Posted on 10/27/2017 7:43:28 AM PDT by Oldeconomybuyer
Alabama GOP Senate nominee Roy Moore serves as a convenient dividing line. If Republicans cannot oppose a former state supreme court justice ousted twice from the bench who espouses rabidly anti-Muslim views and believes homosexuality should be criminalized, the GOP is truly headed for the ash heap of history. So how are they doing?
In certainly the most cringe-worthy move of his career, Sen. John Cornyn (R-Tex.), a former Texas Supreme Court justice, declared that was “proud to offer my support to Judge Roy Moore for U.S. Senate. I look forward to working with him to pass legislation that will effect meaningful change for all Americans.”
However, a ray of sunshine peaked out from the gloom on the topic of Moore. Sen. Jeff Flake (R-Ariz.) announced he wouldn’t support Moore. Sen. Ben Sasse (R-Neb.), who has talked and written in eloquent, principled terms about our democratic creed and was one of the few senators not to endorse Trump, took a small step forward, breaking his sabbatical from moral leadership.
So the question remains: Where are the rest of the GOP senators and members of Congress on Moore? Can they bestir themselves to oppose a man surely as unfit for the Senate as Donald Trump is for the presidency? Listen, congressmen and women and senators move in packs. After a couple act, you might get a bunch more to stand up against Moore. And then another batch, and so on. As belated and comparatively mild as Sasse’s statement was, it should be welcomed. The more independent-minded Republicans are willing to push back against Trump, the better their party and our country will be.
(Excerpt) Read more at washingtonpost.com ...
Well, I’m an Alabaman. If Moore is no more unfit to be a Senator than Trump is to be President, then he’s gonna be pretty good in the Senate.
I’m voting for him.
Jennifer Rubin is like a cartoon character.
You just know if she didn’t pluck daily she would become a uni-brow in no time.
Excerpt: "Because we hold it for a fundamental and undeniable truth, “that Religion or the duty which we owe to our Creator and the Manner of discharging it, can be directed only by reason and conviction, not by force or violence.”Is there anywhere a clearer statement of the underlying principle of the U. S. Constitution's provisions and protections for "the People's" rights and liberties?"The Religion then of every man must be left to the conviction and conscience of every man; and it is the right of every man to exercise it as these may dictate. This right is in its nature an unalienable right. It is unalienable; because the opinions of men, depending only on the evidence contemplated by their own minds, cannot follow the dictates of other men: It is unalienable also; because what is here a right towards men, is a duty towards the Creator. It is the duty of every man to render to the Creator such homage, and such only, as he believes to be acceptable to him. This duty is precedent both in order of time and degree of obligation, to the claims of Civil Society. Before any man can be considered as a member of Civil Society, he must be considered as a subject of the Governor of the Universe: And if a member of Civil Society, who enters into any subordinate Association, must always do it with a reservation of his duty to the general authority; much more must every man who becomes a member of any particular Civil Society, do it with a saving of his allegiance to the Universal Sovereign. We maintain therefore that in matters of Religion, no man’s right is abridged by the institution of Civil Society, and that Religion is wholly exempt from its cognizance." - James Madison
The very foundation of the Founders' Declaration of Independence from a "government-over-people" rule to one of a people's recognition of "overruling Providence" and "people-over-government" liberty was summarized in Jefferson's, "The God who gave us life, gave us liberty at the same time: the hand of force may destroy, but cannot disjoin them."
In our generation, do we not see that "hand of force" unmasked at the same time as that same "hand" not only is reluctant to recognize Madison's "Creator," "the Governor of the Universe," and "Universal Sovereign," or Jefferson's "the God who gave us life," but utilizes that "hand of force" to deny public discourse to include those descriptions in its "politically-correct" discourse or teaching of the youth of America?
Thank God the wise and beneficent Jennifer Rubin has seen fit to grace us with her concern. </barf>
.
They do openly reject all of the founders.
.
Because Republicans elected Roy Moore instead of Strange, we are going extinct? No, only RINOs will be going extinct. Of course, you wouldn’t be worried if RINOs were winning...
Moore is a nut, but he’s our nut. His opponent is Chuck Schumer’s nut.
Radical leftist Rubin is horrified that Moore is “anti-Muslim”. Aw shucks, all Moohammed did was rape little girls and mass murder others. But, we MUST respect those who follow him! Yeah!
There! Fixed it.
Democrats and Republicans became extinct last century.
In fact, I’ll call myself a constitutionally limited power federal government RINO.
I am a fan of Moore. I am not familiar with what he said on this particular topic or what this is really referring to but I am not on board with that.
Bringing in the weight of government force to prevent some guy from putting it in another guys butt??? Which other personal sins should we criminalize? Adultery? Gluttony? Fear? Greed?
The point of the government is to protect MY rights from your will. The government is right to step in when the excercize of your will interferes with my rights. I have a hard time seeing where two guys gaying off affects my rights.
The Muslim thing I am on board with 100%
There are two options; one of which involves America’s survival. I am praying for Judge Moore.
Liberal having a cat over conservative winning.....I’m shocked!!!!
exactly
So she’s a sporkweasel?
Moore should make an interesting addition to the Senate.
In a perfect world I suppose.
Good enough reason for any for voting for him.
I don’t think he’d be against it.
What’s funny is she is supposed to be the Republican voice on that paper.
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.