Posted on 02/04/2007 1:31:12 AM PST by Jim Robinson
I've long assumed that the Republican Party platform included pro-life, pro-family and pro 1st and 2nd amendment planks. Is this true or false? Or is the platform amended each election cycle to conform to the positions of the top polling potential presidential nominee (ie, the one with the most money or star billing and the MSM eye)?
If these planks are based on longstanding, sound conservative principles and are sincerely respected and upheld by the majority of the members, then I'd like to propose a motion that before being seriously considered by the official party powers that be, prospective nominees for the office of President of the United States must in the least demonstrate a solid history of being pro-life, pro-family and pro 1st and 2nd amendments, in addition to a solid history of abiding by and fighting for the other basic Republican planks, ie, national security, national defense, limited government, conservative spending, lower taxes, strict constructionist judges, local control of health, education and welfare, etc, etc.
Or is it too much to ask of the politician asking for our support for the highest office in the land to respect and abide by conservative principles and the basic planks of the party platform?
Or is there a movement underfoot to remove these planks from the platform?
Are they 'freepers'?
Or are they just playing one online?
If not, why even have a Republican party? Well put JimRob!
That is exactly the point. None of the 'front runners' are conservatives. They are Log Cabin Republicans.
Those that wag the tail of the media put them out there as front runners.
There are conservatives running and mulling the run. The enemy within don't want them to win. 2010 is a significant year when a few treaties are suppose to be signed by. A conservative won't sign them. A Democrat or Log Cabin Republican will.
As RNC Chair, Mehlman blessed pro-abort-pro-gay, gun grabber Rudy Giuliani's forays to campaign for Republican candidates during the 2006 campaign season.
The idea was for Rudy to earn campaign chits he would cash in when he ran in presidintial primaries.
To bad the candidates Rudy campaigned for lost. I guess Mehlman's aide Duhaime is Rudy's consolation prize.
Jim, I'm going to be uncharacteristically frank again. I'm not naive enough to believe that party platform is anything other than a carefully crafted document who's sole purpose is to pander to as many special interests as possible in order to garner votes. The platform committee's sole function is to sit and argue about how much it will cost in money and votes to pick Pepsi over Coke.
Poor Bob Dole was way too honest when he admitted that he really hadn't paid too much attention to the party platform. However, Bob was just honest. None of the others are going to really show the slavish devotion to the platform that they'll promise they will in front of the crowd de jour in support of the cause de jour. I supported Dole btw, he was a good man.
Jim, I've always supported true conservative issues. True conservatives being those that will genuinely strengthen my country. I'm never going to get behind a divisive candidate like Alan Keyes (to safely pick someone not running) who despite the assurances of the faithful pulls 3rd party numbers in two party races. Again, being blunt, Keyes and his supporters are at least in part responsible for Barak Obama's meteoric rise to prominence in the Democratic Party. Had Keyes record setting poor showing not given him a landslide that statistically dwarfed Reagan's, he might not be the media darling he is today. At the very least, it's safe to say that the stellar victory didn't hurt.
Sorry Jim, but radical candidates like Keyes are bad for the party, and ultimately bad for the country. They have no real chance for national office no matter how well they are polling on Free Republic. Jim, please, don't fall into the trap where mainstream (yes mainstream, not liberal, not RINO, but mainstream) Republicans are no longer welcome here at Freerpublic. Like it or not, mainstream Republicans are your conservative choice and your best weapon against radical liberals.
It will be interesting to see what his hired advisors have him run as.
Look at this excerpt:
>>Either McCain or Giuliani could run and win as an independent. Either one could raise the money. Giuliani, released from the deadly confines of a Republican primary, would find his liberal social views on abortion, guns, and gays to be an asset, not a fatal flaw. McCain's legendary independence on issues like tobacco regulation, tough corporate governance, campaign-finance reform, global warming, torture of terror suspects and immigration would no longer be seen as straying from GOP orthodoxy once he left the Republican primaries, but would become the basis for a very attractive campaign platform. <<
Just what are these deadly confines we Republicans have? Morals?
I hope he does go as an Independent or Democrat. That is where he belongs.
The platform is created new every election. There are platforms in every district, every state, and nationally and they might not match up exactly. Being on the platform committee is about as interesting as being on a JayCees rules committee. Also, the platform is ignored once the nominations are done.
((((( PING PING PING )))))
Dear Jim Robinson,
"Or is it too much to ask of the politician asking for our support for the highest office in the land to respect and abide by conservative principles and the basic planks of the party platform?"
How narrow-minded of you, how "Little Tent" of you.
You're obviously one of those 100%ers, the Unappeasables who actually insist that the Republican Party run a conservative for the presidency. Get with the times, JimRob, conservatism has "evolved." Republicans don't want those crazy fundamentalist, narrow-minded, theocratic Christians running the show anymore. Republicans want to be the party of low taxes, war, and "compassion."
Haven't you read what's being written on your own forum? Plenty of folks want to rid the party of the destructive influence of us evil social conservatives, us awful pro-lifers, those of us who believe that the family is the first social unit, and that family precedes the state.
Except, they, of course, want us to continue to vote for them, even as they adopt an anti-life, anti-human agenda.
Pay attention! With Mr. Giuliani leading the parade, the NEW Republican Party will lead us into the post-Christian, post-traditional morality, post-social conservative era, where there will be abortions, homosexual marriages, warrantless searches and seizures for everyone!
But no guns!
* sigh *
sitetest
I'd venture to say that in view of the clear and present danger the platform ought to be contra-hillary first, last, and foremost. Everything else could be taken care of later.
Hence, my tagline.
>>>PAC money
bump for emphasis
Ping.
GW Bush, arguably the most important candidate in 2004.
Sounds like Giuliani's positions.
There you have it.
IMO the GOP platform should be, and stay, pro-family, pro-life.
As it has been for many years.
But I ask these questions constantly, and I never get an answer. What did Reagan or GW Bush DO to turn back the tide on abortion?? And how does one now enforce anti-abortion laws, if Roe vs. Wade is overturned?
And what would be gained in our fight for our beliefs, if Rudy or McCain were the nominee, and Hillary won because so-called "real Conservatives" stayed home??
I'd sure like to know...
We have a winner. I'm encouraged. More people seem to be getting it than I at first thought. Good. Very Good.
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.