakland Raiders. Kansas City Cheifs. Whatever team floats your boat.-
100%
Radiofreeeuropa9 months, 1 week ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Though I don't agree with bank bailouts from anyone, AIG should simply be given to students to run, they would do a far better job...they could keep the eventual profits and it would cost us nothing.
Reply
Obama has been sticking to his campaign promises. He said all along it was not that he didn't believe in any war, that he didn't believe in stupid wars. That the Iraq boondoggle hampered real efforts against real terrorists who were implicit in 9/11 attacks.
Hey, as "teams" they both stink. One has looted us while they were stinking though.
-
-
-
100%
Radiofreeeuropa9 months, 1 week ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
The biggest mistake was doing away with anti-trust laws.
Reply
Allowing any 1 entity to control the entire pie is always counterproductive for all in the long run. These "financials" became over 60% of the entire US economy...too big to fail as they say. It shouldn't have ever been permitted in the first place. -
-
100%
skyking2p9 months, 1 week ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
The problem with intolerance (or perhaps its saving grace) is that it cannot resist the temptation to turn on itself. Those who revel in finding others less moral or less religious or less patriotic than themselves will turn their vitriol toward circles closer and closer to themselves until each one stands alone as the paragon of virtue. Ultimately the Republican Party that we have witnessed during the past quarter of a century was destined to fail as it excluded more and more of the country from its ranks.
Reply
In the end it was not enough to be religious, anti-abortion, pro-war, anti-gay, evangelistic, white and anti-government. You also had to be rural and anti-intellectual and blue collar and xenophobic. It was not the choice of Sarah Palin or the collapse of the economy that caused the failure of the Republican Party; it was the Republicans' ever-expanding list of requirements to be a "real American" and thus qualified to join them.
Tolerance is not agreement. As its name states, it is a recognition that differences can and should be tolerated both as a gesture of respect for the value of others and as a practical way for those who do not agree on every goal or position to cooperate on those where agreement does exist. The alternative to tolerance is not purity of loyalty, piety, or morality – it is strife and stagnation.
In the 1960s the Democratic Party championed the civil rights movement and thereby abandoned millions of its members who preached and practiced intolerance toward people of races, nationalities, political philosophies, and religions different from their own. Democrats lost many subsequent elections because of that decision as those people began to vote Republican in national elections. Today they virtually control the Republican Party.
The Republican Party needs to build a new base that tolerates America's growing diversity. It does not need to do this to win elections (though eventually that may be a result), but to once again put its unique political and fiscal policies in reach of all of America's citizens. All of us will benefit from the competition of ideas that once was a hallmark of American society. Changing the party will not be easy, and the transition may include the same kinds of losses previously suffered by the Democrats.
Those who continue to adhere to an agenda of bigotry and intolerance need to recognize how small a minority they have become in America. Having both the Democratic Party and the Republican Party move away from them may finally lead to that awareness. -
Republicrat1844Comment removed: Retracted by user
-
100%
tschrnywolf9 months, 1 week ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
PERSONAL BELIEFS BELONG AT HOME. STRICT SEPARATION STATES IS IN OUR CONSTITUTION, NO MATTER HOW MUCH ROBERTSON, REED ET AL DISLIKED IT. OUR FREE WAY OF LIFE IS A LIVING, EVERYDAY REALITY. :) EVERYTIME THE LAW IS APPLIED AND OUR CIVIL RIGHTS RESPECTED, OUR LIBERTY GROWS STRONGER.
Reply
OF COURSE THE COST IS HIGH, WE ALL NOW THE HIGH COST OF INSURANCE.
THE GOP IS GONG ABOVE THE LIMITS. TRYING TO GET TOTAL CONTROL IS LIKE THE PERFECT BUT SUPREMELY BORING AND ABUSIVE ORVILLE SOCIETY. THE NAZI STYLED SYSTEM WHEN EVERYBODY STEPS AT THE SAME DRUM. DISSENT ISNOT PERMITTED. OF COURSE A VERY RACIST AND REPRESSIVE REGIME.
INSTEAD, HOW CAN WE MAKE THE JUMP TO A REAL FREE SOCIETY? PRESIDENT OBAMA, I THINK, IS TRYING TO FIND PEACEFUL CHANGE AND POSITIVISM. HE IS THE RIGHT LEADER TO HELP US MAKE A CALM AND COMPASSIONATE TRANSITION.
BUT 4 YEARS IS NOT ENOUGH. IT WILL TAKE YEARS TO HELP OUR ECONOMY RECOVER AND SET UP A SOLID FOUNDATION AND A STRONG ECONOMY THAT WILL RESIST FUTURE RECESSIONS.THE FOUNDERS LEFT A SOLID BASE? IF SO WHAT AND WHEN GO WRONG? SQUABBLING BETWEEN PARTISANS WASTES TIME.
OR RATHER, DID THE WRITERS OF OUR CONSTITUTION SWEEP LINGERING PROBLEMS UNDER THE CARPET? AS THE LATE BARBARA JORDAN (SHE WAS A SENATOR OR HEAD OF THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES), " ...IT HAD NOTHING FOR ME AND MY PEOPLE..
SO HOW COULD THE CHRISTIAN ROBERTSON ENCOURAGE THE SOUTH RACISTS AND kkk'RS TO JOIN THEM? A RELIGOUS BIGOT WOULD TELL ME NOW THAT HAS CHANGED. BUT HAS IT, REALLY? HERE, SELF-ABIDED REPS. SAID, OR WROTE LIKE BIGOTS. I COULD HARDLY BELIEVE WHAT I READ. I HAD THOUGHT RACISM WAS PAST. BUT I WAS SADLY WRONG AND VERY DISSAPPOINTED. I LIVE IN THE NORTHEAST, LUCKILY MY STATE IS LIBERAL AND MANY OF MY NEIGHBORS COME FROM aFRICAN ANCESTORS. MOST OF THEM ARE KIND AND HELPFUL. OTHERS ARE SERIOUS, BUT POLITE. I DO NOT UNDERSTAND WHY SOME SOUTHERNERS RESENT THEM.? IS IT INSECURITY, JEALOUSY OR SIMPLY CULTURAL DIFFERENCES?
BUT IF AMERICANS FROM ANGLO ANCESTRY FEEL IN COMPETITION...WHY NOT SHARING JOBS? PRICES WOULD DROP WITH A SMALLER,BUT MORE EFFICIENT ECONOMY. COOPERATION IS BETTER THAN RIVALRY THAT HAS CAUSED THE "RAT-RACE." -
100%
tschrnywolf9 months, 1 week ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
NO HUMAN CAN ADVOCATE KILLING NEWBORNS, OR HALF FORMED FETUSES. BUT MANY POOR MOTHERS CANNOT CONFRONT THE RESPONSIBILITY, OR HAVE NO WAY TO SUPPORT A CHILD. THEN, THOSE GIRLS MUST LEARN TO ABSTAIN. FATHERS ARE LIABLE TOO. BUT IF THEY HAVE NO JOBS, OUR SYSTEM FORCES THEM TO GET MONEY ANYWAY THEY CAN.
Reply
IF WE HAD JOBS FOR THEM, THAT WOULD BE PREVENTED. AS LONG AS HE PAID MONTHLY FEES TO THE MOTHER OF HIS FETUS, OR BABY, THINGS WOULD BE OK.WHEN THE RELIGIOS BLAME THE PARENTS, THEY TOTALLY MISS THE REALITY. NO MATTER WHAT IMPULSIVE YOUNGSTERS DO, OR NOT DO; IT IS THE LACK OF WORK THAT CREATES THE PROBLEM. NOT FETUSES, BABIES , OR PARENTS.
THE CHRISTIAN RIGHT MADE AN ISSUE OF ABORTION, BUT THE TRUE PROBLEM COMES FROM OUTSIDE: MASSIVE UNEMPLOYMENT.
I BELIEVE WOMEN WHO ABORT,SUFFER WHEN THEY HAVE TO RESORT TO ABORTION. NO MOTHER NEEDS THE CRUEL BLOODY DESCRIPTIONS OF SURGICAL WAYS TO KILL TRI-MESTER FETUSES. IN ADDITION, LEGALLY A WOMAN'S BODY IS HERS AND HER DECISIONS ARE ALSO HER CIVIL RIGHT.
IT WAS KIND OF SADISTIC TO USE SUCH A PAINFUL ISSUE. THE ROBERTSON FOLLOWERS WON THEIR BILLIONS...BUT BY INFLICTING TERRIBLE PAIN.! I BET MANY REPUBLICAN WOMEN ABORTED SECRETLY. REALLY, AS THE SINGER SANG:...TEARS IN HEAVEN (REPUBLICAN RICH HEAVEN.)
More News
The Huffington Post
Bernard-Henri Lévy: Jean-Baptiste Descroix-Vernier, Nietzsche, and the Rioters
Huff TV: Arianna Discusses Senate Health Care Reform On Countdown With Keith Olbermann
Lynda Obst: Cindy Hampton: Time To Tell All
Jeff Ma: Splitting 10s With Belichick
Arianna Huffington: Will The Unemployment Disaster Be Obama's Katrina?
Add a Comment
Sign In With Your Propeller Account
Please keep your comments relevant to this story.
To create a live link, simply type the URL (including http://) or email address and we will make it a live link for you. You can put up to 3 URLs in your comments. Line breaks and paragraphs are automatically converted — no need to use <p> or <br /> tags.