I told you my stance. I dont think the Tea Party should address social issues. You took that to mean that I think they should support marxism, because you want to believe that anyone who is fighting one front must be fighting all fronts. you dont live in the real world, where there are social groups, fiscal groups, and defense groups that push their 1 thing, and together, they make up the movement.
No. I never claimed that you wanted the TEA party to openly support social Marxism. I simply pointed out that you have no problem with social Marxism being accepted within the TEA party.
You also insist that the TEA party MUST remain neutral to accepting social Marxism as well. You insist it. So maybe you have a covert agenda to support social Marxism.
Your position is one of appeasement to social Marxism. I though openly oppose that position and urge the TEA party to oppose Marxism in all of its forms.
Just like conservative purists, who champion social issues constantly bemoan RINO Republican Country Club elitists, while GOP supporters of fiscal issues would like the pro-lifers to just go away. The truth is, there is no power for any side if one group is forced out.
The Tea Parties, like the Republican party, need the pro-God, pro-business and pro-defense factions TOGETHER to cause fear in the Left.
You acknowledge that and still insist the tea parties ignore "social issues". Ridiculous.