Democrats and Republicans are essentially the same

where is the option for "i am a nerd who wants to explain my position on this in several paragraphs"

Outsider view: Aren't they pretty much the same except some like to kill doctors who perform abortions?

trolly morbsbait

where is the option for "i am a nerd who wants to explain my position on this in several paragraphs"

DAMMIT

lol max otm :/

https://store.robotlove.biz/image/MYSD%20nice%20try%20card%201.jpg

voted agree 'cause I do, though I know enthusiastic democrats at this point have a reliable script to which they resort on this q

let me know when that script defines a difference between "nobody gets prosecuted for torture" and the democratic version of same, which reads "nobody gets prosecuted for torture"

voted disagree cause there are plenty of issues important to me beyond 'do people get prosecuted for torture' and on a considerable amount of those issues, democrats and republicans disagree.

right, like whether federal health care should include reproductive services, another key issue on which the two agree 100%

Breaking the Demopublican Monopoly:
How to Unify the Political Right with a Third Party that Can Win

By Nelson Hultberg

New Revised Edition, Softcover, 112 pgs., $11.95

We are taught in school that the strength of the American political system lies in the fact that we have a "two-party process." This is akin to teaching that babies come from storks. It is a fairy tale we spin out to avoid messy details of reality we prefer not to face.

The reality is that America is now a one-party state. The Democratic and Republican parties have become nothing but two divisions of the same party -- the Central Leviathan Party. Both divisions are lap dogs for the special interests. No matter who wins, we always get more spending, more taxes, more inflation, more bureaucracies, more wars, and LESS FREEDOM.

The Demopublicans now tax over 50% of our earnings every year. They steal hundreds of billions from our savings through currency debasement. They have brought us a national debt of over $8 trillion. They have saddled us with $45 trillion in unfunded liabilities to come due on the backs of our children. They have bankrupted us as a nation. They are consuming the freedom and the substance of our lives like a swarm of locusts consumes a golden wheat field.

There is only one hope for meaningful reform. Americans must challenge this overweening prodigality with a third political party. But it must be a real third party that can actually pose a threat to the Demopublicans' monopolistic rule.

It is a fallacy to say that third parties in America cannot work. The reason why is because all third parties throughout the past century (like the Libertarians and Perot's Reformers) have been built upon two disastrous flaws that automatically doom them to failure. But correct these two fundamental errors and a genuine challenge to the Demopublicans can be launched.

Breaking the Demopublican Monopoly corrects these two errors and outlines a new, innovative "Two Pillars Strategy" never before envisioned in history. It will effectively challenge the statist establishment and gradually bring the growth of the federal Leviathan to a halt.

The majority of the American people wish to end the relentless expansion of our federal government. They have just never been shown WHY it must be done and HOW it can be done in a clear plan that makes logical sense. This book demonstrates the why and the how with a powerful, revolutionary approach to politics.

Here are just some of the valuable insights (provided in non-technical language) that you will find in Breaking the Demopublican Monopoly:

* Why America is rapidly evolving into a system of economic fascism.
* How the Great Depression came about and why our schools teach it falsely.
* Why an economic mega-crisis is looming up ahead, and why we must have a viable third party in place to confront it.
* Why our growing debt addiction will engulf us like a Tsunami sweeping over a seaside village.
* How the federal government is "cooking the books" just like Enron did so as to hide the truth from the people.
* What the "Two Pillars Strategy" is and why it will revolutionize politics in America.
* What the crucial "tax key" is that, once enacted, will reverse the culture of spending in Washington and end the tyrannical growth of government.
* How to easily stop illegal aliens from swarming into America.
* The real reason our manufacturing jobs are leaving America to go overseas.
* Why Republicans always get corrupted in Washington and lose their stomach for a freedom fight.
* Why we need a message far more powerful than Buckleyite urbanities and Wall Street Journal cliches to promote the cause of freedom.
* Today's battle lies, as it did in 1776, between the New Sons of Liberty and the complacent Tories of the establishment.

We can restore the free, Constitutional system that the Founders envisioned. But in order to do so we have to start thinking outside the box. We need a fresh and radical approach that attacks the source of the Leviathan's growth and also corrects the two fundamental strategy flaws of all third parties. The means to accomplish this are laid out simply and clearly in Breaking the Demopublican Monopoly.

What the Demopublican power structure in Washington fears most are independent men and women who refuse to go along with the regimentation of their society and the erosion of their freedom. If you the reader are possessed of this kind of independence, if you are fed up with the Darth Vaders of the Potomac riding around in black limousines and confiscating still more of your money, rights and freedom, this book is for you. Read and disseminate its message. America's hope is in your hands.

To order copies of Breaking the Demopublican Monopoly
using credit cards, click below

Or
Call your credit card order in at: 1-888-404-2155

Or
Send a check for $11.95 plus $3.00 S&H (Total $14.95) to:
Americans for a Free Republic,
PO Box 801213, Dallas, TX 75380-1213
Make checks out to: Americans for a Free Republic

About the Author

Nelson Hultberg is a freelance writer in Dallas, Texas, a graduate of Beloit College in Wisconsin, and the Executive Director of Americans for a Free Republic. His articles have appeared in publications such as The Dallas Morning News, the San Antonio Express-News, Insight, The Freeman, Liberty, The Social Critic, and on many Internet sites such as Free Market News, Financial Sense Online, WorldNetDaily, and SafeHaven. He is the author of Why We Must Abolish the Income Tax and the IRS (1997) and a soon to be released work on political philosophy titled, The Golden Mean: The Case for Libertarian Politics and Conservative Values.

What They Are Saying about This Book:

Many of us can recall the works of John T. Flynn (among others) in the 1940s and 50s, in defense of limited government, gold-based currency, and equal rights for all. Mr. Hultberg's work reminds us again of the importance and soundness of the principles set forth with such eloquence fifty years ago, and gives forewarning of the dire consequences of ignoring them. Mr. Hultberg pulls us out of the economic dream-world in which so many Americans live today.

-- Dr. John Hospers, Professor Emeritus
Former Chairman of the Philosophy Department
University of Southern California

Mr. Hultberg does far more than playing the role of a latter-day Cassandra in exposing the greatest danger Western civilization has ever faced. He offers a program to reverse the historical tide of collectivism. The vision of Mr. Hultberg is breathtaking. Yet it is no more impossible than was the vision a quarter of a century ago that the Soviet Union and its Evil Empire could be overthrown virtually without bloodshed.

-- Dr. Antal E. Fekete, Director
Lips Institute, Zurich, Switzerland
Author of Monetary Economics 101

This is a wonderful book. Nelson Hultberg is right on the mark when he points to the need for a third party, which can unite conservatives and libertarians in a common political front. Hultberg's plan can be effective, even if Congressman Paul does not do what we hope he will, by extending his campaign beyond the Republican primaries in 2008.

-- Dr. Paul Gottfried, Professor of Humanities,
Elizabethtown College, Author of Conservatism
in America: Making Sense of the American Right

The two-party system is one of the main forces driving America to ruin. We desperately need a viable third party to break the Demopublican monopoly and get us onto a saner path. Unfortunately too many independents, conservatives, and libertarians live in an alternative universe, ignoring political realities. Hultberg, by contrast, realizes that we have to start where people are. His political realism is just what the doctor ordered.

-- Dr. John Attarian, Author of
Social Security: False Consciousness and Crisis

This is an excellent work that offers a powerful plan to reconstitute a party of liberty that -- if adopted -- would drastically reduce the size of government in an "incremental" way, which is the only workable strategy. Nelson Hultberg may be one of the educators we someday come to thank.

-- Gregory Bresiger
Business Writer and Editor, Traders Magazine

The only way to shrink the size of any government is to deprive it of nourishment, and that is what AFR hopes to do with a two-pronged attack on the nation's monetary system and revenue generating apparatus. Everyone who is seriously interested in knocking the two main parties from their pedestal and creating a constitutionally limited democratic republic should wish Nelson Hultberg and his colleagues well in their endeavor.

-- Jerome Tuccille, Author of 21 books
Including "It Usually Begins With Ayn Rand"

As Nelson Hultberg shows, our country is hurtling towards Mussolini's Economic Fascism. Big business, big government, the money-center banks and the financial press are so intertwined, they have corrupted our formerly free financial markets and free financial market press. This is leading us down a devastating path and must be exposed. Now is the time to implement Mr. Hultberg's incremental plan to give Americans a viable alternative to the present choices in our political system when financial market chaos strikes in the upcoming years.

-- Bill Murphy, Chairman
Gold Anti-Trust Action Committee

Bull's eye! Nelson Hultberg has hit the target dead on with this latest work. Like a skilled surgeon, he lays open the root cause of the cancer that has afflicted this nation for too long. Not content with merely diagnosing the disease, Hultberg harnesses his keenly insightful analysis to articulate a thoughtful and achievable cure. All those who love liberty and long for true, limited government, as bequeathed to us by our Founding Fathers, must read this book.

-- Dan Norcini, Market analyst
LeMetropoleCafe.com

Breaking the Demopublican Monopoly is a manual for realistically achievable political change in the U.S. Its core truth can be summed up in one single quote: "Without a credible third party in the [US presidential] race, dictatorship looms over the horizon." Nothing said in U.S. politics over the past 100 years has been more true! Nelson Hultberg points his finger at all the pitfalls that have ensnared third-party attempts in the past, and offers an ingenious set of practical, do-able solutions. Nothing will stop this train once it gets moving!

-- Alex Wallenwein, Editor & Publisher,
The Euro vs Dollar Currency War Monitor

After reading Breaking the Demopublican Monopoly, a quote from Henry David Thoreau comes to mind: "There are a thousand hacking at the branches of evil to one who is striking at the root." This simple, yet elegant political platform, in my view, strikes at the root of the problem.

-- Dave Lewis, Founder and Publisher
Chaos-onomics.com

Obviously, something must be done if we are ever to save the Republic. Hultberg clearly shows the problems inherent with the current third parties in their attempts to turn things around. And he correctly advocates that frustrated activists put together a new effort with a specific economic message that can appeal to supporters of both groups of migrating Republicans and disenfranchised Democrats.

-- Tom DeWeese, President
American Policy Center

Nelson Hultberg offers not only an inspiring vision, but a practical plan to end the seemingly never-ending expansion of government and to restore the current "One-Party-Masquerading-as-Two" American political system to one of fairness, integrity and perhaps most importantly, sound fiscal policy. I would urge anyone not 100 percent thrilled with the illusion of political choice available today to take a look at Breaking the Demopublican Monopoly.

-- Mark M. Rostenko, Editor
The Sovereign Strategist

Breaking the Demopublican Monopoly, by Nelson Hultberg, clearly illustrates the serious situation facing this republic. A wonderful overview, Mr. Hultberg's book provides a solution to this ongoing crisis. We can take back America. Indeed, there is hope, but Americans must take action now if we are to avoid political and economic turmoil.

-- Peter Spina, Owner
GoldSeek.com & SilverSeek.com

To order copies of Breaking the Demopublican Monopoly
using credit cards, click below

Or
Call your credit card order in at: 1-888-404-2155

Or
Send a check for $11.95 plus $3.00 S&H (Total $14.95) to:
Americans for a Free Republic,
PO Box 801213, Dallas, TX 75380-1213
Make checks out to: Americans for a Free Republic

HOME | MISSION STATEMENT | JOIN AFR | WHO WE ARE | BOOKSTORE | DONATE | CONTACT US

Americans for a Free Republic PO Box 801213 Dallas, TX 75380-1213
Copyright © 1996-2009 Nelson Hultberg & Americans for a Free Republic
Disclaimer & Privacy Statement

The "Inconvenient Man" movie about Ralph Nader in 2000 is really a sad look into the general election. The bit about the debates is the saddest of all. Basically that shit is chosen by some TV executive.

thank god for ralph nader, what would the 2000 elections have been like without him

yes, what an awesome world we'd live in if the evil villain ralph nader hadn't robbed al gore of the presidency...think of the idyllic wonderland we'd all be enjoying now without evil ralph

'essentially' being key word here, but yes, i think 90% of what happens in this country/world happens regardless of which party is in office, and the other 10% is either some trivial b.s. or the result of corruption/bad influence which affects all politicians equally regardless of party affiliation

well then sleepingbag I guess my question to you is why do you hate freedom

i wuv freedom! that's why i wuv this country. because pretty much no matter who's in charge, they ain't coming after me. until they do.

Heh, thats "An Unreasonable Man", not "Inconvenient Man".

voted agree 'cause I do, though I know enthusiastic democrats at this point have a reliable script to which they resort on this q

let me know when that script defines a difference between "nobody gets prosecuted for torture" and the democratic version of same, which reads "nobody gets prosecuted for torture"

― Lee Dorrian Gray (J0hn D.), Tuesday, February 9, 2010 10:54 PM (Yesterday) Bookmark Suggest Ban Permalink

voted disagree cause there are plenty of issues important to me beyond 'do people get prosecuted for torture' and on a considerable amount of those issues, democrats and republicans disagree.

― iatee, Tuesday, February 9, 2010 11:02 PM (Yesterday) Bookmark Suggest Ban Permalink

right, like whether federal health care should include reproductive services, another key issue on which the two agree 100%

― Lee Dorrian Gray (J0hn D.), Tuesday, February 9, 2010 11:12 PM (Yesterday) Bookmark Suggest Ban Permalink

j0hn, youre smarter than this

democrats are people that do awful shit in govt for the right reasons.

republicans are people that do awful shit in govt for the wrong reasons

no I'm not max, I know you're passionate about the small-gains game and stuff but to my mind boil the stuff down and the difference is Democrats talk a game I like and play one I dislike, Republicans talk a game I dislike and play the game they talk

uh i prefer j0hn's description actually. maybe i should say dems do awful things for the 'right' reasons.

not usually tbh

Dems don't do anything for the wrong reasons.

or rather: Dems do nothing, for the wrong reasons.

was this thread really necessary though!

(max you should seriously put me on ignore for this from the exact moment Obama said "not one penny for abortion" in the SOTU, btw, because my ability to be rational about it evaporated in that moment - big visceral "fuck you for pissing on ideological ground people gave their lives to gain" happened for me then and no about of parsing the broader game is gonna make up for conceding the philosophical edge there (which, mind, is in fact a practical issue imo) and the disinterest of democratic partisans in the q makes it even worse)

(no amount of parsing the broader game)

im not going to put you on ignore and im not even disagreeing with you--just saying there are better arguments for 'essentially the same' than 'both parties refuse to prosecute torturers and neither party will give federal money to abortion'

think of the idyllic wonderland we'd all be enjoying now without evil ralph

For one thing, some of the "stfu if you won't swear fealty to the Dems" crowd would be driving deathtraps.

in any even this is a question that depends two things 1) how do we define dems vs. republicans (elected officials? party platforms? registered voters?) and 2) ones pov w/r/t ideology

it's a deathtrap
it's a suicide rap
we got get out while we're old
cause tramps like us
baby we were born to trollllllllllllllll

(for morbz)

Wait, now you're telling me Ralph Nader cheated me out of owning my own deathtrap?

Oh, you mean it would have killed ME, don't you. Never mind.

Mr Que, user of seatbelts, ladies & germs

I voted no because Republicans are the bully assholes that beat kids up and Dems are the bully assholes' friends who wouldn't otherwise beat kids up, but, y'know, since first punch was thrown we can get away with it right?

in any even this is a question that depends two things 1) how do we define dems vs. republicans (elected officials? party platforms? registered voters?) and 2) ones pov w/r/t ideology

just ftr, I was deliberately vague about this because I wanted to see which default position people would go to on these questions

the new Dodge Deathtrap, now equipped with a razorblade gearshift

haha i know you were dan thats why im not going to vote and probably enver going to answer conclusively

see what a couple hundred grand and an english degree will get you? endless hedging!

the new Dodge Deathtrap, now equipped with a razorblade gearshift

a razorblade geirshift amirite

i still disagree that they are the same ... though i confess that it IS getting harder to tell the difference in some very important things (e.g., torturing POWs, bailing out and taking mad cash from Wall Street). i attribute some of this "lack of the difference" to the ONE thing where there still IS an undeniable difference b/w the two parties -- that the Democrats have no balls.

Mr Que, user of seatbelts, ladies & germs

i voted for Nader in 2000, fyi

these labels were invented for politicians. citizens accept them for themselves via the equivalent of a gun at the head.

or an overblown metaphor

im not going to put you on ignore and im not even disagreeing with you--just saying there are better arguments for 'essentially the same' than 'both parties refuse to prosecute torturers and neither party will give federal money to abortion'

how I do my math: 1) what issues are most important to me? 2) what is the position of the parties on these issues, once you've done whatever sifting you can do of what they say vs. how they vote? both parties imo are chiefly interested in power; what drives/inspires them to want that power is something we probably differ on. my main point of interest in it is "who will these people sell out to maintain power, setting aside for a second the question of why they want to maintain power?" the answer is usually "women first" and post-Bush we have an extra "also, people held without charge & tortured" which really I mean...you should completely ignore me, because my honest opinion is, any politician who isn't willing to stake his entire career on righting that wrong is a moral coward worthy only of scorn, whatever else he does. "asking for magic," I know.

just make sure the metaphor doesn't go off

xp

all i can say is, that i am beginning to long for the old days when the Democratic Party had some old-school political bosses and hacks in high places nationally who at least understood that you HAVE to share SOME of the loot in order to stay in power. which is basically a plea for a return of the likes of LBJ and Clay Davis, but at least folks like that aren't the bunch of overly-polite pussies who are running things nowadays.

going 2 airport now, I'm gonna be stoked for this thread when my flight gets delayed, see u then

how I do my math: 1) what issues are most important to me? 2) what is the position of the parties on these issues, once you've done whatever sifting you can do of what they say vs. how they vote? both parties imo are chiefly interested in power; what drives/inspires them to want that power is something we probably differ on. my main point of interest in it is "who will these people sell out to maintain power, setting aside for a second the question of why they want to maintain power?" the answer is usually "women first" and post-Bush we have an extra "also, people held without charge & tortured" which really I mean...you should completely ignore me, because my honest opinion is, any politician who isn't willing to stake his entire career on righting that wrong is a moral coward worthy only of scorn, whatever else he does. "asking for magic," I know.

― Lee Dorrian Gray (J0hn D.), Wednesday, February 10, 2010 9:53 AM (5 minutes ago) Bookmark Suggest Ban Permalink

forgive me if im butchering yr take on this but youre saying "both parties do the same thing w/r/t issues i care about" [sidebar: i dont think the no fed $$ for abortion is rad or anything but yr not doing yrself any good services by pretending that these two parties have anywhere NEAR the same position on abortion or womens rights]--which is fair, i guess, but also kind of unfair--i mean it bums me out that both parties are rational techno-capitalists and that we dont just sit around all day and read holderlin and hunt deer and talk about 'being' & by that standard yeah theyre exactly the same. but it seems kind of futile & ultimately destructive to both the political system here and your own blood pressure to say, these are the only two issues that matter, and there is no difference between parties so long as they do the same thing here

re: part b, let me have my moment !!

wait waht? Remind me where the Dems opposed the Iraq War

I'll say this for deej, he knows how to hold a grudge

― Οὖτις, Tuesday, January 24, 2017 2:43 PM (five minutes ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

cmon, J & i beefed not a month ago about something completely unrelated, this isn't one sided

wait waht? Remind me where the Dems opposed the Iraq War

― Οὖτις, Tuesday, January 24, 2017 2:49 PM (twenty-three seconds ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

a dem president would not have pushed for war in iraq; the entire motive for war was concocted in a right wing lab basically

right but the Democrats went right along w it, which doesn't really mark them out as "different"

cmon, J & i beefed not a month ago about something completely unrelated, this isn't one sided

still mad about lil peep eh

I wonder sometimes if 9/11 would have happened on Gore's watch. It very well may have. If it does, the Afghanistan war definitely still happens, Iraq probably not, but bombings overseas in no fly zones almost certainly would have continued. He was a neo-Clintonite and all.

not sure how i feel about new politically outspoken deej god this is fucking tedious

iraq would not have happened under gore, cmon

god this is fucking tedious

― Mordy, Tuesday, January 24, 2017 2:54 PM (one minute ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

your opinions are bad, but good thing you're not tedious or disagreeable

somehow your new shtick in 2017 is worse than all your previous shticks put together

some Dems opposed the Iraq war, just not the ones w/ presidential ambitions

we usta call Gore the Senator from Likud

deej + morbz; honestly cannot figure out who best completes the package of ignorant, shrill and self-righteous anyway u 2 have fun *remove bookmark*

wow how self righteous of me to want someone i argue w/ to stand behind what they're saying & not shift when the social media winds blow

your perception of this is bizarre and wrong and you should stop posting about it

iraq would not have happened under gore, cmon

― Listen to my homeboy Fantano (D-40), Tuesday, January 24, 2017 3:55 PM Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

that's....exactly what I said

damn the one time J admits he's wrong & i cant enjoy it? ffs

your perception of this is bizarre and wrong and you should stop posting about it

succinct and correct

Getting an idea and lying and manipulating to try and achieve that idea on the one hand, and looking at the manipulated evidence and going 'I guess ok' on the other hand, in no way is the same. And I personally think it's incredible anyone fell for the Iraq WMD scam, but falling for it is not the same as creating it.

also all democrats didn't fall for it ... cf our last president

is it possible that trump is.... making ilx better

no hear me out!

pocorn.gif

― k3vin k., Sunday, January 22, 2017 11:18 PM (two days ago)

do i know how this message board works or do i know how this message board works

spelling popcorn incorrectly notwithstanding

Darragh, the passing of Obama and Clinton from the main stage has refocused certain posters' derision onto targets that are more unanimously hated around here. So yes, things are a bit more copacetic.

that was my line of thought but i went and got a sandwich instead

be the change and all that

darraghmac's sandwich '18

sadly it didnt survive the nomnomination process

iraq would not have happened under gore, cmon

― Listen to my homeboy Fantano (D-40), Tuesday, January 24, 2017 3:55 PM (two hours ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

bernie woulda won

flee the bern

it's funny how Bernie change a situation

oh man do i hate reading my posts from the early obama years yikes~

proud of your party's confirmation votes, Mordy?

My mother-in-law spent a little of her time today getting through to Sherrod Brown's office to light some poor staffer all the way up. I think she burned through two of them actually. Roz gonna fuck you up, dude.

@pmgentry
Obama entered office with a huge voter mandate and control of both houses in Congress. Republicans managed to destroy it all in two years.

Pro tip: Republicans didn't do it by being reasonable and "picking their battles."

@DougHenwood
Republicans have a set of beliefs they’re passionately attached to. What are Chuck Schumer’s principles?

yes

Republicans have a set of beliefs they’re passionately attached to.

party's leader is currently an areligious dude who wants to tear apart free trade agreements and buddy up w/ russia, so

and yet he's enacting huge swaths of the conventional GOP wingnut wishlist, go figure!

He is kind of an outlier, though, and he is enabling Republicans with a set of beliefs they’re passionately attached to.

xp

d-40 given that labour led the UK into iraq would you be tempted to agree that labour & the conservatives are thus essentially the same or do you have a deeper underlying objection to this dismissal of mainstream party politics?

Well, Doug Henwood has convinced me. With the smart and admirable way the GOP is acting right now, they should definitely be emulated by Dems.

go march with iatee, into the sea

'everything obama did is bad, how can we tear it up' isn't a set of core beliefs. post-dubya, republicans have defined themselves by what they aren't rather than what they are, which is why somebody was able to run a campaign that broke w/ things that they took for granted for decades.

xp

'lower taxes' is a core belief

so long as Trump keeps signing executive orders and starts signing Ryan/Heritage legislation he's a Republican.

Trump/Reagan tradition

https://theintercept.com/2016/10/30/reagan-alumni-for-trump-remind-america-that-gop-didnt-start-making-things-up-in-2016/

pollution comes from trees!

He asked George Will at a White House reception what made the Blue Mountains blue.

iraq would not have happened under gore, cmon

― Listen to my homeboy Fantano (D-40), Tuesday, January 24, 2017 3:55 PM (two hours ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

bernie woulda won

― flopson, Tuesday, 24 January 2017 23:10 (two day

I mean obviously anyone that thinks "Gore would have invaded Iraq too" is delusional but depressing to think anyone unironically
thinks the second thing is as equally certain