Posted on 02/04/2005 7:52:26 PM PST by Mr. Silverback
Exactly. It is actually a fairly stupid question to ask "Does an elected official owe us?" Of course he does if you voted for him!
Answer this question: Has President Bush done what he said he would do ..?? Yes or No?
If your answer is YES - then I would presume it means Bush keeps his promises. If that's correct, then I would presume he will do what I elected him to do.
Does he owe me that - not really. He's only one man and there will be limits to what he may be able to accomplish. However, I believe firmly in my heart he will do all he can to keep every promise.
We should always hold D.C.s feet to the fire. This article wasn't about lack of action, it was about lack of arrogance. And before you demand "payback," consider these paras from my recent op-ed:
Take the reason most liberals will cite as John Kerry’s downfall: Values voters. The story is that Bush would have gone down in flames except for a tsunami of voters who came out to express raging homophobia and opposition to abortion. True, some exit polls showed that many voters cited “moral values” as the reason for their choice, but that category could cover anything. Ask any voter, and they’ll tell you that they support “moral values.”One exit pollster, Andrew Kohut of the Pew Research Center, got the election results exactly right, and after examining Kohut’s data and actual vote counts, David Brooks of the New York Times found the following:
• Evangelical voters, pro-life voters and voters who pray daily all made up the same portions of voters as four years ago.
• Bush gained votes in 45 out of 50 states, including Massachusetts, but “did not gain significantly in the 11 states with gay marriage referendums.”
• Two of the states that voted against gay marriage—Oregon and Michigan—went by solid margins for Kerry.
• The majority of voters approved of Bush’s job performance, supported the liberation of Iraq and considered Iraq a front in the War on Terror. Fifty-eight percent of them trusted him to direct the fight against terror.
As Brooks put it, “The fact is that if you think we are safer now, you probably voted for Bush. If you think we are less safe, you probably voted for Kerry. That's policy, not fundamentalism.”
Sure, we can go to the GOP with our hands out and demand payment for delivering this election, but every voting bloc except high school dropouts and whites with post-grad degrees can go and make the same case. It's a foolish idea, cooked up in the MSM's newsrooms.
Bears repeating.
One of the things that make him great is that he doesn't play that old political game - he's the President of EVERYONE - besides, he's doing more for God fearing people than any president I've ever known - and I have 15 grandkids, so I've know a few - first voted for IKE
You are halfway right. See post 24. There's nothing wrong with expecting this President's support, but he won this election, it wasn't handed to him.
No offense, but if you think Colson, CyberAnt or I are saying we shouldn't expect him to keep his campiagn promises, you didn't read the article.
Let's see Republicans win if Christians don't vote. I think it's silly not to play politics to influence politicians back to the Constitution.
What Bush owes us is to do the right thing. Conservatives, whether Christian or not, expect him to appoint judges who will rule according to the Constitution and the law, and will avoid creating new law from the bench.
The "Religious Conservative" didn't come out in any greater number than they did 4 years ago. This obsession the left suddenly has with "Evangelicals" or whatever the word this week is, is truly unsettling. Something bad is brewing here.
First of all, awesome screen name! Second, I would like to pose to my conservative Christian friends the following question: would you vote to make or keep an act that you consider immoral illegal even if the prohibition caused more harm than good? In other words, what I want to understand is whether making people's lives better - on net - outweighs the desire to use government to make a more moral society as you may see it.
A great reference to small t and capital T, and totally appropriate in reference to Colson.
So who are the other 24?
Thank you. :-)
Does the Democrat Party owe homosexuals?
1. He doesn't owe us, because he won the election, not Evangelicals.
2. We (the Church) have every right and duty to hold pols feet to the fire, but that's different from demanding special favors like some bunch of special interest lobbyists. I intend to model Christ, not be a conservative image of George Soros.
Yet, your post here seems to assume that I'm saying, "Don't anybody trouble those nice people in DC, we don't deserve to tie their shoes."
Let's see Republicans win if Christians don't vote.
Yeah, we'll see Democrats win instead. Let's hand guardianship of the Constitution over to the "living document" crowd. Good plan.
Well, yes and no.
First, I would say prepare for persecution.
Second, I would say don't sweat the "Evangelicals gave Dubya the win" thing. This is from a David Broder NYT article called "The Value Voters Myth." The emphasis is mine:
Every election year, we in the commentariat come up with a story line to explain the result, and the story line has to have two features. First, it has to be completely wrong. Second, it has to reassure liberals that they are morally superior to the people who just defeated them.In past years, the story line has involved Angry White Males, or Willie Horton-bashing racists. This year, the official story is that throngs of homophobic, Red America values-voters surged to the polls to put George Bush over the top.
This theory certainly flatters liberals, and it is certainly wrong.
If these people are telling themselves we all came out of the woodwork to engage in electoral gay-bashing, it's not because they want to lynch us, it's because they desperately need to preserve the bloated delusion of moral superiority that defines the modern liberal. These people convinced themselves in 1988 that if Willie Horton had never been mentioned (or had even been a white guy) Michael Dukakis would have won. They need a myth to cling to, and this year we're it.
But the myth fits their prejudices, and bigots are dangerous, so keep your powder dry.
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.