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

Flame or agree - etc.
1 posted on 05/15/2014 9:09:58 AM PDT by C. Edmund Wright
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies ]


To: Servant of the Cross; xzins; Lakeshark; RitaOK

thoughts?


2 posted on 05/15/2014 9:10:33 AM PDT by C. Edmund Wright (Tokyo Rove is more than a name, it's a GREAT WEBSITE)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: C. Edmund Wright

Frankly, I can hardly believe it. Not that I don’t believe you, but what is the source?


3 posted on 05/15/2014 9:12:35 AM PDT by TurkeyLurkey
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: C. Edmund Wright

NRTL stretched themselves into a pretzel endorsing Romney the last election. I had no idea that Graham and Tillis were NOT pro-life. Is that true?


4 posted on 05/15/2014 9:16:31 AM PDT by xzins ( Retired Army Chaplain and Proud of It! Those who truly support our troops pray for victory!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: C. Edmund Wright

When you only care about one issue then you support the candidate that supports this issue. They would support a pro-life communist if one existed.

This is why some people get frustrated with single issue folks.


9 posted on 05/15/2014 9:32:15 AM PDT by DManA
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: C. Edmund Wright

It’s the same reason the NRA endorsed Harry Reid - if an incumbent has a sufficiently high enough rating, they will get the endorsement, because the incumbent has an actual track record as opposed to a challenger who may talk a better game but who is an unknown as to what they will actually do in office.


11 posted on 05/15/2014 9:36:15 AM PDT by kevkrom (I'm not an unreasonable man... well, actually, I am. But hear me out anyway.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: C. Edmund Wright
In the short run they may believe that it is better to support the incumbent who claims to be pro-life for two reasons:

1. The incumbent that wins his primary always has a better chance to beat the candidate from the opposing party.

2. An incumbent that keeps his seat will have more seniority than a newbie and can better help craft and carry legislation through congress.

Personally I believe that things have gotten so bad that we need to abandon short-term thinking. I really do think that the Republican Party needs to go away. I'm OK with ten, even twenty, years of Democrat presidents that legalize all sorts of nonsense and make it difficult or impossible for Christians to live openly as Christians in American society.

We may need something horrible to happen in order to finally wake up.

I'm really not liking any of the Republican candidates for President. Even Paul and Cruz are starting to sound like they are making moves in a RINO direction to get the backing from corporations they will need to win in 2016.

Conservatives have been turned into shills for corporations that mouth support for free enterprise and capitalism while spending millions to lobby congress to craft legislation favorable to them with no concern for the US or its long held traditions.

The US is no longer a Christian nation. We are quickly sliding toward the same fate as Western Europe. The corporations like this, the liberals like this. The only people who hate this are conservatives and leftists who want even more socialism sooner.

Large non-profits have a certain inertia. They have salaries to pay, rents and mortgages to maintain. They need to maintain the support of large donors. They can't do this by staying on the bleeding edge of perfect ideological consistency. They need to tone down their rhetoric and make "pragmatic" choices in order to keep the ball rolling.

Of course, the smaller more ideologically pure organizations that we can also give money too will have little or no effect on what society does as a whole.

The best we can possibly do is just give to those local organizations that spend most of their money and effort on saving one baby at a time without trying to change the laws or change the attitudes of the American public.

12 posted on 05/15/2014 9:37:32 AM PDT by who_would_fardels_bear
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: C. Edmund Wright

I voted for Brannon but could easily have voted for Tillis. And I know a number of strong conservatives who did vote for Tillis because he did such a great job as Speaker of the House for the conservative cause. Just because he was endorsed by establishment Republicans does no necessarily put him into their camp. Judge a man by what he does, not by who endorses him.


23 posted on 05/15/2014 10:30:15 AM PDT by elpadre (AfganistaMr Obama said the goal was to "disrupt, dismantle and defeat al-hereQaeda" and its allies.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

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