Skip to comments.See, I Told You So: Social Issues Didn't Drive Independents Away from GOP
Posted on 04/26/2012 3:27:59 PM PDT by Kaslin
RUSH: I want to take you back to this program February 27th, this year, mere weeks ago. I was talking about the Republican Party. They were angry. They weren't being public with their anger, but I was hearing about it through surrogates. They were angry at me for talking about social issues. "Don't talk about 'em, Rush, the social issues, independents don't want to hear about abortion, that stuff, please." Here's what I said
RUSH ARCHIVE: The Republican establishment in panic over the fact I'm killing the party. And you know how I'm killing the party? By not relegating discussion of social issues to the ash heap. They don't want it talked about. Oh, no, they just can't handle it being discussed. They think it's gonna send the independents driving away and the electoral history of this is anything but.
RUSH: That's right. The electoral history. And I was talking, there was a book. Jeffrey Bell wrote a book about how social issues being predominant in the Republican Party has led to presidential victory. And this was the point that I was making. This is an illustration about how the inside-the-Beltway Republicans are out of touch and don't get it and how northeastern liberal Republicans are scared to death of the abortion issue, when they win with it. So I want to follow this up with Brian Kilmeade today on Fox & Friends. They just had a new Fox presidential poll out. Listen to Kilmeade here.
KILMEADE: Among independents, the key voting bloc, who would you vote for if the election was today, 46 to 33, Mitt Romney, a dominant lead.
RUSH: Now, you heard him say "the key voting bloc." See, that's my pet peeve. "So here's Kilmeade. Among independents, the key voting bloc, who would you vote for if the election was today?" Romney up by 13 among independents. And that's after six weeks of this phony war on women stuff that was supposed to send independents running back to the Democrats. Don't buy it. Don't believe the conventional wisdom.
No, NOT Christian Morality—Western Civilization starting with Plato’s Republic and the Nicomachean Ethics....I said “Western ideology” which is what formed our ideology and Worldview, shaped and dominated by Christianity—CERTAINLY....all for the most creative and FREE cultures in the history of mankind where even women and children were given dignity and worth—unlike non-Western cultures which lacked Christian Ethics and Values.
Christianity rid Western Civ of pederasty and slavery—common in all cultures, even Western ones until the ideas of Judeo/Christian Ethics rid the idea that sodomy was “good” and that marriage is between one woman and one man. This equality—elevated women and children—made Natural Law the basis of American Constitution-—Common Sense—that man and woman are different—equal under the law—but fundamentally different natures and have different—important roles—in the family unit.
Economics thrived with the efficiency of the family unit where women were equal in worth to man but had specific roles—as did men. There was order to God’s design of human beings—so children would flourish and be emotionally healthy. Individualism is what comes from Christianity—dignity and worth to all human beings=-the Christian paradigm made America possible. Christian Ethics—as CS Lewis stated—is the most perfect ideology for human flourishing and equality and freedom. Nothing else will work.
Even Machiavelli knew that without Virtue—there can be no freedom. It is proven throughout all of history.
Your gauge brought us Romney, so stuff it.
I think we're seeing two different arguments being made here.
One argument is that “social issues” are irrelevant to people who can't pay their bills and aren't having their basic needs met.
The other argument is that non-Christian cultures have at various times in the past been more economically successful than Western Europe.
The second argument is obviously true and I don't dispute it. I would point out that cultural forms of “civic morality” which promote family values, respect for authority, and not stealing your neighbor's property or trying to kill him are **STILL** transcendent moral values and are at radical variance with modern Western amoral liberalism or libertarianism.
As for the relevance of Maslow’s hierarchy of needs — tell that to the martyred Christians under Nero or the Jews who died at Masada. Tell that even to secular American liberals who opposed the German Third Reich and fought for American freedom during World War II. There are some things which are far more important than food, shelter, or life itself, and even someone who **DOESN'T** believe in transcendent moral values can believe there are things worth dying for.
“Your gauge brought us Romney, so stuff it.”
I’m hardly a Romney fan; switch to decaf.
“That statement proves that you have no clue how things work.”
Your response proves you have no understanding of much; Bolshevism and Nazism are the ultimate expressions of what desperate humans can do to each other when basic needs aren’t met. Luxuries like human decency and morality fall by the wayside fairly quickly.
‘When California is trying to pass a law making it illegal to counsel anyone under the age of 18 so that they turn away from homosexuality, EVEN IF THEIR PARENTS OR THE INDIVIDUALS WANT the counseling, Id say that more & more people are caring about social issues.”
When such a measure passes via REFERENDUM, I’ll believe you. As someone who is pro-life without exception, I don’t think there is any reason to refer to the biological parent of a murdered child as “mother”.
“You need to get your head out of your wallet and look around.”
I must have missed something; we just had a pro-life president for 2 terms.
Actually, the problem is categorizing decency and morality as "luxuries" in the first place.
AS a NJ resident, I can tell you that for all of the talk of “liberals” in NJ, Governor Christie (unapologetically pro-life) beat Jon Corzine, and will still beat any challenger on the horizon. Conservatives have a hard time separating the BS libs give lip service to and how they vote in the privacy of the booth; libs are a self-centered lot, and liberal only when others get the bill. A lot of Dems voted for Christie (who is also a tax slasher), and they will vote for anyone but Obama as well.
Sorry; yes, I do mean people emptying out their piggy banks. Ten years ago I hardly ever saw bicentennial quarters and wheat pennies around; it is as though we’ve stepped back in time to 1980. I’ve also gotten a few silver dimes; that takes me back to 1978!
“It cant happen-if it doesit is a worthless life and inhumane.”
Much of the world already lives like that, and we do in growing increments; the natural family is disappearing in many places, and the birthrate is at European levels.
I am hardly advocating life without morality; I am a Christian and try to live my life as though the last 35 years never happened. I will point out that Adolf Hitler was elected by real live people, who would look the other way (if not actively participate in his plans) while he restored economic prosperity to them.
Don’t believe Americans aren’t so desperate; the election of Obama showed how far we’ve already fallen.
AND subsequently worth voting for. RINOs abandoning the moral values worth dying for abandon the voters that would vote for them today rather than die for them tomorrow. REGARDLESS the RINO sellouts -people will eventually revolt and reclaim the issues that the RINOs abandon. In the Tea Party we see the beginnings of this.
“We’re conservatives. We’re smart enough to multi-task.”
I am, too, and I can as well. I’m referring to the ridiculous image being painted of hordes of femi-Nazis storming polling places because of a perceived threat to their right to murder their children.
The unwillingess of conservatives to budge on their issues (which I share & applaud) is giving the GOP headaches, but so be it. In my 20+ years as a registered voter, I have never voted for a pro-abortion candidate (which in NJ has also included Republicans). I write in conservative candidates so they know I bothered to get off the couch (while casting votes further down the ballot for more local races), and I have never missed a chance to cast my vote.
I would contend that the rise of Hitler was a result of abandoning the moral issues and not the cause. Once the moral issues were abandoned Hitler came to prominence on the primary plank of financial issues and secondary plank of nationalism. Hitler stepped into a morally devoid breech and people looked the other way as long as they got their piece of wealth.
What differences do you attribute to "Judeo-Christian morality" in contrast to "Christian morality"?
“Actually, the problem is categorizing decency and morality as “luxuries” in the first place.”
As a Christian living in a state that is increasingly being filled with people that are not, I assure you that decency & morality are luxuries; we’ve gone from condemning the genocides in Rwanda & Sierra Leone to importing the very perpetrators into our homeland.
I agree that Hitler was the result; you are supporting my contention that social issues matter only when people are fortunate enough to be able to consider them instead of having to focus on how to pay for their next grocery shopping trip.
I think you miss the larger point. The financial problems are a result of the perversion of the moral principles. Hitler fixed the pocketbook first. What is the difference between a financially solvent morally corrupt nation and an in debt morally corrupt nation? Not much...
“The left wants your money to pay for all their social engineering after all.”
The left’s current playbook is to scare women that their right to murder their children is at risk (regardless of how it is paid for); “homosexual marriage” has to be the most losing issue politically (it has never survived a referendum), yet some who advocate for it are winning political office - apparently voters ARE seperating fiscal & social issues. Obama’s 2012 problem is that he’s on the wrong side in both segments.
One day about four years ago I was finishing breakfast at the greasy spoon about a mile away, when I needed to get change for a dollar (so I could finish out my tip). The waitress on the register gave me my change, and I looked down and saw a double flash of white in my change -- she'd given me two silver quarters! I went back to the register and checked, and her drawer was alive with silver quarters -- someone had taken a roll of them to the bank without opening them (a thief? busybody wife? kids?) and cashed them for $10/roll. I got more of them from the cashier, who was in her late 20's and from Mexico to boot, and had no idea what she was looking at in that drawer. I went back to the counter, said look at this to the guy next to me, and dropped a couple of them on the counter. Instantly, the older black guy next to him jerked his head around when he heard the coins hit the counter -- even after 45 years, he knew what the sound of real money hitting the bar sounded like, and snapped to instantly. I went back and got more change, and then I told the girls what they had. I must have got about $1.50-2.00 in silver quarters out of that drawer. Looked over a second later and two of the waitresses were pawing through the cash drawer, getting them out. The black guy went over and made change, too, and got a couple.
Most of our financial problems stem from the fact that we are no longer the manufacturing center of the world; once that was lost, the lifestyles it had sustained couldn’t be maintained. The perversion of moral principles isn’t helping, but I don’t see a direct correlation between them and the export of our jobs out of the country. The Red Chinese peasant working for a daily bowl of rice is simply much more affordable than a Westerner as labor; if we did everything right morally, we’d still have to contend with that fact.