Posted on 09/18/2009 7:26:33 PM PDT by cpforlife.org
What's next, is Steele going to welcome gun control candidates into the party? Candidates advocating for higher taxes and spending?
In a September 3rd interview, Republican National Committee Chairman Michael Steele told a surprised Columbus Dispatch reporter that he would lead the charge of pro-abortion GOP candidates if abortion is a value in their community. Columbus Dispatch Senior Editor Joe Hallett asked Steele "if there is room in the party for a pro-abortion rights candidate…"
Hallett quoted Steele's reply:
"There absolutely is, there absolutely is… The key thing right now-and I think this is true for Republicans across the country-is to have leadership that reflects the communities I live in, where we're from. As we get ready for the battles that lie ahead from this district to all the districts surrounding the state, that you're going to find those candidates emerge and rise up who reflect those values in those communities, and that's a very important step for the party to take, I think, and I'm looking forward to help lead that charge in the future."
There are two glaring problems with his statement. First, the official Republican Party Platform states: "We oppose using public revenues to promote or perform abortion and will not fund organizations which advocate it." Steele has thus flagrantly violated his own Party Platform by agreeing to fund the campaigns of GOP candidates who advocate abortion.
Second, the Platform touts itself as "The party of ideas, rather than a mere coalition of interests." But Steele's comments encourage candidates to be influenced by special interests in their communities rather than Republican principles of life, lower taxes, and smaller government.
It appears that Steele has forgotten that America elects representatives, not merely agents of puppeteer constituents. The words of the father of conservatism Edmund Burke in his 1774 speech at Bristol are more important now than ever: "Your Representative owes you, not his industry only, but his judgment; and he betrays, instead of serving you, if he sacrifices it to your opinion."
This time, Steele is "lead[ing] that charge" of GOP candidates who refuse to protect preborn babies. What kind of pastel-colored GOP candidate will he welcome next? What if a candidate's community wants to give citizenship to illegal aliens , higher taxes, universal healthcare, and more government programs?
During the Jan. 4, 2009 RNC debate for the Chairmanship sponsored by Americans for Tax Reform, Steele revealed that he did not own a single firearm. Could this mean Chairman Steele will use RNC donations to welcome advocates of gun control next?
Please, try to "get it."
I rest my case .... YOU can keep voting for Arly Spectator types, Voinobitch, Taft, Crist, Any Bush ... conservative lite, McClame, Hatch, Snowe, Graham, on and on and on ad nauseum.. the same ones that support stinkng libearls .. it is a collegium of eltitist dirtbags. nothing more nothing less. P.J. O Rourke called them a Parliament of Whores .. I call them a Parliamnent of Egotistical Azzholes that could care less about this country.
What happens when you keep voting mediocrity .. you get LESS than mediocrity .... We have seen it for 25 years now.
But you can go ahead and keep voting these worthles, spineless idiots in .... and then go to your little percious coountry club and say .. My hands are clean .. I voted republican. Never again will I do that ... I have a conscience. America’s conscience is GONE!!!
Maroons among us
I’m in no way saying we should align ourselves with liberals.
What I’m trying to say is that we need the entire conservative party for the win and those in name-only democrats.
There needs to be some compromise within the conservative party.
For your wake up, go to a Hillary Clinton board and respectfully delve into their beliefs on this. Overall+ they are not for Obama. They generally do believe there should be a right to chose but with great limitations.
“An uncompromised American conservative movement would be the mightiest political force on the planet. Unstoppable. Unbeatable.”
If we can’t get all portions of the conservative party, which we didn’t in the last election, we won’t be able to stop a thing.
I’m awake. Are you?
True, Reagan did.
Still we need thecrossover votes that put Reagan in office. Even uber conservative Dems are going to hang onto some type of abortion rights.
Do you, now? The last election certainly was a success, wasn't it? President McCain has been awesome.
There may be much gnashing of teeth and promises to sit the election out, but in the end most will fall in line. Election after election proves that.
What color is the sky in your world?
If in fact, the dispatch reporter fabricated the quote attributed to steele, then the propagandists have lowered themselves to being nothing more than satan’s (the father of lies) minions.
Regarding catholics, and any other faith, or lack thereof for that matter, my criteria is “By their fruit ye shall know them”. Labels are accepted too readily as an indicator of values - and I may have been mislead in that way. (But then, I’m spending more time than I think I should just because you’ve made an issue of my little rant and I prefer to know the truth.)
While I’ve not spent much effort discerning mr. steele’s true foundations (primarily because the “r’s” don’t represent me), from reports and impressions I’ve garnered from FR, steele is just the gop’s lead salesman and has done nothing to improve my perspective.
To me they’re ALL politicians *ptui* (unless they demonstrate otherwise as do Jim DeMint, Duncan Hunter, Alan Keyes, Sarah Palin and I think Michelle Buchannan).
You may have facts to which I’m not privy. If so, I’m willing to listen.
If in fact, the dispatch reporter fabricated the quote attributed to steele, then the propagandists have lowered themselves to being nothing more than satan’s (the father of lies) minions.
Regarding catholics, and any other faith, or lack thereof for that matter, my criteria is “By their fruit ye shall know them”. Labels are accepted too readily as an indicator of values - and I may have been mislead in that way. (But then, I’m spending more time than I think I should just because you’ve made an issue of my little rant and I prefer to know the truth.)
While I’ve not spent much effort discerning mr. steele’s true foundations (primarily because the “r’s” don’t represent me), from reports and impressions I’ve garnered from FR, steele is just the gop’s lead salesman and has done nothing to improve my perspective.
To me they’re ALL politicians *ptui* (unless they demonstrate otherwise as do Jim DeMint, Duncan Hunter, Alan Keyes, Sarah Palin and I think Michelle Buchannan).
You may have facts to which I’m not privy. If so, I’m willing to listen.
Are you saying that the vast majority of conservatives didn’t support McCain?
He's always been pretty square on the issue of supporting "life". At the same time he has learned to be a tad too polite for even my comfort level (which you can imagine does not call for politeness) but he's had to work in Maryland.
They have real Democrat thugs walking the streets over there who would be willing to kill you at the drop of a hat. They elect Mafioso to be mayor of Baltimore (See Nancy Pelosi's father as an example), and people willing to direct forced abortions have an advantage in getting appointed to the bench.
Mr. Steele holds to his values but he's lived and worked in the precincts of Hell entirely too long.
After reading through this thread I did a quick search to see if I could get deeper into the premise of the article.
My memory was quickly refreshed as I reread the articles below from just six months ago. It would be good if more can be added.
I believe Steele must go, and quickly. He is very compromised and is a disaster waiting to happen.
Steele is a symptom of the bigger problem: THE GOP is CORRUPT.
The GOP’s corruption is different than the RATs but it is just as crucial that it be removed.
I think these are the main problems that must be addressed ASAP:
1. The national GOP is run by a group of moderate democrats and/or pro-choicers. They are out of touch and seem to care less about what we think or want.
2. The nomination process for POTUS is rigged purposely to give advantage to RINOs.
I think one possibility is a tea party style approach to the problem.
It seems conservatives might have a unique opportunity with the current wave of awakened tea party & town hall movement folks to actually retake the once great GOP.
One thing seems likely if we do not: McRomney or worse for the next GOPotus nomination.
What say you FREEPERS?
(excerpt)
http://www.jillstanek.com/archives/2009/03/rnc_chair_micha.html
March 12, 2009
RNC Chair Michael Steele: Abortion is “individual choice”
UPDATE, 3/12, 9:45p: The Steele abortion flap has grown throughout the day.
For conservatives, Steele is becoming the focus of pent up wrath toward Republicans who tell pro-lifers what they want to hear to their face but then melt on the pro-life issue when in a different crowd or when it’s time to vote. Wrote Tony Perkins of FRC in a press release this afternoon:
This only serves to reinforce the belief by many social conservatives that one major party is unfriendly while the other gives only lip service to core moral issues, which is why many have dropped their affiliation with the GOP. If such a visible Republican leader continues in this same vein I am sure the trend will continue. The prospects of more social conservatives leaving may excite the “big tenters,” but that will only last until they find the Big Tent is empty.
Those were words to be taken seriously.
Meanwhile, the opening schism got lots of press....(excerpt)
(excerpt)
http://spectator.org/blog/2009/03/11/michael-zelig-steele
AmSpecBlog
Michael “Zelig” Steele
By Philip Klein on 3.11.09 @ 10:15PM
In 1983, Woody Allen made the mockumentary film Zelig about a man who longs for approval so badly that he changes to fit the people who are surrounding him. The movie may as well have been written about Michael Steele, who continues to tie himself in knots as part of his effort to reach out to moderates.
Steele already has been ridiculed by all sides of the political spectrum for blasting Rush Limbaugh on CNN only to apologize when he received blowback. But now, via Matt Lewis, I see he told GQ that he believes abortion is an individual choice. Here’s the portion of the interview:
How much of your pro-life stance, for you, is informed not just by your Catholic faith but by the fact that you were adopted?
Oh, a lot. Absolutely. I see the power of life in that—I mean, and the power of choice! The thing to keep in mind about it… Uh, you know, I think as a country we get off on these misguided conversations that throw around terms that really misrepresent truth.
Explain that.
The choice issue cuts two ways. You can choose life, or you can choose abortion. You know, my mother chose life. So, you know, I think the power of the argument of choice boils down to stating a case for one or the other.
Are you saying you think women have the right to choose abortion?
Yeah. I mean, again, I think that’s an individual choice.
You do?
Yeah. Absolutely.
So basically, in an effort to seem more inclusive, Steele tried to appropriate the language of the left by saying life is a choice, but then he allowed himself to be backed into a corner in which he said that women have the right to choose abortion — by definition, a pro-choice postion. Perhaps realizing what he had just said, Steele then tried to add nuance to his point:
Are you saying you don’t want to overturn Roe v. Wade?
I think Roe v. Wade—as a legal matter, Roe v. Wade was a wrongly decided matter.
Okay, but if you overturn Roe v. Wade, how do women have the choice you just said they should have?
The states should make that choice. That’s what the choice is. The individual choice rests in the states. Let them decide.
Do pro-choicers have a place in the Republican Party?
Absolutely!
So, after getting boxed in, he suddenly shifts from “individual choice” meaning “women have the right to choose an abortion” to it meaning that states have an “individual choice” about whether or not to permit women to exercise choice. Liz Mair, charitably, thinks that Steele was trying to express the pro-choice, anti-Roe, position but that he just was clumsy about it. Even if that were the case, however, it wouldn’t be consistent with other recent statements he made on the subject.
(excerpt)
You will have the moderate problem until you show that a strong prolife stand (i.e., one that excludes or marginalizes pro-aborts) can win a statewide or national election.
A pro-lifer runs for Congress. Pro-life voters tell his door-to-door canvassers, “I’m voting for him. I’m not interested in doing any else, though. yard sign? No, let me think about it. I’ll ask my pastor if that is necessary. Keep warm and well fed.”
Pro-life candidate loses 50.1% to 49.9%.
(a little secret: ... the pro-aborts aren’t the problem.)
Freepmail wagglebee or DirtyHarryY2K to subscribe or unsubscribe from the moral absolutes ping list.
FreeRepublic moral absolutes keyword search
The Democrats are generally credited with these tales but I suspect they have some RINO assistance (don't they? you know, right?)
Good to hear you, Mr. P.
"I suspect they have some RINO assistance (don't they? you know, right?)" What exactly do you mean?
It’s become crystal clear that RINOs - iow “moderates” in the GOP - are the real reason 0bama and other lefists have the power they have. The GOP enables them to win. I think many of them in DC are totally complicit.
If nothing else, they don’t give us real candidates. Not because real conservatives wouldn’t win, but because they don’t want real conservatives to run.
Look at 9/12 in DC. We need to start pushing back.
There's no reason for any Freeper to bring it up again unless he has ulterior motives.
I think you need to account for your motives before you get back into that old piece of propaganda.
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.