Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Values Voters Move Into The Driver's Seat (Conservative Base Finally Gets Heard Alert)
Worldnetdaily.com ^ | 09/18/2007 | Janet Folger

Posted on 09/17/2007 11:07:54 PM PDT by goldstategop

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 61-8081-100101-120121-133 next last
To: longtermmemmory
What did you expect? There was no national prominence to attend, there was not going to be any national or international media to help broadcast.

It was poorly produced, and the technical difficulties should have been addressed weeks ago when this was planned, not during the debate.

81 posted on 09/18/2007 6:42:20 AM PDT by Pistolshot (Keyes/Paul '08 - When you can't get crazy enough.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 79 | View Replies]

To: durasell
...they didn’t turn out in large numbers for a midterm — but will they turn out in large numbers for a Presidential election?

That is exactly the point - the GOP disenfranchised the "values voters" last time and seems intent on doing so again. The value voters were a little snookered by G.W B. but they worked for his campaign and came out in droves to support him. Right now Fred, Mitt, Rudy and McCain have declared, by their absence, that they will take the religious right for granted in hopes of not embarrassing them selves in the secular media. That is not Regan-esque - that is how to loose and election and destroy the base of the republican party (something that Hillary couldn't do - without their help).

82 posted on 09/18/2007 6:59:13 AM PDT by DaveyB (Ignorance is part of the human condition - atheism makes it permanent!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: DaveyB; All
I asked a question upthread which hasn't gotten an answer.

Maybe someone could take a crack at it.

Who do the "values voters" want as coalition partners to win elections, and what are they willing to do to get them?

83 posted on 09/18/2007 7:10:21 AM PDT by Jim Noble (Trails of troubles, roads of battle, paths of victory we shall walk.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 82 | View Replies]

To: WildcatClan
Just because I espouse a view doesn't mean I've ever LIVED it, like most others, even Presidential candidates. ;o)

It's good to know what a person thinks about lots of subjects, not just those of interest to a particular group. Those who watched the debate had interests in particular subjects. Some who didn't watch may also be interested in those subjects, but will find out how the candidates stack up on those in other ways. One debate shouldn't make or break someone's interest in a candidate.

84 posted on 09/18/2007 7:58:25 AM PDT by SuziQ
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: Conservativegreatgrandma
If this one was on TV, I don’t even know what network carried it.

Axccording to the story yesterday, it was on the Sky Angel network, which, I assume, is a Christian network. The article mentioned the Dish network, so I guess Sky Angel is on that one. Not sure about any other satellite or cable networks.

I haven't watched any of the debates so far, because I just don't think they're worth the time.

85 posted on 09/18/2007 8:01:13 AM PDT by SuziQ
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 62 | View Replies]

To: goldstategop

A candidate forum that was missing half the GOP candidates, no one knew about, was on television, and isn’t getting reported on will have zero impact on the primaries and less on the general election.


86 posted on 09/18/2007 8:07:12 AM PDT by Phantom Lord (Fall on to your knees for the Phantom Lord)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Jim Noble
Because "gay rights" represents to heterosexuals the proposition that they should be able to have sex with anyone they want, whenever they want, regardless of religious or social conventions - and that view is enormously popular.

Ah, but it doesn't end there - for those in the gay movement, it means that they should be able to have sex with kids in school as well. Or in Minnesota airport bathrooms. Or on the freakin' street corner. That view is immensely unpopular. The unwillingness of the Republican Party to call out homosexuality and understand how fundamentally incompatible it is with conservatism is one of its many failings.
87 posted on 09/18/2007 8:08:05 AM PDT by Old_Mil (Rudy = Hillary, Fred = Dole, Romney = Kerry, McCain = Crazy. No Thanks.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 67 | View Replies]

To: goldstategop; Jim Robinson

Bump. Surprised there hasn’t been more discussion of the debate.


88 posted on 09/18/2007 8:37:44 AM PDT by ProCivitas (Duncan Hunter = Pro-Family + Fair Trade = Pro-America)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: goldstategop

There’s a fine line between Values Voters...people who (like myself) have a moral background they live by, but realize that the government’s role in such things should be limited to what the Constitution allows, and the so-called “conservative” nanny-staters...and I wonder what group was represented here.


89 posted on 09/18/2007 8:40:45 AM PDT by RockinRight (Can we start calling Fred "44" now, please?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Rudder
I asked this question on an earlier thread and was told by a values voter that, "we don't make lists of our values." I never received a meaningful answer.

They make lists.

-----------------

 Values Voters’
Contract with Congress

http://www.valuesvoter.org/preamble.cfm?host_id=f2a

We are citizens of the United States of America and subjects of the sovereign Creator, acknowledged in the Declaration of Independence as the Supreme Ruler and Judge of the World. We hereby declare our belief in the self-evident truths established by the Declaration, to wit, that we are all created equal and endowed by our Creator with certain unalienable rights; that among these are life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness; that human governments are instituted to secure these rights, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed. We strongly affirm our allegiance to the Constitution of the United States, as it was framed and amended in light of these truths, to provide for a republican form of government, which means a government of the people, by the people and for the people, in which they make laws and govern themselves through representatives they elect.

Moved by our faith in God and this republican creed we join together now to defend representative self-government against the greatest assault it has ever faced. This assault has been more dangerous and successful because it comes from within and aims to destroy not just our physical defenses, but the moral ideas, habits and practices that sustain our character as a free people. As a nation the United States of America has achieved material success unparalleled in previous human history. But without fortitude and selfdiscipline, we would not have reaped the fruits of free enterprise. We have thrice led our Allies to victory against foes that enacted the worst possibilities of human depravity. But without courage and a true sense of responsibility for ourselves and all humanity we would not have triumphed against their cruel and implacable ambition. We have achieved or applied unprecedented advances in scientific knowledge. But without respect for the gentle yoke of God’s reason, and the diverse possibilities with which it has seeded the comprehensible universe, we could not have expanded the enlightened sphere of human comprehension. We have truly experienced the blessings of liberty, but never without the virtues and qualities of good conscience and decent character.

For some decades now supposedly “liberal” and “progressive” forces within our society have waged an insidious campaign to corrupt and destroy the moral foundations of our liberty. Under the compassionate guise of government welfare and social programs they have eroded our fortitude and self-discipline, taxed away our independent resources, and in particular undermined the centrality of family as the locus of individual self-reliance. Under the guise of sexual freedom and self-determination they have corrupted our sense of responsibility for our own offspring in the womb and for our biological relationships in general. This ultimately affects all relationships that draw upon the capacity for self-sacrifice we ought naturally to learn and practice in the context of decent family life. Under the guise of scientific knowledge, and a fallacious separation of religion from public life, they have thrown off the yoke of reason, and denied our sovereign right to acknowledge, as a people, the existence and authority of the Creator. But the Creator’s being and will represent the principle of unity that makes possible both the diversity of individuals and the orderly community that, on the whole, they may become. Thus, though they masquerade as the champions of community and compassion, these self-styled “liberals” and “progressives” have discarded the principle of unity, the sense of a common good, indispensable to both.

As the principal instrument for their assault upon the foundations of our liberty they have resorted to an abuse of the judicial system, and in particular the Federal judiciary’s assertion of supreme and unchecked constitutional power that supersedes and may arbitrarily nullify any action taken by the executive or legislative branches. But the Framers of the Constitution understood that sinful human nature is always a prey to inordinate ambition. Therefore, the Constitution denies supremacy to any one branch of government in order to secure self-government by the people as a whole. By itself, therefore, the assertion of judicial supremacy overthrows the framework of self-government established by our Constitution. However, the power thus destructively obtained has been even more destructively used.

Disregarding the Constitution’s explicit terms, the U.S. Supreme Court has arrogated to itself governmental power that the Tenth Amendment unambiguously reserves to “the states respectively and to the people” and created from its false reading of the Establishment Clause a pervasive hostility to religion.

Disregarding the Constitution's explicit terms, the U.S. Supreme Court has arbitrarily withdrawn the protection of the community from generations to come. By authorizing an assault upon the natural rights of children in the womb it has abandoned in principle the Constitution’s stated objective of securing the blessings of liberty “to ourselves and our posterity.”

In consequence of this power-grab, and the false claim that makes it possible, the Courts have purported to forbid prayer and other religious elements in government funded schools, activities and projects authorized by the people;

They have interfered with the public celebration of religious festivals and observances determined by the people;

They now seek to remove all references to the Creator, God, from public declarations adopted by the people, in particular the display of the Ten Commandments or other revered religious symbols on public property; the words “under God” from the pledge of allegiance, and “In God we Trust” from our coins and currency.

Having in this abusive fashion denied the people’s authority over their own religious affairs, power-grabbing Judges have begun a similar campaign against the general moral authority of the people. In Particular:

They are attempting to deny the sovereign right of the people as a whole to define the public standard of marriage in accordance with their moral beliefs and practices;

They are seeking to destroy the authority of parents to supervise the upbringing of their children, especially when it comes to their sexual education, behavior and decision making. In its place they mean to substitute the power of government as the chief determinant of individual personality, paving the way for totalitarian control and repression.

Our identity as a people arises more from our adherence to common moral principles than from any other characteristic. The Judicial assault against the moral authority and sovereign rights of the people therefore weakens our sense that despite our great diversity we have become, out of many, one nation. But the Courts have also assaulted the strength of our national identity more directly:

By purporting to apply in their decisions foreign laws never subject to ratification or legislation by proper Constitutional means;

By interfering with the sovereign right of the people to establish immigration policies, police our national borders and administer public services and programs with respect for the distinction between citizens and non-citizens. This has contributed to weakened border security, and a tide of illegal immigration that, in the context of international terrorism, may also bring with it a threat to our physical security.

In defense of our national principles, our Constitution of self-government, our decent character, and our shared national identity, we the undersigned citizens of the United States come together in support of actions we hereby agree to be right and necessary for the common good of all.

We therefore seek the following:

1. TO AFFIRM the national relationship with God in our places of worship, schools, mottos, and public spaces, we call for the passage of –

·    The Pledge Protection Act to prohibit activist judges from taking "under God" out of the Pledge (H.R. 2389, S.1046);

·    The Constitution Restoration Act to prohibit activist judges from ruling against acknowledgments of God (H.R. 1070, S.520);

·    The Public Expression of Religion Act to prohibit activist judges from ordering taxpayers to pay lawyers who seek to erode our national relationship with God (H.R. 2679); and

·    The Workplace Religious Freedom Act to promote religious accommodation in employment (H.R. 1445, S. 677).

2. TO SECURE our national interest in the institutions of marriage and family, we call for the passage of –

·    A constitutional amendment to completely protect the institution of marriage; and

·    The Marriage Protection Act to prohibit activist judges from forcing states to redefine the institution of marriage (H.R. 1100).

3. TO SECURE our fundamental right as parents to the care, custody, and control of our children, we call for the passage of –

·    Legislation to codify the principles set forth on Nov. 16, 2005, in House Resolution 547 which would protect parental rights;

·    The Child Interstate Abortion Notification Act to prohibit the transportation of minors against parental rights (H.R.748);

·    The Parental Consent Act to prohibit the use of federal funds for any universal or mandatory mental health screening (H.R. 181);

·    The Child Medication Safety Act, to protect children from being coerced into taking drugs in order to attend school (H.R. 1790);

·    Legislation that empowers parents to choose schools for their families that share their value choices, as well as ensures families are not forced to pay twice for their educational choices; and

·    We call for enforcement of the Protection of Pupil Rights Amendment (PPRA), which prohibits schools from using privacy invading surveys or evaluations without prior written parental consent (20 U.S.C. 1232h).

4. TO SECURE our God-bestowed right to life, we call for the passage of –

·    Legislation to affirm the right to life of our children before birth;

·    The Human Cloning Protection Act to prohibit human cloning (S.658, H.R. 1357);

·    Legislation that protects life by prohibiting the use of human embryos for research;

·    The Unborn Child Pain Awareness Act to raise awareness of the pain experienced by children before birth (S.51, H.R. 356); and

·    Legislation to prohibit any taxpayers’ money for organizations that perform, promote, and/or fund abortions.

5. TO SECURE our God-granted liberties, we call for the passage of –

·    Legislation to reverse the loss of religious liberty for churches concerning their involvement in moral and social issues;

·    Legislation to ensure that speech and lawful religious expression are never punished as a “hate crime”;

·    An amendment to the Higher Education Act to guarantee First Amendment rights of worship, speech, and association to students and employees as a condition of federal grants and student assistance;

·    Legislation to complete the incarceration process through prisoner re-entry training and child mentoring; and

·    Legislation or policies that call for continued rejection of the anti-family and deceptively-named “U.N. Convention on the Elimination of Discrimination Against Women (CEDAW).”

6. TO SECURE our God-given stewardship of property, we call for the passage of –

·    Legislation affirming that government may not redefine “public use” to take the private property of one person to give to another.

7. TO SECURE an environment of decency that is free from pornography and obscenity, we call for the passage of –

·    Legislation to restrict obscenity and pornography, and guard against its mis-stated protection under the First Amendment.

8. TO SECURE just taxes, and end immorally destructive taxation, we call for the passage of –

·    Legislation to fundamentally reform the national tax system and reduce the tax burden on Americans; and

·    Legislation to make permanent Marriage Penalty Relief and the Child Tax Credit.

9. TO SECURE our national borders and identity, we call for the passage of –

·    True Enforcement and Border Security; and

·    Legislation to prohibit, in cases of constitutional interpretation, the use of foreign law as authority.

10. Judges who legislate from the bench subvert our republican form of government of the people, by the people, and for the people, and threaten all these legislative aims.

THEREFORE, WE URGENTLY CALL FOR Judicial Restraint, and an end to Judicial Activism.

·    We call for the passage of the Judicial Conduct Act to hold federal judges accountable to the Constitution.

Above every consideration of selfish passion, ambition, or interest, we hold to the ultimate intention of our Constitution: to secure the blessings of liberty to ourselves and our posterity. For this purpose, and in support of the beliefs and actions we have herein declared, we pledge our lives, our fortunes, and our faithfulness, so help us God.

 

 


90 posted on 09/18/2007 9:10:44 AM PDT by SJackson (isolationism never was, never will be acceptable response to[expansionist] tyrannical governments)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: Prokopton

Prokopton writes::::
“Yes. People who go around proclaiming that they are the ones with “values” are, thank God, a narrow group of pretentious intolerants. The major candidates know this and rightfully ignored the self serving show this little group put on. People with values are a large group, egotists who call themselves “value voters” are not.”
Nav_mom responds: Hmmmm you just marginalized a segment of conservatives, using the poster words from the left (pretententious & intolerant) you then went on to define yourself as pretty much a moderate, who IMHO is nothing more than a chest beating fence sitter. Sort of like the Rino GOP politicians who have done so much harm to the Republican party.
91 posted on 09/18/2007 9:18:56 AM PDT by Nav_Mom
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: All
goldstategop wtites:: “We won’t vote for Hillary Clinton but neither will we vote for someone who takes us for granted and doesn’t think our values are worthy of being given respect”

Nav_mom responds: Hence, the blood bath of election 2006. Many on here seem to think that if Hillary wins it will only be a short detour and then we will miraculously rebound in 2012. I disagree, if the leftest, socialist Democrats get back in the white house they will ensure they NEVER lose power again. They will give illegals the vote they will increase entitlement spending, they will carry on with illegal election policies and the media will supply all the needed cover. If Hillary wins in 2012 it will be the beginning of the end. IMHO.

92 posted on 09/18/2007 9:28:20 AM PDT by Nav_Mom
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Amalie

What makes you so sure that a President Hillary Clinton along with a Democratic majority in Congress won’t maintain their political majorities forever by allowing amnesty for illegal immigration legislation to be signed into law and then also allow legislation to be signed into law that allows illegal immigrants throughout the U.S. to register to vote? Doing these things will bring in large, continuous waves of illegals into the U.S. for the long-term, and allowing these illegals the right to also legally vote throughout the U.S. will truly prevent conservatives and Republicans to counter such high numbers of new voters. These illegals who do vote will vote for “far leftist” politicians at every level throughout the U.S. for the long-term!


93 posted on 09/18/2007 9:34:48 AM PDT by johnthebaptistmoore
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 49 | View Replies]

To: Nav_Mom
Hmmmm you just marginalized a segment of conservatives, using the poster words from the left (pretententious & intolerant) you then went on to define yourself as pretty much a moderate, who IMHO is nothing more than a chest beating fence sitter. Sort of like the Rino GOP politicians who have done so much harm to the Republican party.

With supreme irony you have given proof to my post with your intemperate response. Your words literally scream "pretentious". You are being ignored for good reason.

94 posted on 09/18/2007 9:38:57 AM PDT by Prokopton
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 91 | View Replies]

To: SJackson
I agree with the indictment and the legislative wish list. Unfortunately, elections do have consequences. Politicians sometimes do disappoint us given the nature of politics. Expecting 100% fidelity from them is impossible. We need to be realistic about what we can get in a country with a highly organized Left influential in many of our society's leading institutions.

"Show me just what Mohammed brought that was new, and there you will find things only evil and inhuman, such as his command to spread by the sword the faith he preached." - Manuel II Palelologus

95 posted on 09/18/2007 9:45:58 AM PDT by goldstategop (In Memory Of A Dearly Beloved Friend Who Lives In My Heart Forever)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 90 | View Replies]

To: Prokopton

“What a bunch of pretentious holier than thous”

You know you really betray your own bigotry aand ignorance by labeling a whole group the way you have...you betray your own name”Prokopton” or truth seeker!


96 posted on 09/18/2007 9:55:14 AM PDT by mdmathis6
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: SuziQ

I’m with you. Every group around has their “debates”. I can’t keep up with them.


97 posted on 09/18/2007 10:08:06 AM PDT by Conservativegreatgrandma (Democrats--Al Qaeda's best friends)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 85 | View Replies]

To: Jim Noble

You are absolutely correct. We can either go for the best we can get and then all hang together or we will be relegated into obscurity and never win another election. I’ll take what I can get. We need to fight it out in the primaries. That’s why they have them.


98 posted on 09/18/2007 10:11:52 AM PDT by Conservativegreatgrandma (Democrats--Al Qaeda's best friends)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 68 | View Replies]

To: mdmathis6
You know you really betray your own bigotry aand ignorance by labeling a whole group the way you have...you betray your own name”Prokopton” or truth seeker!

No, they betrayed their bigotry and ignorance by describing themselves as "values voters". It would be similar to my name meaning not "truth seeker" but "truth dispenser". If I characterized myself, which I don't, as the only one who voted based on the truth, I would be pretentious. My post says nothing about people who weigh "values" when they vote, only about people who pretend, by their self description, that they are the "values voters", and because of this other people must pay attention to them.

Pretentious....1) unjustified or excessive claims (as of value or standing). Websters Dictionary

99 posted on 09/18/2007 10:14:07 AM PDT by Prokopton
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 96 | View Replies]

To: Old_Mil
The unwillingness of the Republican Party to call out homosexuality and understand how fundamentally incompatible it is with conservatism is one of its many failings.

Excuse me. This is the job of the churches and we have far too many "churches" who are part of the problem. If the churches were doing their job, we wouldn't have to be discussing this issue.

How many Freepers belong to "churches" that promote homosexuality? A whole bunch I bet. But they don't have the guts to get out and they advance a homosexual agenda just by contributing financially to their "church". Schools, churches and entertainment tell us homosexuality is good but we expect the Republican party to convince people that it is wrong? That's too late.

The people themselves had better believe it's wrong and then vote for the right candidate.

100 posted on 09/18/2007 10:18:07 AM PDT by Conservativegreatgrandma (Democrats--Al Qaeda's best friends)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 87 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 61-8081-100101-120121-133 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson