He speaks like the like the libertine libertarian atheist that he's always been.
FReegards!
Posted on 12/29/2013 7:06:04 PM PST by SeekAndFind
Filling in for Sean Hannity earlier this week, Neal Boortz suggested that Republicans will be unable to take the House in 2014, and that the reason will be social conservatives and cultural issues.
(via Breitbart.tv)
This whole thing about Phil Robertson and what have you – it speaks a lot to what we have coming up in the election next year. We desperately need to get the Democrats out of control of the United States Senate. The survival of our republic may depend on getting the Democrats out of control of the Senate, sending Harry Reid into the position of minority leader in the U.S. Senate – the survival of the republic may depend on that. And the Democrats are afraid that is indeed what is going to happen. That is why Harry Reid pulled the nuclear option a couple of weeks ago – because they were afraid we may lose the Senate.
This is a common refrain in Washington and among the “old guard” of the GOP: The notion that we can totally win if only we would stop caring about silly little backwoods issues like abortion, prayer, marriage, values and, well, the list goes on. It is not actually difficult to understand why this idea appeals to this group. After all, who can but think that we should do whatever it takes to ensure a Republican majority in the hopes of stopping the runaway spending train and reckless mismanagement of America under the current regime? Not to mention the steady decrease in American power and prestige on the world stage. We’re less safe, less wealthy, less secure, and soon to be less healthy. To stop the agenda set in motion by the pseudo-socialist politics of the democrat party has to be paramount, surely.
But expecting social conservatives to accept that their core issues should “sit this one out” is an absurd expectation. What are we saving if we surrender our values in order to save it? For social conservatives, the threats they see are every bit as immediate, every bit as damaging, and every bit as dangerous as the fiscal issues. Why then relent? Shunning social conservatives hasn’t worked yet. What makes them think it will in the future? Especially when we have overwhelming evidence that America is just about fed up with the moral decline in America. Just ask A&E.
So yes, social conservative issues will continue to play a major role in politics and elections for the foreseeable future. Maybe our Washington problem-solvers should try and figure out a strategy for working with that, rather than coming back every two years and telling social conservatives to be neither seen nor heard while still expecting them to turn out and support the party.
The answer is you execute the sob who raped her without any appeal. You pass laws that enable women to carry the weapon of their choice to be able to defend themseleves.
Next question please.
Wrong. Social conservatives staid home due to two lukewarm candidates.
He speaks like the like the libertine libertarian atheist that he's always been.
FReegards!
Him again? retire already.
To #7. Let’s rephrase your very good comment just a little.
How about: Conservatism exists because it supports “traditional morality” (which was the bedrock on which our country was founded).
Bump!
If they are nor moral, I doubt they will be honest or conservative unless there is a profit in it for themselves.
Vote fraud will determine the Senate, and if it does this time, then turn out the lights because the Republic is over.
Yes, and they would have if they had not
had to run against both parties. We had
this weasel
on nightly telling everyone why these crazy
people could not win, and that was after
they had won their primaries.
If anybody who claims to be following political reality tells you non-ironically that the social conservatives are the reason the GOP’s in trouble going forward, pat them on the head and have them go sit at the kids’ table. If you’re paying them for the advice, stop and get them off your payroll, because they’re stealing your money.
When this a** comes on I turn him off.
It’s not social conservatism that will split the party in two, it’s amnesty. That’s our red line in the sand. I know people who are ready to leave the Catholic Church over this. They certainly would be willing to leave the Republicans over it.
Basically? It’s rule of law. If we give up that “plank of our platform,” we really don’t have anything left. And we have no more moral standing to criticize Obama’s abandonment of the rule of law.
They are collapsing already—aging fast, and with 30 million excess young men.
Boortz is a pro-abortion libertarian and his opinion means less than nothing to me.
If social conservatives don’t win, there will not be a USA to save.
No Neil, a lot of the base stayed home because they were tired of holding their noses to vote. Mcpain and mittens were both democrat lite. I voted for Gov. Palin in 2008 and the demo lite ticket in 2012 to try to get the food stamp pres_ _ ent out of our house.
For GWB damaged the GOP brand so bad that something even worse was elected twice more convincingly than GWB in either election.
Best that can be said about Bush #43 is that he actually improved his showing the second time around. BO did not.
sore loser independents who run despite being primaried will hurt victory.
Boortz should just crawl back under his rock.
Stick to your guns.
My position is that Abortion is morally wrong in the sight of God.
There is no “out” clause for rape, incest or whatever. It is called being consistent with your position.
One of the biggest problems in our society today is moral relativism. We tend to compromise on virtually every moral question. Conservative’s with strong stand on abortion are likely to NOT be moral relativists.
The correct answer is, “I believe that abortion should not be used as a method of birth control.” (As long as you understand that about 85% of Americans support this statement.)
If you compare conditions in China just a few years ago under Mao-Tse-Tung and now, China is 10 times richer. There are now 1.2 NEW millionaires in China compared to during Mao regime. Pretty soon, in less than 7 years, Chinese economy is growing fast enough to become world’s number 1 economy, surpassing USA. Doe not look to me like the almighty is punishing them enough!
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.