Where did we change? (Page 2)

I think politically we are on the same page

I am a Republican that is why I am addressing that party and asking others who are Republican what their thoughts on the subject is. I do not feel I am attacking one party.

This is the key item in my opinion.

If birth control is what you're talking about, then you're framing the liberal opinion completely wrong and that's why civil discussion has all but disappeared.  We don't want to pay for people to have unbridled amounts of sex.  We see it as a women's health issue as well as a way to deal with a growing teenage pregnancy problem.  Paying for birth control can save an enormous amount of money that would later be spent on other health issues and possibly government assistance.  It's just preventive medicine.  

Whether or not pre marital sex and birth control is immoral is up to you.  You don't have to have it and you don't have to take it.  But those beliefs should not deny all of us a safe and affordable way to address health issues.

Why?

This argument is nothing new and has been around even with the founders. There are those that believe in limited Federal power, and there are those that believe it should have much much more.

Currently the Democratic party has nothing I value. Not even civil rights... because they do not want "civil rights" as in individual liberty... it is nothing but a bribe for more Federal power.

Currently, the Republican party has nothing to do with small government or individual freedom. the only individual freedom they hold dear is if you are a Christian... then you should have cart blanc to do what you want. That is not limited Federal power and individual freedom... it takes expanded Federal power to push such an agenda.

Economically, I want fiscal conservative... Dems can just move along because they don't even understand the term. And currently... the only track record the Republican party has is that they can spend as much as the Dems as long as it is on what they want.

The Federal Government has grown too big, and so has it's ever expanding budget. Currently there is no party that is doing anything to stop that. Republicans are completely ineffective and hypocritical on all fronts. Pushing a conservative Christian agenda only makes them more absurd.  However, the more the country is divided and extreme the postitions taken... I see no turn around anytime soon. It seems to be a race of who can push for the most extreme social adenda possible while spending the most money. It's my belief that the 60% majority has been taken hostage by the 20% extremists on both ends of the spectrum. I see no signs of slowing down.

Marriage is a special class and is subsidies by government. The are reasons other than love and so forth that gay rights groups are pushing the marriage issue so hard. In my opinion, it is a 10th amendment issue left up to the States to regulate and reciprocate so I am neither for DOMA of federal recognition of gay or straight marriage. For disclosure when I ran for State Senate office as a Republican I supported the State recognition of gay marriage. 

I can tell you the way to change the party is get active in the party. I doesn't take a heck of a lot of effort to get like minded Conservative to take over the inner workings of local party politics.

I did it four years ago and a young group of us took over our city and county committees and now the my inner group just got our guy elect State Chairman so we are driving the state agenda for the GOP. 

But now I getting my booted out on the local level because the Ron Paulians have become better organized than us and will be driving the agenda when the next slate of officers is elected. They have already taken control of recruiting their like minded candidates to run for city and state office. Its all good as it's my time to step away anyway as I'm burnt out on it.

Fresh ideas and energy are always good, especially for party politics where those in power always resist change.

In other words...it's OK for your guys to apss judgement because their ideals allign with yours.  LMFAO!

Funny but I never thought about the age part before. I am 35 and I know Tony is (slightly) under 45 but don't know about TriR but that could be a big factor in years to come as what the political ideals of the nation move to in the future.

I believe the younger demographic has a lot to say about the platform, but has not had enough influence to change it yet.  I'm 37, and pretty much agree with this line of thinking, and wish there was a valid third party.

I do believe that some of the issues that polarize both sides (gay marriage, abortion/birth control, etc.), are  not  as  black and white as a lot of folks may think, and does require some compromise.  A lot of folks have no issue with gay marriage, or extending benefits to married couples, regardless of makeup.  But, you start running into an issue, when these start running counter to religious beliefs and how that will affect a certain person's religious choice and government involvement in that area of one's life (forcing a religion to accept gay marriage, either by direct or indirect influence).  Then it becomes a bit more complex for right or wrong reasons of all parties involved.

I think fear is a motivator for and against in both the democrat and republican parties, and that's how we get the two extremes, which are the ones getting all the attention.  Instead of focusing on solving the  issues at hand and working together.  The use of fear by both parties appears to be driving the vote, and the unpopularity of the government officials.

I did point out that my comment was crass.

But your comment is a perfect example of my point on the liberal mind set.

A couple of questions for you;

1. How does subsidizing irresponsible behavior result in less irresponsible behavior?

2. Where is the requirement stated that if you want to engage in a high risk behavior it is my responsibility to pay for that high risk behavior? 

Count me in! As a 44 yr old, I just made the cut. I agree that the age has a lot to do with agreement/disagreement of the current social platform of the republican party. As long as they stay "in-bed" with conservative groups, they risk alienating the younger voter, maybe for life.

The republican party need  a strong republican candidate that can afford to deviate from the conservative social platform, focus on fiscal issues (by actions, not only by words) and still can count with the full support of the republican party. Clinton did something similar to democrats, although not to the scale that the republican party needs it today. I truly believe that if that happens, a lot of current Rep senators will follow suit, abandoning ideas that they might not fully believe, but need to "follow" to ensure re-election (that issue also presents itself in the democrats).

My SuperPAC is taking donations...

Good question. Some people think it's Christie. I am not sure. But then again, Clinton was not that well known before his rise, so maybe there is someone waiting in the shadows...

No. When you remove the economic cost of an individual's decision and and place that cost of that decision on the public then obviously you get politicians like Grandma Bloomberg restricting choices for the "Good of the People". 

Any grab by the government to regulate or manage, including things that are best left in your bedroom will eventual result in restrictions of personal choice and bigger government. 

The economic axiom holds pretty true; If you want more of something subsidize it, if you want less of it tax it. I think most Republicans get that which it why they tend to always get my vote. 

Yeah, thanks for that one pitt.  It's a gem.

EDIT: Not only that, but bless you for the Hitler reference.  Just wanted to make you you knew it was noticed and appreciated for what it is.

A "Centralist" party.  Almost every one of my close friends (all over 55) would support such a movement.