I have recently been engaged in one of the most thought provoking conversations of my life; one that calls on retaining the wisdom of experience while disengaging the perspective of the years required to get there.  The goal of the project is to develop a young Republicans organization that will attract members under the age of thirty.

Association based on political philosophy is not exactly the hot topic for the twenty-somethings.  But party affiliation is primarily about principles.  And the Republican Party Platform is not a list of cool things to do on Spring Break.

We are knowingly beginning at a disadvantage.  Gallup reports that, “Young voters overall tend to identify more strongly with the Democratic Party than the Republican Party, so it is highly likely that they will break for Obama in the ge
2
1
View Full Article
Mark Baisley

Mark Baisley

Mark Baisley is a security and intelligence professional

Most Recent Articles

Join the Debate
39 Comments So Far
« Previous1Next »
AmericaforAll Wrote: Oct 15, 2012 5:34 PM
The amount of bias pumped into this article is appalling. I found it hard to take it seriously as an educated opinion. The parties have very little differences to begin with. Not only did your title mislead, but the content holds no weight and needs a serious fact check to even be considered somewhat true. This is absolute bullsh*t. Very disappointed with this website.
Flag as Offensive
AmericaforAll Wrote: Oct 15, 2012 5:35 PM
and this author. Its about time we rise above the mudslinging and focus on the positives of each party and what will ACTUALLY help ALL AMERICA
Flag as Offensive
Spikeygrrl Wrote: Jul 19, 2012 2:55 AM
HOW CAN I HELP?
Where can I send my resume? (not presuming you've got paid positions, just that you might want to know what my skills are before you decide where best to use me on a volunteer basis)

orionaut @ g mail . com
Flag as Offensive
Marvin E. Fox Wrote: Jul 15, 2012 5:16 PM
The Tyranny of a Pure Democracy is an excellent article. I agree with almost everything you said. However, saying the Democratic Party prefers any democracy is absurd by any definition of democracy. The commonly used definition 'majority rule', wasn't cast off by the Democrats, it was never tried. There is a good definition of democracy in Black's Law Dictionary, mine is the sixth edition, page 298. You really need the Democratic Party's standard official definition of democracy to know what they mean by democracy!
The definition of our Republic is its Constitution; all other definitions are false or incomplete.
Redefining our Republic as "our democracy" is false , and more Ridiculous by the minute.
Marvin E. Fox
Flag as Offensive
samhouston Wrote: Jul 15, 2012 5:05 PM
To Paulus, in another post you said "Agree that there's no essential difference between the two parties. It's socialism straight versus socialism on the rocks. Either way, you get socialis." Probably so, but with obama you get marxism, communism, and socialism all rolled up in one. Our founding fathers wanted America to be as Rebublic "for which it stands". In other words government for the people and not government over the people. We have some hope in the Republican party, even today, that has less government control over the people, many Republicans still believe in free enterprise, freedom of some speech, and freedom of religion, even capitalism. Given the choice I will take the Republican bad over the Dem bad anyday.
Flag as Offensive
Marvin E. Fox Wrote: Jul 15, 2012 6:11 PM
Great job samhouston, you do good work. my website is www.americarepublicspring.com clic the blog button.
Marvin E. Fox
Flag as Offensive
Paulus Textor Wrote: Jul 15, 2012 7:49 PM
When you choose the lesser of two evils, you're still choosing evil. This is not working out well, I hope you realize.
Flag as Offensive
Paulus Textor Wrote: Jul 15, 2012 2:26 PM
Democracy or Majority Rule are bad ideas.

Like your mother told you long ago, just because the majority does something, doesn't make it right.

I would prefer rule by super-majority; that is, require three-quarters approval to pass any law, rather than mere majority. Fifty percent of the people are wrong one hundred percent of the time. At least with a super-majority requirement, it's tougher (though not impossible) to pass idiotic laws.
Flag as Offensive
Joseph64 Wrote: Jul 15, 2012 2:47 PM
And what about the rights of the 25%? How do they get their opinions respected under such a system? Repression by super majority is no better than by simple majority and is, in fact, worse because it encourages conformity of thought and punishment of any idea that is new or different.
Flag as Offensive
Marvin E. Fox Wrote: Jul 15, 2012 5:37 PM
Give us the empirical data showing how the Democratic Party found a majority of citizens for a specific cause, and legislated the "majority will' of those citizens into law. Give us the definition of democracy the Democratic Party gives to its leaders, supporters , and those who send the Democratic Party money for elections.
The Black race is less than 25%.
The Hispanic race is less than 25%
Native Americans are less than 25%
Are they important enough for the majority to protect even if they whine?
Marvin E. Fox
Flag as Offensive
Paulus Textor Wrote: Jul 15, 2012 7:44 PM
True repression is wrong, no matter what size of majority does the repression. My point is that passing laws is much more difficult if you require a three-fourths majority, rather than a mere fifty percent plus one.
Flag as Offensive
Marvin E. Fox Wrote: Jul 15, 2012 5:27 PM
Paulus, I believe a super majority of 75% would mean that whoever required that majority of a nation's people has passed his last law. Our Nation is a nation of laws passed by reasonable men. Our problem isn't our Repuiblic's loss of reasonable men. Our problem is that we, as a natiion, are electing self important, criminal, agenda driven, and incompetent to public office.
Remember, a vote against any democrat is a vote against every Marxist.
Flag as Offensive
Paulus Textor Wrote: Jul 15, 2012 7:46 PM
The point was: requiring a super-majority reduces the chances of passing bad laws, as compared with a mere fifty percent plus one. The rights of a sizable minority (twenty-five percent) should be able to block proposals by a tyrannical mob-majority.
Flag as Offensive
pamela247 Wrote: Jul 15, 2012 11:54 AM
I only hope that the Tea Party becomes its own political party and adheres to the Constitution of the United States.
Flag as Offensive
pamela247 Wrote: Jul 15, 2012 11:51 AM
I am tired of the Republicans and Democrats playing the American people for fools. There is no difference between the two parties. they both ride the gravy train while they play us against each other all the while taking from us to put into their pockets. Example: Romney was booed at the NAACP convention when he talked about repealing Obamacare BUT I did not see one news source show that he got a standing ovation at the end. Why? We have troops in foregn countries dying and fighting for our freedoms yet our freedoms are being lost right here in our own Whitehouse. The Obama administration is riddled with socialist/communists trying to take down America. Our newsmedia is in bed with them while our troops are fighting ghost wars.
Flag as Offensive
Paulus Textor Wrote: Jul 15, 2012 2:21 PM
Agree that there's no essential difference between the two parties. It's socialism straight versus socialism on the rocks. Either way, you get socialism.
Flag as Offensive
Marvin E. Fox Wrote: Jul 15, 2012 5:46 PM
Pamela247. I hope you have some spare energy to raise you up about November. I am a citizen of this Republic who does not belong to a political party. Both parties have caused problems. However, it is my belief that we must hang on to the Repunblican party until we get rid of the Democratic/ socialist/progressive's party. Don't give up! You are a very good person and the democrats want you to believe it is useless to vote against them. That is a bald faced lie. Vote in November!
Flag as Offensive
Masher Wrote: Jul 15, 2012 11:16 AM
There have been in the past, think the “Greatest Generation,” and there are presently, think of our sons and daughters in the military, many young people that understand liberty and freedom and are willing to do what is necessary to defend it. There are also many that merely live off what government can give them, or vote with their emotions. There is an old expression that says if you are not a Democrat at 20 then you have no heart, and if you are not a Republican at 40 then you have no brain. That being said, the Republicans can add to their support by getting government out of the morality business, and buttress the concept of personal responsibility. Not to mention a little Constitutional integrity.
Flag as Offensive
Paulus Textor Wrote: Jul 15, 2012 2:22 PM
I don't think fighting wars on the far side of the globe, against enemies who never attacked us, constitutes dedication to the cause of individual liberty.
Flag as Offensive
Joseph64 Wrote: Jul 15, 2012 2:49 PM
Then you are a fool. Those men and women are fighting for the liberty of the people in the countries where they are fighting, people who are unable to fight for themselves. Hitler never attacked us directly prior to FDR getting us into the war, so I guess we should have allowed him to just take over Europe, right?
Flag as Offensive
Paulus Textor Wrote: Jul 15, 2012 7:54 PM
Sorry, that does not follow. Iraq and Afghanistan do not compare to Nazi Germany and Imperial Japan. Japan actually DID attack US territory, and was allied with Germany. Iraq and Afghanistan did not attack us; a non-government entity did.

And it's not the responsibility of American soldiers to "fight for the liberty" of people on the far side of the globe. Especially when that is just propaganda bilge used to sell an unnecessary war.
Flag as Offensive
Silas Longshot Wrote: Jul 15, 2012 9:18 AM
That is the most succinct and bang on article of 'definition' that I've seen in years, clearly enumerating the distinctions of what the parties 'ideals' are.
If only those republicans IN the positions at DC would DO these things, consistently, uncompromisingly and sometimes courageously, then we could save the republic. This election may be the nudge over the edge, 'democratic' socialism made irreversible by the insatiable demands of the entitlement mentality voter that demands more 'free stuff' from the government, who doesn't givadam who must pay for it.
surviving urban crisis
Flag as Offensive
Steven668 Wrote: Jul 15, 2012 8:58 AM
If the Republican Party has the slightest desire to appeal to anyone, it must acquire, and adhere to, a set of principles that distinguish it from the Democrat Party. Vowing to fight to the last to enforce fiscal discipline, then voting to raise the already ridiculous debt ceiling, makes them noisy speechmakers that are indistinguishable from Democrats in practice. Young people hate hypocrites above all else. Democrats practice what they preach. Republicans practice what Democrats preach. Which is the more honest party?
Flag as Offensive
Docnick Wrote: Jul 15, 2012 1:12 PM
Well said. Ron
Flag as Offensive
Steven668 Wrote: Jul 15, 2012 5:09 PM
Ron thanks you. He doesn't usually say things all that well.
Flag as Offensive
Steven668 Wrote: Jul 15, 2012 5:10 PM
P.S. - Who is Ron?
Flag as Offensive
Vva70 Wrote: Jul 15, 2012 8:47 AM
I was trending conservative at age nine. The way it was first explained to me, it basically amounted to "conservatives believe you should decide what you want to do and keep your money, while liberals believe the government should decide what you should do and take your money." There was probably more nuance in the explanation than that, but again, nine. I couldn't figure why anyone would ever vote for the latter.

And honestly, the individual freedom aspect is what has always driven me ideologically. Having that as a basic principle gives the conservative argument a great edge. I think we too often let the left drive the argument away from principle and into practical minutiae, where their argument is simpler (though still wrong).
Flag as Offensive
James92 Wrote: Jul 15, 2012 8:47 AM
Ben Franklin, to paraphrase, said 'we've given you a Republic if you can keep it". We haven't - we've failed. We've let the "Progressives" slowly steal away the Republic and replace it with a Socialist Democracy.
Flag as Offensive
Marvin E. Fox Wrote: Jul 15, 2012 5:59 PM
James92. There is no such government as a socialist democracy. Socialism and democracy are totally incompatible.
By definition, democracy requires a free choice from each citizen to form a 'Majority Rule.'

By definition, socialism requires the government pooling or control of all national natural resouces and the redistribution of those resources by government. The governments equal redistribution of wealth (social justice) can not be accomplished otherwise.

A socialist democracy has a fatal flaw!
The first, socialism, has always failed!
The second, democracy, has never been tried!
Marvin E. Fox
Flag as Offensive
Czarina Wrote: Jul 15, 2012 8:20 AM
"Republicans" and conservative leaders and grass roots need to address the general electorate with the same kind of educational bent as they are concentrating on college-age kids. A great number of democrat liberals and independents that vote democratic are woefully uninformed about issues as well as the true value system of each party. Everything is about educating ourselves and others and we need to at least try to inform our neighbors and friends whenever the opportunity arises.
Flag as Offensive
Mike131 Wrote: Jul 15, 2012 10:05 AM
Frankly the Democrats have the upper hand here, since the majority of university professors describe themselves as liberal and shamelessly compel their students to swallow the liberal cool-aid or suffer lower GPAs. As a result I know graduate of a prestigious East coast college who couldn't explain to me why we have leap years. In fact. I have been deeply disappointed for many years by the product of our institutions of higher learning. They are simply mills for the manufacture of self aggrandizing feel good activism. You spell that L.I.B.E.R.A.L.S.
Flag as Offensive
Robert125 Wrote: Jul 15, 2012 8:18 AM
A democracy is nothing but mob rule, and what we have at present, now that it has been corrupted, is only one step above. Any government without a moral center, is just a bunch of villains looking for a patsy to pay for their perks.
Flag as Offensive
Marvin E. Fox Wrote: Jul 15, 2012 6:05 PM
My websit www.americarepublicspring.com
MarvinE. Fox
Flag as Offensive
ssc Wrote: Jul 15, 2012 7:42 AM
WHAT??? Who ever writes headlines at the Townhall ought to be fired. This piece was entitled The Tyranny of Pure Democracy and the article had NOTHING to do with the title. And this is a recurring problem at Townhall. Often I am enticed to read an article by the title only to find that the article is totally unrelated to the title. Pretty shoddy.
Flag as Offensive
annfan_777 Wrote: Jul 15, 2012 8:48 AM
"The Democratic Party prefers the tyranny of a pure democracy (frequently described as two wolves and a sheep voting on what’s for dinner)."

---------------------

Pay attention.
Flag as Offensive
Steven668 Wrote: Jul 15, 2012 9:12 AM
In our current system, the two wolves are the Democrat and Republican Parties, and the sheep is the rest of us. The sheep has been hand-fed by the wolves and had his wolfish qualities praised to the skies for so long that he is reluctant to disagree with his toothy "friends." Even after they start carving.

My metaphor is probably too obscure, but space prevents me from explaining better.
Flag as Offensive
LibertyColumns Wrote: Jul 15, 2012 1:18 AM
Here's why young people go with the Democratic Party:

The Republican Party does boring stuff on TV news shows. I'd rather watch MTV or use my iPhone.

The Democratic Party gives me free money. Now I can buy some Katy Perry songs on iTunes.
Flag as Offensive
patrickhenry_strikesback Wrote: Jul 15, 2012 12:22 AM
How many of you patriots are tired of the political system being rigged against you? How many are tired of paying endless debt and taxes to a private Federal Reserve Bank that loans your tax money back in the form of inflation?

Check out (see below):

www.constitutionliberty. com

Sign up for the Newsletter!

Thanks.
Flag as Offensive
« Previous1Next »
New comments on this article - click to refresh