Posted on 06/14/2009 4:28:12 PM PDT by The Spirit Of Allegiance
FR EXCLUSIVE: RON NEHRING, CALIF GOP CHAIRMAN TO FREEP YOUR QUESTIONS! -- ASK AWAY!
I was invited to participate in a strategic GOP meeting on June 5, during which many topics including the Internet, voter registration and fundraising were discussed from a tech/strategy standpoint.
Durind the event I had the chance to speak with Ron Nehring, California GOP Chairman. I mentioned to him that GOP leadership is perceived as RINOs (Republicans In Name Only) by much of the grassroots.
When I noted that an enormous GOP opportunity exists among both Republicans and Democrats on the issue of our borders, fighting blatant amnesty for criminal aliens, he replied--much to my surprise--that in his eight years in leadership not a single candidate has sought his counsel on this topic.
We discussed GOP party involvement in the primary process. If I understood correctly what he said, candidates are not assisted by party leadership until after they win a primary--Republican candidates must slug it out with their own local efforts and resources. This is a marked difference from the 'central casting' done effectively by the DNC.
As we spoke, I suggested to Ron that he participate in an online discussion at FreeRepublic, and mentioned that Duncan Hunter has done so. He agreed.
I then spoke with Jim Robinson and mentioned how I'd like this to serve as a template for not just California but for the leadership of all 50 state GOPs and for the RNC to do likewise, as a means of being sure the voting, contributing grassroots and the state and national leadership are all committed to winning the same platform. If merely "a failure to communicate" is the problem, FR can be the solution.
Here's how Ron and I agreed it would go: I would solicit worthwhile questions (QUESTIONS THAT GENERATE MORE LIGHT THAN HEAT), and then Ron would then respond online.
This thread is the one that is soliciting your questions, publicly or by FREEPMAIL ("Private Reply"). I will screen the public and private questions and arrange a follow-up thread where the questions and answers will be published in a few days, hopefully interactively.
While this is the California GOP, those of you in other states please feel welcome to clone this effort so as to give your state leadership the best possible chance to show strong commitment to all issues that relate to Conservatism and the GOP. I also welcome privately-submitted suggestions and background information. Whether public or private, be sure your issue is specific and verifiable.
Please be certain that the questions are framed in a neutral, non-hostile manner, without false premises or profanity or they will be pulled. However, DON'T shy away from asking tough questions. Remember, "Loose Lips Sink Ships" so use discretion in what you post publicly. I can ask Ron Nehring private questions. Freepmail and spellcheck are your friend.
Please accept my thanks in advance for your participation.
TSOA
cc: Jim Robinson
REFERENCE: (There was a 2007/2008 Duncan Hunter interactive thread also, to the best of my memory)
Exclusive Freeper Interview with Duncan Hunter - Part 1
Exclusive Freeper Interview with Duncan Hunter - Part 2
(Disclosure): RANT I just read the (Tea Party) Riot Act to a RNC telephone fund solicitor....
I told her I'm the last person who would hope to see the GOP divided but I am not satisfied that the RNC's agenda is satisfactory...
FR articles keyworded CALIFORNIA GOP
FR articles keyworded RINOPURGE
FR articles keyworded PRIMARIES
FR articles keyworded Moral Absolutes
FR articles keyworded Conservatism
Another great Conservative for San Diego is MARK WYLAND
Reason: Republicans are waiting for some CONSERVATIVES to do their dirty work!
Up until about January, I was republican. That last fiasco of an election caused me to change to independent.
I don't have a third party.
But, I promise that I will never again vote against my conscience. I'll vote based on the conservatism of the candidates....Life, 2d Amendment, Family, National Defense, Ownership, Religious Non-Interference, and Non-Intrusive Taxation are a few of the issues that define conservatism for me.
And I'll write in if necessary.
If you are part of a Free Methodist group then the things I've said do not apply but if you're part of the United Methodist church, then your church advocates for abortion, homosexuality, illegal immigration and income redistribution.
Surely, you're familiar with the extremely liberal, Bob Edgar, aren't you? He is/was a Methodist minister, Democrat congressman and head of the NCC. There is nothing godly about this man.
The Methodist church here in Iowa invited Jeremiah Wright to speak. The man I called even said that he agrees with Jeremiah Wright for God to damn America. Would you accept that from the Republican party? I think not.
I am saying that churches are far more important than any political party. I want those who demand perfection from the Republican party to be consistent and also expect perfection from their church.
I’m also a scientist with a good deal of background in modeling and Earth and Environmental sciences. So the first issue I’d like to talk about is Global Warming.
1. The democrats are vulnerable on this issue . . .
Reagan won by taking strong stands and moving the public to the conservative position. Gerald Ford lost by splitting the difference.
IOW, a Gerald Ford will find himself in a strong attacking position - and convert it to an indefensible passive "defensive" posture. Just the sort of folly that earned the contempt of General Patton.And exactly the way that John McCain lost to nobody.
I am an elder in the United Methodist Church.
Did you read what I wrote about how the church operates? There is absolutely no connection between me and Edgar, me and Iowa, and to some degree, me and the history of the UMC.
What I’m involved in is the movement to CHANGE the denomination. It has been doing quite nicely, thank you, and much of what is bothersome is changing in our direction and HAS BEEN for the past 16 years. We get only 10 days every 4 years to affect the denomination as a whole, and we’re winning.
I repeat: “It is far more important to work to change the church than it is to work to change the political party.”
The church is more important to me than any old political party. They are throw-aways as far as I’m concerned.
In fact, it appears that just this past WEEK, almost ALL of our bishop areas (annual conferences) rejected amendments created by liberals at our last 4 year meeting designed to prevent conservative african and asian churches from having an equal vote in our meetings.
You simply don’t know how our denomination works, and you don’t seem willing to admit it. You seem sincere to me, though, so I’m more than glad to answer any questions you might have. You sound like a sister in Christ.
I found this which is interesting. It states the official positions of major religions in America. The Methodist church is very much pro-abortion. http://www.pregnantpause.org/people/wherchur.htm
You don’t seem to be understanding what I’m writing, or I’m simply not writing it well.
I said that it makes more sense to work to reform this church than to reform a political party.
What denomination are you a part of?
With this I agree. I believe liberal churches are a huge part of our problem. If churches would be doing their job, we wouldn't be in this mess but liberalism has a stranglehold on the churches just as they do on government and education. In fact, I blame "churches" more than any other group.
The difference between the churches and political parties is that there are more choices available with churches than political parties.
I wish you luck in your quest to change the United Methodist Church but liberals are liberals and they are not going to give up their control.
I was faced with the exact same dilemma. I took the easy way out and left the ELCA. That was several years ago and the denomination has deteriorated even more than it was then.
Personally, I do not believe these extremely liberal denominations are redeemable. They have commited (in my opinion) capital offenses by denying the very diety of Christ. They have substituted their own perverted liberal agenda for Biblical truth.
Just yesterday, my brother who is still in the ELCA asked my sister what the Bible says about homosexuality because the ELCA is in the process of going the whole route of welcoming homosexual pastors, homosexual unions, etc.
We left 15 years ago and have had 15 years of hearing and studying the true gospel peacefully.
I do agree it would be best if the liberal churches could be transformed but I am highly skeptical. You have to get rid of the rot at the top first and I don't see that happening.
what is your denomination now?
THEN they merged with some other Lutheran synods in 1988 and formed the ELCA. This is when the real trouble started. We left I think in 1992 for the far more conservative Lutheran Church Missouri Synod.
One day I stopped at the nearby Missouri Synod church and went in and talked to the pastor. I told him I had two main concerns. The first one was if the LCMS belongs to the NCC. He assured me they did not. Then I asked him if they had an official policy on abortion and he again said they have an official policy against it.
That was before the issue of homosexuality became as large an issue as it is now.
Anyway, we left the ELCA for the LCMS and have been richly rewarded for it ever since.
Our Bible studies are based on scripture. The past two weeks we have spent two hours studying the history and how languages have influenced the Athanasian Creed. Before it was boring repetition. It no longer is boring repetition.
Regarding the issue of gay marriage, one day the pastor held up the Bible and said that it comes down to what we believe about that book--is it the inerrant Word of God, or not? It's that simple.
Yes, it is a fine denomination. It is probably one I would consider if I ever were to leave the UMC.
I KNOW I am being fed with the meat of the Gospel. Freeper, Charles Henrickson is a LCMS pastor.
Would you mind deleting all of the off topic posts by xzins and Conservativegreatgrandma in this important thread.
xzins and Conservativegreatgrandma,
Take your debate to a religous thread, not a political one.
Why do you consider these off topic? It is very much on topic. Besides, as far as I’m concerned, this discussion is over. Sorry, if you found it offensive or boring. You are invited to join in anytime you want.
I'm not a Californian. But since you ping me . . .Dollars are what you pay taxes with. It is only the requirement to pay taxes which creates the value in currency; dollars are government debt. The only difference between a dollar bill and a government bond is that the bond pays interest. Government debt is something people own individually. The government can't meaningfully own its own debt, any more than you can write an IOU to yourself that has any meaning.
But in a way, ownership of your debt is the only thing you have - in the sense that you have to control your debt and not, for instance, suffer identity theft and have debts racked up in your name outside of your own control. If you cannot control your spending and your debt, you lose your credit rating and cannot get money, or the things you wish to spend money for. And the same applies to the government. If the government creates arbitrarily large debt, it is creating dollars - the "money supply" is said to expand. But dollars are not money, in the sense that their value is invariant. The less scarce dollars are, the less the value of each dollar. But the less the value of each dollar, the faster that dollar will move through the economy because the more it resembles a hot potato which must not be held long because the value in it has a short half-life. This process is chaotic and tends to be unstable.
sidebar discussions are quite common throughout freeperland. This discussion is connected to the “reform the Gop” debate, and in the midst of that I was asked why I was not as zealous to reform the church I attend.
So...it is connected.
Even then, though, people have for a long, long time had sidebar discussions on nearly every thread I’ve ever been a part of.
and that denom would be?
See post 131. Thanks
I'd like to suggest four necessary conditions for principled republicans and conservatives to regain control of the GOP and eliminate the destructive RINO (Republican In Name Only) domination from a national perspective although some of these are also valid in state races as well. I posted these here on FR in the days after the recent national election
1. GOP registration required to vote for GOP candidates so that crossover voters do not select our candidates in primaries.
2. Move primaries up in several large conservative states so that RINO-infested northeastern states no longer chose our presidential candidate. (I heard you mention this on your show yesterday, which was gratifying since I wrote about it a couple days after the election.)
3. Allot delegates to the GOP convention from each state based on the number of registered GOP voters in that state. Just because a state has a big population does not get you more delegates to the GOP convention- Dark blue states should not choose our candidate.
4. Divide the delegates from a state between candidates based on primary results- No more winner-take-all primaries.
How can such proposals be enacted within California and nationally?
Thanks,
Rockitz
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.