The GOP tries to figure out how to ditch social conservatives

But social conservatives should not be worrying about that. All the GOP ever gave them was exploitation anyway and now the GOP is making the exact wrong call trying to cut them loose so they can focus on corporate wealth and Randian social Darwinists as they retreat further into the bubble of unreality.

Social conservatism (with the exception of gay marriage) did better than Romney. What people who care about the Church’s full orbed social teaching should do is take this opportunity to invent an approach to our politics that takes into account all the people the GOP have consistently managed to unjustly ignore.

I’m beginning to suspect that may require letting the GOP go hang. I am reminded of the remark that Zippy once made about machines: they don’t do what you want them to do, they do what you design them to do. The GOP is designed by the corporate interests that control it to skillfully manipulate social conservatives into voting for crony corporatists and militarists who string them along on the family and life issues they care about, never delivering the goods, and making them vocal allies and supporters of war, torture, and neglect of the weak. The machine will keep doing what it is built to do. Our options are to retool the machine or to cease to feed the machine and build a new one. The Dems, by the way, are faced with a similar problem and Dems who are profoundly dissatisfied with their party should likewise look to retool or (I think) get out of the party and make common cause with those on the right who want a more human and humane politics.

"From Jonathan Liedl's piece:Hittinger defines malignant technology as “the systematic application of tools to culture, ..."

Is Technology Morally Neutral?
"Hmmm... I'm having a difficult time deciding the right way to reply because I think ..."

Is Technology Morally Neutral?
"Lewandowski, another sociopath Catholic who flaunts his faith - like Paul Ryan, Steve Bannon, Kellyanne ..."

Our Post-Satire Age
"Comment keeps getting deleted. Will try one last time...See Russell Hittinger's essay "Christopher Dawson on ..."

Is Technology Morally Neutral?

Browse Our Archives

Follow Us!

What Are Your Thoughts?leave a comment
  • The local radio guy here in St. Louis is blaming Gingrich and Santorum for Romney’s loss. It was their attacks using Bain Capital that were later used by the Dems to keep Romney from winning

    • Hardy har har. The person responsible for Mitt Romney losing is Mitt Romney.

  • I have taken the first step. I Formally switched my political allegiance from Republican to Democrat 2 days after the election. I going to establish a branch of the Democrats for Life in Delaware. I have already had more success talking to Obama Catholics than ever before. Those in my parish are uneasy about the thought of bringing the life issue into the Delaware Democratic Party. I begin to see why they politely ignored me when I was a pro-life Republican. Radical progressive liberalism dominates the Democratic Party in Delaware. In other states too, I bet. But if we want to educate people to take political action on life issues, we need to educate the Democrats. That’s where the Catholics are, for better or for worse.

    • rachel

      Rae, that sounds like a good idea. I think we should be open to all options. Maybe a third party or try to help out the Democrat party. I know one thing for sure, I would be fine with the Republicans going extinct as a party. Also, I think the pro-life issue needs to be depoliticized. Strapping the pro-life issue to one political party was always a bad idea. Its time to think outside the box :).

    • Ted Seeber

      I believe that the answer to bringing pro-life to Democrats, is to use the language of the Civil Rights movement for the unborn.

      Especially females, the unwanted, the unplanned, children of rape, children with disabilities. These are the lives most threatened by liberal abortion.

    • Michael

      In states where one party Democrat rule is the norm, Republicans ought to consider joining the Democrat party so their views can have a chance of being expressed.

    • HeavyGuy51

      Yes, we need to educate the Democrats, but we also
      need to PRAY for the Democrats, too, for all of the rank and file who are Democrats,
      including and ESPECIALLY the RADICAL social liberals, that the Holy Spirit will enlighten them and lead them to STOP CONDONING mortally-sinful behavior. I have many friends who are living in mortal Sin. These people, however, do not CLAIM to be Christians of any stripe and do not CLAIM to be orthodox Christians especially. I do have one Liberal, VERY liberal, female friend, of over 35 years, who IS a liberal Christian, but then again, this otherwise very-sweet woman (I still think of her as a college girl, lol) was raised on the pablum-crap Catholicism that was taught as “Catechesis” when godless people with no faith took over Catholic education and catechesis in most parishes in the 1960s and 1970s in the false name of the falsely-so-called “Spirit of Vatican 2” and was also influenced by the godlessly-revolutionary culture of that time too. I also pray for her, as she never had a fighting chance at orthodoxy, and it will take the Holy Spirit to help her see through her doctrinal and moral errors.
      And we also need to pray for all those CATHOLICS who are committing the horrible error of LIONIZING those billionaire, often multi-multi-multi-Billionaire corporate elitists and calling for them to have to pay very, very, very low taxes, etc. These elitists, many of them, are deliberately not paying their hardworking, back=breaking jobs-working employees a LIVING WAGE when they can, even in this recession, MORE than WELL-AFFORD to do so (( I am privy to some of their profit figures and I **know** what I am talking about. In private, they BRAG about how they are rolling in the money even in this recession )). This kind of behavior, the wealthy paying hardworking people a lower than poverty level wage, is, no matter who says differently and no matter WHAT arguments they use to try to back up their position, a SIN THAT CRIES TO HEAVEN FOR VENGEANCE, every bit as serious, according to all church teaching, as the Sin of Murder as expressed in abortion, that we all detest, every bit as wrong as men marrying men, in fact maybe even worse in some ways. The Holy Scriptures and Christ Himself, did not share their rosy-lensed admiration of the super-rich. Neither Jesus nor the Israelite prophets EVER condemned a rich man merely because of their bare fact that he was rich. No. But the scriptures do roar all the way through to the Apocalypse, that it IS the rich who oppress the poor, who oppress the CHURCH, who crush the needy, KNOWINGLY. Not all of them, to be sure, but the great majority of them, and they (unless touched by the Holy Spirit in a powerful way) NEVER willingly do anything generous and altruistically, for ANYbody, unless they are FORCED to do so. “W” cut their taxes to the bone.
      So that they would CREATE MORE JOBS. They TOOK those tax cuts, and OUTsourced I think about 25% of American jobs, fattened the pockets of their shareholders and themselves, and guess what all those big companies do with the rest of those tax cuts and massive profits? I KNOW what they do: they FINANCE Planned Parenthood. They FINANCE NARAL Pro-Choice AMERICA. They FINANCE “Catholics for a Free Choice (gag me!!), they FINANCE the most RADICAL elements of the same-sex sexual lifestyle Movement. They FINANCE **all ** the things that these Ayn Rand, social darwinist Catholic conservatives sincerely LOATHE. I don’t think that most of these Catholic Conservatives KNOW THIS about these Rich People, whom they have been tricked into thinking will keep “creating jobs” if their taxes are kept very low. They WON’T. And they pay as LITTLE as the law will let them get away with (and in my case, steal part of it BACK from me AFTER I’ve done the work and EARNED it, and they do this to us SYSTEMATICALLY and intentionally and without a TWINGE of remose. We have to pray for THEM, too, and for the Catholics who have been duped into supporting the huge corporate tax cuts that are STILL IN PLACE for these folks EVEN under Obama, EVEN when the “Dems” controlled the House for the first two years of this “messiah’s” Administration.
      I apologize for the very long comment. I do not MEAN to get onto a soapbox on another person’s blog, but this writer is CORRECT about a huge segment of the LEADERSHIP of the GOP. It’s not all of them who are in the pockets of the Rockefeller crowd, but it’s ENOUGH of them to really ruin this Party. Which was MY Party, and for now still IS, but I’m Party-shopping even as we speak.
      God bless you all.

  • vickie

    Rae: May God bless your efforts. It would be great, if all parties, regardless on their take on other issues, would agree that killing innocent humans will not give us the society that we want. The other thing about your approach is that maybe it could allow us to see each other as more then a set of sound bite positions. I once met a Pro-life Ayn Rand person – I never got to find out how she got there but cool. That is not to say that Randianism, communism, conservatism or libertarianism are good, or do not deserve criticism but an Randian who embraces life still deserves encouragement.

  • I remember reading a book by author Norah Vincent, a lesbian who decided to pass as a man. (It’s a very fun and fair book to read, btw.) She referred to herself as kind of butch, until she tried to pass herself off as a man. Then she appeared downright girly. It was a question of which of her characteristics were being highlighted at the moment. In women’s clothes, her masculine characteristics came across. In men’s, her female characteristics came across.

    I was a socially conservative, pro-life Democrat for a long time. I left the Democrats, ultimately, not on that issue — even though they were often deeply hostile to it. I left the Democrats because of a lockstep thinking that appeared open-minded but was actually very close-minded, what Allen Bloom called The Closing of the American Mind and the Pope called the dictatorship of relativism. Discussion, ultimately, became impossible, because there was a presumption that you were talking out of your racial, gender and class-based social constructs, which broke down all possible discussion. I find similar tendencies in the right with the Randians.

    While I think it’s an option for social conservatives to return to the Democratic Party, and probably a good idea, I do think you need to be ready. Today’s Democratic Party (and for the past 30 years) has become increasingly masterful at shifting reality, abusing language, and manipulating the context of a discussion. They are rhetorical experts and very smart. It becomes difficult to untie the rhetoric and get back to reality and common sense.

    You may find, in the Democratic Party, that other differences are highlighted, a la Norah Vincent.

    Still, I think social conservatives have made a serious mistake in congregating in one party. We do need to get out of the GOP and see if we can draw out the social conservativism of the Democrats (and it’s there). It’s just dangerous.

    I am thinking of returning to the Democratic Party, on the grounds that the GOP brand is so stigmatizing with Democrats that they don’t listen to anything else beyond that. Essentially, we’re talking about becoming an avante-garde of concern trolls for social conservatism within the other party.

    It’s an idea. My two cents.

    • Kristen inDallas

      I think it’s a good idea. I also think it’s a good idea for a bunch of punk-rock pacifist lefty protestor types (like myself) to give up on the democratic party and try to infiltrate the libertarian arm of what’s going on inside the republican party. I’m not sure about voting dem or republican in any given election (depends on who’s running) but some priority shifting is in order, me thinks, and we should play to our strengths (not what the party calls for). Personally, I don’t understand why not everyone in Texas claims to be a Republican (at least until the primaries) or why not everyone in CA is a registered democrat. If we’re going to be forced to vote for a party we don’t like (by virtue of living in a non-swing state) why don’t we start messing with that party a little sooner in the process?

      • That’s an excellent idea, too.

  • Over and above not ever getting anything accomplished (and I agree completely there–the GOP powers -that-be have *never* had any intention of getting anything done on our social agenda), the fact that orthodox Christians in America consistently pin their hopes on the Reps has done significant damage to our witness. Believing people like Mitt Romney when they tell us that they care about the pro-life cause makes us look like gullible rubes. Meanwhile, people like Franklin Graham make it look like the Christian religion is just a cynical use of religion as means to political power…

    • HeavyGuy51

      I’ll share something with you about Romney, briefly.
      BEFORE becoming a Christian (Presbyterian) and before later becoming a Catholic,
      I went to the Mormon Church for many months. You could never ask to meet a lovelier
      bunch of people. Their doctrines about the Godhead and Christ are remarkably weird and
      heretical, but with only a couple of exceptions, their moral teachings are ROCK SOLID, as is, and I will bear them witness, their almost unbelievable level of generosity to the poor and needy, both among their MEMBERS and local non-Mormon members of the community. I saw this with my own eyes. Most of the LDS/Mormons are beautiful souls, despite their theological errors. Which is why I find BOTH Mitt Romney AND Harry Reid absolutely appalling, as both men are “Mormons.” Romney and Reid, while practicing Mormonism, Romney as governor and Reid in the Senate, both advocated loudly, social teachings that are 100% opposed to the moral teachings of the LDS religion. That, I do not understand. They believe that their religion is “purified, restored Christianity” given to them directly by CHRIST HIMSELF, and then turn around and desecrate it’s moral teachings by supporting the things they support (or in Romney’s case, ONCE supported and I sincerely believe that, inwardly, he still does).

      • Oh, trust me, I live in MA… we know *all* about Romney’s betrayal of his religion’s social teachings…

  • The Deuce

    Yup, I think it’s time to abandon the GOP, as loudly as possible, so that they know what’s about to hit them. If they want us back, they’ll have to actually do something substantial, rather than give us yet another hack who attempts to split the difference. Without us, they don’t have a prayer, but they’re welcome to try.

    As for the Democrats, I’m pretty sure that every social conservative who isn’t a complete idiot has left them already.

    • With the GOP, my problem is mostly that they don’t really believe what they say they believe. For the Dems, my problem is mostly that they do really believe what they say they believe.

    • Mark S. (not for Shea)

      “As for the Democrats, I’m pretty sure that every social conservative who isn’t a complete idiot has left them already.”

      At the Federal level, yes, I think you’re right. At the local level, not at all. There are still lots of socially conservative Democrats at the local level.

      It’s because Big Money has no infected politics at the Federal (and increasingly at the state) level. A candidate who wants the job is very often forced to toe the Party line or hit the door. Too many choose to sell out. And that’s true of both parties, not just the Demmies.

      • HeavyGuy51

        THAT next to the last statement is absolutely true.
        The Dems CRUSHED the aspirations of the late Governor Casey BECAUSE
        he was not Pro-Abortion. For that ALONE.

    • Patrick

      “As for the Democrats, I’m pretty sure that every social conservative who isn’t a complete idiot has left them already.”

      Most African American voters are somewhat socially conservative. It may be changing, but blacks came out 3-to-1 against “gay marriage” here in California in 2008, while going for Obama by 9-to-1 or more.

      • The Deuce

        That’s the only thing that African Americans are socially conservative on as a group. They’re the primary customers of Planned Parenthood, and while they may not like gay marriage, they aren’t particlarly pro-traditional marriage either, with out-of-wedlock rates that are absolutely through the roof. And as their voting patterns show, their opposition to gay marriage is very, very low on their list of priorities.

        • Ted Seeber

          For many African American populations, the traditions that we think of as traditional marriage were destroyed by white slave owners on purpose. Fredrick Douglas was complaining about it as far back as the 1830s.

          Now that we’ve destroyed it for whites as well with the sexual revolution, perhaps what we really need is to redefine the language and start teaching the difference between love and lust in public school.

          I can dream can’t I?

          • HeavyGuy51

            Your statement above is absolutely true.
            “God fearing” slaveowners, respected members of their (usually) protestant churches, deliberately destroyed all the cohesive family-unit bonds of their slaves, and often used the men’s WIVES as their “wenches” and mistresses. Even in pagan, spiritistic Africa, the majority of the people were very devoted to their families and to their husbands and wives. The Slave Owners, most of them, did not see these people as even being “fully” human, and deliberately introduced into their lives, grossly immoral lifestyles and WRECKED their thousands of years of strong Family-oriented traditions. THAT destruction, by the slave-owners, of these people’s once-strong basic moral values, is why those out-of-wedlock rates are “through the roof.” As for them being heavy customers of abortion clinics, not too big a percentage of them have abortions, but the ones who DO, just like the white women who do this, tend to have MULTIPLE abortions. And as for them being BIG customers of Planned Parenthood, the White FOUNDER of Planned Parenthood, Ms. Margaret Sanger (who founded it as “The Birth Control League”), INTENDED for that to be the case. She regarded these people, Blacks, Jews, Mediterranean types, as HUMAN WEEDS, she wrote this about them explicitly, called for their numbers to be thinned out in order to create a race of (white) Thoroughbreds, and even left in writing, her wishes to get some black folks to be paid to or duped into, support her movement so that minorities would not realize that this League (now called Planned Parenthood) was deliberately trying to greatly-reduce if not eliminate, their populations. To that end, the birth control league, now PP, operated HEAVILY in minority, especially black, neighborhoods. I do not believe that it is accidental that the vast majority of PP “Clinics” today are STILL located in, or on the fringes of, African-American neighborhoods.
            This was DONE TO these people. They didn’t come here to this land filled with the practice of gross immorality. The slave trade, segregation and oppression AFTER they were freed, coupled with the WICKED conspiring of rich white elitist racists like Sanger, is why the Black Community was corrupted. The wealthy DID IT to them, deliberately.

            • Ted Seeber

              In Portland Oregon, at Benson High School, they’re still paying African American (and other) students $5 for a parental consent signature and $5 for each of 5 “Course Evaluation” forms- while depriving participating students of 10 hours of Math, English, and other core course instruction a week.

              $30 to listen to a Planned Parenthood commercial on contraception and abortion.

              Our State Pro-Life chairman happens to teach math at Benson High School. Needless to say, his job is hanging by a thread over his simple objection to students being taken out of class, and a Planned Parenthood representative is now taking roll call in all of his classes and removing those students who are enrolled in their program.

          • TMLutas

            The black family was stronger in 1912 than in 2012. No serious observer could maintain otherwise. Pick a social indicator and look at the data. They were horribly oppressed in 1912 and took strength from their families.

  • Robert

    I’m all for a new party, but I have little confidence that it will be successful. As evidenced by the posters whose solution is to become Democrats, too many Catholics crying about “randian social Darwinists” are quick to embrace the bloated, federal bureaucracy the Democrats favor because they don’t understand Catholic Social Doctrine.

    My personal preference from an economic standpoint doesn’t exist as a party. The closest would be a pro-life Libertarian Party at the federal level with a proper blend of state, business and non-profit institutions at the state and local level.

    • Ted Seeber

      I don’t care if it is successful or not- I just want somebody I can vote for with a 100% clear conscience.

      Right now, I can’t.

    • HeavyGuy51

      Dear friend, your post, idealistically-wise, makes a LOT of sense.
      However, this would only work, as a democratic Republic will only continue to work, as
      our Founders (many of them said), in a nation of GOD FEARING people.
      The problem is, as scripture says, all people have a broken, “sin” nature, which, if they do not
      call out to God to change by filling them with the Holy Spirit,
      leads ALL people to selfishness, greed, and callousness at the very least. All people have this tendency. If they do not practice gross greed and selfishness, it is BECAUSE they are FOLLOWING the proddings of a conscience ENLIGHTENED BY the Breath of God, by the Holy Spirit, even if they are not AWARE that THAT is why they are kind and generous. The problem with Libertarianism, is that it assumes that if the government gets out the way, people will use the money that bureaucrats are not systematically ROBBING from us, to do good, kind, charitable and merciful things to give out more-needy neighbors not merely a hand-out only, but also a leg-up and opportunities for growth and ennoblement. But in reality, that is not true. Most people GIVE in order to get their NAME ON A PLAQUE, and Jesus LOATHED this behavior. Just as he LOATHED the behavior of people, who were vicious scum as individuals, such as SOME of the posturing Pharisees, who made LENGTHY PRAYERS in PUBLIC in order to be, for the PRIMARY PURPOSE of being ADMIRED, LOVED and TRUSTED by people who did not know that this was all pretense and that under that veneer, they were ROBBING THESE PEOPLE BLIND. Politicians who build Habitats for the homeless, and make SURE that they are PHOTOGRAPHED DOING SO, when behind the scenes, for example, they deliberately arranged the handing over of an entire nation, NICARAGUA, knowingly and on purpose, into the hands of COMMUNIST TYRANTS. But people still think of this man and many other politicos like him, as a GREAT GUY because of those homes for the Homeless. I could give you many examples of this, and name names, which would make your jaw drop. And it wouldn’t be the sin of Detraction, either, because these people I’m talking about are vicious, live like KINGS, but give a few “big” donations (from their vast wealth, making the gift NON-sacrificial in the eyes of God, because it’s not even .05 percent of their INTEREST income).
      I’m rambling again, but Libertarianism, though it’s a good idea, will not work, because it can only work when people have good hearts ennobled and enlarged by the Spirit of God. Unfortunately, and we see it all over the land and every day, a great majority of the Upper Classes RESIST the Holy Spirit’s noble promptings to mercy and generosity, as do a large number of the middle class, and yes even a large number of the poor. The more wealth we have, especially if we inherited it or won it, the MORE we need to pray to God to GIVE US a spirit of mercy, kindness and generosity, because it is common, as scripture states repeatedly, that when people become prosperous, for them to turn away from both GOD and from their fellow man.
      This is a link to a play, it is 2-1/2 hours long. It is beautiful. It is incomparable. It is, in highly allegorical form, the story of ONE man’s “pilgrim’s progress” from a wrathful ex-con, into a fully-perfected Saint of God by the time he dies, it is his “purgative way,” the enlargement of his heart and the consequent wiping out of his ego and pride. I am a trained actor (could always use MORE training at this craft too), and let me tell you, there has never, ever been anything like THIS musical, ever written for the stage, neither as an original work nor (as was this one) a translation of a novel to a theatre piece. Ignore the occasional, brief foul language. Do not miss the forest for the occasional tree. This story, if you listen INTENTLY, and “GET” it’s multi-faceted “point,” will make your heart grow three sizes larger every time you watch it. Give this story a chance to get into your bone marrow, and your soul and spirit will **never** be the same again. It’s producers KNOW that it is posted, that it HAS BEEN for a long time now, and they have NOT requested that it be taken down. God bless you. And I promise the owner of this Blog that I am not going to post any more today. The heart needs to change. Neither REVOLTS nor POLITICS can accomplish that, only God CAN. This story is ABOUT, and a cry FOR, Mercy and “Agape.” Enjoy (( and let’s pray for our enemies, definitely )) :

      • HeavyGuy51

        One more thing, and I’ll shut up.
        This story is not preachy, but it is deeply rooted in the Gospel. Very deeply.
        To grasp the degree of mercy and kindess this story is calling for, to REALLY grasp it,
        you have to get out a picture of the SACRED HEART OF CHRIST, and meditate intently on that Sacred Heart. I’ve become increasingly aware that the picture of the Sacred Heart is not merely a religious “picture”, no, it is an IKON, an image that tells a very profound “story” about the TOTAL humility of God. There is, literally, NOTHING, that He is NOT willing to do for anyone who calls out to him. There is NO LEVEL of giving that He will hold back, no matter HOW much it may “hurt” Him.

  • Mark S. (not for Shea)

    In practice, the GOP abandoned social conservatives almost 20 years ago. They still pay lip service, but that’s all it is.

    That lip service is getting less and less lippy every election.

    A new party has never worked in American politics. Not once. Any time a new political party emerged (the Republicans, the Bull Moose, etc.) it was almost immediately absorbed into the 2 party system. What we need to do is to begin to change the culture, change hearts and minds, in our homes and in our communities. We need good people of consience and courage to invade both parties.

    • TMLutas

      Social conservatives need to identify specific legislation to pass or repeal, especially at the local level. The US has 90k governments. All of them could use improvement.

  • Robert

    @Mark Not-Shea – I agree: “A candidate who wants the job is very often forced to toe the Party line or hit the door.” Part of the problem with our current political party structure, is that the party “ethic” has to be held at all levels. While I am all for a consistent life ethic (which no party has), economic policy should vary, in accordance with both solidarity and subsidiarity.

    • Kate

      YES! I have made the observation elsewhere that the wonderful thing about the Catholic principles of solidarity and subsidiarity is that they are decidedly *pragmatic* in practice. There is no ‘one and only’ way to live these principles, but in every circumstance they prompt the questions: How would I want to be treated in this situation? (solidarity) Who is best suited and available to meet these needs? (subsidiarity) The answers will always vary as much as communities, people, industries, needs, abilities and circumstances vary. No economic dogmatism is flexible enough to make those judgments irrelevant or unnecessary.

      • HeavyGuy51

        Kate, your post is beautiful. THANK you for your lovely observation.

    • HeavyGuy51

      Robert, SO VERY well said. Thank you sir.

  • Tim S.

    In Dem dominated districts I think it is worthy to stay in the hunt as a pro-life Dem trying to get a foothold on popular opinion among social conservative Dems. But in Repub districts it may be better to go in as a Repub who puts the social issues first and shows some flexibility for the prudential judgments on economics and so forth..

  • Adolfo

    Those seeking a party built upon the whole of Catholic teaching on human dignity and such should check out the American Solidarity Party or the Christian Democratic Union.

  • Tim S.

    For an interesting read on the difficulties facing third party candidacies in national Presidential elections- I recommend Ralph Nader’s book – Crashing the Party- he got crushed in the establishment vice where the two major parties crossover and work together to keep their duopoly intact. We need to make it easier for third parties to get a presidential candidate on the ballot in every state- some kind of universal rule should be enacted to keep certain states from hamstringing the procedure to practically ensure that getting on the ballot is next to impossible for upstart parties. We also need to have the presidential debates taken away from the control of the two parties- by keeping even nationally known candidates out of the debates it pretty much guarantees that most Americans will not take the candidate as a serious option. These are just two areas of concern.

    • HeavyGuy51

      BOTH parties are, in fact, controlled by, the Rockefellers and other eastern-establishment blue-blood families. Some will call this statement conspiracy “theory.” It is not theory at all, it is hard-core and irrefutable FACT. I am not smart, not at all. It is not “fact” because “I” say so, but because it is, in fact, “fact.” Follow the money trail, and you will see. Who donates to the parties? Who are the individuals? Who are the Corporations? Who OWNS these corporations? Who finances THEM (the corporations)? Which Foundations give to the Parties? WHO started those foundations? WHO is in charge of them NOW?? Ask the right questions, and your eyes will fly wide open when you start reading the answers, which are as close as your keyboard and your google search engine.
      Peace to all of you.

      • Richard Johnson

        Looks like someone found a Tardis and went back a few decades for that answer. Hate to burst your bubble, Doctor, but the Rockefellers, rich as they are, have slipped a notch or three in the past 30 or so years. Corporations still control the game, and some indeed are based out east. But you need to update your program a bit.

        • ivan_the_mad

          I’d certainly not deny that moneyed interests control the Republocrat party. But there is certainly an admonition to be made here. Mr. Kirk exhorts conservatives “to reject the embraces of the following categories of political zealots: … Those who discourse mainly of the Trilateral Commission, the Bilderburgers, and the Council on Foreign Relations.” —

  • Stu

    Both parties need to go hang.

    I can respect someone trying to change the Democrat party but that ship left long ago and it isn’t coming back to safe waters.

    Better to get people of both parties to realize that you don’t have to vote for either mainline party candidate. You can choose another candidate and the sun will still come up.