Comments on: Instead of a divorce, the GOP needs primary reform Wed, 30 Jul 2014 19:10:25 +0000 hourly 1 By: AdamSmith Thu, 24 Oct 2013 14:25:10 +0000 I see a different trend not mentioned in this article.

I see headlines in the Wall Street Journal and Bloomberg BusinessWeek highly critical of Ted Cruz, AND a constant stream of articles in those two business publications in favor of immigration amnesty and expanded H1B visa immigration. A well-financed campaign for more and more immigration.

What does this mean?

First, remember that immigration amnesty is highly valued by the Democratic Party and Barack Obama.

It must be noted that when the Senate’s Gang of Eight Immigration Reform bill of last month passed in the Senate, it had loud support of BIG GLOBALIST BUSINESS fronted by powerful Republicans like John McCain and Lindsay Graham. In other words, the same old pattern of Republicans supporting BIG BUSINESS as opposed to the American citizen.

When that Immigration Reform bill arrived in the House of Representatives, again it had the backing of the old-guard House Republicans. (Old-guard meaning they have been in Washington long enough to have lost their souls to big money.)

It was only the young, new House Republicans who stood by the American citizen, and valiantly stood up to GLOBALIST BIG BUSINESS, and refused to pass the immigration reform act.

This is why I now support the House Republicans. They are the only part of government still fighting FOR the American citizen, and defending the American citizen against BIG CORPORATE GLOBALIST BUSINESS, and the deadly tsunami of destructive immigration that GLOBALIST BIG BUSINESS, cheered on by their mouthpieces Wall Street Journal and Bloomberg BusinessWeek, has unleashed on America.

Immigration is quickly destroying the American middle class. The only hope to stop it is the as yet uncorrupted House Republicans. That is why I support the House Republicans.

By: ptiffany Mon, 21 Oct 2013 21:16:37 +0000 @RMoS:
Are you implying that Faux News is unfair and unbalanced, manipulated by conservative Plutarchs and appealing to members of MOP using the tools of the Idiocracy? Tsk, tsk, tsk.

By: ptiffany Mon, 21 Oct 2013 21:07:46 +0000 A question not asked here is: Who cares? Is it all about the Politicos who don’t know where to direct their fealty? Or, could it be about the vast majority of Americans who just want a government that can govern? The media with its incessant coverage of the myriad of political angles all promoted by the Plutocracy and their minions in the Wall Street Casinos has made their bet on the former. Some of us remember the days when the mass media was directed toward the interests of the Pee-Ons, not the Tenth of the One Percenters.

It’s the government of the people, by the Plutocracy and for the very, very rich. Political parties such as the More-On Party (MOP), a subset of the Party Of Stupidity & HYpocrisy (POSHY), are just part of the rich people’s game, a side amusement to bailout of their gambling losses in the Wall Street Casinos using Pee-On taxpayer funds. It’s the old steal from the poor to give to the rich Reverse Robin Hood process. The results have already been determined:

The PLUTOCRACY RULES (through the Idiocracy) ! !

How many jobs have the “job creators” offshored today? Hey! Those Chinese and Bangladeshian kids need sub-minimum-wage McJobs too! Senilator McCain told ABC that Apple is the epitome of “Made in USA” with most of its workforce in and all of its products made in Asia. Who profits from this?

By: RMoS Mon, 21 Oct 2013 12:46:47 +0000 Many replies here seem to be ignoring the author’s point. Mr. Salam doesn’t take a position about what the GOP should be(come), he simply endorses the idea of providing primary voters with contemporaneous (i.e. at ballot casting time) information about candidate positions/endorsements.

He asturely concludes: “Indeed, it could intensify intra-party conflict by encouraging the formation of new pressure groups. But it would help settle the question of whether Republicans want to be the party of Sarah Palin and Ted Cruz or of Chris Christie and Jeb Bush. And that’s not nothing.”

As a practical matter, given the role of Mr. Murdoch (Fox News, etc.), I suspect the result would be to destroy the current GOP. Do you vote for candidates who believe that Obama is secretly a practicing Muslim born in Africa, or those who disagree? How about candidates who oppose the “war on Christmas?” Anyone who watches Fox News will understand that Roger Ailes’ “talking points of the day” (allegedly issued in a memo or e-mail to all anchors and commentators) will become the required mantras of certain candidates.

Although I’d dearly love to see the GOP in its own putrid venom, I think this would not be good for the two-party system in the long run. Let voters make up their minds before coming to the polling booth. Even if that means that they automatically vote for the candidate with a surname of “Smith” over the candidate with an unfamiliar surname (other things being equal).

By: Superhank Mon, 21 Oct 2013 05:31:40 +0000 The Tea Party is the future. The problem with the Republican Party is there are too many old farts in office. John and Mitt were too old to win election. I think the Dems are going to make the same mistake in 2015 by nominating Cllinton.

By: Callah Sun, 20 Oct 2013 00:03:17 +0000 “When you lie down with Dogs, you wake up with $25 Billion dollar fleas…”

By: ptiffany Sat, 19 Oct 2013 20:39:43 +0000 It should be obvious. All this gerrymandering is backfiring. It is well know that when trying to reach a consensus, those with alterior agendas will take advantage of that desire. That’s exactly what’s happened with the GOP and especially poor Speaker Of the REpublicans (SORE) – aka Bonehead or Boner. In the futile quest for a copesetic party, they’ve gotten chaos instead.

I’m a lifelong Republican, but in recent years it seems as if we’ve been moved to an insane asylum named the Idiocracy and completely controlled by the Plutocracy.

By: OUTPOST2012.NET Sat, 19 Oct 2013 08:56:56 +0000 The arguments of Mr. Salam are viable. However, he ignores the generational change(s) and the values of new and younger voters.
I would say it is quite possible that the whole political spectrum is shifting to the left. Then GOP (like Christian-Democrats in Germany) is supposed also to move to the left. By the standards of 1980, the Republicans will have to evolve into a “center-center” party.
It gives available ideological space for the hard-core rights.
On the other hand, we can’t exclude the money factor. The oligarchy doesn’t care of ideology. It cares of protecting its interests in the Congress. From this angle, the chance for the Tea Party is quite modest.
Even “straight” Republicans have difficulties of keeping their identity while winning the elections.
Considering the two-party system without broader societal changes is not enough these days.

By: Samrch Sat, 19 Oct 2013 00:32:09 +0000 The tea party tactics and agenda is outside the acceptable for most voters. Which means with them having a big role the Republicans are doomed to lose. The idea of shutting government till you get what you want when you have a minority position obviously goes against democracy (majority rule). In my view I expect all parties to help things go in the direction the active laws show or amend or repeal them.

I do not know what I would do without regulation of: dangerous things (like radioactive things, explosives) , markets of highly technical things requiring test (drugs, buildings), and all sorts of insurance (not paying out means profits for insurance companies), etc. I need laws and regulations. I therefore will not volt any part claiming to anarchists or libertarians.

By: JL4 Fri, 18 Oct 2013 23:34:10 +0000 Interesting insights, Mr. Salam. My opinion is the Tea Party can’t survive without the mainstream Republicans. They may want to be a third party, but I don’t think they can get the votes needed to be viable; they went one “crisis” too far.