GOP: Gays wooed/Santorum booed, AWB stays, Prolife plank might go, & Social Conservatives wondering

Catholic Family Association of America/ Free Republic ^ | 5/9/03 | Dr. Brian Kopp, Vice Pres., Catholic Family Association of America

[Polycarp]

It is undeniable: Social conservatives, especially Christian conservatives, have been the base, bread and butter contributors, and footsoldiers of the GOP for decades.

Yet there are troubling signs on the horizon of the GOP party which must be analyzed and addressed by those same social conservatives.

The Santorum flap was instrumental in exposing the fact that the GOP has no desire to stand behind those who embrace and express the traditional viewpoint on homosexuality. The unabashed courting of the Log Cabin Republicans has been seen as going hand in hand with the failure of the national GOP leadership to rally around Santorum, and defend his rights and ideals, which are indeed representative of the base of the GOP.

The Bush administration has announced that it will support the continuation of the Clinton era gun grab known as the Assault Weapons Ban (AWB), despite earlier promising moves from the Ashcroft Attorney General's office that indicated this Administration at least understood the intent of the Second Amendment.

Finally, some conservative observers and pundits are privately worrying, with good reason, that the GOP will jettison the Pro-Life plank from the GOP party platform before the 2008 elections, if not before. Former PA Governor and current Secretary of Homeland Defense Tom Ridge, considered second in line if Cheney is unable to continue as VP, was one of a handful of GOP governors who demanded the pro-life plank be pulled from the GOP party platform in 1997.

Obviously, such moves carry no negative repercussions for ambitious GOP movers and shakers, even with the "pro-life" Bush administration. While the Democrats mercilessly apply a pro-abort litmus test to judicial candidates, the GOP is too timid to stand by its own pro-life plank and do likewise.

It has often been said that the three issues central to social conservatives are abortion, homosexuality, and the Second Amendment. Not all social conservatives agree to the respective ranking of these issues in the top three list, but most agree these three issues are the core social conservative issues.

Yet the GOP appears to be waffling on all three issues, and all portents indicate this waffling is and will continue to grow into a battle for the soul of the GOP in the next 4-8 years.

Frankly, I doubt social conservatives are going to come out on top on all three of these core issues. Further, its quite possible that, given current trajectories, the GOP will cave on all three.

Unfortunately, there are those within the GOP who despise the presence of the social conservative influence among its ranks, and desire nothing less than to move the GOP farther to the left (they will call it being "moderate") to, in effect, leave social conservatives with no party to call "home."

What then?

Many argue that its no use going too far down this path of thought. Bush himself has some true "conservative" bona fides, and does not appear willing to allow this "moderating" (read, "Liberalizing") force within the GOP to 100% hold sway. At least we hope this is the case.

But the battle is upon us, and the conservative movement must decide how to address it. In fact, first and foremost, social conservatives must wake up and realize how far this battle has already advanced, and how much ground the liberalizing forces in the GOP have claimed.

Then we must, reluctantly, think about the unthinkable:

What will social conservatives do IF the GOP 1) removes the pro-life plank before 2008, 2) continues its waffling on the homosexual issue, and 3) continues the attack on the Second Amendment which advanced so very far under the previous administration.

Its time for social conservatives to be pro-active instead of reactive, and to make our voice heard even louder than ever within the GOP.

The soul of the GOP is at stake, and I for one do not desire to be left politically homeless by 2008.

[Polycarp]

discussion ping

[GrandMoM]

BUMP for evening read!

[Notforprophet]

I just hope somebiddy posts that "flight suit" pic... :)

[denydenydeny]

If, if, if.

What if we all had four arms instead of two? Let's discuss.

[Consort]

The GOP is using a Circus Tent while their regular tent is in the shop being patched up.

[tuckrdout]

how about you post it?

[sinkspur]

Frankly, I doubt social conservatives are going to come out on top on all three of these core issues. Further, its quite possible that, given current trajectories, the GOP will cave on all three.

Let's see:

1) Bush is the most pro-life president this country has ever had, and that includes Ronald Reagan.
2) Tom DeLay announced, this afternoon, that the AWB will never make it out of the House.
3) Santorum makes a mess, Bush is supposed to clean it up and, because he doesn't, thereby teaching Rick Santorum to pick his battles wisely, some frantic Republicans think Bush is rolling out the red carpet for NAMBLA.

We were already knee deep in hyperbole, and it's getting deeper.

[caisson71]

The conservative game plan is working. Why abandon it now? It's like a war plan, it changes when the first shot is fired. Shots, barrages have been fired. Did any conservative think this was going to be EASY? Is there any doubt the GOP has taken some hits? If the GOP appears to be abandoning the mid-conservatives, we can get their attention, state our case, show them the votes we bring with us and again advance against the enemies of our country. What's the alternative? Dimocraps, Greens, another divisive party? We may lose a few battles but it is important to win the WAR. Cowboy up instead of ""quitting"".

[thepitts]

Seems to me that conservatives are politically homeless right now.

Would a conservative send 15 BILLION dollars to Africa for abortions?

[SoCar]

Boo Hoo!! Guess all the social conservatives will stay home or vote for a RAT in 2004.

I welcome the Log Cabin Republicans to our party. Obviously they are able to put aside their personal homosexual agenda for issues more important to the nation. Good for them.

There are simply not enough of the Christian Conservative so-called base to win elections. Demonizing pro-choice Pubbies like Rodge and Rudy is a recipe for disaster. Most of us do not think like Gary Bauer. It is not "all or nothing." Even RINOS like Snowe, Spector, etc. voted for Estrada. We can stick together and win or stand on the high pious moral ground and lose.

Bush is doing all he can feasibly do. He deserves our unwavering full support.

[Cap'n Crunch]

Should be interesting to watch.

I hope the assault weapons ban gets shot down, magazines for my M-14 will be cheaper.

:-)

[Cap'n Crunch]

Nothing like posting something for discussion and getting mud slung all over you eh?

[thepitts]

Bush has done more to advance the liberal agenda than clinton did.

[Desdemona]

The biggest mistake would be dropping the pro-life plank, IMO. I doubt that it will happen, though. It would be to pro-family advocates advantage not to kick and scream really loudly, but stand stoically and refuse to budge. Hysteria won't help at all.

A bigger question has to be answered: if not the republican party, where to go? It's the best chance of maintaining the life plank. If social conservatives walk and just stay home on election day, does that help society? That's a big question to answer.

[Cicero]

I'm in sympathy with the Catholic Family Association, and I'm very strongly pro-life. But I think this news release is somewhat hysterical.

Bush has, for the most part, been strongly pro-life. Unless I see more evidence that he or Rove is pushing to drop the pro-life plank I don't believe it is likely.

I think Rove sometimes miscalculates. He miscalculated badly by not supporting Simon in California and by putting that jerk Gerald Parsky in power there. But for the most part he and Bush understand the fine line that has to be walked between doing everything you would like and refraining from doing things that would lose too many votes and throw your party out of power. Politics remains the art of the possible.

[SoCar]

Bush has done more to advance the liberal agenda than clinton did.

Then I guess you'll be comfortable voting for Kerry, Lieberman, Edwards, or whoever the annointed RAT is in 2004. Good ridenance!!

Bush has done as much as he possibly could to advance the conservative agenda. He is in no way liberal. He is only one man and does not have the power to enforce his will. A successful politician knows what the limits are and gradually tries to move the country in his direction. The progress Bush has made is undeniable. Sorry he doesn't meet your standards. If he did though, his popularity would be around 30% The nation simply is not where you are. Get it?

We are blessed to have George W. Bush as our President. He is simply the right man at the right time. He has my full unwavering support. He is so far removed from the scum that last held the office that any comparison is not worth the effort.

[sinkspur]

Nothing like posting something for discussion and getting mud slung all over you eh?

Where's the mud, Crunch? Everybody's being civil, unless you think mere disagreement is "mud."

[Jeff Chandler]

Ah, the dark cloud inside the silver lining.

This is just so much talk and jaw. The battlefield is in the Judiciary.

[RJCogburn]

It is undeniable: Social conservatives, especially Christian conservatives, have been the base, bread and butter contributors, and footsoldiers of the GOP for decades.

No, I'll deny it...a base perhaps, but the base.....I'm not convinced

[Remedy]

the conservative movement must decide how to address it. In fact, first and foremost, social conservatives must wake up and realize how far this battle has already advanced, and how much ground the liberalizing forces in the GOP have claimed.

• The Senate has a majority of Republicans
• The leader of the Republican Party is BUSH.
• The judicial nominees are BUSH'S.
• The filibuster of HIS nominees is in violation of the Constitution and the Senate oath of Office.
• President Bush's Judicial Nominees Represent A Legacy Worth Fighting ForTo be honest about it, President Bush's nominees for the federal bench have been better than either those nominated by Reagan or his father. They are extraordinary. If Bush can fill all the vacancies in the federal court system, even if he should be denied a second term, then he will have made the greatest contribution a president can make.
• President Calls for Judicial Reform

  Its time for social conservatives to be pro-active instead of reactive, and to make our voice heard even louder than ever within the GOP.

• US Senate: Senators Home

[Remedy]

post #21

[RJCogburn]

Most of us do not think like Gary Bauer.

Thank goodness.

[SoCar]

Politics remains the art of the possible.

That line sums it all up. I'll have to remember it. Thanks.

I do have to disagree about your assertion that Rove miscalculated by not supporting Simon. From what I saw from afar, Simon was a disaster! No polictical acumen what so ever. Rove knew better then to expend any of Bush's political capital behind such a loser. Good move on his part.

The best candidate was the White House choice of Riordan. I'll take a winning RINO in a liberal state like CA over a conservative stumble bunny every day. The mistake was made by CA GOP primary voters, not Rove.

[narses]

Politics (from the Greek, poly = many, tics = blood sucking parasites) is the art of the possible. Given a choice (and we are), as Catholics we ought to choose the possible moral better position as opposed to the impossible moral perfect position. In other words, the lesser of two evils is better than the greater thereof.

Our choices are:

1 - the Democrat Party,
2 - the Republican Party,
3 - or some Third Party (the Perotista Reform Party, the Harold Browne Libertine Party, the Constitution Party or a "new" third party).

Given those choices, we need to fight within the least objectionable of the blood sucking parasites for the vehicle most likely to advance Catholic values and least likely to attack them. IMHO that is the GOP.

[SoCar]

You are so right, Christian Conservatives are a base, but not the only one.

[SauronOfMordor]

Sounds like a reason for the social-conservative wing to start their own group within the Republican Party, and field its own candidates in the primaries. The primary process is the key to the control of the party

[Polycarp]

not sure why I bother.

this is NOT a "conservative" web site.

[Cap'n Crunch]

Keep fightin' Doc! Your an inspiration to me.

[Mr. Mojo]

Bump for sanity.

[k2blader]

Bump!

[sinkspur]

Sounds like a reason for the social-conservative wing to start their own group within the Republican Party, and field its own candidates in the primaries.

There won't be any primaries in 2004. But, social-conservatives had Bauer and Keyes in 2000, and they flopped like a pancake maker in a mosh pit.

[Young Rhino]

this is NOT a "conservative" web site.

Nothing wrong with a woman in comfortable shoes, provided she looks like Elizabeth Hurley instead of Hillary!, Rosie, Donna Shalala, or Janet Reno. In other words, attractive lesbians are okay by me...although bisexual ones would be better.

I'm just one of those economic conservatives/social libertarians that contaminate the social conservatism you hold dear.

[RJCogburn]

But, social-conservatives had Bauer and Keyes in 2000, and they flopped like a pancake maker in a mosh pit.

Don't forget L'il Pat Robertson in an earlier round.

[Polycarp]

That should be, "Young Rino."

[Always Right]

There won't be any primaries in 2004. But, social-conservatives had Bauer and Keyes in 2000, and they flopped like a pancake maker in a mosh pit.

Quayle was actually the only social conservative that had a real chance. Then again GW is a somewhat of a social conservative, but makes it too low of a priority.

[Young Rhino]

Not witty, original, or accurate. But what else should I expect from one of Patsy Buchanan's Brigadiers?

[sinkspur]

Then again GW is a somewhat of a social conservative, but makes it too low of a priority.

He's had a war on terror to fight, in case you hadn't noticed.

[RJCogburn]

this is NOT a "conservative" web site.

Perhaps you ought to then heed the words of John McLaughlin.....

[supercat]

//The biggest mistake would be dropping the pro-life plank, IMO. I doubt that it will happen, though.//

They badly need to rework it. I've posted elsewhere exactly how I think it should be changed, but the idea is to compromise actions without compromising principles, and to have a platform that 90% of Republicans could agree to 100%.

[Wilhelm Tell]

Does anyone remember the "Gay Communist Gun Club" skit that was on Saturday Night Live years ago? Just suggesting a possibility for some of our brilliant Republican strategists.

[cpforlife.org]

narses,

Excellent points! The only thing I have to add is we should be more aggressive in promoting our values within the Grand Old Party—most especially with regard to defeating Pro-Abortion & Pro-Sodomite “Catholics” in Congress. It will never be perfect, but the 3rd party route is not realistic.

[supercat]

I still like the bumper-sticker slogan "GAYS WITH GUNS DON'T GET BASHED". Sure way to give liberals' brains a short-circuit.

[fatima]

"Santorum makes a mess,"Truth is not a mess.Kinda nice to hear it once in awhile.

[narses]

Every devout Catholic ought to consider running for an elected position within the GOP. Your local precinct captain's job is a great entre into the political life. Saint Pius X ran for and was elected to local office, so ought we.

[Polycarp]

Yeah, sure. Show me one post where I have EVER backed Buchanan.

[Always Right]

He's had a war on terror to fight, in case you hadn't noticed.

Yes, but even before the 9-11 and even during the election, Bush never emphaisized his social conservative views,

[narses]

" Santorum makes a mess,..."

How? The AP rewrote what he said to make the mess. Santorum said EXACTLY what the Catholic Church says Deacon. The TRUTH ought to be defended. That you attack him for speaking the truth says volumes, about you.

[sinkspur]

"Santorum makes a mess,"Truth is not a mess.Kinda nice to hear it once in awhile.

Why won't Santorum go on one single talk show to defend his remarks?

If they're the truth, then he shouldn't be afraid to repeat them, over and over and over.

[Roscoe]

this is NOT a "conservative" web site.

Are you nuts?