Posted on 02/22/2014 3:21:09 PM PST by callthemlikeyouseethem
I don’t know what you were trying to say, but I imagine it was another way of trying to promote abortion, gay power, and anti-God social liberalism.
There is also the understandable fear of a Third Party, something like the Ross Perot Problem that gave BJ Clinton two terms. This is the trick of the century ... how to allow the Republican Party to die without handing the reins over to the Democrats for at least half of the century. If that happens, in all likelihood there will be no republic left for the 22 Century.
IMNVHO, it is not reasonable to assume that the GOP will "reform" itself. The deal incumbent Establishment Republicans have is simply too good a deal for them to give up. The GOP will have to be voted out of existence.
So far, no one has a viable idea of how the Hell that is supposed to happen. Are ww wrking on it?
What I was saying, obviously, was that the party should be pro-life, but on a legal, rights-based strategy, not a social one.
I don’t know what that means either, it is a political party, it elects people to decide law.
I’m not abandoning anything. Social legislation belongs at the State level, not the Federal level. The states are doing a good job of curtailing abortion, for example.
The states were meant to be “laboratories” for social legislation, to see what worked and what did not work.
Too bad that wasn’t done for prohibition. We could have, as a nation, saved a lot of trouble and money.
The statement was found on a blog concerning the founding of the Republican Party. And I have tried to find it again after my computer was hacked, again, last year but no luck.
Does this mean I want the Republican Party to refuse to support social conservatism? No, it does not. I want us to win nationally and concentrate on conservative issues that will appeal to most Americans.
You have to abandon that silly claim that the Republican party “”Originally, back in the 1850s, they promised not to get involved in social matters.””.
For one, they wanted slavery to be made against the law, just as we want abortion to be made against the law, they were for preserving marriage, just like now.
You already have the libertarian and democrat party if you are a social liberal, conservatives will continue to fight to keep the GOP a conservative party, in fact more so, we are trying to turn it right, not left, as you are.
Your last paragraph didn’t make any sense, unless you are agreeing with me and conservatives.
Replacing left-wing authoritarianism with right-wing authoritarianism is not the answer.
I'll remained focused on Liberty, which transcends the phony left-right political spectrum.
I'm not interested in being bounced between competing visions of Tyranny, which is what has been happening in America for at least the last century. I reject any embrace of Tyranny, whether it be "conservative", "liberal", or any other label...
LOL, you must despise the pre-1960s America before you guys moved the nation so far left and destroyed our culture and traditions, and made it a social liberal paradise that the left loves.
Jefferson wrote: “Endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights, and that among these are LIFE...”
Rights are a legal matter. They are granted by our Creator, but our discussion of them should remain purely legal in nature.
At least I’m not the only one who gets it.
“Currently just 25% of Americans identify themselves as “Republicans.” On the other hand, 38% of Americans identify themselves as “conservative,”
That could mean that 25% of Americans are RINOS and 13% are “non rino conservatives” (do the math, non rino conservative equals 38-25 or 13)
It seems to me that 25% rino conservatives is larger than 13% not rino conservatives.
Ansell, sweetie, I won’t abandon the U.S.Constitution, period. That document gives us the greatest amount of liberty for the largest number of people. You and the left want to narrow those liberties. Marriage and abortion aren’t mentioned in the U.S.Constitution so the power to regulate those are left to the states. And accusing me of being “left” demonstrates how ridiculously destructive you are towards other Conservatives.
You, and “social conservatives”, are making the same mistake the liberals-Democrats-Progressives-communists have promulgated in the past 200 years. Using non-existant ‘powers’ in the U.S.Constitution in an attempt to manipulate human behavior has resulted in terrible laws such as prohibition.
That wasn’t what the framers of the U.S.Constitution intended.
When you can make sense, then try again, your posts are too vague to make out.
Abortion as “liberty”, gay marriage, as “liberty”, it doesn’t get much more left than that.
LOL!
There's lies and there's damn lies, and that's a damn lie...
You’re wasting time trying to explain it to that one. I think he’s purposeky being obtuse, not to mention making incredible assumptive leaps of reasoning regarding other posters. Anyone who can’t tell the difference3 between a social issue and a legal issue isn’t worth the time, honestly.
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.