Steele: GOP Should Reach Out To Gay, Pro-Choice Voters

Video Cafe (via Fox News) ^ | Feburary 1, 2009 | David Sunday

[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.

[itsahoot]

We don’t have to embrace their ideology or beliefs but lets not reject them openly.

Rom 1:32 Who knowing the judgment of God, that they which commit such things are worthy of death, not only do the same, but have pleasure in them that do them.

[Retired COB]

And what is his stance on illegal immigration?

As opposed to his wide stance on being gay?

[Just mythoughts]

If they want to come on in and vote along with us, it’s the only way we’re ever going to expand our numbers—not by becoming liberals, but saying “You’re welcome to come on in and join us.” If we’re confident that our ideas are right and when one thinks about them they’re the obvious smart choice, we shouldn’t be afraid of gays and abortionists—whoops, prochoicers—coming along because of our ideas about defense (against Islamofascists, who hate gays and prochoicers), taxes (show them that keeping taxes low empowers the individual), small government, etc. As long as WE don’t change to attract them, what is the problem? And if we don’t start adding to our numbers, how are we going to change the current situation? Where are “new” voters going to come from if not from outside the party?

I thought maybe you might rethink what you consider to be reaching out. This bunch that exist for their gayness and prochoice principles are NOT going to find anything about conservatives attractive, unless we stop being conservatives.

Actually I am beginning to see the scenario of Gideon getting replayed and God is paring down to His acceptable number so the rest of the world will know who is in control.

[itsahoot]

Logic on this forum, such a rare find.

[spectre]

I did defend my position. Can't you read?

sw

[Grunthor]

“As long as WE don’t change to attract them, what is the problem?”

That’s the fear. That liberals like Steele and Todd-Whitman and McCain and Giuliani will be the new leaders of the party and their policies will be the new identification of the party. Which would basically make it a pro-defense and low tax version of the Democrats.

[Reagan Man]

>>>>>However, on my list of priorities and issues, [abortion] 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.

BULL! Recessions come and go. Abortion is the law of the land. If you don't respect human life and stand up for the unborn, America is doomed.

"Abraham Lincoln recognized that we could not survive as a free land when some men could decide that others were not fit to be free and should therefore be slaves. Likewise, we cannot survive as a free nation when some men decide that others are not fit to live and should be abandoned to abortion or infanticide. My Administration is dedicated to the preservation of America as a free land, and there is no cause more important for preserving that freedom than affirming the transcendent right to life of all human beings, the right without which no other rights have any meaning."

~~~ President Ronald Reagan : "Abortion and the Conscience of the Nation", 1983

[Names Ash Housewares]

I don’t know if they are effective, I mean we just went through that kind of thing with McCain didn’t we?
I suppose you can highlight the broader appealling values like fiscal conservatism and smaller government, sometimes people including myself agree strongly with certain core beliefs that others are not quite as important.

So I would say, rope ‘em in with the broader appealing conservative core issues, and they may come around on the rest or not mind so much.

[MadIsh32]

This is no recession my friend. Being 10 trillion dollars in debt is a major issue

The solvency of this nation is at stake. And we are here messing around with abortion

[Darkwolf377]

'The time has come to take back Reagan's party and restore his vision of America... nothing is ever easy and the things that matter most are the hardest. LLS'

Well-said.

Where were the voters who swung the election to Reagan.

They weren't all Republicans. Who were they if they weren't?

All together now:

Reagan Democrats

If we go to them, we're no longer conservatives. We have to make them come to us.

We give them a reason to come to us: defense (make them realize this war is REAL), taxes (personal liberty) etc.

[Beagle8U]

I was labeled as a Klansman for trying to point out all the liberal crap that Steele believes in.

Affirmative action, pro abortion, anti gun, I guess he may as well come out in support of the queer agenda.

This doesn't surprise me a bit.

[Blue Highway]

makes you a RINO and part of the problem. The only solution is conservatism.

[RushIsMyTeddyBear]

“As long as WE don’t change to attract them, what is the problem?”

That’s the fear. That liberals like Steele and Todd-Whitman and McCain and Giuliani will be the new leaders of the party and their policies will be the new identification of the party. Which would basically make it a pro-defense and low tax version of the Democrats.

________________________________________________

“Democrat Lite”.

*heavy sigh* All this just burns my butt.

[Will88]

By the way, if Republicans wanted to pander effectively, they would have chosen an Hispanic.

They had one not so long ago: Senator Mel Martinez of Florida. I can't think of any great advancements made during his time at the helm of the RNC.

[P-Marlowe]

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.

Don't say you weren't warned.

A lot of us were sounding the alarm about his liberal positions on abortion and gun control and affirmative action, but nobody wanted to hear that.

Well, Michael Steele has shown his true colors.

I'm not surprised. I'm just surprised that it took so long.

[jla]

#188 - Great post!

[donna]

That's a slippery slope this early in the game, especially sense Steele is a Black Republican and the Rats are just salivating at the chance to prove us "racists".

That's it? That's your intellectual position?

Conservatives embrace baby killing and pervertion to prove we are not racist?

Now, THAT'S the slippery slope that conservatives have long been predicting, LOL.

[Reagan Man]

I distorted nothing. What I did was speak the truth and that hit home with you. GOOD, maybe you'll chose your words more carefully in the future.

Michael Steele and you believe in embracing candidates who are pro-abortion and pro-homo rights. I disagree with that philosophy. I agree with Reagan. You don't.

“We will have no more of those candidates who are pledged to the same goals as our opposition and who seek our support. Turning the Party over to the so-called moderates wouldn’t make any sense at all.”
~~~ Ronald Reagan, 1965

[NoLibZone]

Figure on an 8 year Obama deal.

[Just mythoughts]

Where were the voters who swung the election to Reagan.

Aren't the Reagan Democrats majority the above 60 crowd. They are dying off and the new majority is the under 60 crowd the spoiled baby boomers who grew up on the 60's being told life was free love, sex and abortions. 'peace man'.