WLO banner ad

Wednesday, October 29, 2008

Will the Republicans learn anything from the massive defeat looming ahead?

From the Associated Press:

Barack Obama, gunning for a national landslide, now leads in four states won by President Bush in 2004 and is essentially tied with John McCain in two other Republican red states, according to new AP-GfK battleground polling.

The results help explain why the Democrat is pressing his money and manpower advantages in a slew of traditionally GOP states, hoping not just for a win but a transcendent victory that remakes the nation's political map. McCain is scrambling to defend states where he wouldn't even be campaigning if the race were closer.

This is what happens when the Republicans nominate a liberal.

They get their collective ass kicked. The Democrats are the liberal party. By nominating a liberal, the Republicans have made themselves irrelevant.

The only small government party in this country is the Libertarian Party.

If small government Republicans can not retake their party, the Republicans are going to join the Whigs in the historical dustbin.

An Obama presidency, combined with Democratic control of congress, is going to result in a tremendous economic setback for this country.

And it's largely the Republicans' fault for letting it happen. They failed to provide any real alternative. The only defense of McCain from even hardcore Republicans is that he's' "not as bad as Obama." That is insufficient.

The Libertarian Party is in a position to make massive gains in the aftermath of the impending economic debacle ahead.

The question is whether or not small government Republicans try to rebuild the rotting infrastructure within their crumbling party, or join the party that actually supports their limited government philosophy.

It is the same choice faced by those on a sinking ship with plenty of lifeboats. Go down with it, or jump the hell off a ship that no longer serves its intended purpose.


  1. Why are you voting for Bob Barr instead of Chuck Baldwin? Just curious.

  2. At what time did Chuck Baldwin talk to the Libertarians and ask for their vote?

  3. Goldwater_Conservative: My feelings about the Constitution Party are addressed in this post - http://www.bluecarp.com/2008/09/why-did-ron-paul-endorse-chuck-baldwin.html

    As a Goldwater fan, I think you would appreciate a distaste for the mix of religion and politics. Goldwater said "I don't have any respect for the Religious Right. There is no place in this country for practicing religion in politics. That goes for Falwell, Robertson and all the rest of these political preachers. They are a detriment to the country."

    You can find more of his thoughts on religion and politics right here: http://www.liberalslikechrist.org/about/Goldwater.html

    In sum, I think the Constitution Party, if it where in power, would implement a theocracy, thereby destroying individual rights and growing government in an attempt to enforce the New Testament. To me, they are as dangerous as any other pro-state party, just in a different way.

    I grew up going to Sunday School in the Southern Baptist Church. I have been taught that religion is about love and faith. No government can make anyone love or have faith. It is a futile exercise.

    Government can use force to put you on your knees, but it can not make you pray once you get there.

    That's why I voted for Bob Barr and not Chuck Baldwin.