Comments Posted By Jaybo
Displaying 1 To 6 Of 6 Comments


Jeff @ 36 said,

"American Society as a whole has moved to the left, and the traditional American values that built this great Country have seemingly all but disappeared. We need to hold on to & cherish these values, not discard them like yesterday’s garbage."

This statement is really a misrepresentation of the facts. From a christian's perspective, immorality has increased but we are more conservative in a secular sense than we were in 1980.

I am a christian and, as I have said in previous posts, I watched the Reagan revolution from the beginning. We did not have any misconceptions that Pres. Reagan was going to legislate christian values to our country. We simply believed that his conservative philosophy would allow this country to give us the freedom to continue to promote what we feel to be our great commission.

Some of what has happened is the result of christians (like myself) forgetting who really has the power to change things; and putting our faith in a political party to legislate righteousness.

We were wrong. Righteousness can never be legislated, it can only come as the result of a change in a person's heart (or a society's). Christians should continue to do their duty as americans and vote, but we need to go back to the real power that can change a society. We need to go back to promoting the gospel and leaning on God to
do what only He can do to change this gradual slide into immorality. God is no respector of persons. He can work through democrats as easily as republicans.

Putting the above aside, I was very encouraged to hear that Michael Steele was being considered as the new head of the RNC.

It is way past time that republicans realize that the democrats are more than happy to keep african-americans ignorant of their true potential. That's why they continue to lie and scare them with fables of republicans wanting to take them back to the 1950s. If republicans cannot see the weakness and irrationality of this methodology and provide a positive, hopeful alternative; then we (republicans) are in more trouble than I first believed.

This could even be the next big visionary goal of the new Republican Party. We (republicans) have succeeded in changing our society and it is no longer a "new deal" culture. Our next great challenge will be to welcome all ethnic groups into this superior way of thinking.

As christians, our job is to do what we do best. Promote the gospel of Jesus Christ and lean on Him alone to change the heart of America. This is not the responsibility of The Republican Party. Unfortunately, we seemed to have forgotten this.

Comment Posted By Jaybo On 11.11.2006 @ 14:43

Here is further proof of what I mean when I doubt the "new-found" middle ground that the dems seem to stand on.

(posted on The Daily Kos)
Lamont's challenge to Lieberman in Connecticut was a victory for the movement
I was working on a post to explain how we won in Connecticut by targeting Joe Lieberman (even though Ned Lamont did not ultimately defeat him in the general election) when I observed this morning that Markos had already written something like that for DailyKos.

And since our friends over at unSoundPolitics have already tried to jest at Markos for the loss (which is hilarious, considering that we had a huge series of victories while they lost big) I'm going to excerpt him instead:

In some DC circles, there's a lot of chortling about Lieberman. But we did what we set out to do -- to make clear to the party leadership that the war was going to be this year's decisive issue. Until Lamont won his primary, that obvious point wouldn't pierce the DC bubble. So we had to make our point in a dramatic fashion.

Furthermore, Lieberman will caucus with the Democrats. That's fine. Hopefully he's learned his lesson and will actually go back to representing the people of Connecticut. If he does, he'll be fine in six years.

If he doesn't, he'll be right back where we started and will face an even more mature people-powered movement. And all he has to do is look at the 2008 Senate calendar, and the almost dozen serious Democratic pickup opportunities, to realize that any thoughts of switching parties would be a short term power-play at best.

Lieberman has been neutered. If he leaves the caucus for short-term gain, he loses all leverage and power and harms his long-term interests. Yet he doesn't stay in the caucus as a Democrat, but as an independent. And in that capacity he can criticize the Democratic Party all he wants without it being a story of "Democrats versus Democrats". He can flirt with Bush without it being a case of "bipartisanship".

In any case, Lieberman is the old. An artifact of a bygone era. Let him sunset in the Senate as we look to our future leaders -- people like Tester, Webb, Klobuchar, Brown, McCaskill, Whitehouse, and so many exciting new faces in the U.S. House.
Our challenge to Joe Lieberman was a victory for people powered politics. We didn't even expect to beat him in the Democratic primary, but we did, and that had an important effect on dozens upon dozens of races across the country.

Could Lamont have campaigned harder after winning the primary?

Probably. He didn't have to lose momentum by waiting to see if Lieberman just might change his mind. He could have benefited from a slight change in strategy.

I am not sure what other commentators have meant they said our challenge of Joe has given him all this power and leverage. Joe was already a traitor to the party. He could choose to caucus with the Republicans, yes, but what's in it for him?

A final act of desertion would have to be permanent. Neither caucus would tolerate him going back and forth. And if he caucused with the GOP, he could easily end up in a smaller minority after 2008. Joe knows this, and that's why he and the Democratic establishment have made a deal.

Lieberman is indeed ultimately irrelevant. We will continue electing populist progressive champions to the U.S. Senate in the effort to build a people powered governing majority.

Comment Posted By Jaybo On 10.11.2006 @ 22:01

beornn52 @28,

It really remains to be seen if the democrats are really going to give any power to the blue-dog democrats that are now coming to congress.

Their money and their constituencies are going to put a lot of pressure on them.

I will wait and watch, but so will the voters.

Comment Posted By Jaybo On 10.11.2006 @ 21:25


Another important point. The conservative movement is not a fixed target, it is a concept.

Let me explain what I mean. If you go back to the beginning of the Reagan Revolution, you will remember that it was a "visionary movement". At the time of its inception, it was right of the country and the vast majority of america's political power. Over time we have actually watched the country move to the right over the years to where we are today. Reagan Republicans were responsible for many of the current policies that we now take for granted. The biggest is a 180 degree change in the way the military is treated and viewed. I know this because I was in the military and saw how we were treated first hand.

Conservatism is an "idealistic" movement that attracts people of principle and character. Contrast this with the nutroots on the radical left.

They are what some career politicians in the republican party had become. Win at any price and damn convictions and principles.

The nutrootsof the democrat wing will now expect their blood-lust to be satisfied now that the dems have won. If they do not get what they want, do you think they will be willing to conceed?

I doubt it. These people are too irrational and emotionally driven to do that. This is the achilles heal of the current Democratic Party.

If the democrats in congress do not appease them, a war will begin soon. Remember what they did to Sen. Lieberman?

Comment Posted By Jaybo On 10.11.2006 @ 13:04


Careful son, I served in The Air Force under the infamous Pres. Carter and also voted for Pres. Reagan both times.

I am also probably older than you and have watched the Reagan Revolution from the beginning.

You can call yourself a conservative all you want, but that doesn't make it so. Pres. Reagan would have become sick if he would have seen the way the republican party has turned into the party of big government.

You can thank your RINO buddies for that one.

Now, I gave you several facts that, I believe, support my opinion.

How about debating me on the facts and leave the name-calling to the trolls?

Comment Posted By Jaybo On 10.11.2006 @ 12:33


Talk about off the mark!

Did you take any time at all to view the polling data and get a feel for what happened and why the middle left the Republican Party?

If you did, you would have seen the exact opposite of what you claim.

Most middle of the road voters see the democrats as more fiscally responsible than the republican politicians that are now on the sidelines! You have to give the democrats credit for pulling off this feat of deception that even the best magician would admire!

This could never have happened if your vaunted RINO's hadn't pulled the party so far left that they lost the middle!

The second real reason why republicans lost was the Iraq conflict. Speaking as someone that knows, The President was fallen into the trap of trying to reprove that the Vietnam Conflict Model could be used again. I am absolutely amazed that we have a republican president that thinks we can fight a limited engagement conflict and expect to win.

Political correctness may have finally destroyed this country and its strength. If we cannot do what is necessary to win in Iraq, then we are only a paper tiger.
If we are only a paper tiger, then you are now witnessing the beginning of our gradual decline. Trust me, the islamo-fascists will gain great comfort if they also see the above and it will be a sign to them that
"Allah" backs their war against the "Great Satan". It will only be just a matter of time before a major calamity will befall another major american city in the form of an attack.

Political power and influence will never be the strength of the Republican Party. To be honest with you, If the Democratic Party ever became more conservative than the republicans guess who I would vote for?

Having said that, I will tell you that I voted last Tuesday almost straight republican because the alternative was even worse.

I hope and pray that the party ignores the nonsense from people like you. Our future depends on it.

Comment Posted By Jaybo On 10.11.2006 @ 11:57

Powered by WordPress



Pages (1) : [1]

«« Back To Stats Page