Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : DON'T START THE WAR -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Crimson Ghost who wrote (4893)	2/2/2003 2:09:08 PM
From: PartyTime	Respond to of 25898

Pretty much the "Fundamentalist" White House has the following which not only holds it together, but which it also must pander toward: a) The GOP anti-abortion forces form a Republican base that'll never leave the party, especially with the likes of Falwell, et. al. keeping 'em in check. b) Although having to compete somewhat with the Libertarians, the anti-gun controllers also are safely perched within the Republican ranks, especially on the national statge. And when push comes to shove, the Libertarian sentiment takes a back seat and the GOP not only counts on 'em, but relies on 'em. c) Next comes the corporate big money which is meant to tie in the theme of being patriotic and family values. This money comes primarily from: industrial defense-related, oil, chemicals, timber (paper), diamonds, gold, silver, copper, tobacco, real estate, stock brokerage firms, insurance, advertising-media, corporate medical, etc. And, of course, its the gung-hoism above--anti-abortionist zealots, anti-gun control zealots, false sense of patriotism, and a forced version of family values all of which quilt into a blanket meant to draw in a large proportion of the military vote. Add in a mix of GOP "Southern Strategy," i.e., appealing to racism without overtly admitting same, and we now know why the GOP has won has it has in the national elections. Indeed, were Clinton not a Southerner, we likely would have seen Bush I as Bush II, instead of his son. Of course, the nitty-gritty hits the fan when this undue influence begins influencing the judiciary, as well. Keep your best memories on your sense of freedom--we may well need to bring it back down the road.