Posted on 02/10/2007 1:39:11 PM PST by TitansAFC
There is no point to electing Pro-Family, Pro-Life, Pro-Free Speech, Pro-Second Amendment candidates anymore. At least, that's what we're essentially being told by the Rudy Giuliani for President crowd. The candidates themselves have no impact on such issues, we're told, and so we shouldn't take that into consideration when choosing whom to elect.
Yes, the Pro-Life, Pro-Family, Pro-Gun, Pro-Free Speech voters should not take their respective issues to the voting booth. They are issues that can be addressed simply by nominating judges. That's all that matters. So we're told.
So this is where the Pro-Life, Pro-Family, Pro-Gun, Pro-Free Speech crowd stands with the modern GOP, eh? This is all that's relevant for the Social Conservatives and Gun Conservatives in 2008, is it? Well, at least that's the perspective of many Pro-Rudy publications, such as National Review, and the clear majority view of GOP columnists nationwide.
Let me sum this up: Those of us who are Pro-Life, Pro-Traditional Marriage, Pro-Family, Pro-Second Amendment, and Pro-Free Speech have been reduced to a three word expression determined by Pro-Rudy pollsters and perhaps some time previous to his candidacy:
"Roberts and Alito" (Also accepted is "Thomas and Scalia.")
That's it. That's all we are to them anymore - that's all it takes. This alone should be enough to placate the base, or at least enough to stem fears of any GOP candidate so long as there exists a Democrat on the ballot. Just three words, whether the candidate has a history deeming this implied promise credible or not. Just three words, that's all.
It's a shame, isn't it?
Never mind Embryonic Stem Cell research; never mind the Mexico City Policy. The President has no effect on life issues.
Never mind a push for Hate Crimes Legislation or Campaign Finance Reform. The President has no effect on Free Speech issues.
Never mind the Assault Weapons ban, or lawsuits against gun manufacturers, or calls for federal laws against guns. The President has no real effect on Second Amendment issues.
Or so we're being told.
"Roberts and Alito!" -- Oh yes! Problem solved; all questions answered! Whatever were we concerned about in the first place?
This is what they want us reduced to. They want our free labor as volunteers, for certain; they want our votes and unending party loyalty, no doubt. But our issues? No. Not anymore; not in 2008.
We're at war, after all! How can anyone take those peripheral issues seriously in a time of war? Abortion? Bah! The Soviet Union might nuke Washington tomorrow! And we're supposed to address abortion?!?!
Oops, sorry. Replace "Soviet Union" with "Islamofascists." Same argument, different decade.
Yes, that's the other thing. We're supposed to table our issues - not that they'd ever table issues like taxes and Free Trade - but we're supposed to table ours until that mythical time in the future when no one on earth means us harm anymore; that day in the future when war is no longer upon us or even imminent.
You see, our issues need to be put aside during a time of war; and we've declared perpetual war. How about that?
It comes to this: we are to be Republicans first, and issues voters last. Or so we're told. Voting is always a choice between the "lesser of two" evils, and Democrats are always, under every circumstance, the greater evil. Why, it would be irresponsible to stay home or vote third party just because our issues are off the table - even all of our issues.
After all (reading from cue card), "Roberts and Alito."
Perhaps most frustrating in all of this is the strange lack of concern the National Review and Pro-Rudy types have about his record. He spoke at NARAL, called for the purging of the Pro-Life platform from the GOP, raised money for Pro-Abortion groups, called for federal laws against guns, sued gun manufacturers, spoke out in favor of tougher Hate Crimes Legislation and Campaign Finance Reform, just to start. He has been an abortion rights activist, a gun control activist, an activist for limitations on Free Speech, and an activist for gay rights.
An activist, yes. He has taken active steps in every case, using all of his influence as mayor to promote said issues. He has stood hand-in-hand with the enemy onthese issues, and often used what powers were availoable to him as Mayor to enforce them.
Does this concern the Rudophiles? No. They are still unabashed Rudy apologists. What concerns the Rudophiles - get this - is that values voters might have a problem with this and hold it against him.
Yes, you heard that right. They are concerned not with his stances, issues, and record - they are concerned with the Social and Gun Conservatives having a big problem with it when the First Tuesday in November, 2008 comes to pass.
Make no mistake about it, if the Social Conservative and Gun Conservative movement is willing to bend this far, the party will not be asking them to bend any less in the future. This will not be the last time the base is given an abortion rights/gun control/ gay rights activist and told he's the "next Reagan." On the contrary, these new stances will be the standard for future "Conservative" candidates, having proven that they can not only fail to address Social and Gun Conservative issues and still win elections, but they they can run candidates who have been activists on the wrong side of every issue and still win.
"Roberts and Alito! And now that I've addressed all of your issues........"
So now, there's no point in fighting for those Pro-Family, Pro-Gun, Pro-Life, Pro-Free Speech candidates anymore. They cannot have any effect, after all, on any of said issues - with perhaps the exception of voting on judges. We can win a lot more of the Moderates and Independents if we takes those issues off of the table, anyway, and simply run as an anti-tax, pro-defense party - stance we know that large majorities can easily agree on. Just say, "Roberts and Alito;" that should be enough. Asking for anything more would be, well, unreasonable.
Or so we're being told.
Dear RockinRight,
Tax cuts are definitely supply-side.
Remember that lots of libs will feign to be fiscal conservatives. They want to balance the budget (or so they tell us). But it isn't by cutting spending, it's by raising taxes.
And in a static model, that appears to work.
It's a tenet of supply-side economics that as you reduce marginal rates toward the optimum tax rate, revenues actually increase (which requires dynamic analysis to predict). In that Mr. Bush's reductions all resulted in large increases in tax revenue, I'd suggest that we haven't reduced to the optimal revenue-raising rate.
I haven't studied Mr. Hunter's record of 28 years in depth, so I don't know whether any tendency toward "big government conservatism" is a function of his own beliefs, or rather a function of loyally following his president for the last six years.
In that I think it's very tough for the president's party in Congress to oppose his initiatives, I'm willing to cut some slack to candidates who emerge from the House or Senate who've been swallowing Mr. Bush's big government solutions for the last six years.
sitetest
"I am being very serious and would appreciate your insight."
I wasn't trying to say that Newt Gingrich was Pro Family and perfect in all catergories. What I was trying to say was that Duncan Hunter and Newt Gingrich are the ony two choices that I have for the President of the United States of America at this time. No one is going to be perfect in every catergory and at this point these two are the only ones I would consider and look into farther to make my choice. I really do hope that there will be more choices that come out to run for President that will be people that have the beliefs that you and I want our President to have. I really want to vote and have someone elected that will be a President that follows the United States of America's Constitution in the way that our Founding Fathers wrote it down and not in the manner that these people in office in the House and Senate want us to believe it says what they want us to believe it says. I will tell you this, that at this point I do lean more toward Duncan Hunter than I do Newt Gingrich. What I don't want is to have a choice between McCain and Clinton; because I don't like voting for McCain because he is the lesser of two evils. Don't think I don't respect McCain. The time he spent in the Hanoi Hilton has made him the Manchurin canidate. I believe that there are things in his mind that were implanted there when he was in the Hanoi Hilton that he doesn't even realize. I hope this has made some sense because I want America to have a President that will take care of Her and also a House and Senate that will do the same thing. All of those catagories are important to me. I am only registered to vote as a Republican, what I am is a Patriot and American. God Bless America and All who have protected Her since 10 November 1775.
Armageddon itself is near if we don't vote for your favorite RINO.
Set aside the fact (along with our conservative convictions and principles) that RINO-rudy is WRONG on all of our dearly held the issues (including some VERY important ones such as the LIFE-OR-DEATH issues of ABORTION and GUN CONTROL) EXCEPT maybe TWO and all will be good-to-go.
Hold your nose and vote RINO-rudy!!!!!!
Don't think so.
Since the social right does not have a winner......maybe the only way to keep the party from fracturing and beating hillary is a Rudy/Newt ticket.
Wow you just get worse with picks. They have six marriages between them. I hope they get another couple in for the heck of it. Maybe before the end of their term in office we will have a few turn overs of First Ladies. That would be a first. /sarc.
Dude, you are confusing me with EternalVigilance.
I did not write "That's why he was afraid to run against her for the Senate."
All I implied was that Rudy has not proven that he can beat the Lizard Queen. I am not responsible for what people say in reply to my replies.
I included you since it was about a response to your original post.
Thank you. :~)
See you around the debate :~)
I agree with you about Duncan Hunter. The more and more that I read about him is making me choose him at this time. This is just the way that I am. I don't just listen to what the supposedly politically correct world tells me. I have to go and research on my own and make up my own mind. It seems that you and i are on the same path.
It's a sorry field of potential candidates. Liberal Rudy, Mad McCain the Madman and so on.
"This is funny and ironic. The income tax has made us all slaves to the state. The property tax has made us all serfs and the concept of property ownership a cruel joke."
Ridiculous!
Are you a member of the title nobility?
No?
Then you are descended from people who WERE serfs, and you would STILL BE serfs, had the power of the state not been taken up by your ancestors as a club to beat down and end the private ownership of humanity by the wealthiest and most powerful in humanity.
You are free and equal BECAUSE OF the state.
And, given that Giuliani supports Roe, how in the world could anyone trust him to appoint an originalist to the court? That is about as credible as believing John Kerry was for gun rights when he carried a rifle and went hunting in an orange jumpsuit.
It's sad when conservatives here can openly state Rudy is unacceptable but conservatives on radio like Sean Hannity openly ponder selling out their beliefs and supporting him. Conservatism can't be advanced through RINO politicians.
HA HA HA HA HA HA HA
I guess this answers my question about it being parody, as no rational, thinking being could actually hold such views.
"I guess this answers my question about it being parody, as no rational, thinking being could actually hold such views."
Nobody who understands history could think any differently.
HA HA HA HA HA That's a good one. LOL
You could wait for the Primaries first! ;)
If I were American, I wouldn't support Rudy!
In that case, I'm kinda glad you're not American! ;)
*Back to the up-coming Irish General Election....*
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.