Posted on 02/02/2009 9:17:17 AM PST by UCFRoadWarrior
Michael Steele, the new chairman of the Republican National Committee wants the GOP to reach out to candidates who support gay marriage and are pro-choice. Steele told Fox's Chris Wallace that it was "important" to reach out to those voters.
WALLACE: You are one of the co-founders of something called the Republican Leadership Council which supports candidates who favor abortion and gay rights.
STEELE: Yes.
(watch video)
WALLACE: Does the GOP needs to do a better job of reaching out to people who hold those views?
STEELE: I think -- I think that's an important opportunity for us, absolutely. Within our party we do have those who have that view as well as outside and my partnership with Christy Todd Whittman was an effort to build a bridge between moderates and conservatives.
(Excerpt) Read more at videocafe.crooksandliars.com ...
Donna...Did you really say that?
Heh..
Im a “conservative” “limited government type” that wants a divorce from the liberal GOP, the liberal Democrats and the liberal population of this country. Irreconcilable differences being just cause for the split.
Its apparent that the GOP wants to move to the left to appeal to collectivists. Fine, they will probably win more elections that way. However, they no longer are a cause for limited government, and by extension, freedom and liberty.
Seriously.. F—k ‘em.
Brilliant.
I still fail to see the obsession with abortion that our SoCon friends have
Focus on fiscal issues and we win elections, and win them big
1994 wasn’t won on abortion
Leave the gays and lesbians do what they do on the left side. There is no place for them with the GOP.
This Forum will not stand up under the Log Cabin, anti 2nd amendment, pro abortion onslaught."
Drama queen..
sw
So, what are you saying? If we vote for people who favor abortion and gay marriage, that those people will preserve economic and personal freedom?
And, just who is "eagerly tossing economic and personal freedom out the window"?
Your statement doesn't make a lick of sense. People who are pro-life, and people who've voted for the many pro-marriage state initiatives, are most all conservatives who are pro-economic and personal freedom.
Or maybe you're saying that liberal, pro-choice Republicans will trash the party and ensure continuing losses if they don't get their way?
He should’ve won in 06 too. But he ran an awful campaign and lost to dirtbag Strickland.
No, it doesn’t need to be changed, but supporting the Conservative cause is not an “all or nothing” proposition. That kind of thinking limits the large amount of people who may be 51% conservative to voting for democrats because they’re told by conservatives that their conservative lean doesn’t qualify them to vote conservative, because they’re somehow not conservative enough.
Our glory days was the 1994 Republican Revolution.
Christie Todd Whitman and Michael Steele organized to overthrow the Revolution - they have been every successful.
lol. No worries, I hope you post towards me quite often
My personal view is that abortion is wrong and murder.
However, on my list of priorities and issues, it is very low. I am far more concerned with the fiscal future of our country, because without some fiscal sanity it won’t matter if abortion is legal or not. There will be no America
My mistake. I never should have tried using rational reasoning with a moron.
First they go defensive. Then they go ugly. All without any factual basis.
Look dark. Read up on things before you comment. Spouting off ignorantly around here is not recommended.
I said Palin’s first veto was based on balancine the state budget.
Check it out:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sarah_Palin#Governor_of_Alaska
Budget, spending, and federal funds
Governor Palin in Germany, July 2007In June 2007, Palin signed a record $6.6 billion operating budget into law.[73] At the same time, she used her veto power to make the second-largest cuts of the construction budget in state history. The $237 million in cuts represented over 300 local projects, and reduced the construction budget to $1.6 billion.[74] In 2008, Palin vetoed $286 million, cutting or reducing funding for 350 projects from the FY09 capital budget.[75]
We don’t have to win over these types. We can triumph witnout them if we just don’t abandon or water down our conservative principles. Whitman? Give me a break! Big tent, be damned!
“the abortion issue is about 99 on my top 100 list of issues facing America today”
OK, so we have one pro-abortion @ 99th importance, vs MANY anti-abortion @ 1,2-importance
What about the “freedom” of the little baby that gets it’s little head smooshed in?
sw
good point. The Lord does want us to seek first His Kingdom.
That’s a cute insult.
Now, come up with an intellectual discussion to defend your position.
I hear you. I never said it was smart for Steele to pursue this line. Just sayin...
FR is not supposed to be a home for liberals.
In case you actually missed it, I said:
Here’s an idea:
The only way to maintain a conservative site is to start banning Michael Steele supporters.
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.