BRISTOL'S MYTH

I don’t allow holier than thou idiots like you define what I am or what I am not. You know nothing about me or my involvement with the Pro-life movement. It is the my way of the highway intransigence of your type that got us a far Left, pro-abortion President, House and Senate. But hey that’s fine with you because you can sleep well at night knowing that your right. Spare me the sanctimoniousness.

“Understand that you and I have verrrry different ideas about winning elections”(You’ve got that right. I want to win you want to dream).

“Mine are consistent with conservatism as a first principle. Are yours? Mine are also more practical”(Based on recent election results I would say you have a pretty inflated opinion of yourself there Skippy).

“Socially conservative blacks and Hispanics are within reach of the GOP”(I have been hearing that for at least 30 years and it ain’t happened yet).

“So are socially conservative union voters, my fellow Roman Catholics (the ones who actually attend Mass will vote GOP as long as that means pro-life, those who shun Mass or support baby-killing are, by Church definition, NOT Catholic)”(As a member of a strong pro-life, Catholic, union family I can tell you none of them, other than me and my wife, vote republican. They all vote democrat as they have ever since they got off the boat. Try again.)

“Mormons, Evangelicals, Missouri Synod and Wisconsin Synod Lutherans, Westminster Presbyterians, Eastern Orthodox, Chassidic and other Orthodox Jews, Jews who care about the future of Israel”(Jews vote overwhelmingly democrat in every election and always have. Your not doing very well here.)

“military veterans, those who favor a manly foreign policy, and resistance to revolutions social, economic and, as necessary or desirable, military”(Hey even a blind pig occasionally finds the acorn. You are probably right on the military families as they vote self-interest and for a strong national defense).

You sound a lot like global warming proponents, could, would, might, will, too bad but like your GW counterparts the facts don’t back up your contentions. If all these people actually voted as you think they should we would be living in paradise. The problem is they don’t and never have. With the exception of the military, the Mormons, who are reviled on this site, and most EVs none of the people mentioned consistently vote Republican or conservative. In fact most of the practicing Presbyterians, MO. Synod Lutherans and practicing Catholic I know personally voted for OBama. The sad truth is that most people do not vote social issues. They vote their pocket book. They might agree with your position on abortion, gay rights and guns, as I do, but they don’t vote based on those issues that often.

But you just keep telling yourself how all those historically democrat voters are going to join you in the voting booth. Just keep ignoring the one huge problem with your contention, almost none of those you mentioned vote conservative consistently or ever have. So while you wait for all of the above mentioned to get on board you continue to push those who have supported the Party in the past and the young who might join us in the future away by your demand that they be ideologically pure by your standards. Let me know when you get all these people on board. Excuse me if I don’t wait for your fantasy to come true. I will be out trying to get people elected that we can work with and get us the number we need to govern and make policy. But you just go ahead and sit home convincing yourself that next election all these supposed conservative voters will show up at the polls.

How do you know what the “underlining reasons” were? Maybe those icky conservative Christians, your words not mine, went to the polls and voted for their pocketbook even it meant voting against their social views. I had no use for McCain, but I liked Sarah so I voted for him and then went home and took a shower. Maybe they didn’t like everything OBama stood for, but liked his economic message and voted for him. I know normally conservative Republican voters who did because they were hurting and thought a change would be good. They don’t agree with the Bambster on abortion, but they thought maybe he could make thing better economically. Wrong headed from my point of view, but it’s what they felt.

Bottom line is I’m determined to bring republicans back into power in this country and end the pox that is presently effecting the Nation. If that means hoping that we can again put together a coalition of social, economic and national security conservatives to form a winning team count me in. If some of the Econs and NatSec people don’t agree with me on every social issue so be it. My guess is that some of the SocCon and NatSecs won’t agree with the Econs on economic issues and on and on. The idea is to win, not sit on the sidelines and dream about a world that doesn’t exist. The greatest enemy of the good is the perfect.

You certainly have learned your media mythology very well. Sorry about your family and their voting habits. Except for the fact that your family generally votes Demonrat and mine GOP, those families sound otherwise similar. Mine voted Democrat so long as the Roman Catholic Church was the Democrat Party at prayer. When the Demonrats started their enthusiasm for killing babies and for Lance doing whatever with Bruce, even my most Democrat relatives with one exception turned GOP.

Why don't your relatives as Catholic ethnics vote Republican or conservative????

Maybe your relatives resist your rhetorical style or your substitution of insult for reason. Maybe, your relatives aren't very Catholic (a matter of belief and commitment to the actual Faith and not a matter of ancestry) because voting in such a way as to materially assist abortion incurs latae sententiae (automatic without publicity or bell, book and candle ceremonials) excommunication. Maybe they are no more insightful than you are. Maybe someone authorized you to trade the lives of most aborted babies for false assumptions of saving a handful (pie in the sky, bye and bye) someday in the undetermined future.

There may be many reasons for the results of the 2006 and 2008 elections but a need to undergo a spinectomy on abortion is not one of them. "Moderates" have already undergone the removal of their spines and brains and so it comes as no surprise when the mushballs resent those who retain principles. "Vote for us because we might mildly inconvenience the kindly physicians who help Muffy exercise her 'reproductive' 'rights'" is not a slogan to rally around, Skipper!

If your relatives are voting Demonrat and you define them as pro-life, then you need a more accurate definition of pro-life and so do they. You and they also need a far more accurate definition of "Catholic." If that makes me sanctimonious, then hit me with your best shot!

Your prescription is that the GOP be the party of spoiled social airheads and materialist morons like Muffy and Skipper down at the polo club. When you get Muffy and the Junior Leaguers to get their hands off each other and curtail their passionate support for the abortion industry (to save them tax money by killing poor kids), you can get back to me.

A few corrections: the word Presbyterian as I used it does not apply to the entire denomination but, as I posted, to Westminster Confession Presbyterians. Likewise, the reference was to Chassidic and other Orthodox Jews and not to the general Jewish vote.

Since the mass of folks who work with their hands and are socially conservative, according to you, vote their pocketbooks, would it not make more political sense to satisfy their economic agenda while remaining social issue, military, gun, etc., hardliners????? Their are only a relative handful of brainless Muffies and Skippers and Junior Leaguers. We spend money politically to obtain votes because votes are more valuable than money. Why not go straight for the votes rather than crawling into the gutter with the Demonrat babykillers and lavender queens to compete over Muffy and Skipper.

If you think me sanctimonious, that might someday be relevant but only if I gave a rat's patoot for your opinion. Don't hold your breath. Given the empty impracticality of your attempts at argument, your every insult is a badge of honor.

Two years before Ronaldus Maximus became governor of California, many of us had Reagan for President stickers on our cars and 16 years later we not onoy elected him but took out ten Demonrat Senators including the likes of McGovern, Frank Church, Gaylord Nelson and the cream of the radical Demonrat Senate Caucus. Numerous House Demonrat Fommittee Chairmen and caucus leaders like Brademas went down that night as well. The method (assisted by the rank mediocrity of Jimmuh Peanut) was the one I laid out for you and which you deride. Your argument is the one that Nelson Rockefeller, George Romney, William Scranton and a host of others made before they lost control of the grassroots party and afterwards as long as they lived. Utilizing money as usual, some of today's mushball GOP like LAMAR! and Giddy Dole and Charlie Crist make the same argument. Sometimes they even get elected. The GOP will be restored along with our nation by first purging the GOP of the spineless and brainless "moderate" crowd and then taking the disciplined and militant remnant core of the GOP to war against the Obamas and the Pelosis and the Reids and their ilk. We can do that very well without you. In fact, we shall.

If Muffy and Skipper want to die homeless and dine at soup kitchens after their trust funds are completely depleted or confiscated under Obamanomics, they can keep up their love affair with abortion and perversions and vote to keep Obama (and Bill Ayres and Bernardine the Radical Queen and Mark Rudd, et al. and their agendas) in the driver's seat or they can vote for people with spines and with America's traditional agendas. Muffy and Skipper are the tail that will not be allowed to wag the dog. AND, based on your expressions here, neither will you.

BTW, that word "we" as used in your last paragraph, is not likely to apply to any combination of thee and me in the foreseeable future, RINO.

As soon as my 89 year old mother and 92 year old aunt get back from morning Mass I tell them you don’t consider them real Catholics because they vote democrat. I am sure they will be impressed. I will also let my mother, who when talking about abortion, never fails to uses her standard comment that under no circumstances do you ever throw away a baby that she is not pro-life enough for you. Again I am soon she will be impressed. As for your RINO comment, the last refuge of those who are out of substantive argument, if someone who works for a pro-life group, has his own pro-life website, is a lifetime member of the NRA, has been fired from a writing position at a local magazine for being too political and way too conservative to suit the suits and has voted conservative/Republican for 30 years is a RINO then I guess you nailed it. My guess is it more to the point that anyone who disagrees with you is a RINO in your eyes.

I found it interesting that nowhere in your response did you address the facts that almost all of the people you expect to rescue the Republican party in your fantasy have never consistently voted Republican. I know the truth hurts and that often it’s easier to wrap yourself in delusion than face truths you don’t like. Feel free to keep sitting on the sidelines as a holier than thou, ideologically pure, card carrying member of the political minority, while the rest of us do the heavy lifting of winning elections. You keep dreaming about a world that will never be and I will continue to work for a Republican majority that we (and as per your request you are not being included in the we) can work with on the tough issues facing the Nation.

Well since I have never liked McCain and he was not last on my list of potential candidates because he wasn't even on the list, I am not sure what your point is. The only reason I voted for the little s**t was because he picked Sarah as his Veep and the alternative was too horrible to contemplate, and even then I felt like taking shower afterwards. And yes some moderate Republicans do feel uncomfortable around some social conservatives, especially those that are very in your face about their stands on the issues. Again what's your point. I have worked many times with people I wasn't comfortable with if the goal was worth it. And maybe you should consider that the reason we have gone back to minority status is because in the last two elections we have lost the moderately and conservative voters. There will never be enough social conservative in this Country to maintain an electoral majority. If conservatives want to win they have to bring all three of branches of the movement together to win. Throwing away economic conservatives because they don't hold hard core social conservative views make no more sense than pushing away the SoCon because they don't agree with tax policy, or the NatSec because they are not totally on board on gun control. You win with electoral numbers. ideology is fine, but if you don't have the numbers you don't get to govern it's that simple. You asked how I thought McCain's candidacy was working for me, well I might ask how are OBama, Nancy and Harry working out for you? They weren't put into office by the far left. They were put into power by convincing the moderate and moderately conservative voters that they were what the country needed. And want them out of power we are going to have to welcome these people back into the fold.

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.