Thanks again! I'm so pleased that you seem to be listening to our suggestions like the round table discussions. MORE PLEASE! Also, please get more of the great folks that write regularly at Antiwar.com. Specifically I'd love to see Ray McGovern, either one of the Scott Horton(s), Pat Buchanan, Scott Ritter, Glen Greenwald, Justin Raimondo, Philip Giraldi, etc, etc.
Independents become too "isolationist" when it comes to safety of the nation. Republicans can get this done; Conservatives cannot. Far too long conservatives brought social issues into the fray hoping to sway votes (we call that entitlement, btw) instead of holding to limited gov't, fiscal/personal responsibility, safety of the nation.
Free Market solutions can solve these social issues with creativity and innovation, not through government imposing/infringing on Americans.
If you're a conservative wanting gov't to control behavior (read: moralize) through legislation, then you're part of the problem because you're asking the same thing that liberals are – entitlement and favor for your opinions over others.
I'm a little confused by your definitions. "Republican" is a political party. Conservatism is an Ideological position. Certain Republicans (like the neoconservatives) brought some very unconservative ideas into the party, like the ones you mention.
Also, The "free market" deals with economic issues, not social ones. I'm trying to understand your points but am getting hung up on your terminology. Thanks.
My exact thoughts, as well. I am also having difficulty understanding the first sentence concerning independents compromising the nation's security due to their propensity to become too "isolationist." Didn't president Washington warn us in his farewell address to avoid foreign ties and obligations? I wonder what the Father of Our Country would think of Barry the Usurper sitting as the Chair of the UN Security Council. No doubt he would demand to know how the hell Barry is sitting as POTUS in the first place. I know what John Adams would say:
“Posterity, you will never know how much it cost the present generation to preserve your freedom. I hope you will make good use of it. If you do not, I shall repent in heaven that ever I took half the pains to preserve it.”
Actually, the free market can manage the "social issues" of concern by getting gov't out of 'em to start with, then having Americans who are passionate about certain issues, create solutions that are funded & promoted with free market dollars; no more subsidies or gov't favoring the self-interests of others.
Independents don't like war, and I agree, I'm not fond of it myself. However, I live in reality that in our development as a society there are people who want to kill Americans, there are people who want to enslave other human beings, commit genocide, et.al.
and I agree, Barry the usurper! did you see the latest on Repubx.com? check it out.
With freedom comes responsibility. Americans are part of this world and if we uphold freedom of the individual, then so long as any human being is not free, America must prioritize those situations which are a threat to freedom and act. "Head in the sand" attitude is irresponsible.
Hopefully that clarifies those points. Check out my blog or my homepage for my book, there's some info there, too.
BTW – thanks for having a rational discussion – it's refreshing! : )
I think there may be rules, though, that prevent a candidate from selecting a running mate until a designated time. I may be wrong. Designating the Judge as a running mate early in the campaign may prevent him from broadcasting his show and appearing on other news programs. Perhaps it is better that he wait in the wings and maintain his current efforts until late in the campaign. A Paul/Napolitano ticket would be formidable, indeed. It would be awesome if Peter Schiff was appointed to a key cabinet position, so he can get some payback for what the IRS thugs did to his father. Paul/Napolitano could turn our entire country around.