Posted on 11/05/2014 9:58:55 AM PST by Yashcheritsiy
To begin with, this election was, generally speaking, a rejection of the notion being advanced by many in the establishment wing of the Party that the Republicans needs to move to the Left on social issues like abortion and gay “marriage.” Earlier this year, GOP establishment leaders like Kevin McCarthy and Paul Ryan announced their plan to begin trying to recruit “Young Gun” candidates – socially liberal, and often homosexual, candidates to run under the Republican banner in an effort to “broaden the appeal” of the Party, especially to younger, socially liberal voters. John Boehner backed this effort, throwing money at the candidates who had been recruited to run this year. However, the voters who were supposed to be impressed by the GOP’s lurch to the Left on “individual choice” issues instead reacted with a collective yawn. In the race for the open seat in Massachusetts’ 6th congressional district, “Young Gun” Richard Tisei - a gay Republican who has a 100% rating from NARAL and Planned Parenthood, who (obviously) supports gay “marriage,” and who is “married” to his “partner” - lost by 15 points to a non-incumbent and relatively unknown Democrat. To give this some perspective, Tisei had ran for the same seat in 2012 against a well-known and long-time incumbent and lost by only a single point. It does not appear that Tisei’s choice to flaunt his peculiar lifestyle choice did him or the GOP any favors this time around...
(Excerpt) Read more at canadafreepress.com ...
It’s a double-ZOT thread (so far)...
That was the legendary DannyH! He of the hundred screen names.
Possibly. It's a mental affliction that I don't claim to have the first understanding of. If this one was subtly asking for help, she sure went about it the wrong way.
I thought we’d never be rid of him. I had some serious FReepmail discussions with him and eventually he’d go off like a rocket. Never understood why.
I have no doubt at all that s/he is lurking and waiting for winter break from college.
Once s/he’s back at hi/r mother’s house, crashing in her garage and stealing her WiFi, s/he’ll be back.
DannyH
It’s been several years so I think he gave up.
We sort of have our own version of Fast And Furious going on here, with all the zots lately. LOL!
You contend that there are 'gay beings'. I disagree, as such the premise you base your arguments upon is not relevant.
The ONLY objective defining characteristic regarding homosexuality is the inclination, predisposition, and or choice to engage in homosexual sex. ANYONE can claim to 'be' homosexual AND there is ONLY way to even attempt to prove such a claim -engage in homosexual activity. Even then, still it proves NOTHING as to a state of being but rather a state of doing.
Boy... I said my last views of it...to me the government is here IMHO to protect the nation from enemies. It is NOT again in MHO regulate what FREE PEOPLE do. If it not hurting society, I don’t care. Call it my Yankee upbringing...
Yes... libertarian do have some conservative views on FREEDOMS. what libertarians are goofy on is defense and open borders.
Now...I'm finished with this posting..
Pushing dope, pushing homos and now pushing daisies. :)
You are far from Christ.
The only ones obsessed with people’s bedrooms on this thread are the ones who got zotted, and yourself.
Bedrooms aren’t the problem. It’s the public square. You know, the place you want to force the rest of us to accept homosexual perversion.
If this “issue” is going to be the “downfall” of Republicans, and America by the way, it will be because of folks like you, not because of those who refuse to accept homosexual behavior as acceptable, or who are willing to have it forced on our children.
So you refuse to condemn wrongdoing, instead embracing it.
Got it.
Google “Folsom Street Fair” with safe search off.
Embrace what you find.
The open borders thing with libertarians absolutely puzzles me. The drug policy is “it’s his business; if he’s not hurting you, leave him alone, let him hurt himself.” So, individual freedom is the basis of a lot of their argument.
How exactly does ‘open borders’ fit that concept of individual liberty? Folks from anywhere should be allowed to wander into our country as they wish, work if they wish, vote if they wish. Essentially, they’re saying that national boundaries are a violation of individual freedom? Is that it?
If so, then they are arguing for zero government on the planet.
Reality is that someone will seize power. They always have and always will.
So, a national sovereign government should be limited, but it is to preserve the freedom of those within those boundaries. And their property....both their individual property and their joint property (bridges, highways, etc.) that they have decided to build as a combined effort.
The libertarian will NOT say that John Illegal can walk into HIS house and treat it as his own refrig, TV, computer, etc.
But for some reason, they say that John Illegal can do exactly that with a banded together group of people...a nation.
It is a non-sequitur in my mind regarding their premise of individual liberty.
Who is talking about that?
You and your leftist/libertarian ilk will destroy this country through your unwillingness to forbid anything.
This issue is going to be the downfall of the Republicans. Yes, I said it.
Really troll? You think that not succumbing to the homosexual agenda will be the downfall of the GOP.
The GOP was founded upon social conservative principles, one of which was the sanctity of marriage between ONE MAN and ONE WOMAN, this was in the VERY FIRST GOP PLATFORM.
Your defeatist attitude brings to mind what Winston Churchill said to Neville Chamberlain after he signed the abominable pact with Hitler:
"You were given the choice between war and dishonor. You chose dishonor and you will have war."
Social Conservatives is part of the Conservative wing of the Republican Party. So is fiscal conservatives and constitution conservatives.
There is ONLY ONE successful type of conservative and that is the understanding that fiscal conservatism, social conservatism and strong foreign policy/national defense are ALL VITAL. This is the only formula that has ever worked.
Some of us conservative don't go to church...I'll let GOD judge me at the pearly gates...
You ARE NOT a conservative. You are a libertarian who has a total misunderstanding of the Constitution, you think the Constitution exists to protect your precious vices like sodomy, prostitution, dope and pornography. The fact that you are a liberal who believes in anarchy and no taxes doesn't make you a fiscal conservative, it makes you a loser.
Now...I'm finished with this posting..
Why troll?
Conservatism is about principles.
I have the courage of my convictions and I will stand up for what I believe in, if my views are unwelcome somewhere then they can throw me out and good riddance.
You LACK the courage of your convictions. THAT is what makes you a troll, you aren't willing to say what your really believe because you know that you will be removed from this fine conservative forum and be unable to spew your filth any longer.
Thank you for clarifying that. It is a point which ought to be made more often
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.