Why I'm Joining the GOP

[Galvatron]

Link

After a lifetime voting for and working for Democratic candidates and independents, I'm finally going to make the switch and become a Republican.

The reasons are many, not the least of which is age. I turned 55 recently and, having lived more than half my life, I can't afford to worry anymore about the other guy. It's time for me.

As a Republican, I can now proudly -- indeed, defiantly -- pledge to never again vote for anyone who raises taxes for any reason. To hell with roads, bridges, schools, police and fire protection, Medicare, Social Security and regulation of the airwaves.

President Bush has promised to give me more tax cuts even though our federal government owes trillions of dollars to its creditors. But that's someone else's problem, not mine. Republicans are about the here and now, and I'm here now.

As a Republican, I can favor exploiting the environment for everything she's got. No need to worry about quaint notions like posterity and natural legacy. There are plenty of resources left for everyone, and if we don't use them, someone else will.

I want a party that doesn't worry about things before we have to. Republicans refuse to get hog-tied by theories such as global warming, ozone depletion, fished-out oceans and disappearing wetlands. The real problems -- if there are any -- aren't forecast to take hold for at least 50 years. So what do I care? I'll be dead.

As a Republican, I can swagger and clamor for war -- in Iraq, Afghanistan, Colombia, wherever -- even though I've never fought in one or even been in the military. I can claim that we're fighting for Democracy, ignoring reports of torture at Abu Ghraib, Bagram Air Base and Guantanamo Bay, and a spreading gulag of secret detention centers around the world.

Freedom, as every American should know after spending $300 billion for wars in Afghanistan and Iraq, isn't free.

As a Republican, I can insist on strict moral values when it comes to sex and ignore the growing moral chasms in business, politics, sports, journalism and the leadership of the Roman Catholic Church.

A society that loses control of its sexual urges faces unwanted pregnancies, socially transmitted disease, broken families. Those overzealous about wealth, however, produce only a higher GDP, lifelong security for their family and more minimum wage jobs for the lower classes. What's wrong with that?

As a Republican, I can favor strict punishment of criminals, except for those who happen to be my friends or neighbors. Isn't that the very definition of community -- looking out for friends and family?

I will be pro-death penalty and anti-abortion, pro-child but anti-child care, for education but against funding of public schools. As a Republican, I'll have a better chance of getting to spout my opinions in the media, which for some reason seems convinced that since Bush was re-elected with the smallest electoral margin of any sitting president in history, liberals are passe.

As a Republican, I'll say goodbye to "old Jesus" and hello to "new Jesus. " Sure Christ started out as a liberal Jew, and look where that got him. Compassion, love and diatribes against the rich only encourage the weak and punish the most successful among us. The Jesus that Republicans worship is a muscular, decisive, pro-war crusader hard at work cleansing the world of evildoers, not, God forbid, turning the other cheek.

My decision to become a Republican didn't come easily. For years I clung to the idea that the foundation of a democratic society was our implied social contract, each of us committing some level of personal sacrifice to the common good of all.

I regarded taxes as dues we pay for better roads and schools, safe inspection of meat and dairy products, maintenance of parks and protection of wilderness areas. I see now that looking out for the common good resulted in shortchanging the most important element in this formula -- me.

Let Democrats continue promising the "greatest good for the greatest number." Republicans clearly have my number -- No. 1.

I'm sure a lot of my friends reading this will ask me, "How can you sleep?" My answer will be, "Who's got time? I'm busy earning money." While they're bellyaching about rising deficits, the outsourcing of jobs and casualties in Iraq, I'll be marveling at the march of freedom in the Middle East, upticks in the GDP and the president's plan to link Social Security to the magic of the marketplace.

As a Republican, I simply won't listen to bad news anymore. Bad news doesn't get me or my family anywhere. If you don't have anything good to say about somebody, don't say anything at all -- unless it happens to be about a Democrat, of course.

[wolveraptor]

Nice.

[Dalton]

Praise the Lord and Pass the Elephant Buttons!

[wolveraptor]

Elephants have bigger cocks than asses. So vote for the Giant Orgasm Party today!!

[Asst. Asst. Lt. Cmdr. Smi]

Loved the "Jesus started as a Liberal Jew, and look where that got him!" line.

[Civil War Man]

Reminds me of a joke my father told me one time.

If you're young and not liberal, you have no heart. If you're old and not conservative, you have no money.

[felineki]

"Look Lois, the two symbols of the Republican Party: an elephant, and a big fat white guy who is threatened by change!"

Very amusing article. Sad that it's so true, though.

[Perinquus]

"Look Lois, the two symbols of the Republican Party: an elephant, and a big fat white guy who is threatened by change!"

Very amusing article. Sad that it's so true, though.

So sad that it's loaded to the gills with strawmen you mean. It is humorous, and it is not entirely without valid points. To think that it is a realistic appraisal of just how Repulblicans think is not only wrong, it's mean-spirited.

[wolveraptor]

Well duh. No individual (besides Moore and Limbaugh) can be attributed all the extreme characteristicis of both parties.

[Iceberg]

"Look Lois, the two symbols of the Republican Party: an elephant, and a big fat white guy who is threatened by change!"

Very amusing article. Sad that it's so true, though.

So sad that it's loaded to the gills with strawmen you mean. It is humorous, and it is not entirely without valid points. To think that it is a realistic appraisal of just how Repulblicans think is not only wrong, it's mean-spirited.

Would you care to point out inaccuracies in the overall effects of Republicanism as illustrated by the article, as opposed to just throwing out the claim of "straw man" and running away?

[Fleet Admiral JD]

"Look Lois, the two symbols of the Republican Party: an elephant, and a big fat white guy who is threatened by change!"

Very amusing article. Sad that it's so true, though.

So sad that it's loaded to the gills with strawmen you mean. It is humorous, and it is not entirely without valid points. To think that it is a realistic appraisal of just how Repulblicans think is not only wrong, it's mean-spirited.

Would you care to point out inaccuracies in the overall effects of Republicanism as illustrated by the article, as opposed to just throwing out the claim of "straw man" and running away?

Maybe because *gasp* very few republicans share all of those views.

Me, for example.

[Fleet Admiral JD]

Stupid lack of edit feature...

Iceburg, aren't you the one who claimed that republicans throw babies out of car windows?

[wolveraptor]

Let's see (I'll use Bush as the average Republican for simplicity's sake), the article is accurate about:

1. Bush promises tax cuts, despite the huge federal deficit.

2. Bush sure as hell isn't "the Environmentalist President", what with the legalization of foresting previously protected areas, his disbelief of green house warming, etc.

3. Bush has made needless war, and isn't even a veteran.

4. The scandals and still unapologized for Fuck-ups in the Bush administration have been too many to count, what with the false State of the Union address, the supposed manufacturing of evidence to go to Iraq, Abu Gharaib, Guantanemo Bay, the lack of any WMDs, the failure to find Osama, their support for Pakistan despite the fact that Osama might be sheltered there, etc.
Yet they still feel they can legislate their anti-gay morality into law.

5. Bush is pro-capital punishment.

6. Bush is "pro-life".

7. Bush is anti-child care.

8. Bush is for education.

9. Bush is against the funding of public schools, as demonstrated by his "No Child Left Behind" act.

10. Bush is a religious psycho, with no concept of "Turn the other fucking cheek, jackass. And no, I don't mean your ass, you perverted fag*."

11. The Bush regime has a shitload of propaganda.

The article is innaccurate about:

1. There is no evidence that (I am aware of) Bush would punish friends and family less harshly than a random stranger.

*No offense meant to gays.

[Iceberg]

So sad that it's loaded to the gills with strawmen you mean. It is humorous, and it is not entirely without valid points. To think that it is a realistic appraisal of just how Repulblicans think is not only wrong, it's mean-spirited.

Would you care to point out inaccuracies in the overall effects of Republicanism as illustrated by the article, as opposed to just throwing out the claim of "straw man" and running away?

Maybe because *gasp* very few republicans share all of those views.

Maybe you missed the point entirely - I know that Perinquus did. The point of the article is that the effect of voting for Republican candidates, is the same as holding all of those opinions, because that is what Republican politicians in office vote for.

On some level, Republicanism requires a denial of the reality of the social contract. Right-wing leaders preach to their followers that nothing is owed to society in exchange for the services and protections we gain from society, without even thinking about them. Republicanism, in a nutshell, is selfishness, pure and simple.

"In our society we have developed an attitude of 'I'll take care of myself, I'll make it myself and you make it yourself and if you don't make it, that's your fault. And if I make it, well, then, I'm very good and I deserve a lot of credit.' We don't have enough sympathy for those who don't make it. Part of the reason, I'm convinced, is that we've learned not to see the poor. When the American people saw, with vivid pictures, the destruction that resulted from the tsunami, they responded. They saw the devastation. They don't see that child who's going home tonight to no food in the house." - Archbishop Harry Flynn

[Iceberg]

1. There is no evidence that (I am aware of) Bush would punish friends and family less harshly than a random stranger.

The answer to this depends on how Ken Lay's trial and sentencing goes.

[wolveraptor]

1. There is no evidence that (I am aware of) Bush would punish friends and family less harshly than a random stranger.

As you will soon see, I am aware of very little in this world.

[Jew]

The article is a cynic's view of the Republican party. It paints the party as self-serving and utterly corrupt. Fine, if that's what Gillenkirk wants to do then more power to him. But for people who want to make informed decisions on all the issues, we can't simply reject all Republican values as shortsighted, ignorant, and venal. I'm certainly not Republican but I recognize when they are right on an issue.

Additionally, Gillenkirk damages his credibility when he sets up a false comparison between capital punishment and abortion:

I will be pro-death penalty and anti-abortion

Implying that capital punishment and abortion are on equal footings is ethically absurd. Supports of capital punishment believe it is justifiable to demand the life of a criminal who takes a life; opponents of abortion believe abortion is unjustifiable because it is the murder of an innocent life. The critical difference here is the guilt or innocence of the person in question. To suggest that only an intellectually dishonest person would believe innocent lives should be spared and that murderers should be put to death is in itself an intellectually dishonest argument.

Nice article, Gillenkirk. Well-written and good style, but clearly not a thinking man's treatise on the mistakes of the GOP.

(Oh, and social contract theory is a neat idea that's been around a long time, but it's whole other discussion. Social contract theory is useful but has some rather big holes in it.)

[Coyote]

Reminds me of a joke my father told me one time.

If you're young and not liberal, you have no heart. If you're old and not conservative, you have no money.

Heard the same one, but it went "If you're old and still liberal, you have no brain".

[Darth Wong]

You know, people can deny that the Republicans are the party of short-sighted self-interest for the wealthy all day long, but they won't be able to change the fact that the Republicans do seem to consistently do things which just happen to serve the short-sighted self-interest of the wealthy.

[Dalton]

You know, people can deny that the Republicans are the party of short-sighted self-interest for the wealthy all day long, but they won't be able to change the fact that the Republicans do seem to consistently do things which just happen to serve the short-sighted self-interest of the wealthy.

George Carlin said something about this once on Imus - the left tends to care more about people, while the right tends to care more about property.

[Alliance SpecForceTrooper]

2. Bush sure as hell isn't "the Environmentalist President", what with the legalization of foresting previously protected areas, his disbelief of green house warming, etc.

Oh, you mean The Kyoto Treaty? Hate to break it to you, but this idea that all climatologists believe that human activity is the cause of Global Warming is purehogwash. There is no consensus.

Is Global Warming a reality? Yes, but its a natural cycle of the Earth. We can no more stop it than we could cause the Sun to go out.

Our best bet is to learn to adapt instead of burying our heads in the sand.

3. Bush has made needless war, and isn't even a veteran.

Yea, like the bombing in Kosovo under Bill Clinton was somehow necessary?

11. The Bush regime has a shitload of propaganda.

All regimes have and use propaganda. Its an unfortunate truth.

[darthdavid]

2. Bush sure as hell isn't "the Environmentalist President", what with the legalization of foresting previously protected areas, his disbelief of green house warming, etc.

Oh, you mean The Kyoto Treaty? Hate to break it to you, but this idea that all climatologists believe that human activity is the cause of Global Warming is purehogwash. There is no consensus.

Is Global Warming a reality? Yes, but its a natural cycle of the Earth. We can no more stop it than we could cause the Sun to go out.

Our best bet is to learn to adapt instead of burying our heads in the sand.

3. Bush has made needless war, and isn't even a veteran.

Yea, like the bombing in Kosovo under Bill Clinton was somehow necessary?

11. The Bush regime has a shitload of propaganda.

All regimes have and use propaganda. Its an unfortunate truth.

And somehow, by adressing 3 Points out of 11 (and in dubious ways at that) you've defeated the wr's argument. Good job, you're a fucktard.

[Alliance SpecForceTrooper]

And somehow, by adressing 3 Points out of 11 (and in dubious ways at that) you've defeated the wr's argument. Good job, you're a fucktard.

So, what did I say that was untrue?

[SirNitram]

And somehow, by adressing 3 Points out of 11 (and in dubious ways at that) you've defeated the wr's argument. Good job, you're a fucktard.

So, what did I say that was untrue?

'No consensus on Global Warming'. There has been for some time, it was recently, yet again, reinforced by findings that match only the models that use industry in their equations.

'KYOTO BAD!!!!!' is a red herring, intellectual dishonest.

'KOSOVO! CLINTON DID IT!!!!!' is a red herring, intellectually dishonest.

'There's always some propaganda..' is a black/white fallacy, intellectually dishonest.

In short, you were an asshat.

[Alliance SpecForceTrooper]

'No consensus on Global Warming'. There has been for some time, it was recently, yet again, reinforced by findings that match only the models that use industry in their equations.

Yea, brainiac. Ever occur to you that the equations themselves, the so-called Hockey Stick is bullshit?

'KYOTO BAD!!!!!' is a red herring, intellectual dishonest.

Kyoto is usually what is held up as being proof that Bush wants to somehow toxify the Earth.

'KOSOVO! CLINTON DID IT!!!!!' is a red herring, intellectually dishonest.

Sorry, but the intervention in Kosovo bears heavily on the legality of the war in Afghanistan and Iraq.

'There's always some propaganda..' is a black/white fallacy, intellectually dishonest.

Name a government that hasn't used propaganda.

In short, you were an asshat.

And fuck you to.