Two kinds of Republicans (1 Viewer)

[State_Governor]

Watching the Senate debate on Immigration Reform and Border Security, I've come to appreciate fundamental differences between two kinds of Republicans:

1) Traditional Conservatives: this is basically my group. The legislators who take care in not giving big corporations the upper hand by simply passing the laws to encourage illegal immigration, which is a good thing for big corporations since it makes it more justifiable to pay less to their employees, taking away most of their benefits. That's what these fat cats want: reduce costs of production (and these include employees' salaries). If it was in their power, they would just tear down the borders to favor free trade and impose the rules they want. This group of conservatives, though opposing Government regulation, is pretty much in favor of controlling our borders and enforcing the law, which will preserve the life quality of our American workers.

2) Neo-conservatives: I imagine you have to include all kinds of businessmen and entrepreneurs in here, those who want to pay their workers miserable salaries and less benefits. The manufacturing sector in America is being outsourced by these businesses who would deem fit to sell the country for a quick buck. No controls, no regulation, no borders, free trade... And in the end less quality of life for everyone except the big cats of which this White House is their truest representative. The strange thing is that the Democrats, who always see themselves as true champions of middle-class American families, are backing the President in this measure to further encourage illegal immigration and do absolutely nothing about it. Folks, this same proposal was passed in 1986 and it only brought about more illegal immigrants.

 

[-Demosthenes-]

There are lots of kinds. My favorte is the RINO (Republican In Name Only) republican, not partisan enough to be called a "true" republican.

 

[State_Governor]

I hope you don't say that because of my affiliation.

 

[-Demosthenes-]

I hope you don't say that because of my affiliation.

What? No, I just don't like people who use partisan beliefs instead of logic, which some people actually do.

 

[Iriemon]

Watching the Senate debate on Immigration Reform and Border Security, I've come to appreciate fundamental differences between two kinds of Republicans:

1) Traditional Conservatives: this is basically my group. The legislators who take care in not giving big corporations the upper hand by simply passing the laws to encourage illegal immigration, which is a good thing for big corporations since it makes it more justifiable to pay less to their employees, taking away most of their benefits. That's what these fat cats want: reduce costs of production (and these include employees' salaries). If it was in their power, they would just tear down the borders to favor free trade and impose the rules they want. This group of conservatives, though opposing Government regulation, is pretty much in favor of controlling our borders and enforcing the law, which will preserve the life quality of our American workers.

2) Neo-conservatives: I imagine you have to include all kinds of businessmen and entrepreneurs in here, those who want to pay their workers miserable salaries and less benefits. The manufacturing sector in America is being outsourced by these businesses who would deem fit to sell the country for a quick buck. No controls, no regulation, no borders, free trade... And in the end less quality of life for everyone except the big cats of which this White House is their truest representative. The strange thing is that the Democrats, who always see themselves as true champions of middle-class American families, are backing the President in this measure to further encourage illegal immigration and do absolutely nothing about it. Folks, this same proposal was passed in 1986 and it only brought about more illegal immigrants.

I think a interesting dichotomy of Republicans was described in the book "What's the matter with Kansas." One group is the fiscal republicans. The tend to be wealthier, pro-business, anti-taxes, anti-regulation, anti-social services. The other group is the religious conseratives, who tend to be conservative on social issues. These two groups have held a loose coalition that has brought them to power. So far the coalition has held, in part because the fiscal group has gotten its tax cuts without the associated cost of slashing spending (by borrowing $7.3 trillion dollars from 1980 to today); the religious group gotten platitudes but hasn't really made a lot of progress on its issues -- abortion is still legal, you can't pray in school, etc. Although things are starting to change.

 

[disneydude]

I actually think that there are two kinds of republicans:

1. The radical-right wingers who cowtow to every whim of the "Christian" (in name only) radicals. For the most part these are the anti-abortion fanaticals that don't care if everything else that makes our country great is mortgaged to the hilt, so long as they ensure that a woman's right to choice is taken away. These are primarily the Bush-apologists who will support anything and everything that Bush does, not because they think it makes sense or agree with it, but because he is helping them in their abortion fight.

2. The true GOP conservatives who believe in smaller government, less government entitlements, more pro-business that pro-worker - supply side economics. Those who's political party has been hijacked by the radical right.

I will NEVER vote for a Republican who fits into the first category and will never have any respect for them because of their short-sided views.
I would consider voting for Republicans in the second group and hope for them that one day they will get their party back.

 

[Iriemon]

I actually think that there are two kinds of republicans:

1. The radical-right wingers who cowtow to every whim of the "Christian" (in name only) radicals. For the most part these are the anti-abortion fanaticals that don't care if everything else that makes our country great is mortgaged to the hilt, so long as they ensure that a woman's right to choice is taken away. These are primarily the Bush-apologists who will support anything and everything that Bush does, not because they think it makes sense or agree with it, but because he is helping them in their abortion fight.

2. The true GOP conservatives who believe in smaller government, less government entitlements, more pro-business that pro-worker - supply side economics. Those who's political party has been hijacked by the radical right.

I will NEVER vote for a Republican who fits into the first category and will never have any respect for them because of their short-sided views.
I would consider voting for Republicans in the second group and hope for them that one day they will get their party back.

Your post perfectly illustrates the fracture that is stressing the Republican coalition. Like most coalitions, they work until they start being successful, and then the factions want their due and get unhapply when their coalition partners start to balk.