I am not only judgemental, I do assume alot. I am a STAUNCH republican. Not a down the middle Rep. Fences tend to hurt. Just because I do not accept your point of view does not mean I don't see your point of view.
you mean this kind of Republican......... I'm a Republican Because... I BELIEVE the strength of our nation lies with the individual and that each person’s dignity, freedom, ability and responsibility must be honored. I BELIEVE in equal rights, equal justice and equal opportunity for all, regardless of race, creed, sex, age or disability. I BELIEVE free enterprise and encouraging individual initiative have brought this nation opportunity, economic growth and prosperity. I BELIEVE government must practice fiscal responsibility and allow individuals to keep more of the money they earn. I BELIEVE the proper role of government is to provide for the people only those critical functions that cannot be performed by individuals or private organizations, and that the best government is that which governs least. I BELIEVE the most effective, responsible and responsive government is government closest to the people. I BELIEVE Americans must retain the principles that have made us strong while developing new and innovative ideas to meet the challenges of changing times. I BELIEVE Americans value and should preserve our national strength and pride while working to extend peace, freedom and human rights throughout the world. FINALLY, I believe the Republican Party is the best vehicle for translating these ideals into positive and successful principles of government.
Sounds good. Too bad the Republican party got hijacked by the neocons. (btw, your link doesn't work. You might want to edit your post to remove the extra http://)
I am... That the Republican Party is the party of the open door. Ours is the party of liberty, the party of equality of opportunity for all and favoritism for none. The Republican Party includes large numbers of fiscal conservatives, social conservatives, neoconservatives, libertarians, and members of the Religious Right. The Republican Party is the more socially conservative and economically libertarian of the two major parties. The party generally supports lower taxes and limited government in some economic areas, while preferring government intervention in others. In the 1980s, the Republican Party was more strongly conservative than before. In his 1981 inaugural address, Republican President Ronald Reagan summed up his belief in limited government when he said, "In the present crisis, government is not the solution to our problem; government is the problem."[1] Since 1980, the GOP has contained what George Will calls "unresolved tensions between, two flavors of conservatism -- Western and Southern." The Western brand, wrote Will, "is largely libertarian, holding that pruning big government will allow civil society -- and virtues nourished by it and by the responsibilities of freedom -- to flourish." The Southern variety, however, reflects a religiosity based in evangelical and fundamentalist churches that is less concerned with economics and more with moralistic issues, such as opposition to abortion and same-sex marriage. Noting the waning influence of libertarian philosophy on contemporary Republican ideology, Will describes the current Republican Party as "increasingly defined by the ascendancy of the religious right."[2] Separation of powers and balance of powers The Republican Party believes that making law is the province of the legislature and that judges, especially the Supreme Court, should not "legislate from the bench." Most Republicans point to Roe v. Wade as a case of judicial activism, where the court overturned most laws restricting abortion on the basis of a right to privacy derived from the Bill of Rights and the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution. Some Republicans have actively sought to block judges who they see as being activist judges and they have sought the appointment of judges who will practice judicial restraint. Other Republicans, though, argue that it is the right of judges to extend the interpretation of the constitution and judge actions by the legislative or executive branches as legal or unconstitutional on previously unarticulated grounds. The Republican party has supported various bills within the last decade to strip some or all federal courts of the ability to hear certain types of cases, in an attempt to limit judicial review. These "court stripping" laws have included removing federal review of the recognition of same-sex marriage with the Marriage Protection Act[3], the constitutionality of the Pledge of Allegiance with the Pledge Protection Act, and the rights of detainees in Guantanamo Bay in the Detainee Treatment Act. These limitations were overruled by the Supreme Court in Hamdan v. Rumsfeld, which held that the precedent of Marbury v. Madison on the court's ability to review the constitutionality of laws overruled the Congress' ability to make exceptions in Article III, Section 2 of the United States Constitution. Compared with Democrats, many conservatives believe in a more robust version of federalism with greater limitations placed upon federal power and a larger role reserved for the States. Following this view on federalism, conservatives often take a less expansive reading of congressional power under the commerce clause, such as in the opinion of William Rehnquist in United States v. Lopez. Many Republicans on the more libertarian wing wish for a more dramatic narrowing of commerce clause power by revisiting among cases, Wickard v. Filburn, a case which held that growing wheat on a farm for consumption on the same farm fell under congressional power to "regulate commerce ... among the several States..." President George W. Bush is a proponent of the unitary executive theory and has cited it within his signing statements about legislation passed by Congress. The administration's interpretation of the unitary executive theory was ruled unconstitutional by Hamdan v. Rumsfeld, where the Supreme Court stated the President does not have sweeping powers to ignore or revise laws and court rulings. The Bush administration has now sought Congressional authorization for its previously executive mandated programs, as was the case with the Military Commissions Act, or abandoned the illegal programs, in the case of the National Security Agency domestic wiretapping program. Economic policies Republicans emphasize the role of corporate and personal decision making in fostering economic prosperity. They favor free-market policies supporting business, economic liberalism, and limited regulation. Recently, opponents have stated that Republicans are no longer the party of fiscal responsibility, citing the 2006 federal deficit as the largest in US history.[4] A leading economic theory advocated by modern Republicans is supply-side economics. Some fiscal policies influenced by this theory were popularly known as Reaganomics, a term popularized during the Presidential administrations of Ronald Reagan. This theory holds that reduced income tax rates increase GDP growth and thereby generate more revenue for the government from the taxes on the extra growth. This belief is reflected, in part, by the party's long-term advocacy of tax cuts, a major Republican theme since the 1920s. Republicans believe that a series of income tax cuts since 2001 have bolstered the economy.[5] Many Republicans consider the income tax system to be inherently inefficient and oppose graduated tax rates, which they believe are unfairly targeted at those who create jobs and wealth. They believe private spending is usually more efficient than government spending. Most Republicans agree there should be a "safety net" to assist the less fortunate; however, they tend to believe the private sector is more effective in helping the poor than government is; as a result, Republicans support giving government grants to faith-based and other private charitable organizations to supplant welfare spending. Members of the GOP also believe that limits on eligibility and benefits must be in place to ensure the safety net is not abused. Republicans strongly supported the welfare reform of 1996, which limited eligibility for welfare and successfully led to many former welfare recipients finding jobs.[6] The party opposes a single-payer universal health care system, such as that found in Canada or in most of Europe, sometimes referring to it as "socialized medicine" and is in favor of the current personal or employer-based system of insurance, supplemented by Medicare for the elderly and Medicaid for the poor. The GOP has a mixed record of supporting the historically popular Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid programs, all of which Republicans initially opposed. On the one hand, congressional Republicans and the Bush administration supported a reduction in Medicaid's growth rate.[7] On the other hand, congressional Republicans expanded Medicare, supporting a new drug plan for seniors starting 2006. Republicans are generally opposed by labor unions and have supported various legislation on the state and federal levels, including right to work legislation and the Taft-Hartley Act which gives workers the right not to participate in unions, as opposed to a closed shop which prohibits workers from choosing not to join unions in workplaces. Republicans generally oppose increases in the minimum wage, believing that the minimum wage increases unemployment and discourages business.[4] Social policies A majority of the GOP's national and state candidates oppose abortion on religious or moral grounds, oppose the legalization of same sex marriage, and favor faith-based initiatives. There are some exceptions, though, especially in the Northeast and Pacific Coast states. They support welfare benefit reductions and oppose racial quotas, but are split regarding the desirability of affirmative action for women and minorities.[8] Most of the GOP's membership favors capital punishment and stricter punishments as a means to prevent crime. Republicans generally strongly support constitutionally protected gun ownership rights. Most Republicans support school choice through charter schools and education vouchers for private schools; and many have denounced the performance of the public school system and the teachers' unions. The party has insisted on a system of greater accountability for public schools, most prominently in recent years with the No Child Left Behind Act of 2001. The religious wing of the party tends to support organized prayer in public schools and the inclusion of teaching creationism or intelligent design alongside evolution. Some even advocate the teaching of Creationism exclusively.[citation needed] Although the GOP has voted for increases in government funding of scientific research, many members actively oppose the federal funding of embryonic stem cell research because it involves the harvesting and destruction of human embryos (which many consider ethically equivalent to abortion), while arguing for applying research money into adult stem cell or amniotic stem cell research. National defense and security The Republican party supports unilateralism in issues of national security, believing in the ability and right of the United States to act without external or international support in its own self-interest. In general, Republican defense and international thinking is heavily influenced by the theories of neorealism and realism, characterizing the conflicts between nations as great struggles, such as Reagan's Evil Empire stance on the Soviet Union and George W. Bush's Axis of Evil. Republicans secured gains in the 2002 and 2004 elections with the War on Terror being one of the top issues favoring them. Since the September 11, 2001 attacks, the party supports neoconservative policies with regard to the War on Terror, including the 2001 war in Afghanistan and the 2003 invasion of Iraq. The doctrine of pre-emptive war, wars to disarm and destroy military foes before they can act, has been advocated by prominent members of the Bush administration, but the civil war within Iraq has undercut the influence of this doctrine within the Republican Party. Rudy Guliani, a prominent Republican presidential candidate, has recently stated that Republicans must keep America "on the offensive" against terrorists, stating his support of that policy. The Bush administration supports the position that the Geneva Conventions do not apply to unlawful combatants, using the premise that they apply to soldiers serving in the armies of nation-states and not terrorist organizations such as Al-Qaeda. The Supreme Court overruled this position in Hamdan v. Rumsfeld, which held that the Geneva Conventions were legally binding and must be followed in regards to all enemy combatants. Other international policies Republicans support attempts to spread democracy in the Middle East and around the world. But, Republicans have reiterated the need for realism in international policy, when the Bush administration forged strong alliances with dictatorships such as Uzbekistan and Pakistan in pursuit of international policy goals. The party, through former U.N. Ambassador John Bolton, has advocated reforms in the UN to halt corruption such as that which afflicted the Oil-for-Food Program. Some Republicans oppose the Kyoto Protocol (although there is a section which supports it within the party), claiming that the treaty would hurt America's economy and do nothing to stop warming from major competitors such as China. The party strongly promotes free trade agreements, most notably NAFTA, CAFTA and now an effort to go further south to Brazil, Peru and Colombia. Republicans are opposed to illegal immigration. The Bush administration has made appeals to immigrants a high priority long-term political goal, but that goal is not a high priority in most local GOP entities. In general, pro-growth advocates within the Republican Party support more immigration, and traditional or populist conservatives oppose it. In 2006, the White House supported and Senate passed comprehensive immigration reform that would eventually allow millions of illegal immigrants to become citizens, but the House, taking an enforcement-only approach, refused to go along.[9]
Well Pirate and KD joined it!!! lol. Not that it is bad. I like debating with both when I can put my words together correctly but since that never happens the debate hasn't occured either. I like watching them debate.
My version was straight from the GOP website. I edited to show some interesting points. Given the current administration and some of these views is it any wonder why the Republicans are in trouble if they continue on the current path.
Now how could I get pictures of me in a "former life"??? and besides...so sorry world but...I don't do pictures or videos.
http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/2007-06-03-congress-pet-projects_N.htm?csp=34 WASHINGTON - After promising unprecedented openness regarding Congress' pork barrel practices, House Democrats are moving in the opposite direction as they draw up spending bills for the upcoming budget year. Democrats are sidestepping rules approved their first day in power in January to clearly identify "earmarks" — lawmakers' requests for specific projects and contracts for their states. Rather than including specific pet projects, grants and contracts in legislation as it is being written, Democrats are following an order by the House Appropriations Committee chairman to keep the bills free of such earmarks until it is too late for critics to effectively challenge them Is this what you call honest government? This is why you are a proud democrat? You should be ashamed of those that you helped to elect. Unfortunately, you'll probably call this story B.S. and make excuses for them. You're Great White Hope are a bunch of crooks...
Depends on how literal you take "In a past life" I personally don't believe in reincarnation, so in a past life could be the college years or a previous job. When teaching a workshop I often state that "I was a Quality Manager in a past life". Well if you don't do videos or pictures, do you have any drawings?
