Posted on 02/02/2009 9:17:17 AM PST by UCFRoadWarrior
Awesome post
It seems like many on FR have lost their sense of liberty and simply want to impose religious facism on the rest
I am baffled by those who make abortion issue number 1 when there are so many other threats to liberty which they conveniently ignore
...I’d even allow those AIP jugheads in.OL
Maybe I’m missing something but what’s wrong with trying to reach out to other groups? Weren’t people on here not long ago saying how we needed to educate more minorities and other groups on what the Republican Party stands for? The Republican party =/= Conservative Party. Like it or not, we’ve got to get the White House out of control of the Dims. Each political party has their factions, and lets face it, the MSM has painted the social conservative base to be something it’s not. If the Republican party pushes fiscal conservatisim (no bailouts), no expansion of government, and national security, they can easily win next cycle.
As much as I would love to see the social conservative bloc do better, there’s not many left in the either House or Senate. Pledging to not vote or w/e is only admitting defeat and basically giving four more years to that POS B.O.
There are more important immediate things than getting upset at someone who’s trying to gain numbers. If you don’t like what he’s doing or have a better suggestion, why not email him? Chairman@gop.com for your convenience.
And if this post gets me banned from FR, well, I enjoyed my stay.
LOL!
You are a complete liar. Palin herself never used that made-up BS of yours--how would vetoing that help a budget situation, it would be spending MORE?
She did it to comply with SCOTUS judgments.
But by YOUR rationale she MUST be pro-gay--she vetoed a bill and, as a result, made tax money available to go to same-sex couples.
It's funny seeing someone so ignorant hanging themselves! LOL!
But abortion stances would definitely lose elections for Republicans. And it was hardly a front burner issue during the 2008 election. It was only mentioned about once, during that Saddleback church pow wow.
For whatever reason, you seem to be the one who has blown that issue greatly out of proportion. It's been a basic plank in the Republican party for years. Do want it changed?
We do not need to reach out to special interest groups, as special interest groups, which is what Steele is doing. We reach out to people, who ever they are, on principle.
But conservative principle includes ethical and moral standards. Pro-life is not really a special interest group, it is rooted in a standard. It is a principle issue which defines what genuine freedom means.
I have to change my interpretation of what he meant when he said he’d knock down anyone that got in the way of the new RNC direction from liberal RINOS to the true conservatives like folks from Free Republic and those that listen to Rush that want a more conservative party. If he is telling conservatves he is going to knock us down and push us aside to get out of his way, then the Republican Party as we knew it is goig to get pretty ugly, and hope the party revolts.
This is entirely the wrong approach and I strongly disagree with Steele. Most disappointing.
LLS
Did you read my post where I detailed that?
“there are VERY FEW pro-choice voters”
I am a pro-choice republican voter.
I am very reluctantly pro-choice, however. I am not religious, and it is my deep love of human freedom that compels me to support the procedure with restrictions and conditions.
Honestly, though, the abortion issue is about 99 on my top 100 list of issues facing America today. Right above welfare for polar bears, maybe.
Rush is only partly right when he says “Conservatism wins everytime it's tried”
Fiscal yes it's true, but Social Conservatism (a.k.a. Christian Socialism) on the other hand repels
Case in point, Embryonic Research, which was on the ballot in Missouri and New Jersey
In 2006 In Conservative Missouri, it was fought as a moral issue yet it still passed by a large margin,
Yet in 2007 in Ultra Liberal New Jersey, it was fought as a fiscal issue and ended up being soundly defeated.
Fiscal should come 1st, social issues should be hearts and minds issues not federal government ones. Focusing on the social issues over the fiscal ones is what has brought the GOP to disater. Continuing that path will ensure we never win an election again. Don't like abortion, don't have one, don't like what's on TV, Don't watch. Meanwhile if you don't like the spending on a particular program, try not paying your taxes, see what happens.
For one, i think the vast majority of people really don't want over half of our economy socialized, but that is exactly where Pelosi and Obama are taking us.
Don't forget the Feminist onslaught. Big government to help women raise their children in place of the husband and father.
"Breaking the glass ceiling" is Jane Fonda, et al, not conservatism.
I wouldn't agree with your assessment here. Can there be no greater liberty than be allowed to live, which millions of babies are denied?
Now, some Freepers do tend to think narrow-mindedly. And some are just frustrated that the we haven't yet returned to our glory days of the 80s.
But, we will all fight and call each other names, then rally, (for the most part), in 2010 and 2012.
I honestly believe that the one person who can bring the desired unity to the Party, thus to conservatives, is Sarah Palin.
And I am proud to state that this is my first post, and hopefully not the last, to FR's "token Muslim".
Blackwell should have won.
I agree with you.
The problem with the GOP is that they abandoned small government principles.
It is not about protecting their interest in gun grabbing or gay marriage, it is about finding people who are willing to fight against this unprecedented expansion of government that we are headed towards.
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.