If the Texas Republicans ran the country

Forums: Politics, Texas
Email this Topic • Print this Page

Considering the prominence of the Republican Party of Texas in national politics (George W. Bush, Tom DeLay, Karl Rove, et al.), it's useful to take a look at the 2000 and 2002 party platforms (accessible here) and see some of the policies the Texas Republicans advocate for the nation (items only in the 2000 or 2002 platforms identified as such: all others are found in both platforms):

--The Party calls for the United States monetary system to be returned to the gold standard (2000).

--Congress ... should withhold appellate jurisdiction of the Supreme Court in such cases involving abortion, religious freedom, and all rights guaranteed under the Bill of Rights.

--The Party supports the immediate adoption of American English as the official language of Texas and of the United States of America....

--The Party calls upon the Texas Legislature and the United States Congress to repeal any and all laws that infringe upon the right of individual citizens to keep and bear arms as guaranteed by the 2nd Amendment to the United States Constitution; and to reject the establishment of any mechanism to process, license, record, register or monitor the ownership of guns.

--The Party believes that the practice of sodomy tears at the fabric of society, contributes to the breakdown of the family unit, and leads to the spread of dangerous, communicable diseases.... The party opposes the decriminalization of sodomy.

--We support the elimination of public funding for organizations that advocate or support abortion. We urge the reversal of Roe v. Wade.

--We call for the abolition of the U. S. Department of Education and the prohibition of the transfer of any of its functions to any other federal agency.

--We support the requirement that schools teaching sex education must teach directive abstinence until heterosexual marriage with an uninfected person as the only safe and healthy means of preventing sexually transmitted diseases, the spread of AIDS, and pregnancies in unwed students, and is also a way to build strong and lasting relationships.

--The Republican Party of Texas reaffirms the United States of America is a Christian nation, which was founded on fundamental Judeo-Christian principles based on the Holy Bible (2002)

--Our Party pledges to do everything within its power to restore the original intent of the First Amendment of the United States and dispel the myth of the separation of Church and State. We support the right of individuals and state and local governments to display the Ten Commandments on public property subject to their control (2002) (similar language in the 2000 platform).

--Since Secular Humanism is recognized by the United States Supreme Court as a religion, and our government-funded schools are prohibited from teaching any religion, the Party believes that Secular Humanism and New Age Religion in any form should be subjected to the same state and federal laws as any other recognized religion.

--We support individual teachers' right to teach creation science in Texas public schools.

--We support and strongly urge Congress to pass a Religious Freedom Amendment which provides: "Neither the United States nor any State shall prohibit student-sponsored prayer in public schools, nor compose any official student prayer or compel joining therein."

--The Party supports amendment of the Americans with Disabilities Act to exclude from its definition those persons with infectious diseases, substance addiction, learning disabilities, behavior disorders, homosexual practices and mental stress thereby reducing abuse of the Act (2002)(similar language in the 2000 platform).

--The Party supports an orderly transition to a system of private pensions based on the concept of individual retirement accounts, and gradually phasing out the Social Security tax.

--We urge that the IRS be abolished and the Sixteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution be repealed.

--We further urge that the personal income tax, inheritance (death) tax, gift tax, capital gains, corporate income tax, and payroll tax be eliminated. We recommend the implementation of a national retail sales tax, with the provision that a two-thirds majority of the U.S. House and U.S. Senate is required to raise the rate (2002).

--The Party believes the Minimum Wage Law should be repealed and that wages should be determined by the free market conditions prevalent in each individual market (2002)(similar language in the 2000 platform).

--We demand that our federal legislators vote only for balanced budgets. Social Security should be taken off budget. In case of a budget surplus it should never be used to increase spending, but rather to pay off debt or be returned to the United States taxpayer.

--The Party believes it is in the best interest of the citizens of the United States that we immediately rescind our membership in, as well as all financial and military contributions to, the United Nations.

--The Party urges Congress to support HJR 77, the Panama and America Security Act, which declare the Carter-Torrijos Treaty null and void. We support re-establishing United States control over the Canal in order to retain our military bases in Panama, to preserve our right to transit through the Canal, and to prevent the establishment of Chinese missile bases in Panama.

Comments?

[edited to delete a duplicated passage]

Topic Stats
Top Replies
Link to this Topic

Type: Discussion • Score: 1 • Views: 2,401 • Replies: 23

No top replies

Whoa! Can't we just give Texas back to Mexico?

0 Replies

The Texas Republicans ARE running the country. Many Republicans in this state hold similar views, but they rarely get elected to statewide office. Not so long ago, one of them ran for governor and advocated privatizing the University of Washington.

Unfortunately, it's different in Texas...

0 Replies

These people are the most zealous bunch of Fascists since...well, you know.

They will continue to press their agenda at every front, and theirs is a take-no-prisoners philosophy.

Look for redistricting by the Republican majority in your state legislature, coming soon.

And if you think what joe started this thread with is extreme, just watch what they do if they get four more years.

0 Replies

This thread deserves a kick, with this:

Quote:

Texas has had six flags flying over it, as every amusement-park attendee knows. The flags include those of France, Spain, the Confederate States of America and our very own Republic of Texas.

Now it flies under a seventh. As 2003 has proved, we are now living in a country named -- like Afghanistan or Uzbekistan -- after the most influential part of the population. Like Turkmenistan, this new country is ruled by a powerful warlord. (The CIA World Factbook says Turkmenistan's president "retains absolute control over the country and opposition is not tolerated.")

Welcome, then, to DeLayistan -- where absolute control is retained and opposition is not tolerated.

DeLayistan's flag honors both the hardball nickname and former bug-exterminating career of its potentate, Tom DeLay: It features a hammer smashing a roach. In a nod to the wacky religious extremism that led DeLay to denounce Baylor University as unacceptably liberal because it didn't dismiss out-of-hand the whole evolution thing, the flag's hammer resembles a cross. (Oh, and the roach is wearing a Democratic National Committee T-shirt. Sure, it's kind of a busy design for a flag, but DeLay's an ayatollah, not a graphic design artist.)

In forming this new country, in ridding Texas of its nasty decades-long habit of democracy, Tom DeLay of Sugar Land has earned the coveted title of the Houston Press Turkey of the Year.

Life in DeLayistan can take some adjusting for those who are used to the free and easy ways of countries like, say, America.

Texans are not alone in coming under the DeLay thumb, of course. Residents of Florida still shudder in horror at the memory of the Semi-Well-Behaved White-Collar Hordes DeLay bused down to county election offices in the wake of the 2000 presidential vote, demonstrating for George W. Bush and the right to think Ann Coulter makes sense. Residents of California have had their own foreign puppet installed.

Here in what used to be known as Texas, DeLay snapped his fingers and his minions obeyed -- holding not one, not two, but three special sessions to push through a redistricting plan that nobody but Tom DeLay wanted. (For what it's worth, the plan previously in place had been supported by the GOP over Democratic objections.)

When even the Republicans couldn't agree, DeLay came in and "mediated" a solution -- while the governor was out of state. Reports that the "negotiations" consisted entirely of legislators asking, "How far would you like me to take it up the ass, Mr. DeLay?" are quite possibly an exaggeration.

"He wielded enormous influence and he was very persistent and stayed with it through to the end," one lobbyist says, wanting anonymity even while stating what was obvious to pretty much everyone in Austin.

So get used to life in DeLayistan. Border checkpoints will ensure each arriving car has a Bible, a concealed weapon and a "Rush Is Right" bumper sticker.

More Texas Turkeys can be found here.

0 Replies

They represent everything that the rest of the world fears about the United States. What a pack of redneck scum.

0 Replies

Unfortunately, as D'Artagnan noted, in many respects they ARE running the country -- or at very least, exerting an undue amount of influence over how it is run.

But, in my world, every cloud has a silver lining.

The only way we are ever going to get away from all this bullshit is to have it shoved in our collective faces in ways that can no longer be simply ignored by the lazy or uninterested.

And this group of Texas Republicans certainly knows how to "shove!"

They may be doing us all a favor.

0 Replies

Well, I was encouraged by the fact that the Texas Republicans dropped their support of the gold standard from their 2002 platform. Clearly, the Republican party is making a bold statement that it is ready, at long last, to enter the twentieth century.

0 Replies

Re: If the Texas Republicans ran the country

joefromchicago wrote:

Considering the prominence of the Republican Party of Texas in national politics (George W. Bush, Tom DeLay, Karl Rove, et al.), .....

<edited to prevent spamming>

....Comments?

[edited to delete a duplicated passage]

While I don't agree will ALL of what was noted above, I agree with a lot of it.

THe problem with most of you Liberal types is that you seem to think that you are the only ones that believe in the 'rightness' of their cause.

We of a more Conservative bent have our own beliefs that we are as committed to as you are to yours. If you want, we can go over point by point which of the above items I agree with and why, but all it will do is result in a flame war that will serve no useful purpose.

Just keep in mind that we Conservatives are a part of this country as well and we constitute a significant percentage of its population. Just because the majority of the posters on this board are what many of us on the Right would call 'bleeding heart Liberals', you had best remember that the temperature of this countries Liberal/Conservative level can't be summed up in your local coffee house poetry reading or on the SDU meeting on campus of your local college. There is a whole country out there of people who don't believe that the answer to all this countries woes is higher taxes on the rich, cutting our military, more regulations and laws on our citizens and more social programs.

Just remember that other peoples opinions can have merit too.

0 Replies

Re: If the Texas Republicans ran the country

Fedral wrote:

joefromchicago wrote:
Considering the prominence of the Republican Party of Texas in national politics (George W. Bush, Tom DeLay, Karl Rove, et al.), .....

<edited to prevent spamming>

....Comments?

Just to clear up any possible misconception, I created that list myself. I didn't pull it off some liberal website or get it sent to me by some "spammer." Instead, I got all of that information from the official website of the Republican Leadership Council of Montgomery County, Texas -- and I linked to it.

Now, if someone wants to copy the list and post it on some liberal website or spam it around, there's nothing I can (or would) do to stop it.

Fedral wrote:

THe problem with most of you Liberal types is that you seem to think that you are the only ones that believe in the 'rightness' of their cause.

Quite the contrary. I think most of us "liberal types" recognize that you "conservative types" also believe in the rightness of your cause. It's just that "we" believe that "you" are wrong.

0 Replies

Joe,
I didn't edit the list because I thought you did anything was incorrect with the data you wrote. I did it to cut down on the amount of scrolling the readers would have to do to get to my reply. I didn't edit it to censor, just to cut down on the amount of 'header' on my post.

And as to your second point, just as you believe that we are wrong most of the time, we conservatives believe that you liberals are wrong most of the time.

Isn't Democracy wonderful.

This debate brought to you by the Free Expression of Ideas, a subsidiary of Free and Democratic Societies and States.

0 Replies

Fedral wrote:

I didn't edit the list because I thought you did anything was incorrect with the data you wrote. I did it to cut down on the amount of scrolling the readers would have to do to get to my reply. I didn't edit it to censor, just to cut down on the amount of 'header' on my post.

That's fine, I understand. I just couldn't figure out what you meant by "spamming."

Fedral wrote:

And as to your second point, just as you believe that we are wrong most of the time, we conservatives believe that you liberals are wrong most of the time.

I wouldn't have it any other way.

Fedral wrote:

Isn't Democracy wonderful.

Well, it's tolerable, I'll give it that.

0 Replies

Fedral

Not to quarrel with any of the things you said...but an observation, if I may:

There also are many of us out here who do not consider themselves to be liberals in any sense of the word -- who disagree quite vehemently with the thrust of the "conservative agenda."

I acknowledge without prodding that the "conservative agenda" is diverse -- and I acknowledge without prodding that there are elements of the "conservative agenda" with which I feel more comfortable than I feel toward the liberal take on the same issue.

And on average, I think the "liberal" representation in our legislative branches have been much, much more realistic about the role of government in a democratic society than the conservative representation -- and I think the liberal representation has been much, much, much, much less hypocritical than their conservative counterparts.

0 Replies

Frank,
Please excuse me if this seems blunt but, I have seen a number of your posts in the past and I am sorry but I cant see much sign of anything that would be considered conservative.

I also believe that the liberal agenda of trying to be 'all things to all people' and a bunch of 'cradle to grave' we will look after your best interests because 'we know best' attitude is the most unrealistic set of goals that could be set.

People don't need to be looked after, they need to be left alone by government.

(P.S. Just curious Frank, I see from your sig that you are from Jersey. I grew up in Toms River until I joined the Army. Just wondering what area you hailed from?)

0 Replies

Fedral wrote:

(P.S. Just curious Frank, I see from your sig that you are from Jersey. I grew up in Toms River until I joined the Army. Just wondering what area you hailed from?)

I'm from Piscataway. I spend lots of time down the shore -- and travel through Toms River often.

Quote:

Frank, Please excuse me if this seems blunt but, I have seen a number of your posts in the past and I am sorry but I cant see much sign of anything that would be considered conservative.

I try to keep it hidden. But it is there. Gun control and capital punishment are probably two areas where I have as much in common with conservative arguments as with liberal arguments.

(BTW, please be as blunt as you want. I love directness-- even when I disagree with what is being said. And I can be almost terminally blunt myself.)

Quote:

I also believe that the liberal agenda of trying to be 'all things to all people' and a bunch of 'cradle to grave' we will look after your best interests because 'we know best' attitude is the most unrealistic set of goals that could be set.

Well, I'm sure our liberal friends would take objection to your characterization of the "liberal agenda" -- and they are welcome to do so. But as an outsider, I take objection to the characterization.

I don't think liberal representatives try to be "all things to all people" anymore than conservative representatives do. Both groups often put more thought into getting re-elected (than doing what I perceive to be the right thing) than I would prefer.

And most are not interested in "cradle to the grave" help -- but truly want to set reasonable safty-net programs in place to protect people who honestly cannot compete in the dog-eat-dog society in which we find ouselves living right now.

Quote:

People don't need to be looked after, they need to be left alone by government.

Hummm...a bit simplistic for my taste, Fedral. I think government (which really is nothing more than our elected representatives) has a necessary function in society -- and I think carnage, chaos, and anarchy would result from government "leaving us alone."

0 Replies

Fedral wrote:

I also believe that the liberal agenda of trying to be 'all things to all people' and a bunch of 'cradle to grave' we will look after your best interests because 'we know best' attitude is the most unrealistic set of goals that could be set.

Taking issue with the "liberal agenda" re providing certain services from "cradle to grave" does indeed seem to be one of the conservatives' favorite beefs against liberals. Only what services are being referred to? Health care? I suspect that's one of them. Are we better off with the current system than we'd be with some sort of "cradle to grave" health system?

Because right now many people, including some in the cradle and some close to the grave, aren't getting any...

0 Replies

D'artagnan wrote:

Fedral wrote:
I also believe that the liberal agenda of trying to be 'all things to all people' and a bunch of 'cradle to grave' we will look after your best interests because 'we know best' attitude is the most unrealistic set of goals that could be set.

Taking issue with the "liberal agenda" re providing certain services from "cradle to grave" does indeed seem to be one of the conservatives' favorite beefs against liberals. Only what services are being referred to? Health care? I suspect that's one of them. Are we better off with the current system than we'd be with some sort of "cradle to grave" health system?

Because right now many people, including some in the cradle and some close to the grave, aren't getting any...

Welfare is one of the primary beefs of the Right with the Left.
Now no one is saying that we can't afford to help people that need it, because this country is wealthy enough to pitch in to lend a hand to its citizens. It's when it goes from being a 'little assistance' to being 'expected' and finally to an 'entitlement' that there becomes a problem.
Not having a job is a tragedy NOT a career. We are paying millions of people in this country NOT TO WORK and some of these families have been part of this system for multiple generations.

Some other 'cradle to grave systems'
ADFC
Welfare
Public Housing
Food Stamps
Social Security
Medicare
Medicaid

These systems shovel out billions of dollars to people from when they are born until the SSA sends a check to help bury you.

I am not saying that these programs need to be eliminated. What I am saying is that turning a system that was supposed to be an assistance to unfortunate families into a monolith that eats a significant chunk of our Federal budget every year needs to be changed.

I am not a heartless, cruel monster who wants to see children starving on the and families out on the streets. What I AM saying is that America takes better care of its 'unfortunates' (aka 'Our precious Human Resources') than just about any country. Try being poor and jobless in Africa or Asia, then you will understand poverty.

But the Liberals think that if we just throw more money into the bottomless pit if ever increasing social programs that all will be right and perfect in the country.

I only have three words for those who believe this .......
YOU ARE DREAMING

If you pay people to sit at home and not work year in and year out, what incentive do they have to EVER look for a job?

Just my 2 cents ..... pre tax

0 Replies

The U.S. does not take better care of its "unfortunates" than just about any other country when the comparison is made to other Western countries. The comparison should be to Western Europe, not to Asia or Africa, where the resources are far from adequate.

But those Western countries provide the "cradle to grave" services that you object to. The fact is that the U.S. has relatively high rates of infant mortality and illiteracy.

You can't have it both ways. Either we provide certain basic services, or we don't. But to say that unfortunate people are being cared for when, in many cases, they aren't is just plain false.

0 Replies

Fedral wrote:

I am not a heartless, cruel monster who wants to see children starving on the and families out on the streets.

Good! Didn't think you were!

Quote:

But the Liberals think that if we just throw more money into the bottomless pit if ever increasing social programs that all will be right and perfect in the country.

Jeez, there you go again! Making a characterization that really is not a "one size fits all."

How does this sound to you:

Conservatives seem to think that if you kick poor people hard and often enough -- they will have the good taste to stop being poor.

Quote:

I only have three words for those who believe this .......
YOU ARE DREAMING

If you pay people to sit at home and not work year in and year out, what incentive do they have to EVER look for a job?

Two comments:

1) Some of the people being "paid to sit home" are probably costing society less using this method than they would cost society if you forced them to "work" for the money to obtain food, clothing, and shelter.

2) It may be that these far on the fringe liberals are dreaming. But it is a nice dream -- and one that at least imagines people having enough food, clothing, shelter, and amenities to make life reasonable.

Conservatives on the fringe dream also -- but they often dream nightmares for the "them's" of the world.

Like I said -- I ain't a liberal, but at least they are aimed at more humane goals than many conservatives.

0 Replies

Joe's original post shows exactly what reasonable Texan Americans are having rammed down their throats daily. It is a hell of a burden, having to answer to the world for what my state government is doing. I vote for Green and Democratic candidates every time, having long ago decided not to ever vote Republican again for the rest of my natural life. I don't feel responsible if I end up voting that way after I am dead. Somehow I don't think it would be my fault.

0 Replies

If the Texas Republicans ran the country

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know